Moderation discussion

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:15 pm

And I should have the opportunity to try this, over every one else, because I am the one who asked for it first. I've presented a plan. I'm a Doacratator. Or I am a Fascist. Give me three (3) threads of my naming and find out!

Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit

I'd be for that. The wo/man has stepped up to the plate. That's saying a lot.

I just hope the thread leaves out any discussion about cephlapods.

No squid talk. None.

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:30 pm

Badger:

I just hope the thread leaves out any discussion about cephlapods.

Did you mean: cephalopods? Just checking.

What’s the mater Captain Fuckwit the only way you can interact on this board is if you can have full control of what is on it.
You talk big. Show us. Start a thread of your choice. Lets see who will post to it.

Define highly successful thread. Is it highly successful thread only if it has what you want it to have in it?
“Highly successful thread” ?? To what end? By whose standards? For who?
Your narrow view sounds like you cannot interact with people who think different from you.

Define
Qualified to censor, against those whose opinions "matter"

Again "matter" as you see it.

You seem to have some preconceived idea of what a board should be.

Just because it is your preconceived idea does not mean that it is way every one thinks. And just because you think you are right does not mean that you are.

You have proved nothing until you interact with out the ability to change your word and others. Like the rest of us do. If you don’t you’re just a troll stirring shit and you will never earn any respect around here. No need to reply this here this is my only post on the matter.

You can always PM me I wont read it. See I can censor, against those whose opinions "don’t matter" and hey look I am not a Moderator. Look no special tools needed.

Yes I am a sock…deal with it.

Come on Captain Fuckwit prove your self. Or are you all talk?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:31 pm

I would rather him create topics, like everyone else. Right now there are no tools available where we could do what he suggests, and look how difficult it is to scrounge up needed resources for the spamming problem.

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:39 pm

[quote]would rather him create topics[/quote]

Me too. If he can't deal with it like the rest of us. How can we trust that he can do it with the tools.

Captain Fuckwit must prove him self or he is just slinging troll shit.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:44 pm

Dr BENWAYLADEN wrote:...If you don’t you’re just a troll stirring shit and you will never earn any respect around here. No need to reply this here this is my only post on the matter...You can always PM me I wont read it... Yes I am a sock…deal with it.

No, unfortunately I have to deal with it. You cant expect to make a statement towards someone like that without a response, so it kinda looks like pulling a punch and running off - especially when you say its comming from a sock.

Please try to make your points without that kind of stuff in policy feedback.

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:58 pm

...If you don’t you’re just a troll stirring shit and you will never earn any respect around here. No need to reply this here this is my only post on the matter...You can always PM me I wont read it... Yes I am a sock…deal with it.

If you don’t you’re just a troll stirring shit and you will never earn any respect around here. No need to reply this here this is my only post on the matter.

You can always PM me I wont read it. See I can censor, against those whose opinions "don’t matter" and hey look I am not a Moderator. Look no special tools needed.

I noticed that you left out the point. I don’t need to be a Moderator to censor info on this board. I can just not read it.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 9:28 pm

ja, ironic, hunh?

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 5:09 am

Ironic no. Just very interesting the way you protect Captain Fuckwit. And would edit a quote to show what you want it to show. Its kinda like telling a joke a leaving out the punch line. If you edit a statment and leave out the point of the statment...well I Just find it very interesting.

Oh and about the sock. I conceder Captain Fuckwit to be a sock. And I only talk to socks with a sock.

I am calling Captain Fuckwit on his words. Put up or shut up!

My words are very clear. If he wants to be a Moderator prove it. Or stop flaming people on this board.

Sincerely yours,
the sock named Dr BENWAYLADEN

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:47 am

Protecting CF!? Fuck no, I dont have much motivation to do that. I just need to be fair and equal to everyone despite how I may personally feel towards them. But really, I was not trying to warp your comment to make a point, just pull out some stuff as an example.

As far as what you are saying though, I am pretty much in agreement. Hopefully others will comment as well.

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:54 am

My apologies for my assumptions in this matter. I only have respect for you spectabillis.

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:24 am

Dr. Benwayladen,

Would you be kind enough to highlight where you feel CF engaged in "flaming" of people on this board in the past couple of days? Perhaps I missed something....I did see a comment about DVD but considering the long standing animosity he inspires I overlooked that as it's like a routine gripe.

