Moderators

coletti wrote: »

Thank you. You seem to be saying that we all have to trust a moderator’s judgement

and the same with the admins who were entrusted by the site owners in the same way.

coletti wrote: »

and imply they should not be questioned or have to explain their decisions.

I think you need to re read what I wrote.
Mods do get questioned, by posters, by other mods and by admins and the same applies to admins, they get questioned by posters, by mods and by fellow admins.

I am one of the first people who will ask questions when I think something is off kilter, I have gotten stick over doing so but I will always ask the awkward questions, it's part of who I am.

coletti wrote: »

Thanks for the advice. If I ever have a specific issue then I will pm the mod.

So about this thread you keep banging on about which was closed did you pm the mod, or thier co mods or the cat mods?

coletti wrote: »

The discussion we have been having here is why a moderator should close a thread, and not allow anyone else to contribute to it. In this instance, the reason given for closing the thread was that it was not going to be of interest to anyone else.

Can you link to the thread?
There is no way I can answer that site unseen as I have no idea what the context is or what forum.

coletti wrote: »

And how did the moderator know if anyone else might be interested or not?

We simply have no idea. In fact, he can't possibly know what everyone else might or might not be interested in. Any more that you or I know what everyone else might be interested in.

There could be a big range of reasons from it being off topic to the forum or that that topic has been done to death several times all over, like I said there is not way I can explain or comment with a link and context.

coletti wrote: »

The irony is that, if that were true, and no one else was going to be interested , why was it necessary to close the thread if no one was going to be interested, as then no one would have added anything more to it?

Again I can't answer that with out context can you please link to the thread.

coletti wrote: »

I was asked by Oscar Bravo what policy I’d put in place to cover such a situation. I replied that a good policy would be to not allow moderators to close threads because they guess that no one else might be further interested in a topic (nothing that if that were the case, then why is there a need to close it, as no one would be further adding to the thread anyhow).

Again hard to make any sort of call or statement with out context, I really, really want to see what this thread was, so please post up the link.

Some times certain topics can be flash points in a forum and it makes sense to lock it so it can't be dug up by a search and kicked off again months later.

coletti wrote: »

His response has been to avoid the issue or suggestion ( which he asked for) and to start playing with me by being flippant and avoiding the feedback he asked for.

Look there are not that many iron clad rules for the site, and then each forum can have additional rules and a different interpretation of the site rules.
So while you persist on talking generically unless the context of which forum and what thread it was, there is no way to answer the questions you are asking.

Mods judgement calls can seem very subjective at times due to posters and esp new posters to the site not knowing the history of a certain topic in a forum, or the history of certain posters in a forum.

Yes posters can ask questions and inquire why a certain mod action was taken but unless a link is provided so that it is in context no one can tell you why or if it was the right decision or a dodgy call and mods are human we do make mistakes.

coletti wrote: »

That he does so is revealing.

I think he just wants you to be transparent and specific cos you are posting with out getting to the heart of the matter and I have often seen posters which don't link to the thread they have question/issue with are just posting to have a whinge. Not saying you are but again could we have a link please.

"More matter with less art,"

coletti

Thaedydal wrote: »

So about this thread you keep banging on about which was closed did you pm the mod, or thier co mods or the cat mods?

Can you link to the thread?
There is no way I can answer that site unseen as I have no idea what the context is or what forum.

There could be a big range of reasons from it being off topic to the forum or that that topic has been done to death several times all over, like I said there is not way I can explain or comment with a link and context.

Again I can't answer that with out context can you please link to the thread.

Again hard to make any sort of call or statement with out context, I really, really want to see what this thread was, so please post up the link.

Some times certain topics can be flash points in a forum and it makes sense to lock it so it can't be dug up by a search and kicked off again months later.

"

While I had one particular thread which sparked off this bit of this discussion, I'm interested in the principle and the rules.

In the case I have in mind, the moderator gave his reason for closing the thread because, in his view, it would not be of interest to anyone else. (Quite how he knows that in uncertain and it seems unlikely he can know if a particular thread will not be of interest to anyone else. But that’s what he claimed).

