Rule #2: Discussion of Moderation

[Revoltingest]

We do what we can within the boundaries of the rules, especially Rule 2. Some Site Feedback threads take a lot of effort to address due to the sheer length thereof, but we still try to address them when we believe doing so could be conducive to more understanding and clarity.

I'm not offering any particular measure to take here.
But when staff receive feedback about impressions,
It might offer an opportunity to better understand the
mind of civilians. This could inspire something useful.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm not offering any particular measure to take here.
But when staff receive feedback about impressions,
It might offer an opportunity to better understand the
mind of civilians. This could inspire something useful.

It could, as long as the feedback and impressions aren't based on gossip or repeatedly clarified misconceptions.

Something one has to accept as a fact of life is that no matter what one does when working among a lot of people, someone will always be dissatisfied or insistent on a misunderstanding regardless of any clarification to the contrary. That is why identifying priorities and picking one's battles is an essential skill to have.

The above applies both to RF and in-person interactions, from my experience.

 

[Revoltingest]

It could, as long as the feedback and impressions aren't based on gossip or repeatedly clarified misconceptions.

In my post, I was leaving the possible solutions up
to you guys. I assume staff would be judicious.

Something one has to accept as a fact of life is that no matter what one does when working among a lot of people, someone will always be dissatisfied or insistent on a misunderstanding regardless of any clarification to the contrary. That is why identifying priorities and picking one's battles is an essential skill to have.

The above applies both to RF and in-person interactions, from my experience.

No disagreement here.

 

[Heyo]

Explaining every action or lack thereof to everyone who files a report is not a priority because it is both unfeasible and pointless--harmful, even, since it would violate confidentiality of moderation.

I think it could lessen your work load if you'd explain frequently asked questions in an open site feedback, either in discussion with someone who wants to have an open discussion or simply as a report with anonymised examples. It beats having to explain it over and over again.

 

[nPeace]

Most likely your definition of "personal attacks" and/or trolling is different from ours.

In the good old days, before we switched over to Xenforo, it was easy to go over a members reports, that is the reports that they've made and sent us, to check something like this out.

There have been times in the past that we've had members come out into the open forums like you just did and say "Well, I made reports and reports and nothing happened, blah blah blah blah blah", and then it turns out they never actually made any reports, or if they did it was one or two over the course of however many years and about something that may have upset them but wasn't actually a rule violation.

You're saying here that you reported actual personal attacks and trolling and nothing was done about it. I seriously doubt that.

But I'll give you a chance to verify it.

How about sending me a conversation message telling me who you reported along with a rough timeframe and I'll go check it out.

I know this is an old thread, but I decided to revive it, instead of starting a new one.
I have had the same experience as @Koldo.
I'll like to ask a question... or two, since I am not sure if it will be answered in Site Feedback (SF).
Are posts in Site Feedback answered, where there is genuine query? Are there times when posts are ignored, and on what criteria?
Where does one make inquiries in the event that post were ignored that did not fit those criterion?

 

[Quagmire]

I know this is an old thread, but I decided to revive it, instead of starting a new one.
I have had the same experience as @Koldo.

Hopefully you noticed that the reports that @Koldo was talking about turned out to be imaginary.

We can only deal with actual reports, not reports that a member intended to make but never did.

 

[Twilight Hue]

A week ago I asked the following question in a "site feedback" thread:



Since I've got no answer yet, I suspect that the moderators aren't too delighted to see such an OP but also aren't opposed to it. Well, here it is. May it lead to an open debate about the value of secrecy in moderation or at least revive the discussion we had.

My argument for opening moderation to more transparency is that
1. people will have a better understanding of how the rules are interpreted. We learn from examples and there are simply too few examples when I only see when I get moderated. This understanding will eventually lead to fewer infractions of the rules and less work for the moderators.
2. It reduces the feeling of being singled out and picked on. When my experience is others getting moderated vs I get moderated of about 0 : 12 the moderators may insure me that I'm not singled out but the evidence is still not in their favour. A more transparent moderation ensures that people can see the fairness of the moderators and don't have to believe in it. Which will lead to a higher acceptance of moderation and less discussion about it, ergo, less work for the moderators.
3. It should be a principle that transparency is a good thing and there should be a good reason to be not transparent.

What do you think about transparency in moderation?

My only concern is bias. Political, health, or otherwise.

RF isn't perfect imo, but it still has a reasonable and fair system in general.

 

[nPeace]

Hopefully you noticed that the reports that @Koldo was talking about turned out to be imaginary.

We can only deal with actual reports, not reports that a member intended to make but never did.

Obviously @Koldo is not everyone, as you know.

 

[Quagmire]

Obviously @Koldo is not everyone, as you know.

Not seeing your point.

You said you were having the same experience that @Koldo had.

 

[nPeace]

Not seeing your point.

You said you were having the same experience that @Koldo had.

The same experience he referred to in this post. Not where he might have said he did not report, when he thought he did.

 

[Quagmire]

The same experience he referred to in this post.

Yes, I know what you meant.

Not where he might have said he did not report, when he thought he did.

That's not what he said. That's what I said.

 

[nPeace]

@Quagmire my questions were not to @Debater Slayer alone. Any staff member can answer.
Are posts in Site Feedback answered, where there is genuine query? Are there times when posts are ignored, and on what criteria?
Where does one make inquiries in the event that post were ignored that did not fit those criterion?

 

[nPeace]

Yes, I know what you meant.



That's not what he said. That's what I said.

You saw my point then... or you didn't?

 

[Quagmire]

@Quagmire my questions were not to @Debater Slayer alone. Any staff member can answer.
Are posts in Site Feedback answered, where there is genuine query?

Generally yes, which is why every site feedback thread you've ever made aside from your most recent one, and there've been a few, was answered almost immediately.

I just checked.

Are there times when posts are ignored, and on what criteria?

Posts in Site Feedback are never ignored, but, just speaking for myself, I tend to de-prioritize site feedback threads that start out with loaded questions, accusations, sermons, tantrums, or anything else that tells me I'd be better off devoting my time and attention to something else.

Fortunately there are staff members who have more patience than I do, so even those threads tend to get taken care of.

I also tend to put site feedback threads on the back burner if it's the same member asking the same questions that've been answered multiple times before. I figure if they didn't get it the first half a dozen times, one more time probably isn't going to make a difference.

I try to give my time to issues where I think it's actually going to do some good.

You saw my point then... or you didn't?

When someone says,"I'm not seeing your point", that generally means they're not seeing your point.

And at this point I'm wondering if you can see your own point because you seem to have lost track.

 

[Aštra’el]

I like to imagine I’ve become quite proficient at skating on thin ice. I guess… operating within the rules just comes naturally when you’ve become “authoritarian”.

 

[nPeace]

Generally yes, which is why every site feedback thread you've ever made aside from your most recent one, and there've been a few, was answered almost immediately.

I just checked.



Posts in Site Feedback are never ignored, but, just speaking for myself, I tend to de-prioritize site feedback threads that start out with loaded questions, accusations, sermons, tantrums, or anything else that tells me I'd be better off devoting my time and attention to something else.

Fortunately there are staff members who have more patience than I do, so even those threads tend to get taken care of.

I also tend to put site feedback threads on the back burner if it's the same member asking the same questions that've been answered multiple times before. I figure if they didn't get it the first half a dozen times, one more time probably isn't going to make a difference.

I try to give my time to issues where I think it's actually going to do some good.

I understand personal feelings get in the way at times. Should that be a quality of good moderation?
Obviously all moderators would not have the same opinion. So it's a matter of personal feelings then?

When someone says,"I'm not seeing your point", that generally means they're not seeing your point.

And at this point I'm wondering if you can see your own point because you seem to have lost track.

Yes. My point was made. So how can it be I have lost track? That's a contradiction, isn't it?
I'll like to make the point that one cannot base all instances on just one. Generally, that is done where that one instance is favorable to ones position.

 

[Quagmire]

I understand personal feelings get in the way at times.
Should that be a quality of good moderation?

No. How'd we get on that topic?

Obviously all moderators would not have the same opinion. So it's a matter of personal feelings then?

About what?

You know, just because you don't like the answers your getting doesn't mean that the person giving the answers has it out for you.

Yes. My point was made. So how can it be I have lost track?

I don't know, but somehow you managed to.

That's a contradiction, isn't it?

If it is, it's yours so I'll just let you deal with it.

I'll like to make the point that one cannot base all instances on just one. Generally, that is done where that one instance is favorable to ones position.

Absolutely no idea what you're talking about now.

Which "one instance" are we talking about here?

 

[Heyo]

I know this is an old thread, but I decided to revive it, instead of starting a new one.

Thank you.

I have had the same experience as @Koldo.
I'll like to ask a question... or two, since I am not sure if it will be answered in Site Feedback (SF).
Are posts in Site Feedback answered, where there is genuine query? Are there times when posts are ignored, and on what criteria?
Where does one make inquiries in the event that post were ignored that did not fit those criterion?

Just FYI: I have currently an unanswered question on Site Feedback though I have also to admit that I wasn't very humble or friendly when asking. I let it slide since I cool off quickly but those unresolved matters stack up and at every new event I get more and more emotional.

 

[nPeace]

No. How'd we get on that topic?



About what?

You know, just because you don't like the answers your getting doesn't mean that the person giving the answers has it out for you.



I don't know, but somehow you managed to.



If it is, it's yours so I'll just let you deal with it.



Absolutely no idea what you're talking about now.

Which "one instance" are we talking about here?

I'm not allowed to comment on the behavior of moderators. Good bye.

 

[nPeace]

Thank you.

Just FYI: I have currently an unanswered question on Site Feedback though I have also to admit that I wasn't very humble or friendly when asking. I let it slide since I cool off quickly but those unresolved matters stack up and at every new event I get more and more emotional.

I think whether someone responds emotionally or not, is irrelevant to queries in an area set up for site feedback, but maybe I am just too unimportant to know.