I'm not here to bring out the paddles and stir this mess up even more, however I happen to like CF's idea. But considering the current state of the eplaya I don't see anyway it's going to happen with official sanction. CF, IMHO the only way this is going to get traction is if you take your idea and run with it. Setup a thread with the topic of your choice and then give us a dry run. Post after the fact what would you flag, moderate, etc, and why? Sure you may not have the allmight kill switch for posting in there, but we would see your idea in action and it might help build support for what you want to accomplish.

Beyond that I will say on the record that SB exceeds every expectation I had for a moderator on this board. And with that I'll go back to lurking and learning.

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:39 am

Just to echo Spectabillis,

One issue with CF's idea is technical. He wants a thread he can moderate (too lazy to do complex underlines and itals, sorry) which means being able to control the content of "his" threads. It is simply not possible do this with the current system the way it is set up.

Dr BENWAYLADEN · Post by **Dr BENWAYLADEN** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:12 am

Kinetic IV I agree with you ASSESMENT of the matter.

My apologies for the heat in my post.

SED · Post by **SED** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:22 am

Any reaction to fire elf's lewd and antagonistic postings?

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:41 am

i have removed the images that violate our TOS from that thread.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:10 am

Dr BENWAYLADEN wrote:My apologies for my assumptions in this matter. I only have respect for you spectabillis.

thanks, but dont worry about it. i sometimes have to be short and direct when people post certain personal things in policy discussion just to keep it on track and from the personal shit throwing. that does not always come off well, and gets people in an immediate defend/attack mode. hey, if i was posting something and some moderator came along to throw it down i would raise all kinds of hell.

but since there is no way to post up some rules or explanations, there is no other way to do it.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:15 am

SED wrote:Any reaction to fire elf's lewd and antagonistic postings?

see what i mean?

really sed, please keep that personal stuff out of policy discussion.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 5:40 pm

I would rather him create topics, like everyone else. Right now there are no tools available where we could do what he suggests, and look how difficult it is to scrounge up needed resources for the spamming problem.

Got it. Understood. Thanks just the same.

Captain Fuckwit · Post by **Captain Fuckwit** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:21 am

(05/03/05)
I think you are all full of shit.

<Re-paginate Here>

Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit

SED · Post by **SED** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:28 am

spectabillis wrote:
SED wrote:Any reaction to fire elf's lewd and antagonistic postings?
see what i mean?

really sed, please keep that personal stuff out of policy discussion.

I searched for a more direct way to complain about this poster, but could find one. What's the appropriate way to bring such behavior to the attention of the mods?

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:52 am

PM's work well for alerting the mods to issues.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:04 pm

BUMP!

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:23 pm

i am reminded of something important - we dont always know if and when we say something that others take personally.

most online communities create this sort of self-filtering capacity where people are often hit hard when they cross some community issue, its a self moderating mechanism that sort of defines the boarders and provides informal rules.

but sometimes it requires tough skin when someone gets hit for something they post that may be out of line, and with new people, that can make them immediately defensive without the opportunity to step back and try to understand what is going on. so i think its important to not only remind people (but also remind myself) that it can be taken too far.

unfortunately, in a moderator role i have to deal with conflicts that often make me the target of attacks, and people dont always own up to what they say and do. (now I am NOT aiming this at anyone specific here, let me make that clear so no one feels the need to defend themselves) so i dont always know whats going on immediately and can come off wrong, or even make the mistake in who is provoking what.

communications is an important and often mis-used tool. yeah we can all throw it down and poke stabs in making our point, but what about confusion? what if someone is taking something personally without anyone else knowing it? asking what they meant, or repeating what you thought they said back to them can go a long way.

besides, its much easier to clear it up and move on to better things like building art, growing past our limits, and having fun.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Mon Apr 17, 2006 4:56 pm

dvd dug up an interesting and relevant topic, http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... highlight= i wish technopatra was still on board.

its interesting because most of these points were, and still are, covered not only when the role first started up but also when antiM was brought on board. most of it has been followed in the general ideas and spirit, but there are a few things that i think are off and i think also fall short.

As suggested in the Policies section, I am warm to the idea of establishing the "erangers" who have not admin privileges (no ability to edit, delete, move or lock any posts or threads) but will be given a chance to establish themselves as thread moderators/vibe patrol and gain the community's trust.

