Overmoderating in instruments forum.

corkstudent

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=57764515

Whichever way you spin it, threatening to ban someone for 2 minor offenses is way over the top. It does nothing for the health of an already waning board. This is a fairly common occurance by the looks of things, and it really shouldn't be. It wouldn't really hurt anyone to be a little more lax on things that don't really hurt anyone.

He also locked the thread when I pointed this out, for "Investigation", which is frustrating because I needed an answer to that question as soon as possible. Not only was the overmoderation not necessary, it ended up harming instead of helping.

Karl Hungus

In fairness, you shouldn't be questioning moderator decisions on-thread, that drags things off topic. If you've an issue with a decision, you PM the moderator or take it to the helpdesk if they are unresponsive.

dr.bollocko

I would have thought it would be reasonable to bump a thread looking for a legitimate answer rather than starting a new one. But I am sure this is another one of those multi-layered fast-paced plots involving huge groups of online warriors and a history going back years with all those fast action shots and shaky cameras I hate.
Still though.
/popcorn.

Doctor J

This smells familar :pac:

I agree with the decision, the warning was justified, bumping a thread less than a day old which was still on the first page is just stupid and this outburst is equally so.

Karl Hungus

dr.bollocko wrote: »

I would have thought it would be reasonable to bump a thread looking for a legitimate answer rather than starting a new one. But I am sure this is another one of those multi-layered fast-paced plots involving huge groups of online warriors and a history going back years with all those fast action shots and shaky cameras I hate.
Still though.
/popcorn.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to bump a thread as long as it's not excessive and becoming annoying, and there's no specific rule against it either.

Maybe this is something that needs amending to the charter, because no actual rule was broken.

Doctor J

It's just a bit of forum cop on, it shouldn't need to be written down. The thread in question was, what, the fourth or fifth thread on the first page? Bumping it was pointless and every forum could do without that kind of crap.

corkstudent

Karl Hungus wrote: »

In fairness, you shouldn't be questioning moderator decisions on-thread, that drags things off topic. If you've an issue with a decision, you PM the moderator or take it to the helpdesk if they are unresponsive.

I'm taking it up with PM and they are being unresponsive. This is why taking things to PM is generally useless, when not in public moderators are under no pressure to act reasonably.

Also, regardless, it was an over-reaction on two counts. Plus, you can also say the same for Feylya's comment - it should have been via PM, not on the forums. It seems silly to switch means of contact like that, if it was via PM I would have responded to it there. Doing it publically is making a public point to everyone, which members should be entitled to do in return. PMs aren't read by the forum as a whole, so a mod's word goes unquestioned.

Either way it would have been easily solved by a mature discussion via PM instead of a combative comment left in the thread itself. I don't think it's fair that mods can leave potentially volatile pushy comments and nobody can say anything back, it's by definition trolling. Locking it was doubly unnecessary.

Karl Hungus

Doctor J wrote: »

It's just a bit of forum cop on, it shouldn't need to be written down. The thread in question was, what, the fourth or fifth thread on the first page? Bumping it was pointless and every forum could do without that kind of crap.

Aye, but you know what they say about common sense, don't you? I think in times like this a quick amend to the charter is fair. I've already PM'd Feylya with my suggestion for the rule.

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

It's just a bit of forum cop on, it shouldn't need to be written down. The thread in question was, what, the fourth or fifth thread on the first page? Bumping it was pointless and every forum could do without that kind of crap.

It was kind of pointless, but you shouldn't punish someone for posting "pointlessly" in their own thread. I had the thread URL linked to so I didn't look at the forum before posting in it, I only realised how inactive the forum was after I went out of the thread. I thought it would be towards the end of the page. It's a simple mistake, and mods getting pushy over it isn't really very helpful.

If I'm not even breaking a rule, then it's a bit much. If the rule is still going to be 2 pointless bumps and you're banned, then it's a rule that shouldn't really be there(Unless those bumps are purposely intended to mess with the forum, though even then it's a little extreme). It's an uphill battle getting this forum to be less strict but it would be nice if some day it evolved to the point where if a mod brings something up in public, it can be challenged in public(to encourage mods into taking things up via PM, saying take it to PM should go both ways if mods are just going to be swinging their weight around).

Karl Hungus

corkstudent wrote: »

I'm taking it up with PM and they are being unresponsive.

Ah, but which did you do first, send a PM or post this?

dr.bollocko

In fairness, why would someone expect an immediate reply on the forum when a post is posted at ten on a saturday night looking for some info?
And then bumped at 12 on the sunday looking for same?
Give people a chance to recover from the night before!

Doctor J

You weren't punished, you were warned. Now we have all this, this horribly familiar nonsense.

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

You weren't punished, you were warned. Now we have all this, this horribly familiar nonsense.

A second occurance would have been punishment, so it's still over the top. If you're saying the forum is great because you don't get banned for a first minor offenses I'm sorry but you have ridiculously low standards for forum moderation.

