Customize

Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

Discussion in 'Support Questions' started by sue, May 24, 2010.

?

Which of the following statements are true to you ? MULTIPLE CHOICE

Poll closed Jun 2, 2010.
1) Moderators need to take an active and neutral role in discussions. 78 vote(s) 61.4%
1) Moderators should not post and only infract, ban or move posts. 13 vote(s) 10.2%
2) Moderators should troll less. 52 vote(s) 40.9%
2) Moderators should troll more. 35 vote(s) 27.6%
3) Forum users should do their part on making the community better 98 vote(s) 77.2%
3) Only moderators can make the community better. It is their responsibility. 9 vote(s) 7.1%
4) O$a, Dav1d Miscarriage punchbag are wordplays i can appreciate, they add value to one's comments. 33 vote(s) 26.0%
4) Insistently repeating O$a, Dav1d Miscarriage punchbag is annoying and should not be encouraged. 54 vote(s) 42.5%
5) Flaming each other on the forums helps prepare someone for dealing with bullbaiting. 37 vote(s) 29.1%
5) Flaming each other over non issues, has no value, is unpleasant and should not be done. 62 vote(s) 48.8%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. anonsoulless Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    To be fair I think your explanation is a pretty good answer to his question, I just don't think the question of "why are people crazy" is as relevant as "why are crazy people here," or more to the point, "what do we do about the crazy people that are here?"
  2. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I don't see how, presently, infractions affect poster leeway. They seem to generate butthurt, and tie up mods, without actually having any community effect. Fewer infractions will have no more-or-less effect AFAICT.

    <brokenrecord>
    Either eliminate infractions altogether, or make them effective for both mods (a three point infraction should NOT tie up a mod for half an hour) and for the community (by having repeat offenders reach the suspension limit, and by pre-emptively heading off the butthurt)
    </brokenrecord>
  3. andonanon Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I was trying to define what a crazy person was so that there was a distinction made between crazy people and other kinds of bad posts.

    I chose the concept of trying to see if the person was attempting to deal with reality or with personal issues and make that determination independent of the actual content of the post.

    But you know, who knows, maybe I am trying to rationalize some of my own fail posts via this theory? Maybe I am reacting to my internal emotional issues and not to reality?

    Like I said, I leave it to others to decide if I am rational or not.
  4. chrisanon Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]


    My point is only that over-modding leads to self-censorship and over-careful posting, and that certainly wasn't an issue in any of the old threads I'm thinking about. I just used them as an example of vigorous open expression and don't want to re-open any old fights.
  5. Uncle Remus Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    TruFax, and again that line becomes burred. Mod are in a no win situation, either way they catch hell.

    You cannot force a site into being better but you most certainly can force one into becoming worse.

    Again, applying restriction to intelligent and proactive people is not conducive to intellectual creation. A very sharp, double edged sword.
  6. eddieVroom Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Speaking of Tinfoil: as we are discussing an "Applied Philosophy" that regards itself a Religion, I think it's reasonable to expect some Philosohical and Religious ideas and traditions to become the subject of discussion. People seem to have widely varying sensitivities as to what constitutes "tinfoil" in this arena. I would hope for a little sensitivity and tolerance were it not for the fact that HE COMES
  7. BLiP Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Okay - maybe not ban the ex-Scilons - but what about a special post just for them where they can moderate to their heart's content while showering each other with love bombs and being perfectly "reasonable" 24/7?

    On the other hand . . .


  8. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Re: anonsoulless and andanon.

    I think andanon's approach of applying basic psychology to define and explain behavior was more of an illustration than an argument, and in doing so i believe he has it on the right end.

    Edievroom, i do not think that there will be any crack down on tinfoil and speculation but rather gentle suggestions for people to think about what they are posting. There is a clear difference between healthy speculation and unhealthy delusions.

    Not to bring your hopes up, but as one could tell from the screenshot i posted earlier in this thread, da5id is working on a forum upgrade with a lot of nice and handy features, one of them being user moderation. You'll be able much like on youtube to thumb up or down posts, depending on their rating posts can be hidden. We'd like to release this as soon as possible but it is as many things still a work in progress.
  9. RightOn Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    thumbs up or thumb down posts?
    errr....
    would this cause a post to be more hidden if it doesn't have many ratings? Sometimes good posts fall to the wayside, and would this feature make it worse?
    Or is this a dumb question? or both

    Can we please vote on the thumbs up/thumbs down feature?
    I am not in favor of this feature for a couple or reasons.
    one being the possibility of posts getting burried (if that is possible)
    and two... it may turn into an ego fag situatuon?