Once that is established, in my book they have earned the right to some admin privileges. They will be accountable to the community, each other, and me. ANY abuse of privilege would carry the penalty of immediate deactivation upon review.

I already have a couple of eplayans in mind to tap on the shoulder to be this first wave of community moderators. Their (admittedly subjective) qualifications are:

1 - first and foremost, an ability and willingness to be friendly with some consistency. They have proven themselves by their behavior so far that they are not out to start or fan flames.

2 - they have exhibited a demonstrable ability to debate responsibly. They have responded to some heated threads with integrity and fairness. They are able to clearly illustrate their points and accept it when others don't agree with them.

3 - their presence on the boards is consistent enough that they seem to not only tolerate but embrace the diversity of style and opinion that this community offers. They have been engaged in a variety of different types of threads - informational, cultural, political. They are willing & able to spend the time needed to more effectively moderate the boards.

there are a few people who fit that description, i think i will start to discuss things with them.

1 - Your personal opinion on a particular topic is not relevant, and in fact, is counter-productive to your job as a mediating presence.

2 - Swallowing said opinion can take practice and many deep breaths.

3 - Never, ever, ever, ever post your first response to any issue. give yourself the leeway to write a rant and get any emotion out of your system - then DO NOT POST IT. Toss it and start another one. This is a good approach even when you think you are being cool right off the bat. (I kind of wish more people would do this all the time)

4 - Most people are receptive to constructive feedback about their behavior. It is always worth approaching someone to see where they are at before making any judgement - internally or externally. If they are not receptive, well, just so long as they're not breakin' any rules, leave them and their attitude alone. The community is smart and sensitive enough to support who they want.

5 - Be aware of your effect on a conversation. As a person of authority, people to take your words with a certain amount of weight, and you have to be conscious that you are not blithely throwing that weight around. What may seem like mild statements to you can come across as final words, which kills conversation. Sometimes not contributing to a conversation is the best thing you can do to keep it alive.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 12:08 am

1 - Your personal opinion on a particular topic is not relevant, and in fact, is counter-productive to your job as a mediating presence.

while i have a moment i will explain why this does not work well, when first starting out i tried that and stayed out of most discussions. the person is no longer a member of the community, it puts them outside. this makes an authority figure no longer connected within the community and clueless to what is going on. now in spirit i still understand what the point is - that a moderator needs to be impartial in order to resolve conflicts. i just dont think they are mutually exclusive.

but its also better to have several moderators because then you can make sure that spirit is being followed. not all moderators are going to agree or even be interested in all topics - having more than one gives you the ability to hand it off to that un-interested person.

its also why moderators need to be chosen from the general community where the members have a proven track record - but more importantly an established base of trust and respect they can work from.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:56 pm

just a quick question, but does anyone think moderators should be some sort of automatic community leaders?

i dont.

that does not mean moderators cannot be an important community member just like anyone else, its a valuable trait for a moderator to be well connected within the community. i just dont like the idea of some sorta self-appointed leader that pushes and enforces thier own agenda.

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:47 pm

spectabillis wrote:just a quick question, but does anyone think moderators should be some sort of automatic community leaders?

i dont.

that does not mean moderators cannot be an important community member just like anyone else, its a valuable trait for a moderator to be well connected within the community. i just dont like the idea of some sorta self-appointed leader that pushes and enforces thier own agenda.

wow

so, why was the "i've been asked to leave" locked up? org policy? and how does that action support the postiion you take above?

wow.

my take on it... the LLC wants happy smiley, less snarky people, unlike me... and it is their playground, if you like to play there, you have to play by the rules.

pretty interesting petri dish experiment the eplaya is...

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:36 pm

Jeebus!!!!!

I am shocked, confused, etc...

Post by **AntiM** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:09 pm

Sooo, what's a mod to do when a user starts accusing them of things which simply haven't happened? How do you defend yourself?

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:30 pm

If there's a need to defend perhaps the moderator has went beyond their mandate and they need to step back and rethink the role they volunteered for and if they're really doing what the community wishes...or are they supporting the "vocal minority"? If after doing that soul searching they feel they are right then you come out and say what you need to say, do it once, and move on. If the other person doesn't get it, tough.

I post that reluctantly as I struggle with it myself. But I've said it, now does anyone have any good condiments that go with shoe leather to make it taste better?

Moderation discussion

I think you are all full of shit.

juxtopostion of words and deeds