Some friendly feedback (I swear!!!)

CrazyRabbit

I've read through a good few threads here over the years and there's one thing that I think can be improved upon that will potentially reduce the number of complaints.

I think the mods are very good at enforcing the rules of the various forum charters and those of the site itself. However, it would appear that at least on some occasions the communication from mods to users is not as neutral or positive as possible.

Basically, what I'm saying is that how you moderate someone will greatly effect how they respond to it. Comments need to be as professional and courteous as possible. Failure to do this can result in members feeling bullied, or 'singled out' for unfair treatment etc.

When a person is banned or infracted, I believe it is best to include the following in a communication to the user;
1. The rule that was broken, with a link to the forum/site charter or a quote from it.
2. The length of the ban/infraction, and a short explanation as to the chosen length.
3. Advise them to PM you back if they have any questions/concerns and that their questions/concerns will be acknowledged.
4. The names of the Cat Mods should they need to escalate their concerns.

Again, I'd like to point out that I'm not complaining. I've never been banned and I've apologised the two times I was infracted. So this isn't a 'bitching' post. I'm just trying to offer some feedback based on my experience as a Mod on another (now closed ) website.

seamus

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Basically, what I'm saying is that how you moderate someone will greatly effect how they respond to it.

Agreed. To a certain extent though, anonymity can turn people into assholes and many people will respond in a fashion that they wouldn't even consider responding with in real life, and the attitude of the mod is often irrelevant in these cases. Though the mod can of course avoid making it worse.

Just to fill in the background here on technically what happens:

1. The mod has a control panel where the see a list of the forums they moderate.
2. They choose the forum, stick the username and the ban reason in and click "Ban".
3. They are prompted to send a PM which contains the text which tells you where you've been banned from, the reason given and the duration. They are not required (at present) to send it.

Under each person's username in a thread, you also have the option to "Ban <username>" which bring you to step 2 above.

1. The rule that was broken, with a link to the forum/site charter or a quote from it.

Tough one to do, but at the very least a reason is something which should be afforded to all bans.

2. The length of the ban/infraction, and a short explanation as to the chosen length.

I don't think the length needs to be justified to the banned person, though the mod should themselves be able to justify it if challenged.

3. Advise them to PM you back if they have any questions/concerns and that their questions/concerns will be acknowledged.

This is something that's missing alright, but inviting responses could possibly be more hassle than it's worth. Instead of an actual invitation to respond, perhaps a link to the "Appeals" process would be better - which includes an instruction to speak to the mod.

4. The names of the Cat Mods should they need to escalate their concerns

Good idea. Technically doable, it could be automatically added to the PM.

I still think, like I thought a long time ago, that the PM should be automated and mandatory. The moderator can preview it and make changes to a few key fields, but the text should be standard, and the ban isn't applied until the moderator hits the "send pm" button.

Slidey

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

When a person is banned or infracted, I believe it is best to include the following in a communication to the user;
1. The rule that was broken, with a link to the forum/site charter or a quote from it.

When someone is banned the reason is normally quite obvious, that said the reason is normally given when infractions/bans are issued

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

2. The length of the ban/infraction, and a short explanation as to the chosen length.

Infractions on Boards.ie (with some rare exceptions) are of a set duration. I think it is 10 days. When you are banned the automated PM has the ban length on it. Of course if you have PM's disabled you will not be able to find this out.

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

3. Advise them to PM you back if they have any questions/concerns and that their questions/concerns will be acknowledged.

This could be incorporated into the automated message but in my experience most realise that they can reply to the PM and do so when they have an issue with the action that the mod has taken.

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

4. The names of the Cat Mods should they need to escalate their concerns.

This is a good idea and it can be unclear who the relevant cat mods are at times

CuLT

I think including CMods and an addendum like "Got a problem with my moderating? Call this guy" is somewhat unfair on CMods as the inevitable result of this is that CMods will end up handling the aftermath of nearly every ban in their category.

It implies that every decision is up for debate (and that debate is, in fact, invited), which I think (personally) is asking for a judicial role-playing game where none is required.

The Recliner

CuLT wrote: »

I think including CMods and an addendum like "Got a problem with my moderating? Call this guy" is somewhat unfair on CMods as the inevitable result of this is that CMods will end up handling the aftermath of nearly every ban in their category.

