Very quiet in here

Funny!! The overwhelming feedback previously was that DRP should just be shut down as decisions were never overturned!

The same people fill these feedback threads giving out about the same things. Although which side of the argument they're on shifts depending on how the changes they called for affect them.

- Last feedback wanted people to provide links to their claims. This feedback is asking that people stop asking for links to back up claims.

- Last feedback wanted a clamp down on troublesome posters who disrupt threads. This feedback is asking that (certain) people be given more scope than others.

- Last feedback suggested people be forum banned rather than thread banned. This feedback is complaining people are getting forum banned.

Posters are the ones who set the tone of threads and posters are the ones who have displayed time and time again that discussion or debate on an issue is not as important as being right and taking swipes at "the other side".

Once upon a time in a discussion either side of the argument might concede to the other having a point, even if they didn't fully agree or support it. That doesn't happen anymore. Instead it's pages and pages of arguing at each other rather than discussing a topic.

Moderators have an impossible and thankless job. They try to keep threads on track and encourage people to discuss rather than bicker and jab at each other. But posters who feel they should be able to tell "the others" that they're completely wrong don't like that they are asked to discuss rather than argue.

It's not the moderators' fault that adults can't seem to engage in adult and intelligent debate on an issue. Complex issues will never have simple solutions. Ever. And there will always be two sides. A bit of respect would go a long way.

I won't hold my breath.

If the post was deleted how do you know it wasn't warned? Moderators often delete posts. They don't leave a comment in place to let everyone know. Often a post is warned AND deleted.

We have calls for posts to be deleted and the poster given a PM rather than warning and ban. And then we have people complaining that posts are deleted.

Like I said, it's an impossible and thankless job. Indeed some posters who are prolific on feedback threads have been offered the opportunity to moderate and have turned it down. It seems some people just want to sit comfortably in "the opposition" and not actually put themselves out to do the job they complain that others aren't doing right.

The moderation team will look at this thread. They will consider the feedback and some changes may come. But they have also accepted that it really doesn't matter what they put in place. We'll still have the same people complaining about it.

There will never be a situation where everyone is happy. And in CA, where the malcontents assemble, it's unlikely anyone will be happy.

Exactly - if very few would take on the job, maybe posters should show a little more respect to those who do. It's an impossible, thankless job.

I don't know any moderator on here who looks for thanks or recognition. (They won't get it anyway!) On the otherhand I know plenty of mods who are stepping back or have stepped down simply because it's not worth the inevitable hassle they get for volunteering their spare time.

When does "minor rules breaking" become "bad behaviour" though? The other feedback threads were full of complaints of "low-level trolling", people disrupting threads but not exactly breaking any rules and asking for them to be dealt with.

Now they are being dealt with we have people complaining that they didn't mean those posters, but the other ones - the ones they don't like or agree with.

Both situations can be dealt with more efficiently, delete the posts, PM the users and inform them to note why the posts were deleted if they can't comply with that then start issuing bans.

This is already done. More than posters realise. Many posters get PM warnings, nudges, requests to change what they're doing. Many get more chances than maybe they should.

The reason people are complaining here is that there's multiple bans handed out for technical infractions leading ultimately to a potential permanent forum ban.

At the same time, there are posters spamming the immigration thread with incessant posting adding nothing of value, just arguing the same tired points and it's acceptable.

It seems from this you want people who are "technically" breaking the rules to be let away with it, and people who are "technically" not breaking the rules to be warned!

Again, is this just people you agree with versus people you don't?

If someone is annoying you that much don't keep interacting with them

Amen!

Do you mean "you" as in me personally? I didn't create anything. I was very active on those feedback threads. I engaged. I listened. I brought the feedback back to the active moderators and they discussed a way forward. Any ideas were ones suggested by posters on the threads.

Even posters could see that DRP was filled with time wasters who disrupted threads and then attempted to disrupt DRPs and then complain if their perfectly legitimate warnings were upheld.

Posters have been told there is no appealing of warnings and that a moderator is not obliged to engage with them via PM. The sheer amount of PMs received by mods with those exact same difficult disruptive posters arguing how the mod is abusing their power and is [insert whatever abuse you want to throw at a person volunteering their time here] is astounding. But - posters have been told that even though a mod is not obliged to reply, if they approach the moderator reasonably, without the abuse, without the insults, then they are more likely to get a favourable outcome. And some posters have had warnings reversed after discussion with moderators.

Some posters however feel it is beneath them to try to engage civilly with anyone, including moderators. They usually end up warned and forum banned and eventually, inevitably sitebanned.