The thread was also locked. You can blame that on my response, but either way, I would have gotten "Punished" by having a moderator take on a combatative tone in public with me, and me being unable to publically refute it. That's probably almost as annoying as being temp banned from the forum at the end of the day. It's unfair if mods of the Instruments forum can flame and troll as much as they like. You can say it's okay as long as it looks like an official mod statement, but if someone is a mod chances are that's how they're going to want to rile people up.

I think my issue here is that the moderator seemed a lot more interested in power tripping than the health of the forum. That sounds like a weighty accusation, but I can't think of any way in which that comment helped or could have helped the forum, and the mod eventually acted in opposition to forum by locking the thread.

Bump a thread like that again and you'll find your access being removed

The tone of this comment, to me, is definitely one of somone trying to be a tough guy.



I'm genuinely very upset over this as I wanted an answer and I don't feel comfortable posting on forums with ITGs.

Doctor J

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Aye, but you know what they say about common sense, don't you? I think in times like this a quick amend to the charter is fair. I've already PM'd Feylya with my suggestion for the rule.

If you were to write rules for every potentially stupid thing someone might do on a forum, there would be no room left for threads. The OP did something outside the general realms of forum etiquette, the mod outlined this (perhaps a bit heavy handed but I can understand why) and now we have all this bull****.

I really don't see what the fuss is over, but I think I understand why.

Doctor J

corkstudent wrote: »

I think my issue here is that the moderator seemed a lot more interested in power tripping than the health of the forum.

And pointlessly bumping a thread is healthy for any forum in what way, exactly?

Karl Hungus

corkstudent wrote: »

It's an uphill battle getting this forum to be less strict but it would be nice if some day it evolved to the point where if a mod brings something up in public, it can be challenged in public(to encourage mods into taking things up via PM, saying take it to PM should go both ways if mods are just going to be swinging their weight around).

But if challenging mods on thread were to be allowed, it would make it a nightmare for threads to be kept on topic. A private warning isn't always the best course of action, especially if it's something that needs to be said publicly to get across certain rules. I've also had people post publicly on a thread that I have warned them privately before, so it wouldn't be a good idea at all.

I also don't think anyone is "Swinging their weight around", it's suggesting that the mod is acting out, which isn't the case.

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

And pointlessly bumping a thread is healthy for any forum in what way, exactly?

It didn't really affect it either way. People have to get out of the mentality that every action should be justified before it's allowed, it should be the other way around, the banning of actions needs to be justified.

Locking the thread did harm the forum, since it was a good question. I have to jam with some people, I'm on a limited budget so I really need to know where I can get my guitar fixed up for the best cost. Felyla acted against the forum by locking a thread that was important to someone. I wouldn't be surprised if others were waiting on an answer, too, since it's a fairly major question.

Also the mod in question has not gotten back to me via PM.

leninbenjamin

a complaint about the modding on the instruments forum? what is the world coming to...

corkstudent

Karl Hungus wrote: »

But if challenging mods on thread were to be allowed, it would make it a nightmare for threads to be kept on topic. A private warning isn't always the best course of action, especially if it's something that needs to be said publicly to get across certain rules. I've also had people post publicly on a thread that I have warned them privately before, so it wouldn't be a good idea at all.

I also don't think anyone is "Swinging their weight around", it's suggesting that the mod is acting out, which isn't the case.

Then mods shouldn't leave assertive bolded comments in the threads to begin with. Everybody wins. Public rules should be in the charter. Either way, you can't say it's fair that mods get to push people around without anyone having a right to speak back. It makes a lot more sense to clearly define rules in the charter, act on them fairly and relatively laxly given half of the actual trolls here seem to be, no offense, moderators to begin with. I think the issue is also with the tone that was taken - it was very authoritarian. I don't see why a friendly helpful comment can't suffice. Because both Feylyla's actions and tone was unnecessary, he must have done it for personal reasons and you shouldn't hold mods beyond reason since they have no real qualifications to begin with.

And could you explain how the mod was not acting out? As far as I can see it's the definition of power tripping. The moderation served no purpose to the board itself, therefore it only can to the moderator himself.

Doctor J

He hasn't gotten back to me either, but I don't feel the need to start a thread about it :pac:

Maybe he's offline, it that even possible?

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

He hasn't gotten back to me either, but I don't feel the need to start a thread about it :pac:

Maybe he's offline, it that even possible?

A friend told me that boards mods are chosen not because they're any good, but because they're on pretty much all of the time, especially after the legal issue they don't want anything like that to happen again. If this is true(and it probably is to some extent, given no mod I've encountered in the last few months has had any actual debating skills which should be a given if they're making heavy decisions) it further irks me that mods don't seem to be held to much of a standard, at least in this case.

Doctor J

corkstudent wrote: »

The moderation served no purpose to the board itself

I wholly disagree. You pointlessly bumped a thread, the mod let you know not to do it. As a user of the forum I am thankful threads aren't pointlessly bumped by infrequent users looking to serve their own purpose with no interest in the overall forum.

Again, I fail to to see why the hullaballoo. You got a warning FFS, justified IMO, get over it.

Karl Hungus

corkstudent wrote: »

And could you explain how the mod was not acting out? As far as I can see it's the definition of power tripping. The moderation served no purpose to the board itself, therefore it only can to the moderator himself.

Poppycock I'm afraid. Feylya has always served the interest of the board, and the community who post there. I mightn't always agree with him, but he's done a good and frankly thankless job for years now, he's got more experience in moderating it, and I'd say he's got more of an idea of what he's doing than some johnny-come-lately who thinks they know it all.

Doctor J

corkstudent wrote: »

A friend told me that boards mods are chosen not because they're any good, but because they're on pretty much all of the time, especially after the legal issue they don't want anything like that to happen again. If this is true(and it probably is to some extent, given no mod I've encountered in the last few months has had any actual debating skills which should be a given if they're making heavy decisions) it further irks me that mods don't seem to be held to much of a standard, at least in this case.

OK, so you have an axe to grind against moderators. Thanks for clearing that up.

As a long time user of that forum I think Feylya does an excellent and often thankless job, keeping the forum free of ****e like pointless bumps.

With that in mind I'd like to say thanks to Feylya for keeping a forum I enjoy largely free of crap. Too often mods don't get the thanks they deserve, so I'll use this opportunity to counter that.

+1 to Feylya

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

I wholly disagree. You pointlessly bumped a thread, the mod let you know not to do it. As a user of the forum I am thankful threads aren't pointlessly bumped by infrequent users looking to serve their own purpose with no interest in the overall forum.

Again, I fail to to see why the hullaballoo. You got a warning FFS, justified IMO, get over it.

You ignored the part where I said banning actions should have to be justified, not the actions themselves. It is irrelevant if it is pointless. A single accidental bump, or 2 accidental bumps does not harm the forum as a whole.

Also you're completely turning a blind eye to the fact that the mod took on a combatitive, authoritarian tone and refused to cooperate via PM.

Bump a thread like that again and you'll find your access being removed

Honestly, how is that necessary? It's in the form of a classic threat. "Come near her again..." You must have insanely high limits for what a mod can do and be considered in the wrong.

Mods should be helpful and friendly, not threatening.

corkstudent

Doctor J wrote: »

As a long time user of that forum I think Feylya does an excellent and often thankless job,

Bias, sticking up for friend. Ignoring all your future posts. And before you criticise me for that you also ignore the fact that wording his helpful reminder of rules that I'm unsure actually exist was in the form of a threat. Nowhere did you deal with this, so it's obvious you're sticking up for someone you're familiar with.

Doctor J

corkstudent wrote: »

You ignored the part where I said banning actions should have to be justified...yak yak yak

You weren't banned, you were warned. :rolleyes:

dr.bollocko

corkstudent wrote: »

A friend told me......

....debating skills....

Argument based on hearsay?
This reminds me of a potentially racist statement made by a pot to a poor defenceless kettle.

Doctor J

corkstudent wrote: »

Bso it's obvious you're sticking up for someone you're familiar with.

Clearly you ignored where I said I was a user of the forum , of course I am familiar with Feylya, also a long time contributor to the forum

corkstudent

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Poppycock I'm afraid. Feylya has always served the interest of the board, and the community who post there. I mightn't always agree with him, but he's done a good and frankly thankless job for years now, he's got more experience in moderating it, and I'd say he's got more of an idea of what he's doing than some johnny-come-lately who thinks they know it all.

First off, you're his comrade so it's obvious you're going to think he's doing a bang up job.

I can't really speak for how well he's done in the past, but in this instance, he was unncessarily threatening and arrogant, and you don't seem to be dealing with, and you're also getting overly insulting towards me. This kind of thing should be decided through a mature argument, not flinging around pointless ad hominem like "Johnny come lately". I've been on more than enough forums to know when a mod is power tripping, thank you very much, not to mention I'm pretty sure neither of you have any real qualifications to be mods other than your own mutual support and general apathy of everyone else.

I do find many online forums in general overly strict but managable. This kind of moderation is not "Managable". Most forums don't talk down to people for having a problem with a moderator making unnecessary threats.

Doctor DooM

Calling bull sh*t on you college student.

We already had a little blow out about this with you in the Nocturnal forum.


You know you are not to argue with a mod decision on thread. You got banned for that very reason. It looks like this thread has been created purely to create mischief, tbh.

And then you started posting that I was was being unresponsive via pm, despite the fact you were being abusive to me, not the other way around.

Also posting on a Saturday night and bumping within one day because no one's answered? Not good forum etiquette.