    I don't think posts should be a popularity contest? If a post is popular, it gets quoted enough on its own. Thoughts???

    EDITED: If this entire site was a "chit chat" site that would be a different story.
  10. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Do you get many requests from users to ban themselves?
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I guess every forum has to try it once as it matures...
  12. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    No, an unrated post stays as it is, a post that is voted up stays in the same place. a post that has often been voted down is hidden, but can be seen after clicking on "this post was hidden click here to show the post".

    The order of posts wont be affected by the votes. It is only if they are displayed or not.

    This will allow the community to moderate comments they find uninformative, derailing or other.
  13. RightOn Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    so for members who have socks.... can they vote more than once?
    sorry not computer savy

    also.. was that a "no" to a poll about this?
  14. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    We would be pretty stupid if we didn't expect every feature we introduce not to be abused by sock puppeteers, or people using features to suppress conflicting opinions. Not saying it will be airtight, but abuse will be detected.
  15. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    It appears you have more forum experience than I.
    Since there is implied concern in your post, I'd be interested in a more detailed comment.

    thx
  16. RightOn Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    sooo, the mods will also have to moderate voting too?
    although I do not how big of a task that would be, it will still be an extra task for the mods?
    Do we really need this?
    You said it was for members to moderate other members posts that they find derailing or uninformative.... but then mods will have to moderate the moderation.

    again, I would be in favor of a poll to see if the hive feels this is a wanted and or needed feature.
    just my 2 cents

    thanks for chatting
  17. Anon123456 Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    so i just got off a 24 hour ban for posting my opinion regarding moderator issues in a thread named "community and moderation discussion". if you are going to ask for discussion then dont infract and ban someone when they say something you dont like. i know it is tempting just to ban anyone you have a slight disagreement with but please for the sake of the community and open discussion try to refrain. I tried to appeal my ban because i feel it was not warrented however i had no recourse but to just take it. even if there was an appeal process heres how it would go.

    me: i would like to appeal my ban. why did you ban me?

    mod: because i can

    i really want to crush this cult but i have to admit the aggrivation is getting to me over these unwarrented infractions and bans.

    i saw someone in this thread post "the mods are gods". I disagree. the idea was for everyone to work together and everytime you infract or ban someone "because i can" it drives a wedge between the userbase and the administration.

    many of my infractions i have deserved, but plenty of them were simply for "thread derail". thats such a vague term. example: if i post a joke in a serious business thread , the thread derail rule could be applied even though its not even a derail. and in all seriousness if there is a mod that wants to infract or ban you he can twist the rule anyway he wants, so i agree with the idea of making the rules a bit more clear.

    at this point i dont even know if it is worth continuing this fight when the people i need to work with want to play games.

    if you want to catagorise this post as bitching or whining then so be it. Im sure i will be infracted for some nebulous reason.

    Im doing my best to not baawwwww to hard about this unwarrented ban but put yourself in my shoes for a second. im not rage quitting. im just trying to tell you, i will never bitch when i deserve the punishment. but i will jump around and scream when i dont. If any mod has a personal problem with me then PM me.

    inb4

    banned for thread derail
    banned for personal attack
    banned for blatent tinfoil speculation
    banned for whining
    banned for stating an opinion that the mods dont like.
    banned "because i can"


    PS: thanks for moving all my posts from this thread. good way to have a discussion.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I've seen up-and-down comment voting come and go on three other forums. I don't believe it works, but I was an advocate for it on two of those forums, because I didn't know better.

    I believe trolls can still exploit collapsed posts, moonbats still rise to the bait, it is in the nature of things that, if there is drama, people still expand and look at the low-rated stuff and find themselves unable to hold back from responding.

    But I also believe, as I implied, that it's something that 'has' to be tried. And it's not like my data set (3) of forums where I've seen it tried and fail is significant.

    I believe, in cases like Youtube, the voting really has nothing to do with community moderation, it has to do with making people FEEL like they are having an impact, even if that is utterly false. With something as huge as YT, no-one expects that their contribution will have any 'significant' impact, so it works as a diffuser - a bit like the unconnected 'close door' buttons on lifts 15-20 years ago.

