|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 12:03:33 GMT
I've been threatened directly with warnings in open forums, and I've seen people threatened to be banned in the same manner, but the latter hasn't happened at all recently.
This brings me to a point I forgot to raise earlier. Not to bring up the argument involving me in the meet-up thread (though, obviously, it's the first one that comes to my mind), because it happens all the time, but this open warning stuff and having mods have a go at you and being asked to respond via PMs. It needs to stop.
It's entirely unfair to metaphorically spank (regardless of whether or not the person is misbehaving or breaking rules) a member in a public forum and then not allow them to defend themselves.
If the warnings and accusations are happening in an open forum, it's simply arrogant to have them respond with a PM. If a mod wishes for the complaints, defenses and arguments to be presented to them in that format, the mod themselves should have sent the warning, criticism, command or threat via PM and not in the thread.
Likewise, if a moderator is making accusations and what have you in an open forum, then they have set themselves up to have whichever member to argue their case in that same open forum.
Otherwise, it's a double standard and it's unfair, degrading and belittling.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Sept 19, 2009 13:10:09 GMT
If an argument breaks out, or rules are broken, I don't see the problem being initially dealt with in public (as in, "Stop doing that, you know the rules"), but following it up via PM. Going via PM ensures that everyone's dignity remains intact as much as possible, regardless of the problem. You don't see Trial by Combat (not that it happens very often) on the open forum for a reason; some people only need a quiet word. PMs also have the advantage of preventing a thread going off topic.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Sept 19, 2009 13:14:40 GMT
I've been threatened directly with warnings in open forums, and I've seen people threatened to be banned in the same manner, but the latter hasn't happened at all recently.
This brings me to a point I forgot to raise earlier. Not to bring up the argument involving me in the meet-up thread (though, obviously, it's the first one that comes to my mind), because it happens all the time, but this open warning stuff and having mods have a go at you and being asked to respond via PMs. It needs to stop.
It's entirely unfair to metaphorically spank (regardless of whether or not the person is misbehaving or breaking rules) a member in a public forum and then not allow them to defend themselves.
If the warnings and accusations are happening in an open forum, it's simply arrogant to have them respond with a PM. If a mod wishes for the complaints, defenses and arguments to be presented to them in that format, the mod themselves should have sent the warning, criticism, command or threat via PM and not in the thread.
Likewise, if a moderator is making accusations and what have you in an open forum, then they have set themselves up to have whichever member to argue their case in that same open forum.
Otherwise, it's a double standard and it's unfair, degrading and belittling. Same goes for regular members.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 13:19:39 GMT
I've been threatened directly with warnings in open forums, and I've seen people threatened to be banned in the same manner, but the latter hasn't happened at all recently.
This brings me to a point I forgot to raise earlier. Not to bring up the argument involving me in the meet-up thread (though, obviously, it's the first one that comes to my mind), because it happens all the time, but this open warning stuff and having mods have a go at you and being asked to respond via PMs. It needs to stop.
It's entirely unfair to metaphorically spank (regardless of whether or not the person is misbehaving or breaking rules) a member in a public forum and then not allow them to defend themselves.
If the warnings and accusations are happening in an open forum, it's simply arrogant to have them respond with a PM. If a mod wishes for the complaints, defenses and arguments to be presented to them in that format, the mod themselves should have sent the warning, criticism, command or threat via PM and not in the thread.
Likewise, if a moderator is making accusations and what have you in an open forum, then they have set themselves up to have whichever member to argue their case in that same open forum.
Otherwise, it's a double standard and it's unfair, degrading and belittling. Same goes for regular members. Obviously, except the regular members aren't the ones doing it.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 13:26:34 GMT
I think what Moo means is, no-ones really coming to us via PM.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Sept 19, 2009 13:29:08 GMT
No, actually I did mean members making some aggravated comments then going "REPLY TO ME VIA PM PLZ" or "dont reply or I'll ignore you" or such. Don't tell me it hasn't happened because it has. Recently in fact.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 13:34:01 GMT
Oops. OK, my bad! But yeah, if it involves lots of members arguing then yes an initial message so that all of those involved can see it, is OK I think. But in the very small number of cases where I have felt I need to step in with a single person, I've done it by PM (directly because of above said fiasco with Mitch). Seriously, I would rather talk to you guys, find out whats bugging you than just go straight into OI!! YOU! NAAAAAO!! And if anything is annoying any of you then please, feel free to tell me - or any of the others.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 14:06:17 GMT
I do and have done. Several times. PM, MSN, chatroom. I try and keep things out of threads as much as possible. I know for a fact that several others do the same.