There could well be a whole range of reasons, but in this instance he stated the reason was because he didn't think it would be of interest to anyone else.

I am not looking to examine a particular thread or moderator, but to examine the principle involved. So to assume I am, to choose your words, “bangin on” about a particular thread is not correct. I am interested in the issue, and have no interest whatever in the specific thread.

My question is simple, and can be dealt with on that point alone, (without having to resort to speculating as to a whole range of other possibilities).

Is it reasonable for a moderator to close a thread because he thinks it might be of no interest to anyone else?

How can anyone know what might be of interest to someone else?

Why bother to close a thread in that instance, as if its not going to be of interest to anyone, else, then they won’t add to the thread anyhow?

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm flattered that you seem to think I have the final say on the matter, but I was simply expressing my personal view. That might indeed seem ludicrous, but is that in fact what we're discussing here?

I never said whether or not I think you have the final, or any, say in the matter. We were discussing a point, and you said

oscarBravo wrote: »

We will consider it, but I can't see a compelling reason to implement it. To do so would undermine the trust we place in moderators to exercise their judgement in the smooth operation of their forums.

On the one hand you were going to consider it, and before you finished the same sentence pronounced you had already considered it and can’t see why it should be implemented.

oscarBravo wrote: »

If I'm wrong, and that's not the thread you're talking about, please correct me.

As stated above, I am not talking about a particular thread in which I have no interest. I am interested in the principle which you appear to want to avoid, and appear to prefer, instead, to play games with me.

oscarBravo

coletti wrote: »

On the one hand you were going to consider it, and before you finished the same sentence pronounced you had already considered it and can’t see why it should be implemented.

For an extremely articulate poster, you seem to have a surprising amount of difficulty distinguishing the first person singular and plural.

As stated above, I am not talking about a particular thread in which I have no interest. I am interested in the principle which you appear to want to avoid, and appear to prefer, instead, to play games with me.

In principle, we trust moderators to run their forums to the best of their ability, and to make the appropriate judgement calls as to whether or not to lock specific threads.

If you want to get specific, we'll get specific. If you want to talk about general principles, we generally trust our moderators' judgement; and there are processes to deal with situations where that judgement proves to be flawed.

Speaking of avoidance, you didn't answer my question.

Zombienosh

I used to be a moderator, I had to give it up though, night after night of coke and midgets got the better of me.

Sarky

Midget hookers? how could you stoop so low!?

TommyKnocker

Sarky wrote: »

Midget hookers? how could you stoop so low!?

'spose it was a case of having to

Zombienosh

Sarky wrote: »

Midget hookers? how could you stoop so low!?

They were hookers?!

......that explains a lot.

kboc

this is a perfect example of why i started this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056035844

what a croc of sh1t, typical moderators!!!!

aidan_walsh

Can you explain why that thread should have been left open after the OP derailed it himself and got banned from the forum?

kboc wrote: »

this is a perfect example of why i started this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056035844

what a croc of ......... *and so on(!

Yeah it's not that hard to see. One poster was claiming someone else was writing crap... the thread was going to turn into a flame war soon enough.

I edited what I quoted for good reason.

Listen, the mods here are grand to me, at least from what I see from lurking and whatnot.

I've been to one forum (ON ANOTHER SITE, NOT ON BOARDS.IE (to clear up some confusion :P) that... is just Hell. I'm talking about mods basically saying "I'll block you from posting", then doing it. YET if you tell another user you reported them, it's against the rules. I've seen mods say things that are trolling* or flames.
*One of the most common thing on that site BTW, mods can troll but users can't do anything about it.

See the thing with boards.ie is and (I love this actually) "don't be a dick". But it applies to the mods too. Outside their boards they mod (and even in the boards) they're not like some kind of super(wo)men, they're normal users (isn't sarcasm at all, I'm serious with that).

Let's face it, the post you did quote and the mod posting that clip, sure it was a bit of an annoyance but come on... FFS it's not that hard to PM the mod and say "uh... yeah listen, were you trying to be cheeky with that video or not"?