    But in a smaller environment, like here, people will expect that if 2-3 folk down-rank a troll or moonbat post, that will somehow restrict it's impact. And it won't - or it might - I'd be extremely happy if it does - and it should be tried.
  19. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    We also are thinking of having pastel yellow colors and light purple shades underneath the buttons, want us to put up a poll for that too ? Oh we also probably will make avatars 35px by 35px, would you like to give your input on that ? Fact is it isn't there yet, i thought that it would be seen as a positive thing that we want to try different approaches for the community's moderation not to rely on just a handful of individuals.
    Your track record :
    you have contributed nothing towards the discussion besides moaning about infractions and posting unrelated, one line posts. i hope you will enjoy your ban, it'll be permanent, because i can.
  20. Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Dammit sue.. I was typing a huge wallotext about that and you beat me to it :(
  21. Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Also, in regards to the changes... I don't see the harm in at least Trying it... if it doesn't work or was a bad idea, we can always change it back.
  22. RightOn Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Sue, yikes.
    I was just trying to get a feel about the reason behind implementing this feature and ask some questions about how the voting worked and how it would be handled.

    And yes new features can be very positive. Just because I asked some questions and asked if there can be a poll does not mean I am against new features or anything else that would be positive for WWP.
  23. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Just curious, is there a bean counter somewhere of how many users have been banned since this thread started?

    Disclaimer - I love and adore all WWP mods and admins, who are all well known worldwide for their compassion and sense of humor. And reasonableness. And intelligence. And charm. Just trying to make sure I don't my ass banned here.
  24. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    like 4 and a bunch of socks. If we keep this up Sue will have banned all the moonbats anyway and the discussion will be a moot point.

    AND NOTHING OF VALUE WAS LOST
  25. Azazel Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    4 users + 14 socks = 18 accounts

    1 mod demoded

    LOL at the disclaimer. I love you too <3

    The purpose of this thread is to talk about improving relations not bawwwing about how everything is wrong. They had nothing to add but division when we are trying to unite.
  26. Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    BRING ENTURBULATION.ORG BACK!!!!
  27. El Diablo Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Bit behind on this convo, but I was giving the whole "appeal system", a bit of thought...and caught these comments in the discussion.

    I bolded the last bit, because it seems like a good way to go. How to formulate those "infraction-worthy-if-broken" rules could be rather contentious, but the mods might be in a good position to be able to review what are getting infractions and see if some broad classes emerge.

    From the discussions here I have a few ideas regarding these classes and responses which I hope you don't mind me sharing.

    DERAILING:

    Now, being someone who doesn't mean to, but tends to get caught up in whatever discussion I'm currently engaged in (even when it's veering off-topic), I know that this isn't always clear cut. Or maybe they are from the mod's point of view, but not always from those discussing matters.

    What might be useful is something like...as a first step - a mod request to stay on topic, or offering to split the thread and requesting that discussion be taken there (got caught up in a discussion about old vid games on an unrelated thread...and mods did this exact thing...and everyone was more than happy to comply).

    Then infractions could be made for people not complying. If someone is clearly trying to derail intentionally, I think such an approach would thin them out from those just getting caught up in off-topic convo pretty quickly. Infractions for this would be less controversial, since nobody is being stopped from saying anything...just being asked to say it in an appropriate part of the forum. Reasonable people won't have a problem with that.

    TINFOIL/SPECULATION:

    Now, it has been suggested that seperate sub-forums be made for hard dox and speculation, but I foresee some problems with this.

    If we remember back to the early days of the Rex Fowler situation, speculation and dox were coming out side by side. There's good reason to have a working hypothesis, or even multiple hypotheses being discussed in the same place as more factual information. It's a good way to sort out the possible and plausible from the improbable and implausible.

    The issue is not so much with speculation itself, but with things being presented as fact simply because the poster has great conviction about it's correctness. This could be incorporated into the guidelines, so that people are aware that even if they "know" something is the case (not that they necessarily "know"...but may believe they do), if they cannot back it up with some kind of solid evidence then they need to understate their case - present it as a theory, not fact.

    Personal testimony is another kind of beast which I think people should have the right to question. Perhaps something in the guidelines explaining that such evidence is open to scrutiny and getting butthurt and excessively angry if someone questions it's validity is not acceptable - as is getting butthurt and excessively angry at people choosing to take it at face value.