I will provide a case study of what I mean. It is the Glasgow meet-up thread. I will make it very clear that I am not getting into a debate about whether my initial actions were justified or whatever, but only the ways in which the moderators dealt with it. This is not just about the PM thing, but a number of issues.
On page three of that thread, the argument started with this post: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=3#400490.
Subsequently, the thread did derail slightly.
Then, moderation began with Kimbo's post: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=3#400568.
There is nothing questionable about this post. It was not patronising, rude or arrogant. A simple, blunt request for the discontinuation of thread derailment. I (and everyone else involved) stopped. I did not make another post to continue the derailment, and I did not continue to argue. I didn't make another post at all, until Mambo decides she has to have her say as well, despite the fact that Kimbo had already dealt with it: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400575
Several things are wrong with this post. Firstly, the argument had stopped and so there was no need to make it at all.
Secondly, even if Kimbo hadn't posted and you were simply requesting for it to stop, there was no need to say anything more than he did. Accusing me of trolling was not necessary. If Mambo did, for some reason, think this criticism of me was necessary, it could have easily been taken to PM. However, she decided to do it in a public forum, for all to see and for all to see that, in her opinion, I was doing nothing but trolling.
The issue there, is that if I was not allowed to defend myself in a public forum to declare that I was or wasn't trolling, how was anyone supposed to have a clue?
Thus, following the same logic as the moderators who were posting in the thread, I continued to post in the thread: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400576.
This was followed up by a post from Retro: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400578.
Again, he was telling me- in a public forum- that he is unhappy with my general behaviour. And, of course, bringing his own personal feelings and opinions into the realm of moderating the forum, instead of simply enforcing the rules.
Mambo next: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400580
Here, we have a post that simply insinuates that she deserves respect because she is a moderator; she is superior and bigger than the other members. Which, considering the post was addressing an attitude problem, is another example of double standard.
I replied to Retro's post: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400580
I admit this post was fairly rude, blunt and clearly motivated by anger and should have probably been a PM. However, if it is okay for the admin or a moderator to snipe at someone's personality in an open forum, then it's okay for another member to do so.
This was probably the worst post of all, by Mambo: sonicthecomic.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=brain&action=display&thread=10181&page=4#400580
Asserting the powers of being a moderator, I am very rudely told to shut up. Regardless of whether I was right at the beginning of the thread, things were being said to me and I was responding. Then, despite the mods continually discussing me in this thread, I'm silenced and am not allowed to defend myself.
Why? Because I'm meant to be doing my complaining via PM. I would have happily done this, but when the posts from the moderators themselves were bordering on personal attacks, I felt it was unfair to have to defend myself in private, while I can be attacked in public.
So, a quick summary of things done wrong: -Unnecessary mod interference to chime in when the derailment had ended because of another mod. -Mods continuing the derailment they were supposedly putting an end to. -Mods asking the members to do something they're clearly not prepared to do themselves. -Rudeness towards members. -Allowing personal feelings to get in the way of actually moderating properly. -Accusations being made in public instead of PMs. -Threats being made in public instead of PM.
Regardless of what happened with my initial post, the original argument and what have you, it was a moderator who sparked a second derailment. Kimbo had asked for things to stop politely, and people did.
Mambo's addition was unnecessary and snowballed into further arguing.
This was simply God awful moderation, I'm sorry. Kimbo was absolutely fine and people actually listened to him because of it. Further involvement wasn't necessary, but it was shoved down everyone's throat anyway for bad measure and mod superiority complex.
Mambo and Retro, however... I'm sorry. It's just. No.
Now, Mambo was new to it and is marginally improving between incidents (though you, and no offense, have a long way to go) at moderation. It's forgivable, in retrospect, when you consider that.
