Mod Behaviour

evolvingtipperary101

Why was the 'Mod control of Tubridy payment Thread' closed without any resolution or any apology from the mod it concerned? Nobody was notified of the thread closure. I created the thread and wasn't notified. A very slippery act. Typical really. Mods have no accountability. And there needs to be an open thread that is open to challenge them. They're human, they make mistakes, and should be answerable to posters when they get it wrong which they regularly do, just like posters. It's also quite obvious that numerous mods hold grudges against particular posters and seek to use their unanswerable power to make life difficult for such posters when they can. They also pick and chose whose complaints they respond to and whose they don't.

I was also subjected to this particular post from a mod recently (The mod attacked the poster, not the post. Not to mention completely misread the post. I hadn't suggested McManus was doing anything illegal. I made no real statement at all on any of the things he points out. I asked a series of questions and questioned their validity as questions and the mod took them as statements on McManus and wealth accumulation - and after I challenged the mod on this, the mod chose to make no reply. Pathetic. But it didn't stop the mod from assuming failures in my life and using the word failures. Who do these people think they are?

See below:

15-12-2023 7:16am

 Jim2007

Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators

Posts: 9,515

Mod ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: May 2010

Posts: 9362

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121497308#Comment_121497308

Your entire posting tells us you’ve had a visit form the little green monster and you are just jealous of their achievements, while you flounder around looking for excuses for your failures.

Everyone takes fully advantage of the tax breaks available to them including you, be it on mortgages, pensions or whatever. And many many people build up a very nice nest egg for themselves through hard work and business skills. But if you want to believe it is all the result of tax evasion etc that is up to you.

Newspapers and other media need to sell advertising and the best way to do that is publishing the stuff you parrot off about the couple of individuals you mentioned (no TD though, why that?). And if you want to believe that is how everyone is getting ahead in life, but you, then that is fine, I’m not going to debate it with you.

Big Bag of Chips

The "Mod Control of Tubridy payment Thread" thread has not been posted in since 21st August. It was moved to the helpdesk archive as per this thread.

Jim2007 is not a moderator in the politics forum. He is a poster same as you. If you have an issue with a post report it. This will bring it to the attention of the local moderators. if you feel the report has been missed or appropriate action not taken you should PM the local moderators or a category moderator.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121541619#Comment_121541619

There was no resolution or any offering whatsoever? So, just bide your time to dismiss something rather any worthwhile engagement? Pretty much sums up the attitude.

Says mod next to his name. I did report it. And I messaged the post to another mod. No response. Pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

Incidentally, around the time I created that thread, my notifications and messages were gone through. I could tell because all the messages I left unanswered and notifications I didn't click on changed without me doing so. The red numbering of each notification tab changed. Is that common practice? It felt like all the messages I was getting from other posters about the mod thread were being gone through. I didn't open them, yet the numbering changed on how many messages I had.

On a separate note:

There should be a system set up that allows performance ratings, positive and negative feedback for mod performance on a thread, and a public timetable for what and when mods are due to mod and end moderation of a thread.

1. Moderator Performance Review System: Introduce a structured system enabling forum members to provide structured, objective feedback on moderators' performance. This system will be designed to ensure fairness and prevent misuse, focusing on constructive feedback that aligns with the forum's guidelines and moderation principles.
2. Balanced Feedback Mechanism: Establish a balanced platform for users to submit both commendations and constructive criticism about moderators. This approach aims to foster a culture of continuous improvement and open communication while maintaining respect and professionalism.
3. Moderation Schedule Transparency: Implement a clear, publicly accessible schedule outlining moderators' active periods and responsibilities. This will enhance transparency regarding moderation activities while considering the flexibility required to accommodate moderators' availability and unforeseen circumstances.

Allowing Direct Mentions and Replies to Moderators

Pros:

Enhanced Communication: It can foster open dialogue between users and moderators, potentially leading to a more transparent and collaborative community environment.

Quick Resolution of Issues: Direct communication can help in promptly addressing misunderstandings, questions, or concerns related to moderation actions.

Community Engagement: It can make moderators more approachable and integrated within the community, breaking down barriers between users and the moderation team.

Cons:

Risk of Overload: Moderators might become overwhelmed with mentions and replies, especially in large forums, making it difficult to address all concerns effectively.

Potential for Conflict: Direct interactions might lead to public arguments or confrontations, especially if a user disagrees with a moderation decision.

Disallowing Direct Mentions and Replies to Moderators

Pros:

Moderator Protection: It helps in protecting moderators from direct harassment, personal attacks, or undue pressure from users.

Structured Communication: It encourages users to use proper channels (like private messages or a designated feedback area) for raising concerns or feedback, which can be more manageable. (But a mod needs to be able to communicate. Not all can.)

Focus on Content Moderation: Moderators can concentrate on their primary role of content moderation without the distraction of personal messages or mentions.

Cons:

Perceived Lack of Transparency: It might create a perception of moderators being distant or unaccountable to the community.

