Moderating in Politics

gandalf

This is an example of the reasons I was glad to stand down from moderating politics.

nesf

Moderator makes warning on thread. Poster violates warning. Poster gets infraction.

It's pretty straightforward. It's harsh, since the poster might not have seen the warning, but the warning was given. If it was a ban, it would be going too far I think but an infraction (which is just a formal warning!) is ok in this situation.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo

Dude. Seriously. You're carping.

OK, maybe I overstated it with the "explicit instruction", but a warning was issued.

HollyB got an infraction. She doesn't seem as upset about it as you are. pinder just got banned, because - subsequent to the warning and HollyB's infraction - he deliberately confused immigration into an asylum thread. That's the type of crap we've had to deal with over and over again in immigration threads, many of which devolve into stormfrontesque xenophobia-fests. We've also had to deal with the myth that the Dublin convention requires that people apply for asylum any damn place they like as long as it isn't Ireland - over and over and over again.

It's just an infraction. It's not even your infraction. Let it go.

GuanYin

HollyB made 15 posts within that thread and had been posting in it for quite some time. Frankly, I don't believe she missed all three instances of warnings that were given.

Regarding the rules of the forum or discussion thread, these are guidelines and a moderator may envoke discretionary rules as the situation and need arises.

I'm somewhat dubious about you claiming that the forum rules should all be contained within those threads consdering you had either not read them or decided to explicitly ignore them when you broke them and then complained about the infraction you got for breaking them here.

You can play semantics, I have explained the issue, OB has further explained the issue and nesf has clarified the issue. The infraction stands and now it is nicely in the public eye, we expect not to have to deal with people making the mistake again.

So in a way, thank you for helping educated the ignorant masses

Hobbes

nesf wrote: »

If a moderator is involved in the debate then sometimes they don't act as a moderator because they may not be seen as neutral. i.e. If I disagree with a post of yours and then ban you for it, it doesn't look very impartial, even if the ban was fair.

This happens sometimes in Islam forum and the normal process we take is the moderator who is not in the conversation moderates the thread. So if someone is over the line the mod may flag it for the other mods to review.

Bottom line is though if a mod tells you to do/stop doing something then you should do it. Quoting guidelines won't save you.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hobbes

gandalf wrote: »

This is an example of the reasons I was glad to stand down from moderating politics.

I thought it was because you left your free push chair at the bus stop because the government would get you a new one.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

DeVore

Arguing about moderation in a thread about something else is bold. You deserved your infraction.

Basically I dont think twice about infractions, they are a way of keeping track of the persistent muppets accross the site as they will accumulate infractions from multiple mods. Otherwise, the infraction will dissappear in a while.

c[_] <--- insert storm.


DeV.

Kintarō Hattori

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You like to post while uninformed of the debate that preceeded your comment(s)? :eek:

Fratton Fred

If a moderator gives a warning or instruction, is there some way it can be highlighted so that people skimming through a thread can see it easily?

You quite often get people back seat modding and mods who are involved in heated debates on a forum they do not moderate, so it is not always easy to register that a mod for that forum has given a specific instruction.

If it could ne highlighted in some way then all posters would see it easier and take note.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

~Rebel~

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If a moderator gives a warning or instruction, is there some way it can be highlighted so that people skimming through a thread can see it easily?

You quite often get people back seat modding and mods who are involved in heated debates on a forum they do not moderate, so it is not always easy to register that a mod for that forum has given a specific instruction.

If it could ne highlighted in some way then all posters would see it easier and take note.

aye, like what i was saying on the previous page, if mods had scope to edit the OP, simply adding onto the base of the post, maybe in a different colour or something...would be pretty handy for both users and mods and ideally stop a lot of the repitition that goes on.

GuanYin

~Rebel~ wrote: »

aye, like what i was saying on the previous page, if mods had scope to edit the OP, simply adding onto the base of the post, maybe in a different colour or something...would be pretty handy for both users and mods and ideally stop a lot of the repitition that goes on.

You don't really expect someone to go back and read the OP on a 600 post thread do you????? :eek:

metrovelvet

DeVore wrote: »

Arguing about moderation in a thread about something else is bold. You deserved your infraction.




DeV.

Well then, moderators shouldnt start arguments about warnings, etc in the middle of a thread, instigating the whole off topic route, as Guan Yin does. Also shouldnt break and change the rules as it goes along. It shouldnt be a moderator of politics to begin with.