Also the procedure is to discuss the ban with the moderator first and if that is unsatisfactory then hit the CMods so I don't think putting the CMods in there would be a good idea

The Moderator should provide the CMods if requested obviously

Rev. BlueJeans

I'd tweak that slightly though. There should be a second port of call for any bannee, not necessarily the cmod, because as said they'll end up getting it all thrown their way.

I assume every forum has a second mod or more, a list of mods could *possibly* be added to the bottom of each ban message-I don't know how practical that is to automate, as I wouldn't expect the mods to have to add it each time, that would be daft. A line or two telling the slappee to log out and click the forum link to ascertain same would be an option.

A hearty +1 on the professionalism side of it-the majority already abide by this, and often exceed it, happily.

DeVore

Aye, there are many good points made here and its something we have been moving towards, slowly but then everything happens slowly around here... when you are talking about the personalities of 600+ volunteers, all you can hope to do is move things inch at a time...

While we dont expect Mods to be "customer service representatives" (yuck).... we do ask then to be polite when acting as a Mod. They fall under the same civility rules as everyone else.

DeV.

TouchingVirus

CuLT wrote: »

I think including CMods and an addendum like "Got a problem with my moderating? Call this guy" is somewhat unfair on CMods as the inevitable result of this is that CMods will end up handling the aftermath of nearly every ban in their category.

It implies that every decision is up for debate (and that debate is, in fact, invited), which I think (personally) is asking for a judicial role-playing game where none is required.

The Recliner wrote: »

Also the procedure is to discuss the ban with the moderator first and if that is unsatisfactory then hit the CMods so I don't think putting the CMods in there would be a good idea

The Moderator should provide the CMods if requested obviously

For these very reasons I'd agree with not putting in the CMods in the private message and I'm not even a mod here nor have I been banned from a forum before (I think..). That said, sometimes I struggle here on boards to find the little things.

From being around the forum block a few times I do know that the first point of call is the moderator in question who gave me an infraction. No joy? Perhaps another moderator then, especially if there is a clash. Only then would I consider going to the CMod and if I still don't have anything I'd post in the Helpdesk. I know this, but I'm sure there are countless others who don't and who'd just run the mouth at the moderator, giving them a headache and making it super hard to resist the siteban button

Perhaps a link to an appeals procedure post, part of the FAQ or whatever is in order if it's not already there. People who are asshats will just go nuts at the moderator anyways, blatantly ignoring any procedures in place and deserve what they get. The honest people who feel hard done by would go through the bother to see what they've got to appeal and could look up the Cmods all by themselves. It's the best of both worlds really, you're not landing more work on the Cmods by having them deal with petty things that should be sorted on a lower level but you're also not sending a pm with "I HAVE TEH POWER, YOU ARE BANNED!!!" with little in the way of recourse for a user who feels they've just been sh*t on.

€0.02

DeVore wrote: »

Aye, there are many good points made here and its something we have been moving towards, slowly but then everything happens slowly around here... when you are talking about the personalities of 600+ volunteers, all you can hope to do is move things inch at a time...

While we dont expect Mods to be "customer service representatives" (yuck).... we do ask then to be polite when acting as a Mod. They fall under the same civility rules as everyone else.

DeV.

You mean to say the mods are not just DeV's sockpuppet accounts? Psh, who'd believe that? You might have them all fooled, but not me

Crash

Might be an idea to include the text of the post that the mod used for "ban user" - would make it 100% clear for those type of bans exactly where someone went over the bounds.

CrazyRabbit

Crash wrote: »

Might be an idea to include the text of the post that the mod used for "ban user" - would make it 100% clear for those type of bans exactly where someone went over the bounds.

Agreed. Quite often I see posts/threads created by people saying "Why was I banned".

I also see a few threads in the Feedback forum from people thinking they have been perma-banned from a forum when in fact it's just a short ban or even an infraction.

However it is handled technically, it's important to make sure the user know why they have been moderated, what the duration of the ban/infraction is, and are given some information about how to appeal the decision. And above all, professionalism is absolutely vital. Otherwise it seems personal, and people get angry.

**Timbuk2**

I think that PMs to banned users should be compulsory, and include something along these lines

Dear <username>,
You have been banned from <forum-name> until <date>.
Reason for ban: <reason> + <quote from charter>
If you feel the ban was unfair, this is the dispute resolution procedure:
1. PM the mod that banned you.
2. If you are still not satisfied, PM the relevant CMods (<names of CMods>), but only after PM'ing the mod that banned you.
3. If, after PM'ing the Mod and the CMod, you are still not satisfied, start a thread in the Help Desk.