Retro, however, should know better by now. This is not a dig at him personally, but he's been a mod for over five years and has been terrible at it since the moment he got those blue stars.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 14:24:32 GMT
Ok, why would you say this
Then post a massive tirade of stuff that happened weeks ago - I didn't think you were the kind to bear a grudge. I appreciate I said something mean to you (which I apologised for - thanks for throwing that back in my face) but this is sheer arrogance. You were still being overly harsh to another member and by the way, that member asked for the matter to be closed. I do what I can and I repeat, do not judge people too harshly because of this incident.
Now, I am open to suggestions, I really am but this is just ridiculous - and not what the thread is for.
Addition - Mitch, I have no personal grudge against you - hell I even like you, I think you're one of the funnier members of the board and the stuff you put on Facebook makes me howl with laughter half the time. So yeah, I'm a little disappointed that something I considered water under the bridge is something that still upsets you. Is this what this whole suggestion thing is about, by the way?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Sept 19, 2009 14:30:34 GMT
Yeah Mitch, you kinda made your point already about public comments, you really didnt need to post all that. Considering most of that post is made of up of "mambo this" and "retro that", maybe you should have taken your own advice and PM'd Retro and Mambo about it, either then or now (assuming you havent already) since you obviously havent let it go.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 14:44:54 GMT
Ok, why would you say this Then post a massive tirade of stuff that happened weeks ago - I didn't think you were the kind to bear a grudge. I appreciate I said something mean to you (which I apologised for - thanks for throwing that back in my face) but this is sheer arrogance. You were still being overly harsh to another member and by the way, that member asked for the matter to be closed. I do what I can and I repeat, do not judge people too harshly because of this incident. Now, I am open to suggestions, I really am but this is just ridiculous - and not what the thread is for. You misunderstand the point of that post, which had a lot of effort put into it, which you are now dismissing on the basis that it was a personal attack.
Yes, you apologised and yes I accepted, but using examples is simply a way to get my point across.
I admit, I should have used maybe an example that didn't involve me as I know it's hard to sound unbiased when I was so directly linked to that thread, but it was the first that sprang to mind.
This isn't about me holding a grudge, because I don't care about it anymore. It is simply water under the bridge. I am looking at this not from the view of someone who felt upset, hurt or wronged (seriously, how could I?), but merely looking at the incident and detailing what I felt was wrong in its handling.
However, it is undeniable that this was an example of absolutely awful moderation.
If you're going to ignore this because you don't handle the criticism that well, then it only proves my point further.
I'm sorry if it feels like I'm throwing it back in your face, because that isn't my intention at all. I felt I may as well make a detailed post about the epitome of bad moderation and explain why it's bad.
Again, this isn't a personal attack.
Then tell me, Moo, what exactly did you make this thread for?
The past few pages have been full of critical comments on the moderation team, with no examples given. I gave examples because it's clearly more constructive to do so.
I would have taken my own advice and PM them about it (and, with Mambo, I did and the issue has since been resolved), but this thread was set-up, supposedly, to tell the moderators what we take issue with, what we suggest and have it discussed. If that's not what the thread's for then why does it even exist?
Don't just ignore criticism because you think I'm being a dick.
I will simply put it to you like this:
Can you read that post I wrote above and tell me that the incident in question was handled well?
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 14:54:59 GMT
I can take criticism - I can't take someone accepting an apology for something I admitted I did and then post about it as though it still, personally annoys you.
So, is this whole suggestions thing because of me and this incident? Because I had already said to you I was sorry and that it seemed clear half the members who posted after the incident said they agreed with you - the lesson was already learned and the way I handle things now are drastically different. I listen to people, I speak to them with respect and I try to put myself out there for others. And here I am, discussing with other members and trying my best to pick up on their points. In real life, this is what I do with my friends and other people who want to talk to me about their problems (and by the way - its one of the things I do best.). I'm a problem solver and on this occasion, yes I did something wrong - and I took responsibility for it.
|
|
|
Post by Nam on Sept 19, 2009 14:55:58 GMT
The more I see of this thread, the more I think it's largely just people without mod powers moaning at those who do cos they think they can do it better. That's what it seems to be boiling down to, with a few genuine points that both sides need to deal with.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 14:59:43 GMT
It's not something I'm still affected by, and it'd not just about you. As I said, I wasn't happy with the way Retro dealt with it, and that particular incident contained a lot of issues, rather than just one and that's why I took that one and ran with it.