The mods here are actually great, I've looked through the prision forum and towards other sites the admins are more civil than you could hope for.
Oh and one more thing about that post, if there's something you don;t understand (happened to me once), just ask the mod that closed it and you'll get an explanation, if the mod is being a dick, report the message.

Jazzy

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

See the thing with boards.ie is and (I love this actually) "don't be a dick". But it applies to the mods too. Outside their boards they mod (and even in the boards) they're not like some kind of super(wo)men, they're normal users.

you'd be amazed at how liberal that is though, its the problem solver rule. the one you get involved when you feel like you're wrong. theres a soundbyte insect overlord

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

YET if you tell another user you reported them, it's against the rules.

Only for some users, it seems.

Aidric wrote: »

Only for some users, it seems.

I was talking about the other site, not this one.

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

I was talking about the other site, not this one.

Doesn't change the core point of my post.

LoLth

Aidric wrote: »

Only for some users, it seems.

being the mod of this forum I feel I should clarify why that post was not acted on or seen as a breach of the rules:

The post in question was part of a feedback thread discussing what mods are supposed to/should do about sexist/misogynistic comments in the After Hours forum.(with undertones of why they are "allowed" in the first place) Winters immediately followed the OP with the hilarious "get back to the kitchen" dismissive comment that the OP was taking offense to in the first place, thus clearly not providing feedback and only aggravating the issue at hand. Thaed was absolutely correct to report the post and more to the point, if that post hadnt been made by Thaed, my response was going to be "if you have an issue with a post, report it" Thaed's post however had much more impact along with a practical demonstration of the consequences than my post would have had.

The post linked, fit the discussion at hand and was in fact very much in line with what the admins/mods see as the solution to the issue. So, not favouritism, practicality was the motivation for not slapping Thaed on the wrist and admins, as much as mods are always expected to use judgement and to take into consideration the circumstances surrounding a post when deciding what action to take. Perhaps , in the future, you could take the time to think of some other possible conclusion before jumping to the least palatable and presenting it as fact (and out of context) ?

LoLth wrote: »

Perhaps , in the future, you could take the time to think of some other possible conclusion before jumping to the least palatable and presenting it as fact (and out of context) ?

The only fact I am concerned with is the one where Thaedyal isn't listed as a moderator on Feedback, ergo her post was back seat modding.

Now you can put whatever 'practicality' slant you want on it but that doesn't change the fact that it was back seat modding.

I wonder if a regular poster had made the same post would it have been viewed as practical and nonpunishable.

For fear I be accused of a lone crusade on this one there were some others who felt the same, 1 moderator included.

AckwelFoley

kboc wrote: »

this is a perfect example of why i started this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056035844

what a croc of sh1t, typical moderators!!!!

Yer dead right there kboc. Typical Moderators.

Thank god for mods eh?

I followed the link and had a read of the thread. Construction and planning are one of the few forums i visit here and post on. C&P is a very civil forum with ideas and advice going back and forth. The OP asks a fair question and then insults the first poster that posts in it.

Posters with an attitude like that dont make a forum a very nice place to visit, and to be fair to the mods there in C and P, they rarely if ever get accused of being poor at their job as the forum in itself is in general used by people that learned manners at one point in their life.

I cant fathom what it is about the closing of that thread and the banning of someone that acts like a complete arse, is the cause for you to form the opinion that was poor moderating

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

. YET if you tell another user you reported them, it's against the rules.

Could you point that out for me please in the rules for the feedback forum or the site rules, cos I don't think I have ever seen it.

AckwelFoley

Thaedydal wrote: »

Could you point that out for me please in the rules for the feedback forum or the site rules, cos I don't think I have ever seen it.

..against the charter rules perhaps not, however there are countless examples recently where ban's warns or infractions have been handed out for back seat modding

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67883543&postcount=14
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66604884&postcount=329
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66604201&postcount=114

From the rugby charter here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64584749&postcount=1

Back Seat Modding is a bannable offence. Do not call anyone a troll. Do not tell someone to stop posting. Do not say that you are reporting a post. Do not Back Seat Mod. If a post breaks any point of this charter, use the report post icon , and let the mods know. We will deal with it as we see fit

All that been said, and ive just posted it to show it seems to be unclear wheather its a banable offence or not.