Barrier to Immediate Feedback: Users may feel that their concerns or questions are less likely to be addressed promptly or directly.

The decision to allow or disallow direct mentions and replies to moderators should be based on a balance between maintaining effective moderation, protecting moderators from potential abuse, and fostering a healthy community dialogue. The specific context of the forum, its size, the nature of discussions, and available resources for moderation should all be considered in making this decision. It's also beneficial to have clear guidelines and alternative channels for feedback and communication with the moderation team. And I stress team because some mods are simply terrible at communication and understanding anything outside of their own tunnel vision just as much as any poster. A poster should have access to mods.

Archiving a discussion without notifying the creator can be seen as less than ideal in terms of community management and transparency.

Respect for Contributors: Informing users about changes to their discussions is a sign of respect. It acknowledges their contribution and time invested in the community.

Transparency: Notification helps maintain transparency in moderation actions, which is crucial for building trust within the community.

Feedback Opportunity: If a discussion is archived for specific reasons (e.g., being off-topic, redundant, or violating guidelines), notifying the creator provides an opportunity for them to understand and learn from the decision.

Community Engagement: Engaged users appreciate being kept in the loop. This practice can encourage continued participation and a sense of belonging.

Best Practices

Notification System: Ideally, forums should strive to have a system that automatically notifies users when significant actions are taken on their posts or discussions.

Feedback Channels: Providing channels for users to inquire or give feedback about moderation actions can enhance communication and trust.

While the practice of not notifying users might occur due to various reasons, it's generally considered good practice to inform users about significant actions taken on their contributions. This approach promotes a healthier, more transparent, and engaging community environment.

Big Bag of Chips

You had not posted in the thread since 1st August. Nobody else had posted in the thread since 21st August. There was a lot of moderator engagement and discussion in that thread.

The moderator you mentioned above is a moderator, but not of the Politics Forum The forum he moderates is listed beside his username.

Your messages/notifications were not "gone through", as it is not possible for anyone other than you to go through them.

There should be a system set up that allows performance ratings, positive and negative feedback for mod performance on a thread, and a public timetable for what and when mods are due to mod and end moderation of a thread.

The helpdesk is here for such feedback. It is a public forum. All posters can view and contribute to threads if they wish. Moderators can be contacted directly via PM, or publicly by starting a thread here and tagging them if needed. Any disagreements with moderators can be addressed here, or in the Dispute Resolution Forum for official warnings.

There is not and never will be a timetable for when moderators are due to moderate or a schedule of moderators. Moderators here are volunteers. Giving their time free of charge to the site to help with the day to day running of forums. They will never be asked to commit to a certain timetable or to have their hours logged or recorded somewhere.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121542629#Comment_121542629

You're telling me that Mods and Administrators, especially those involved in the technical aspects of running the platform, don't have broader access to the system, which enables them to access private messages? This level of access is usually necessary for maintaining a platform, handling technical issues, or complying with legal requests. Don't insult my intelligence with that kind of response.

So, you stand by this mod's comment?

Moderators are volunteers? Ah, no wonder it's such a **** show.

Most of the mod comments on that now archived thread were about protecting the mod and his role. Really nasty attitude toward posters for the most part. One of the mod responses was 'grow up, lads.' That's the level we're at, is it?

As far as I can see this Help desk and all avenues toward a mod and 'communication' is a sham. Birds of a feather stick together is the mod motto and there will be no serious discussion of anything a poster brings up. Just a sidestepping from directly addressing anything. Like, I told you that I reported that post and I messaged it to another mod and there was no response. And you, likewise, sidestepped that, without a response. Mods can act how they like and can continue dismissively without any repercussions. One of the huge problems of this site is there is no way to hold posters or mods to any standard. Well, posters get banned and warnings (often from biased mods). But I don't see that same standard applied to mods on any level. It has to be addressed.

Big Bag of Chips

Yes, I am telling you that moderators and administrators have no access to other posters' private messages.

I didn't sidestep anything - I'll be honest, it's very late and I skim read that last post of yours. I didn't read it all. I am not a moderator of the Politics forum, so you will need to bring that post to the moderators attention there. But, just because you report a post doesn't mean it will warrant action.

Moderators also get bans and warnings. Moderators get de-modded. Moderators close their accounts and leave the site because they sometimes feel aggrieved when they are pulled up on some of their actions or reaction. Posters might not always see these actions. Same as you as a poster are not going to be aware of every other poster who gets warned or banned across the site.

It's been 4 months since I read or contributed to that thread. I was possibly one of the most active moderators on that thread and take great exception to you saying "Most of the mod comments on that now archived thread were about protecting the mod and his role. Really nasty attitude toward posters for the most part". My post #113 addressed many of the points being raised by many posters. I was nothing but polite in all of my responses. Same as I have been to you here.