    Why? Because such arguments are not actually looking at the evidence or discussing the subject at hand - They're a type of derail that shits up the thread and makes them unreadible. As above, I think a helpful note in-thread from the mods would be a good first step (which also helps with the transparency/vicarious rule-learning aspect of modding), with infractions for not complying with the request.

    REPORTING, INFRACTIONS & APPEALS

    Maybe have a check-list for the "report this post" function based on the rules/guidelines and category the violation falls into.

    Just an idea, but perhaps a form response based on the infraction-type including further explaination (or re-iteration of the rule), and also what avenues one can take "if they feel this is in error"...could cut down on the work. If the rule they've broken is there in front of them in a pm, then the person wanting to appeal is more likely to examine whether they have indeed broken that rule (or "guideline" if that's more appropriate) and tailor their reponse accordingly.

    Also form response means less work for you guys, and non-controversial infractions from people who realize they're clearly in violation won't require follow-up writing, since presumable they won't challenge it.

    Knowing that an appeals process involves their infraction being reviewed by another mod is also some motivation to not come across as a raving loony with anger issues - since endeering oneself to them would be kinda advantageous! Might cut down on angry responses...but then again, I am prone to optimism. :)

    And also by having a private appeals process in front of them, it could cut down on in-thread bitching about infractions...which itself could be an infraction-worthy offense if it's outside of the "website issues" section.

    The only issue I have with this would be the "public hoopla" that can result, and that it might create problems for you guys in terms of users with several vocal buddies on WWP going all group-butthurt with cries of "Nazi-Mods! Nazi-Mods!" irrespective of the merits of the infraction. But the thing I mentioned before with the in-thread requests before infracting could be an alternative that allows a level of transparency, without it becoming a situation where the user feels singled out...or encouraging further antagonism.


    Anyhow, these are just some things rattling around in my head on this topic. I'm certainly not in the best position to judge a course of action, but thought I may as well put it out there lest any of it is of use.

    Hope nobody takes this as anything more than that. :)
  28. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I should have bolded observe, which means that other users can read the appeal threads but not post in them. This would give a publicly accessible record, and thus would be a good source to determine whether the appealing user or the moderators have been unreasonable in the process. We on occasion get appeals by third party, and have to explain our side of the story. Which can at times be hardly convincing seeing how the third party heard another story before that about how the mods are unreasonable, how its all personal, and how they never did anything wrong.
  29. Hicks Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    32D4g.jpg.png

    Nice feedback in there, keep it coming.
  30. mirror neuron Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    I agree, and as elementary as it may seem I think that some posters would benefit from a simple, general definition of what constitutes documentation, and why. This might help people to understand why "I witnessed it myself" isn't useful in quite the same way as confirmation from two or more sources. Personal testimony is irreplaceable in its emotional impact--it's just not enough to establish something as fact.

    Along these lines, I think part of what's behind that kind of indignation is the impression that someone is invalidating or disbelieving the poster's experience and observations. Separating out the roles of anecdote and evidence and giving due respect to each might be helpful.
  31. TrevAnon Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Well, this thread for me is too long, I just quickly glanced through it.

    I noticed one remark about changing tactics from LOLXENU to writing decent letters to senators. I thought that was a good one.

    I also saw a post about banning someone if they make a stupid post. I'll just say I think that would be wrong. I am a non-native English speaker/writer and only for that reason make more mistakes / stupid posts than others - just because I do not understand or know the finer details of the beautiful English language.

    I enjoy my almost daily visit and think the mods are doing a good job. But hey, I have never been infracted...
  32. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    maybe we should try a week of mandatory anon posting
  33. AnonyMary Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    My 2 cents:

    Consistancy across the moderator board is most important . I liken some of the issues on WWP that were mentioned in the survey to thosemany parents have encountered when dealing with their kids.

    My point is this: You give an inch, they take a mile.

    It's no different with adults , especially if some of them are kids who grew up with parents who could could be manipulated by them. Or if they are just annoying or oppositional by nature

    So unbiased consistancy in enforcing the stated rules is needed by all moderators. It's like having a friend who then became your supervisor. Everyone needs to know what is expected by the mods and all mods know what is expected of them. Mods should also have rules if the don't already. That's just to keep it from being about personalities instead of efforts.