I still take issues with the way other mods operate as well. If that somehow makes it better...
I felt this example was recent enough to still be relevant but long enough ago that it wouldn't be too much of a touchy area.
I'm sorry my post wasn't particular tactful and I'm sorry to have opened a can of worms or made it seem like I was getting at anyone on a personal level, but I don't think that should mean it was entirely devoid of merit and well-made observations and points.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Sept 19, 2009 15:11:09 GMT
Then tell me, Moo, what exactly did you make this thread for? The past few pages have been full of critical comments on the moderation team, with no examples given. I gave examples because it's clearly more constructive to do so. I would have taken my own advice and PM them about it (and, with Mambo, I did and the issue has since been resolved), but this thread was set-up, supposedly, to tell the moderators what we take issue with, what we suggest and have it discussed. If that's not what the thread's for then why does it even exist? Don't just ignore criticism because you think I'm being a dick. I will simply put it to you like this: Can you read that post I wrote above and tell me that the incident in question was handled well? [/color] [/quote] You MADE you point then posted another as an "example" that pretty much just picked on mambo, and to some extent Retro. Why do that? You didnt need to and its not done anything bar annoy Mambo. Thats not really on. And I didnt ignore your critism, I agreed with it, are you ignoring me?
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 15:14:24 GMT
Oh no, he's not annoyed me. I'm just a little upset, its a seperate thing from the mod issue. As far as I am concerned with that, I made a rookie error in trying to throw my weight around and I apologised for it. Now what I try to do is to talk to people instead, which I also believe is the right thing to do. We're all adults here, pretty much. When I first became a mod I was concerned that I had to be seen as doing something so I overreacted - its not who I am and it shows. I shouldn't care what other people think of me, I know but I dunno... I guess because, as I said I actually like Mitch as a member of the forum so to read that was a pretty big shock to me.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 16:00:02 GMT
Seriously, Mambo, I'm sorry I upset you and I know the tone of that entire post is pretty off and it sounds bitter, menacing and begrudging, but that's seriously not how it's supposed to be taken.
I know you've apologised and so did I and we kissed and made up, and I'm not affected on any personal level. I was hoping this wouldn't become a personal thing either. It probably wasn't a good idea to bring it up again on my part and I'm sorry.
However, what I was doing was explaining in more detail than before, exactly what I thought was wrong in that thread- on not just your part. And not just the PM thing, but an array of mistakes made.
It's a controversial topic to bring up, but very little examples have been used in this thread, and when there's no examples, it's hard to get an idea of what someone's talking about.
The posts preceeding my post up there seem to all have a bit of a mis-interpretation about them and no one knows what anyone's on about exactly, so I used examples.
I was planning on using further examples of other areas of moderation that really, really need addressing, and not ones that just involve Mambo and Retro. I'm not singling people out for the sake of it.
But I don't think I'll bother saying anything else helpful in this thread, since apparently it's going to be offensive when no malice is meant.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 16:25:38 GMT
Well I knew exactly what you meant in the first post on this page - and please note I wasn't offended by that, it was your "case study" that upset me. As I said before I am completely capable of accepting criticism and taking it on board where it is due - but that tirade was just stepping over the line. Not only did it upset me but as I said, another member did not want this discussing again and chances are you've upset them as well. You really don't need to go to such detail and post it with such vitriol, it does just make it seem like you have a personal vendetta rather than a disagreement with how we do things. If you do have specific issues which you feel require airing then as we have said countless times, you need to tell us - we can't do anything or improve how we operate without you letting us know. In this case, yes you made your case absolutely clear weeks ago and as I said before, I modified how I approach members who need a quick word, based on this encounter. Change has already happened on this particular issue and I don't know what else you could possibly want from me.
If you say you have other issues to bring up then by all means do so - just not in this aggravated manner in which you've posted here, its not as constructive as it could be. Honestly, I'm not offended because you criticised me - because you've already done it and its been dealt with, as I said I was just upset because that post makes it seem like you have a personal problem with me and this whole suggestion box idea was because of me. If you don't then thats fine and no more needs to be said.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Sept 19, 2009 16:53:48 GMT
Just to add the last word- it really wasn't meant to get at you. The tone, on re-reading, is nowhere near as spiteful as it was supposed to be. I'm sorry for that.
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Sept 19, 2009 19:57:33 GMT
Honestly, emotions need to stay out of this.
Mitch's post is harsh but reasonable - he's given examples of everything he's accused.
It's not bullying. He's also said how it can be fixed. I can see how it would be upsetting, but it's just distracting from the real issues by making a big deal out of it.
When I was a mod (and an excellent one), it was distressing when people called me into question, but the solution is to just observe and respond. It's never personal.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 20:11:55 GMT
I never said Mitch was bullying me - in fact I conceded I was bullying him in that thread. I said his post makes it seem like he has a personal problem with me and if you read his post - yes it is mostly angry (an emotion) and directed at me and to a lesser extent, Retro. And if that is the case, then his personal emotions should stay out of it as well.
Did you even read what I had said, Stu? - I had previously taken criticism on, quite well in fact - and changed the way I monitor and take action, where it is necessary. You should notice whenever I do make a change to someone's post, I put a not in small text on it. Believe it or not it was not me who deleted your post poking mild fun at Tom - and I disagreed with it. When I need to speak to a particular member, I do it by PM. When I make comments on the open forum where it is necessary - its to clarify something that many members have asked or its relevant to more than one person. I have taken his feedback on board and it is extremely frustrating to see that despite an apology and corrective action that I took upon myself and weeks later this kind of post happens. It shakes my confidence as a person and its profoundly upsetting that someone may have a personal problem with me, when they have never even met me!
Apparently it is not personal, as Mitch has pointed out - but I still think his initial post at the top of the page is fine - criticism is fine (and please lets not go into that circus again!), but making it seem like a personal issue when apparently it isnt is not the best way to do this. I do not like the idea that members have some kind of grudge against me, the idea that people think I am some sort of bully and cannot be approached - because quite frankly I am not. I am the least aggressive person you will probably meet! I like talking to people and helping them, not smacking them into submission with the ban spatula. You guys do realise that is a joke, right?
I'm not sure what else you two want from me? I have already told you I have taken what youve said on board and changed - is that not enough?
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Sept 19, 2009 20:33:46 GMT
It's been made thoroughly clear that we don't have a personal problem with you. You need to stop thinking that. People are just doing as they're told: SO! As a trial, there is now a thread in which you can tell us what you think is wrong, what you think is right, and discuss said wrongs and rights. That thread is this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Sept 19, 2009 20:41:05 GMT
*bangs head against brick wall*
Ok - I'll start again - this was a problem that was previously cleared up. It was, as far as I was aware - dealt with and I learned from the experience. But there's a massive post up there demonstrating how awful a mod I am... despite it being weeks ago, when I was massively inexperienced and obviously in some kind of mood... I never tell people to shut up IRL - I am not that rude! I really do not understand the motive here if it is not personal. What is it that you want that I haven't already done?
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Sept 19, 2009 20:47:31 GMT
Nothing. Just trying to add my own opinion on the context of Mitch's posts. Again: SO! As a trial, there is now a thread in which you can tell us what you think is wrong, what you think is right, and discuss said wrongs and rights. That thread is this thread. He was discussing things he thought were wrong. Now those things won't be done anymore (and aren't now, in fact). Which is beneficial for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Super Sonic on Sept 19, 2009 21:17:01 GMT
Moderation should be: Problem sorting Topic moving/locking Nuisance banning In SENSIBLE moderation. AND NOTHING ELSE. Man alive! I agree with something the Cap says. Honestly, emotions need to stay out of this. Mitch's post is harsh but reasonable - he's given examples of everything he's accused. It's not bullying. He's also said how it can be fixed. I can see how it would be upsetting, but it's just distracting from the real issues by making a big deal out of it. Will wonders never cease? I agree with Stu as well. I must say I read some of the moderator's comments these days and feel patronised, even if they aren't directed at me. I really think the mods should take more of a back seat and deal with things far more subtly. A simple post such as "Guys, back on topic please" or "This is getting a bit out of hand" should suffice. If it doesn't, then the parties involved should receive PMs. At the same time, the mod involved should leave a message in the Staff Zone saying it has been dealt with, so that the people involved don't get berated by more than one moderator. And finally, this thread is going nowhere tbh. Lock? :/
|
|