Some posters will never be happy. Any interaction with any moderator will draw complaints and calls of mod bias (even if the moderator is just a poster in the interaction). Sometimes complaints will be legitimate and will be acted on. Oftentimes complaints will be looked at and no action will be deemed necessary.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121542663#Comment_121542663

How convenient.

Case in point, numerous mods posted on the Gangland Shootings thread to not post about anything else gangland related and to keep it to shootings. I tried to create another thread that would deal with other topics related to gangland. A mod closed it down saying there was another gangland thread and there was no need for another. I sent the mod two messages to explain - no response, over a week later. Now, that's just plain stupid. It shows mods sticking together, trying to make some point about sticking together, even going against the directives and 'rules' they apparently uphold. It's pathetic.

Beasty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121620159#Comment_121620159

Please show me where a mod stated the thread was just for "shootings"

You got yourself threadbanned from the Gangland Shootings thread so decided to start another.

evolvingtipperary101

I didn't get myself thread banned. You banned me for something innocuous.

Beasty January 4

You are being warned for the following post:

evolvingtipperary101✭✭✭

Jan 3, 2024

Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting - updated 30/12/23

Snr still fighting for his life

View Post

Do not post in this thread again

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121621139#Comment_121621139

Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting - updated 30/12/23 - Page 656 — boards.ie - Now Ye're Talkin'

Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting - updated 30/12/23 - Page 656 — boards.ie - Now Ye're Talkin'

You quickly followed the above two comments with the comment below:

Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting - updated 30/12/23 - Page 657 — boards.ie - Now Ye're Talkin'

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121620159#Comment_121620159

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121621226#Comment_121621226

Not sure if you are dishonest or just not able to follow simple instructions. You were trying to drag to turn it into a thread about the social impact of drugs. that isn't what the thread is about. the thread is about the gangland pew pews.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121624845#Comment_121624845

I clearly wasn’t and I tried to create a thread on what I wanted to talk about. How can you apply the word dishonest to me?

And to say I was the only one with an interest in wider gangland topics is dishonest. Plenty of other posters were talking about what you mentioned

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625096#Comment_121625096

you read this:

Can everyone please stick to the topic, which is not the legalisation of drugs. Not how you get hold of booze. Not about bicycles. The clue is in the thread title

and somehow you decided it meant this

to not post about anything else gangland related and to keep it to shootings. 

there are plenty of posts on that thread that are gangland related but not specifically about a shooting. the thread managed to keep going for months when there wasn't a single shooting.

It really doesnt matter who else wanted to talk about it on thread. if it is off topic it is off topic. as for starting another thread, if you managed to get yourself threadbanned then I can understand why a mod might see you opening another thread on the same subject as an attempt to circumvent the threadban.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625158#Comment_121625158

You’re the one being dishonest now because you’ve taken it out of the context of the posts that that post follows.

The original creator of the thread posted that it was only for shootings. What are you on about? Why are you changing the goalposts?

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625179#Comment_121625179

The creator of a thread doesnt decide what is on topic for a thread. the mods do that. you were way off topic, you know you were way off topic and still you complain you are the victim.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625188#Comment_121625188

No, I don’t accept that. You clearly dont know what you’re on about. Completely off the context of the thread. But I’m sure you know what I posted … just ignore me and safe us both from wasting yours and my time

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625268#Comment_121625268

the thread isn't about drug legislation. you posted about drug legislation. you even linked the posts. that is off topic. it isn't a difficult concept.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121625278#Comment_121625278

The thread is about gangland - newsflash, gangs supply drugs.

This must be the type of backseat modding the mods like. Obviously this suits them to let stuff like this fill up space rather than address the questions I ask because they can't without tying themselves in knots.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121659275#Comment_121659275

Yeah, you got me. We are all afraid of your mighty intellect. There can be no other reason

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121659647#Comment_121659647

I'm sure that's what I said alright... Jesus wept.

'We.'

maninasia

Yeah same mod loves the 'do not post in this thread again ' random edicts and will keep you out of the only thread on the subject forever because you didn't adhere to their brand of politics.

You try and create another thread tangentially related they shut it down.

You ask the mod why are you banned they won't even know.

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121659996#Comment_121659996

Well, this is it. And they don't really respond to complaints/issues, only to brush them off for long enough to just let them fade out.

TherapyBoy

BAN ALL MODS!

..except me obviously, I’m great! 👍🏼

evolvingtipperary101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121786473#Comment_121786473

....

I find it absolutely shocking that a user thinks admins or mods should have unparalleled access to private messages! What on earth would be the point of that 😅

If someone is abusing the PM function an admin or concerned mod can be added to the conversation or forwarded the relevant text via screenshot. I think that setup is more than enough.

Very confusing to see this suggestion as on one hand we have users who feel we are too heavy handed and another cohort who think the place isn’t Big Brother enough.

ive often said and I’ll repeat it here the best way and really only way to deal with trolls and whatnot is ignore them outright and just report their posts. The amount of times I see users engaging in ridiculous back and forth with trolls and plonkers is astounding.