    Being a moderator can be a thankless job if tied up with having to handle alot of drama and distraction all the time. It's also tempting to be lenient with posters one likes if the mods aren't being consistent and posters are pushing it to get away with what they can. So, there is nothing wrong with setting expectations of everyone here expecting people meet them.
  34. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    That's only going to make things worse because people will have less accountability than they do now.

    Look, this problem isn't going to be solved by a change in moderating style. The moonbats on this forum aren't going to magically give up their hate and start thinking again. The only thing you can do with them now is to contain them. What this site needs is fresh blood and new and diverse ideas and points of view. What the mods can do is send out a message that the bigotry and the blatant tinfoil and the hatred aren't going to be tolerated. Make it clear to new people comming in that this isn't just a group of fanatics. Make it clear that their views are welcome and that this is something of which they want to be a part. It's too late to save the moonbats, we should be thinking about how to contain them for the time being and hopefully we can grow the community some more to the point where they will either wake the fuck up, take their bullshit elsewhere, or be kicked the fuck out. Just my opinion of course.
  35. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Hi, the proposed guideline of expecting people to write in decent English will likely not apply to your case, judging the post you made, you make the effort to be comprehensible. Even if you have mild grammer / spelling errors every now and then the guideline wont apply to you, what it is more meant to prevent is repeated and purposeful butchering of the English language without it being relevant to a thread like for example: LAWLZ gAIsse I head SwIT thang 2 say BUT i forGOTZ, in a serious thread (like this one). This guideline would likely not extend to a chitchat thread talking about cute kittens.

    Hope this explains the suggestion, its reasoning and appeases your concerns.

    I fully agree with more consistency among the moderators and the actions they take. I am not saying we should go as far as turn moderators into homogenic machines all acting according to the same formulas, but more that there is a general agreement of what is and what is not right or wrong conduct, both applying to mods and users. Eventho we have different opinions and approaches when it comes to moderating, we have so far not had any real moderator wars, (knocks wood) so comming to a consensus there shouldn't be too hard. That being said, i think we still want to leave the moderators enough leeway to moderate in their own preferred style, as long as it stays within agreed limits.

    Not to sound patronizing but i at times -- and think that regarding that i can speak for most mods, do feel that "give a finger, get your arm taken" is pretty common around here. We really try and care about keeping this site, the community and the collective going onward in a positive and enjoyable way for all, but sometimes it feels a little unilateral. I realize this may sound like unwarented self importance but the positions we have are rarely appreciated, much like a parents relation with their adolescent offspring.

    I can see where you are coming from, and i must agree that it is the easiest solution to outright ban everyone that is overly sensitive to speculation / vindictive hatred. However i am hopeful that we can guide be it a minority of those individuals into a more sane frame of thought before resorting to such drastic measures, sane not only for the community but for them as individuals. Because i'll admit i at times truly feel sorry for some while seeing them be consumed by hate, and that from a moral perspective trying to help them before giving up on them is the right thing to do.
  36. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    ^
  37. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Someone earlier suggesting instituting a rating system.

    I was watch the NYC protest videos and I had the idea, why not run this place as a parody of scientology? It would be informative for new people, it would be a way to enforce order, and it has the potential to be funny. New people start out as PC's, then progress to Basics, and various other levels. If you misbehave you have to re-take the Basics. Troublesome posters are labelled PTS and really bad ones get their SP declares. Along the same lines, the PR parts of this site perhaps need to be separated from other parts. Someone mentioned having subforums. I propose having them divided into divisions like scientology has. Make the home page a parody of a stress test. Only allow PC's into a heavily moderated pleasant environment where we make our "sales" pitch ...call it..division 6 or something. All other pages are locked from view. Once they have paid their dues there, let them into a general discussion area called Freedom Magazine. If people demonstrate they are rational they can qualify for other forums...maybe one for protesting (Volunteer Ministers?), one for media enturbulation(OSA), research section could be called the RTC. Rename the Thunderdome to Rehabilitation Project Force. The idea is give WWP a new identity that breaks with the past while still maintaining a playful spirit.
  38. sue Administrator

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    Creative and interesting ideas, not sure whether we'd all agree on going with this but i like the rough idea, limitations are kind of a breaking point tho. Got any other suggestions ?
  39. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    and we could call it Gaia Online.
  40. Anonymous Member

    Re: Community and Moderation discussion [Added POLL]

    What do you mean by limitations?

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins