What a moderator does.

Sparky

Yeah, moderating also entails you having to play mammy and daddy in the forums you oversee.

People will make silly mistakes like a poll done wrong or a thread they want deleted.
We have that extra feature of helping them by correcting a poll mistake etc etc.
It's also our job to keep the forum clean and interesting.

Talliesin

theTinker wrote:

I've actually never seen any of that spam on the boards.ie, so if its as bad as u say there must be loads of work going on..thanks mods.

John wrote:

But be warned that bestiality is illegal in Ireland so being a stallion cuts your chances with the ladies substantially.

Funnily enough there is a congruence between these two posts, namely the photographs of men being sodomised by bulls that were Spammed across many forums one lunchtime. A particularly delightful clean-up job that one was.

theTinker wrote:

If i subscribe to the sex forum..will i learn to a stallion in bed? :P

Another thing mods do is tediously repeat things because while we may have written it umpteen times already, more people will come along that haven't read it Here we go again...
Subscribing to boards.ie is a donation. Like modding, it is a way for people who like boards.ie to help out, in this case with its finances.
Subscribers get benefits of two types:
First, small thank-you's it is within boards.ie's gift to provide - larger (but still tastefully small and unanimated) customised avatars, a larger PM limit, more stars under your avatar. These come with no guarantees as to continuation of service (for example, subscibers also get an @boards.ie email address, but this is currently unavailable and fixing this is not at the top of technical issues that need to be resolved) or exclusivity (once only subscribers got free blogs, now everyone does IIRC). They are "thank yous" and should be accepted as such.
Second, there was much humming and hawing about the creation of a sex-and-sexuality forum - basically lots of people wanted there to be one, but lots of people foresaw all manner of problems with there being one - and it was decided to restrict membership to mods and subscribers on the basis that it would be a smaller more managable group who were to some extent committed to boards.ie rather than being throw-away accounts signed up just to saw "willies" a lot until they get banned.
Some people do see it as "subscribing to the sexuality forum". In one way this is a good thing (you're not getting your money back just because you've been banned from S&S, so you're motivated not to act the bollocks) in some ways a bad thing (it's not accurate, and leads to a "hey, I'm a paying customer" attitude where it isn't warranted) and in some ways merely irritating (there were some complaints about boards.ie doing this for the money, which was irritating due to the combination of it not being true with the fact that if the admins had done it for the money, they would have been within their rights to do so).

Thanx 4 The Fish

projectmayhem wrote:

i think this explains the need for mods.

good work guys, it goes unappreciated but deep down we all want your children.

You can have mine, I will pay to send them to you.

!! I knew this being a mod alrk would pay off eventually, at last I can get some sleep !!

tbh

I look at the mods the same as any committee member - always get slagged, always have their motives and methods questioned, but remove them and no-one gets any fun. fair play mods, I say.

The Walsho

Yep, fair play guys. Huzzah for the moderators!

miju

Ruu wrote:

Nice one Mr.Hungus. Indeed, I have always seen my role as janitor like.

aye me too and i actively try not to edit / lock band etc as i personally think you should get into an argument if you cant take a good tongue lashing as long as its not OTT

actually , i think it's about time i got a new mop head , anyone know if DeVore has got any of those request forms left???????

.......i'll get me coat

CiaranC

hah, i got banned from feedback for suggesting moderators should act more akin to janitors rather than policemen

Talliesin

Really?

amp

Fight DA Power HOWTO:

Top ten moderator FACTS:

1. Moderators have the same powers as Admins.
2. Moderators always agree with each other, regardless of the truth.
3. Moderators are employees.
4. Moderators are power mad junkies that ban for fun.
5. Moderators don't like newbies.
6. Moderators are bullies.
7. Moderators have an extra toe on each foot.
8. Moderators cause global warming.
9. Moderators are terrorists.
10. Moderators kidnapped Shergar.

Throw logic and reasoning out the window and live fully in the belief that no matter what you did, no matter how many warnings you receive, no matter what it says in the charter, that by posting a thread on Feedback you'll gain some of your precious ego back. That you will be seen as a champion for justice and users rights.

If your arguments are questioned by more than one moderator, please make sure you suggest a conspiracy. Ignore any moderator that agrees with you. Ignore any users that disagree with you. But most of all continue to ignore logical reasoning.

Remember it's not you at fault, it's the system at fault. Never ever EVAR admit you were wrong. That is a sign of weakness and will result in even more moderator bullying.

projectmayhem

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

You can have mine, I will pay to send them to you.

!! I knew this being a mod alrk would pay off eventually, at last I can get some sleep !!

oh i wasn't serious. it was just spam

(see what i did there? )

6th

amp wrote:

Fight DA Power HOWTO:

Top ten moderator FACTS:

1. Moderators have the same powers as Admins.
2. Moderators always agree with each other, regardless of the truth.
3. Moderators are employees.
4. Moderators are power mad junkies that ban for fun.
5. Moderators don't like newbies.
6. Moderators are bullies.
7. Moderators have an extra toe on each foot.
8. Moderators cause global warming.
9. Moderators are terrorists.
10. Moderators kidnapped Shergar.

I was actually stopped for speeding on the M50 before a mod - I would have paid a fine but he decided it better to ban me from the M50 and pinch my nipples.

Sparky

amp wrote:

Fight DA Power HOWTO:

Top ten moderator FACTS:

1. Moderators have the same powers as Admins.
2. Moderators always agree with each other, regardless of the truth.
3. Moderators are employees.
4. Moderators are power mad junkies that ban for fun.
5. Moderators don't like newbies.
6. Moderators are bullies.
7. Moderators have an extra toe on each foot.
8. Moderators cause global warming.
9. Moderators are terrorists.
10. Moderators kidnapped Shergar.

Throw logic and reasoning out the window and live fully in the belief that no matter what you did, no matter how many warnings you receive, no matter what it says in the charter, that by posting a thread on Feedback you'll gain some of your precious ego back. That you will be seen as a champion for justice and users rights.

If your arguments are questioned by more than one moderator, please make sure you suggest a conspiracy. Ignore any moderator that agrees with you. Ignore any users that disagree with you. But most of all continue to ignore logical reasoning.

Remember it's not you at fault, it's the system at fault. Never ever EVAR admit you were wrong. That is a sign of weakness and will result in even more moderator bullying.

Talliesin

Another thing worth looking at here is how moderator actions look to users and how they look to moderators.

Johnny_Poster is not on boards with the sole intention of Spamming, trolling or otherwise making a nuisance of himself for fun or profit. He has something to say, but in saying that he posts in the wrong forum, loses his head in an argument and personally abuses someone, breaks a rule that exists for a good reason but seems arbitrary to those who don't know why it was put in place, or otherwise does a Bad Thing.

Janie_Moderator meanwhile has a bunch of reported posts, has just deleted two posts from the same person on two forums she moderates both of which said "You visit my website! You enjoy! www.example.com/~someMuppet It good website. I working hard on new features for you" and escalating that to a siteban request (incidentally, one of the good things about having moderators mod more than one forum, rather than always looking for new blood is that it can make the less obvious cases of such Spam more obvious to one of the mods) and comes across the Bad Thing - most often due to a reported post, though possibly they're actually reading the forum - and they take some sort of action (banning, warning, moving or deleting threads or posts, whatever).

So Johnny_Poster has been in some way curtailed in what he wanted to do by the moderator action (or, and this one is always fun, Janie_Moderator has just warned someone else for personally abusing Johnny_Poster, and Johnny_Poster has seen this as an opportunity for getting the last word in, gone on to abuse or at least taunt the third person, and then doesn't understand why that got him banned).

Johnny_Poster's sole interaction with the moderation system of boards that day (possibly ever) is that moderation action. Janie_Moderators interactions with the users of the forums she moderates has been a whole bunch of stuff ranging from infuriating through to rewarding (i.e. the same range that users get interacting with other users, and a bit more of both the good and the bad added on).

Now Johnny_Poster may be of an egocentric inclination, whether because of the mood he's in that day, or because he has a Humbert Humbert like fallacy that he understands the motives of everyone and they most often revolve around him. Or Johnny_Poster may have had a disagreement with Janie_Moderator that Janie_Moderator may or may not remember. Or Johnny_Poster may know that Janie_Moderator's best friend's girlfriend's uncle owns the pub that Johnny_Poster's cousin got thrown out of after a fight.

In such a case Johnny_Poster comes to the conclusion that this was a personal vendetta. Or that Janie_Moderator didn't agree with the opinions he was expressing in the thread (which may or may not be true - as a rule a moderators opinions will indeed cause them mild bias, we are not perfect, but have little or no effect on whether they are accused of bias). Johnny_Poster then makes no attempt to understand the reason for the moderation action (convinced already there was no genuine reason) and either abuses the moderator (moderators are at liberty to respond to such reactions to moderator actions by extending bans, btw) or starts a Feedback thread expounding upon their grievance.

Janie_Moderator, feeling honour bound to keep things as transparent as possible, does a search to answer her immediate question ("who is he again?") and responds.

Tommy_Troll posts something in the thread intended to rile, accuse, annoy or otherwise attack either Johnny_Poster, Janie_Moderator or both.

Krazy_Keyboard opines this is further evidence that the mods are a power-mad clique.

Ian_Poster (a Scottish third cousin of Johnny_Poster, though neither of them know this - it's an even smaller world than we generally acknowledge) brings up an irrelevant complaint (possibly reasonable, possibly) not about another moderator action Janie_Moderator did 17 months ago.

Ivan_Poster (no relation, just a coincidence this time) brings up 7 different cases of Johnny_Poster being a muppet, some of which had already been dealt with by moderators, some not.

Someone posts a picture of an owl with the phrase "O RLY?" on it.

And from here it can go in several directions, almost all of which having the net effect that Johnny_Poster is still banned, many species of owl are in danger of extinction, and just about everyone, except those who thought the thread was funny, are more pissed off than they were to begin with. Johnny_Poster is still convinced that Janie_Moderator (and possibly a conspiracy of all or some mods and/or a few other members in good standing of the community) are out to get them, and Janie_Moderator goes back to forgetting who Johnny_Poster is except a subconcious memory that a particular manga avatar combined with a longish username with an underscore in the middle goes with a poster who's posts might need checking for rule breaches.

therecklessone

Talliesin wrote:

Another thing worth looking at here is how moderator actions look to users and how they look to moderators.

Johnny_Poster is not on boards with the sole intention of Spamming, trolling or otherwise making a nuisance of himself for fun or profit. He has something to say, but in saying that he posts in the wrong forum, loses his head in an argument and personally abuses someone, breaks a rule that exists for a good reason but seems arbitrary to those who don't know why it was put in place, or otherwise does a Bad Thing.

Janie_Moderator meanwhile has a bunch of reported posts, has just deleted two posts from the same person on two forums she moderates both of which said "You visit my website! You enjoy! www.example.com/~someMuppet It good website. I working hard on new features for you" and escalating that to a siteban request (incidentally, one of the good things about having moderators mod more than one forum, rather than always looking for new blood is that it can make the less obvious cases of such Spam more obvious to one of the mods) and comes across the Bad Thing - most often due to a reported post, though possibly they're actually reading the forum - and they take some sort of action (banning, warning, moving or deleting threads or posts, whatever).

So Johnny_Poster has been in some way curtailed in what he wanted to do by the moderator action (or, and this one is always fun, Janie_Moderator has just warned someone else for personally abusing Johnny_Poster, and Johnny_Poster has seen this as an opportunity for getting the last word in, gone on to abuse or at least taunt the third person, and then doesn't understand why that got him banned).

Johnny_Poster's sole interaction with the moderation system of boards that day (possibly ever) is that moderation action. Janie_Moderators interactions with the users of the forums she moderates has been a whole bunch of stuff ranging from infuriating through to rewarding (i.e. the same range that users get interacting with other users, and a bit more of both the good and the bad added on).

Now Johnny_Poster may be of an egocentric inclination, whether because of the mood he's in that day, or because he has a Humbert Humbert like fallacy that he understands the motives of everyone and they most often revolve around him. Or Johnny_Poster may have had a disagreement with Janie_Moderator that Janie_Moderator may or may not remember. Or Johnny_Poster may know that Janie_Moderator's best friend's girlfriend's uncle owns the pub that Johnny_Poster's cousin got thrown out of after a fight.

In such a case Johnny_Poster comes to the conclusion that this was a personal vendetta. Or that Janie_Moderator didn't agree with the opinions he was expressing in the thread (which may or may not be true - as a rule a moderators opinions will indeed cause them mild bias, we are not perfect, but have little or no effect on whether they are accused of bias). Johnny_Poster then makes no attempt to understand the reason for the moderation action (convinced already there was no genuine reason) and either abuses the moderator (moderators are at liberty to respond to such reactions to moderator actions by extending bans, btw) or starts a Feedback thread expounding upon their grievance.

Janie_Moderator, feeling honour bound to keep things as transparent as possible, does a search to answer her immediate question ("who is he again?") and responds.

Tommy_Troll posts something in the thread intended to rile, accuse, annoy or otherwise attack either Johnny_Poster, Janie_Moderator or both.

Krazy_Keyboard opines this is further evidence that the mods are a power-mad clique.

Ian_Poster (a Scottish third cousin of Johnny_Poster, though neither of them know this - it's an even smaller world than we generally acknowledge) brings up an irrelevant complaint (possibly reasonable, possibly) not about another moderator action Janie_Moderator did 17 months ago.

Ivan_Poster (no relation, just a coincidence this time) brings up 7 different cases of Johnny_Poster being a muppet, some of which had already been dealt with by moderators, some not.

Someone posts a picture of an owl with the phrase "O RLY?" on it.

And from here it can go in several directions, almost all of which having the net effect that Johnny_Poster is still banned, many species of owl are in danger of extinction, and just about everyone, except those who thought the thread was funny, are more pissed off than they were to begin with. Johnny_Poster is still convinced that Janie_Moderator (and possibly a conspiracy of all or some mods and/or a few other members in good standing of the community) are out to get them, and Janie_Moderator goes back to forgetting who Johnny_Poster is except a subconcious memory that a particular manga avatar combined with a longish username with an underscore in the middle goes with a poster who's posts might need checking for rule breaches.

Link?

Faith

Talliesin wrote:

Tommy_Troll posts something in the thread intended to rile, accuse, annoy or otherwise attack either Johnny_Poster, Janie_Moderator or both.

Krazy_Keyboard opines this is further evidence that the mods are a power-mad clique.

Ian_Poster (a Scottish third cousin of Johnny_Poster, though neither of them know this - it's an even smaller world than we generally acknowledge) brings up an irrelevant complaint (possibly reasonable, possibly) not about another moderator action Janie_Moderator did 17 months ago.

Ivan_Poster (no relation, just a coincidence this time) brings up 7 different cases of Johnny_Poster being a muppet, some of which had already been dealt with by moderators, some not.

Someone posts a picture of an owl with the phrase "O RLY?" on it.

I roffled!

Karl Hungus

Talliesin wrote:

*Incredibly big waffle*

I find your rant sexist to say the least. You seem to have made your 'Problematic' characters male, such as Johnny_Poster and Tommy_Troll, whereas the female character, Janie_Moderator is the good one, albiet misunderstood. You're trying to stereotype males wrongly. :mad:

WizZard

Talliesin wrote:

Someone posts a picture of an owl with the phrase "O RLY?" on it.

Talliesin

KH, Krazy_Keyboard and Tommy_Troll are both female.

Janie_Moderator is in fact male, but enjoys playing with female personas.

Your assuming otherwise is shortsighted at best, and offensive at worse!!1111-(i²)!

WizZard

WizZard wrote:

You took your time!

Tar.Aldarion

What's a female persona?

Faith

What you have.

koneko

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

What's a female persona?

People with online-boobies

Stark

Admin Amp is disturbingly sexy.

Chinafoot

Stark wrote:

Admin Amp is disturbingly sexy.

Looks a bit like Eddie Izzard

Karl Hungus

Sparky-s wrote:

He looks incredibly like Vincent D'Onofrio in that pic:



Why they could easily be the fruit of the same pair of testicles.

Sarky

Well, amp DOES go around solving crimes and delivering holier-than-thou mini-speeches at the end of his weekly adventures...

Sparky

Ha

The Sweeper

Talliesin wrote:

KH, Krazy_Keyboard and Tommy_Troll are both female.

Janie_Moderator is in fact male, but enjoys playing with female personas.

Your assuming otherwise is shortsighted at best, and offensive at worse!!1111-(i²)!

Oh now that's just all wrong.

It'd be Krazy_Keyboard_Chik77 and she'd post!! further evidence!! lol! that the mods are a power-mad clique!!! :rolleyes: !!

And Titty_CuteTroll 's precise post would be "stop behaving like such a slut, why can't you be nice like me?!!"

Your arguments about wimmin on teh intorwheb are fatally flawed, but the point is mute.

azezil

Sarky wrote:

Well, amp DOES go around solving crimes and delivering holier-than-thou mini-speeches at the end of his weekly adventures...

And you're the funny one, heh heh... i like funny ^_^

amp

Sarky wrote:

Well, amp DOES go around solving crimes and delivering holier-than-thou mini-speeches at the end of his weekly adventures...

See kids, this is what happens when Old Man Sarky escapes the Scooby Do gang. Also, winners don't do drugs at least according to the FBI and they should know.