Post by milowent on Jun 25, 2007 23:06:35 GMT -5
well, the newest hullaballo at the phorum is a revision of the moderating rules.
the gist is that (1) no public complaining about mod actions is permitted - all must be by PM, and (2) Trainer is the new "Moderator Manager"--he basically oversees the moderators and reviews mod actions if complained of.
Here is BK's post from Sunday afternoon announcing the changes:
www.lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11713
Renegade, a cogent debater, posted a response to BK's locked announcement, which went straight to the rubbish bin per BK's new policy:
www.lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=421313&highlight=
Anyone have thoughts on this? You can't really compare Anchor Cove to the phorum. And we've come a long way from Bukanator's promise to never delete any posts.
the gist is that (1) no public complaining about mod actions is permitted - all must be by PM, and (2) Trainer is the new "Moderator Manager"--he basically oversees the moderators and reviews mod actions if complained of.
Here is BK's post from Sunday afternoon announcing the changes:
www.lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11713
We have amended the Forum Etiquette, Rules, and Policies (with The Creators' approval) to add the section about moderators. From this point on, public discussion of moderator actions or moderator policies will not be allowed on the forum, and such posts will be removed.
Why are we updating these rules? Because being a moderator is not an easy job, and moderators are all volunteers. Sometimes the moderator has to be a bad guy, and a user may not like their actions. However, all too often public posts result in users piling on without understanding the issues which may not be appropriate to share with the entire forum. This not only diminishes respect for the moderator but reduces their power on the forum.
Moderators are fans, and often a moderator posts as a fan. But moderator actions such as splitting or merging a topic, deleting or editing posts, warning users, etc. are taken with the best interests of the forum in mind. Some users may not always agree with these actions, but that doesn't mean the actions where inappropriate.
We are also adding a new title: Moderator Manager. Trainer101 will serve as the Moderator Manager at this time. The Moderator Manager is a moderator with no additional powers on the forum; however, he will act as the first level of escalation for concerns about moderator actions. If you have a concern about a moderator, contact the Moderator Manager. He will review the action, compare it against the guidelines, consult with the forum administrator, and respond to the user. If the issue requires another escalation, it will go to the forum administrator, and if the administrator requires another ruling, he will take the issue to The Creators.
Note that this is not a unique rule. In fact, most other major forums have a policy against posting publicly about moderator actions. [Milo adds: Is this true? I have no idea.] On LG15, the moderators are encouraged to post a message explaining why a thread is moved or locked, and even this is rare on other forums. Large forums with a significant number of users require that moderators' actions be appropriate and quick, without fear or public dissent.
If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to
contact me.
Why are we updating these rules? Because being a moderator is not an easy job, and moderators are all volunteers. Sometimes the moderator has to be a bad guy, and a user may not like their actions. However, all too often public posts result in users piling on without understanding the issues which may not be appropriate to share with the entire forum. This not only diminishes respect for the moderator but reduces their power on the forum.
Moderators are fans, and often a moderator posts as a fan. But moderator actions such as splitting or merging a topic, deleting or editing posts, warning users, etc. are taken with the best interests of the forum in mind. Some users may not always agree with these actions, but that doesn't mean the actions where inappropriate.
We are also adding a new title: Moderator Manager. Trainer101 will serve as the Moderator Manager at this time. The Moderator Manager is a moderator with no additional powers on the forum; however, he will act as the first level of escalation for concerns about moderator actions. If you have a concern about a moderator, contact the Moderator Manager. He will review the action, compare it against the guidelines, consult with the forum administrator, and respond to the user. If the issue requires another escalation, it will go to the forum administrator, and if the administrator requires another ruling, he will take the issue to The Creators.
Note that this is not a unique rule. In fact, most other major forums have a policy against posting publicly about moderator actions. [Milo adds: Is this true? I have no idea.] On LG15, the moderators are encouraged to post a message explaining why a thread is moved or locked, and even this is rare on other forums. Large forums with a significant number of users require that moderators' actions be appropriate and quick, without fear or public dissent.
If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to
contact me.
Renegade, a cogent debater, posted a response to BK's locked announcement, which went straight to the rubbish bin per BK's new policy:
www.lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=421313&highlight=
Widespread fascism is still fascism. Just because such rules exist elsewhere doesn't make them right or good.
That got your attention now, didn't it?
Seriously though, I hereby publically criticize your policy not to publically discuss the moderators, their actions, and their policies, as this takes away an important control organ of the general forum population, and basically allows the moderators to crush all opposition simply based on the fact that it is opposition.
I know trainer is a good guy, and I don't assume he'll ignore complaints - but a single, normal user that feels wrongly treated is always less well represented than a moderator, who, by default, enjoys a greater trust by the others - after all, he wouldn't have been chosen if he wasn't a good judge, would he?
And if the moderator then also conveniently deleted all evidence ("it was spam!"), then trainer has testimony vs. testimony, and the moderator wins by default because he's a moderator and enjoys greater trust.
Ordinary users need the possibility to get support from their peers. If a case is handled in private, behind closed doors, that's impossible.
This system cries for the creation of a moderator-cabal. The temptation to abuse your power is much greater if you know you not only have the right, but actually the duty to delete all complains about your work. And if somebody really does complain in private? Oh well, just tell trainer it's a hard job, that you might have overreacted a little, but the user is still the bad one and broke many, many rules. Promise. He did. Really. The posts are gone, but I tell you, he did.
Suppressing the opposition is always a sign of weakness.
P.S.: The fact that you locked the announcement-thread so I couldn't dispute it there is a pretty good example already.
That got your attention now, didn't it?
Seriously though, I hereby publically criticize your policy not to publically discuss the moderators, their actions, and their policies, as this takes away an important control organ of the general forum population, and basically allows the moderators to crush all opposition simply based on the fact that it is opposition.
I know trainer is a good guy, and I don't assume he'll ignore complaints - but a single, normal user that feels wrongly treated is always less well represented than a moderator, who, by default, enjoys a greater trust by the others - after all, he wouldn't have been chosen if he wasn't a good judge, would he?
And if the moderator then also conveniently deleted all evidence ("it was spam!"), then trainer has testimony vs. testimony, and the moderator wins by default because he's a moderator and enjoys greater trust.
Ordinary users need the possibility to get support from their peers. If a case is handled in private, behind closed doors, that's impossible.
This system cries for the creation of a moderator-cabal. The temptation to abuse your power is much greater if you know you not only have the right, but actually the duty to delete all complains about your work. And if somebody really does complain in private? Oh well, just tell trainer it's a hard job, that you might have overreacted a little, but the user is still the bad one and broke many, many rules. Promise. He did. Really. The posts are gone, but I tell you, he did.
Suppressing the opposition is always a sign of weakness.
P.S.: The fact that you locked the announcement-thread so I couldn't dispute it there is a pretty good example already.
Anyone have thoughts on this? You can't really compare Anchor Cove to the phorum. And we've come a long way from Bukanator's promise to never delete any posts.