To be fair however, while i think the wording you used in that thread was a little OTT and leaving yourself open to accusations such as this i think the point you made was none the less valid.

Back seat modding as i see it is to prevent users from putting any more fuel on a potential fire. If i as a joe soap said it as direct as you did, i would expect a verbal warning at least, however due to the fact you mode a number of forums and your experience in modding that "back seat" modding wouldnt apply.

A non issue in my opinion, the lack of clarity in the rule however is something that could be looked into.

oscarBravo

Aidric wrote: »

The only fact I am concerned with is the one where Thaedyal isn't listed as a moderator on Feedback, ergo her post was back seat modding.

Now you can put whatever 'practicality' slant you want on it but that doesn't change the fact that it was back seat modding.

...and the moderator of this forum has explained why he let it slide.

So, unless you're demanding a zero-tolerance regime on the Feedback forum, I'm not certain what your point is.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Could you point that out for me please in the rules for the feedback forum or the site rules, cos I don't think I have ever seen it.

Not again!
When I said other "forum/site" I actually mean a different website, not a different forum on boards.ie.

I'll go edit it so it's less confusing.

Oh and I think your post was proof that at the very least, the mods are civil.

oscarBravo wrote: »

So, unless you're demanding a zero-tolerance regime on the Feedback forum, I'm not certain what your point is.

Stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't demand anything.

I was just looking for consistency.

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Not again!
When I said other "forum/site" I actually mean a different website, not a different forum on boards.ie.

I'll go edit it so it's less confusing.

Oh and I think your post was proof that at the very least, the mods are civil.

Thanks for clarifying Chaotic_Forces

and this is for you Aidric

Thaedydal wrote: »

Thanks for clarifying Chaotic_Forces

Ah you're welcome. I keep forgetting that a "forum" here is just another forum on the main forums. I fixed it up so we should all be flower children and skip through the lillies.

Jazzy

Thaedydal wrote: »

Could you point that out for me please in the rules for the feedback forum or the site rules, cos I don't think I have ever seen it.

isnt there a 'dont be a dick' rule thats sitewide??? but weren't we talking about it and isnt the primary guideline dont be a dick? and wasnt there even this thread about it? hfdfjkdgshghjfjdhgf this is just like star wars episode 1: the phantom menace.
send an e-mail to this webzone if you want a pizza roll

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Ah you're welcome. I keep forgetting that a "forum" here is just another forum on the main forums. I fixed it up so we should all be flower children and skip through the lillies.

No way I am stripping of to skip through the lillies with you,
sorry but have you seen the weather out and there?

Overheal

Thaedydal wrote: »

Could you point that out for me please in the rules for the feedback forum or the site rules, cos I don't think I have ever seen it.

I've been led to believe many a times that it's considered backseat modding, even trollery. But some forums are clear on how to respond to offensive posts: for example the rule in politics is Don't. Saying "Post Reported" or derivations thereof, seems like a response.

And to get straight to a point: It's not like you said it so other people would know it was already reported. You said flat out "Oh look I've reported this and you should all do the same." Which was inappropriate.

Thaedydal wrote: »

No way I am stripping of to skip through the lillies with you,
sorry but have you seen the weather out and there?

MOD ABUSE!

I wanna talk to an admin, how dare you take my right away. I LIKE SKIPPING THROUGH THE LILLIES!

Well would you rather skip through the poppies?

Overheal wrote: »

I've been led to believe many a times that it's considered backseat modding, even trollery. But some forums are clear on how to respond to offensive posts: for example the rule in politics is Don't. Saying "Post Reported" or derivations thereof, seems like a response.

And to get straight to a point: It's not like you said it so other people would know it was already reported. You said flat out "Oh look I've reported this and you should all do the same." Which was inappropriate.

Um.. he quoted my post and it was a misunderstanding. You have nothing to do with it.