~Rebel~

GuanYin wrote: »

You don't really expect someone to go back and read the OP on a 600 post thread do you????? :eek:

if that became the structure on all threads across Boards, where Notes and warnings made throughout the thread were repeated in the OP, it would save everyone a lot of time, and allow people to jump into the middle of a debate without worrying about treading on toes.

GuanYin

~Rebel~ wrote: »

if that became the structure on all threads across Boards, where Notes and warnings made throughout the thread were repeated in the OP, it would save everyone a lot of time, and allow people to jump into the middle of a debate without worrying about treading on toes.

It isn't a bad idea but I'm not sure how to approach it on a forum-wide level.
You do realize, that even if we did this, my post above would be the response that banned posters would use as defence:

"I just saw this one post I wanted to reply to, you don't expect me to read back to the first post do you??"

Regarding the issue at hand, I gave warnings three times in the thread, 38, 91 and the final one in the 300's.

DeV is right though, this was a slap on the wrist, had I deemed the poster malicious I would have removed her access.

javaboy

Instead of the warnings being placed in the OP, maybe a special version of thread tags for moderater warnings could be added. It could work the same as normal tags but the icon could be bigger and red and only be editable by mods.

That and special in-thread "moderator mode" posts would clear up a lot of this confusion.

Fratton Fred

If you don't read the OP, how do you know what the thread is about?

Sure you may skip the next 10 pages, but the OP is what its all about surely?

javaboy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you don't read the OP, how do you know what the thread is about?

Sure you may skip the next 10 pages, but the OP is what its all about surely?

If you've already posted in the thread and read the OP, you're not likely to go back to the OP each time you post to double-check no new rules have been set down.

gandalf

You know there were never the amount of whinging threads when we just banned people for not towing the line.

An infraction is a warning nothing more and nothing less. You'd swear with some of the reactions on this thread and others that we had raped their mothers, slaughtered their children and played pattycake with their spouses.

Christ if a mod tells you to cool it you do, if you continue on in the vein you were warned about you are going to be dealt with. Thank your lucky stars that the infraction system is in place. If a mod chooses to warn in thread they are doing so in a transparent fashion and for the benefit of all who are posting in that thread and to ensure others do not engage in this fashion. There is nothing personal about it.

Overheal

gandalf wrote: »

An infraction is a warning nothing more and nothing less. You'd swear with some of the reactions on this thread and others that we had raped their mothers, slaughtered their children and played pattycake with their spouses.

Not that there would be anything wrong with that.

GuanYin

gandalf wrote: »

You know there were never the amount of whinging threads when we just banned people for not towing the line.

An infraction is a warning nothing more and nothing less. You'd swear with some of the reactions on this thread and others that we had raped their mothers, slaughtered their children and played pattycake with their spouses.

Christ if a mod tells you to cool it you do, if you continue on in the vein you were warned about you are going to be dealt with. Thank your lucky stars that the infraction system is in place. If a mod chooses to warn in thread they are doing so in a transparent fashion and for the benefit of all who are posting in that thread and to ensure others do not engage in this fashion. There is nothing personal about it.

Contrary to popular opinion, I don't like banning people. Or feedback threads. I try an avoid bannings if I can nudge someone in the right direction. Sometimes (like in politics) that needs to be more of a violent push in the right direction. Maybe you're right, maybe I should just ban people outright.

In my mind, it would all be much better if we all read the rules, followed the rules and posted accordingly. In that world there would be hugs and backslapping for those who agreed and congratulatory guffaws and jovial knee slapping for those who made a good counter-point and alot of singing.

Unfortunately my utopian version of boards.ie is a mere pipe dream and we must resign ourselves to raping, slaughtering and pattycake.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GuanYin

Right, I didn't deem it malicious, so I didn't ban her.
Yet you're still unhappy?

Why do you think I should have banned her? In any case, if you want her banned you should report the post.

What have you got against HollyB?

javaboy

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But she wasn't deemed malicious probably based on the post itself. So there's nothing to get upset about there.

So no she wouldn't have removed her access "for posting this", she would have removed her access for something more malicious.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GuanYin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Clearly bwahuh?

You're just looking foolish now.

I question the mindset of any poster who questions the mindset of a moderator when they speak for the moderator by suggesting they considered banning a poster for something obviously innocuous.