The "too many moderators" myth.

Karl Hungus

First of all, I'm making this thread separate to any existing one, as this is not meant to be a reply to anyone in particular, but more of an informative post that I hope can clear up some misconceptions about boards. There does seem to be this idea of too many moderators, and I think people simply just don't realise what a moderator's role is and where their jurisdiction ends.

Lets take a look at how many moderators there are on a per-forum basis, and see exactly what their role is and if there is actually too many. We'll start with the busiest forums here, which are After Hours, Soccer, Motors, Poker and Personal Issues. On the bottom right of each of every single forum, there is a list that shows you exactly how many moderators are in charge of that forum and who they are.

So, for After Hours there are only 6 moderators, Soccer has 7, Motors only 4, Poker has 5, and Personal Issues has 7 moderators. Those are the busiest forums on boards, and there's only a small group of people in charge of each of them. If we take a look at just how busy After Hours is, we can put this in perspective, it has threads 30,891 with a whopping 1,075,301 posts, yet only six people look after it night and day. At any given time there may be hundreds of people posting, so a ratio of 6 moderators to that amount of normal users is hardly excessive. Taking a look at it like that, there's certainly not an overabundance of moderators.

Now, moderators are appointed when needed. A smaller forum will often have maybe two, sometimes three moderators looking after it. Lets take for example Anime & Manga or Mythology, smaller boards = less moderators. So again, it's certainly not a case of too many, you can see for yourself that they're appointed where needed and that's all there is to it.

The golden rule here is that moderators are regular users outside the forums that they moderate. It gets said plenty, but a lot of people don't seem to realise what this means. Lets say for example that I post on a thread in After Hours, I do not moderate that forum so I have no authority there, I cannot edit/delete any posts on After Hours, or ban anyone from there. I am also subject to the same rules as anyone else who posts there, and am expected to abide them, just like every other user who signs up.

Keep this in mind.

Now, this whole "Too many moderators" thing always comes up here on Feedback, so take a look at the bottom right of the Feedback page, you'll notice that there are only 8 moderators of Feedback. Anyone else who is posting here is not acting as a moderator of this forum, they are posting their opinions as users of this site. Anyone like Terry, Dudess, Mordeth, Myself, or any of the other mods are simply posting here as users, none of us are moderators of feedback, and we are entitled to our say too, just like any other user.

Hope this thread helps people understand more about moderators on boards.

Daithi McGee

Nice post.

So would it be Ok, if when you posted here, it didn't show you as being a mod? Just to help things along. Like a cop being off duty and not wearing the uniform, so to speak.

It would help greatly with your idealism.

Unless mods prefer that people know they are mods because the little links in their profiles make it handy and what have you not etc etc.

A cop in unifrom, Is always a cop.
In civies, sure he could be anyone.

:pac:

Karl Hungus

Daithi McGee wrote: »

Nice post.

So would it be Ok, if when you posted here, it didn't show you as being a mod? Just to help things along. Like a cop being off duty and not wearing the uniform, so to speak.

It would help greatly with your idealism.

Unless mods prefer that people know they are mods because the little links in their profiles make it handy and what have you not etc etc.

A cop in unifrom, Is always a cop.
In civies, sure he could be anyone.

:pac:

I've no control over the site showing the details of the forums I moderate, it's not a case of me (or any other mods here) preferring that people know I'm a mod, it's not a uniform I can slip in and out of at will. But if you want to use the cop analogy, I think it would be a more accurate description to say I'm a cop on holiday, so while I have jurisdiction in my own country/forum, I've none while visiting Spain.

Daithi McGee

Karl Hungus wrote: »

I've no control over the site showing the details of the forums I moderate, it's not a case of me (or any other mods here) preferring that people know I'm a mod, it's not a uniform I can slip in and out of at will. But if you want to use the cop analogy, I think it would be a more accurate description to say I'm a cop on holiday, so while I have jurisdiction in my own country/forum, I've none while visiting Spain.

I like your analogy.

Tell you what, take the debate to the mod board reference "it's not a case of me (or any other mods here) preferring that people know I'm a mod,"


See where it gets you.

I look forward to your reply, or lack of.

DeVore

Its a question of matrixes. We are trying to cut DOWN the number of cross references the servers do when forming a thread (its most common act).

If we have to check each post to see if it comes from a mod, then check if that thread is CURRENTLY in a forum that that person mods or doesnt mod and then write or not write the mod link....



...and then do that for the 20 or whatever posts per page you have set in your prefences... all to make you happy? Are you for real?


Dumbest thing you have said in a while.

DeV.

ntlbell

what suprises me is the amount of people that have been posting here for a long time and haven't a f*cking clue about what goes on or how its run

what do they be doing...

Karl Hungus

Daithi McGee wrote: »

Tell you what, take the debate to the mod board reference "it's not a case of me (or any other mods here) preferring that people know I'm a mod,"


See where it gets you.

I look forward to your reply, or lack of.

Why bother? It's immaterial whether you can see my uniform or not if you have a basic understanding of how moderators work, but I'd imagine it'd get me somewhere along the lines of what DeVore just pointed out.

Otacon

ntlbell wrote: »

what suprises me is the amount of people that have been posting here for a long time and haven't a f*cking clue about what goes on or how its run

what do they be doing...

Its like LCD TVs. No idea how they are run, don't care much either cos I have no interest in building one.

Most of my friends on boards (kaimera, Petee, rmacm, sceptre, 440Hz) are mods. I have zero interest in being one, from talking to them. I respect what they do, but know I don't have the patience or will power to do it.

As for there being too many moderators, I really have to disagree. If it were up to me, there'd be more, especially in the high conflict areas like Politics and Soccer. I honestly cannot see the issue with having a large number of moderators, except if you believe that they get special treatment in the fora they don't moderate, which is crap. You may not see many mods banned, because usually to become a mod, you need to display some common sense and this lends itself to not acting the pr!ck most of the time. The same is true for people who have been here a while.

Zaph

What always amuses me about threads complaining of too many mods/over moderation, is that they're rarely from long-term, active posters. Take the two we have currently on the go. Started by two posters with less than 50 posts between them, with one having signed up in November and the other this month, although of course these people are always "long time readers". Yet given this relative newness to Boards they feel both qualified and compelled to tell people where the site is going wrong in terms of moderation, despite there being thousands of active members who are quite happy with the way things are.

I have no problem with people criticising Boards, everyone's entitled to their opinion and constructive criticism that leads to improvements can be beneficial to everyone. But criticising something that you haven't gotten properly involved in (being a long time reader isn't the same as participating) and therefore have little or no direct experience of, negates any argument you make imo. Become an active member for a while, interact with other posters and mods and then if you still feel the same way come back here and people may be inclined to take your criticism a bit more seriously.

Toto Wolfcastle

Daithi McGee wrote: »

Nice post.

So would it be Ok, if when you posted here, it didn't show you as being a mod? Just to help things along. Like a cop being off duty and not wearing the uniform, so to speak.

It would help greatly with your idealism.

Unless mods prefer that people know they are mods because the little links in their profiles make it handy and what have you not etc etc.

A cop in unifrom, Is always a cop.
In civies, sure he could be anyone.

:pac:

If people are too stupid to read the list of forums under a mod's name to see if they mod the forum they are posting in then they deserve the ridicule that they will most certainly be subjected to should they start a feedback thread about something stupid. (The current 2 threads for example.)

Cabaal

Well said Zaph, the over modded complaints come from relative newbie's in 98% of the cases either that or constant trouble makers in the other "% of cases.

I know alot of people on boards.ie for many many years and the biggest complaint I hear of is not about over modded its about some users often been less educated about things, these comments don't come from mods or people that used to be mods.

Personally my thoughts are no matter what site your on you;ll have trouble makers and those that can't follow the rules, don't believe me then look at sites like somethingawful.com, on their forum ALOT of things go without question but you'll still get a percentage of its users that bitch about the man telling them what to do.....bottom line is you can never please 100% of people

ntlbell

Otacon wrote: »

Its like LCD TVs. No idea how they are run, don't care much either cos I have no interest in building one.

that's nice.

but if we are to put that to the users they would buy the tv maybe fumble there way to turning it on and look at the remote stumped.

there's charters in all the forums who the moderators are is on the page and in every send thread that a mod posts in at some point you'll here "but i'm not mod of this forum"

you dont need a degree in computer science to figure it out

mike65

Maybe a flash animation filum in a welcome pack is needed, complete with a nice friendly female voice and lots of pastel colours.

"How to boards"

ntlbell

mike65 wrote: »

Maybe a flash animation filum in a welcome pack is needed, complete with a nice friendly female voice and lots of pastel colours.

"How to boards"

as long as it's not sent with the confirmation email at reg...

no one will ever get it

Otacon

ntlbell wrote: »

that's nice.

but if we are to put that to the users they would buy the tv maybe fumble there way to turning it on and look at the remote stumped.

there's charters in all the forums who the moderators are is on the page and in every send thread that a mod posts in at some point you'll here "but i'm not mod of this forum"

you dont need a degree in computer science to figure it out

Not saying I don't know the difference but I doubt many people think about the behind-the-scenes work on this site tbh.

When it works, people don't care, when it doesn't, people want it rectified. Just saying it is irrelevant to most people the workings of the site, as long as it works.

ntlbell

Otacon wrote: »

Not saying I don't know the difference but I doubt many people think about the behind-the-scenes work on this site tbh.

When it works, people don't care, when it doesn't, people want it rectified. Just saying it is irrelevant to most people the workings of the site, as long as it works.

But the moderation of it is not a technical issue.

it's clearly stated on the page how many there is on each forum.......

it's just a case of opening your eyes.....it's not _that_ difficult

Dudess

I don't think Otacon is referring to behind-the-scenes technical work. There are constant behind-the-scenes moderator discussions on how to deal with the various things that crop up.

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

I don't think Otacon is referring to behind-the-scenes technical work. There are constant behind-the-scenes moderator discussions on how to deal with the various things that crop up.

why would anyone need to know about them to work out how a run of the mill discussion board works?

I'm talking about the bare basics.

Forums.

Mods.

Threads...

They simplest of concepts on a forum seem to be very confusing to a lot of people

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dudess

ntlbell wrote: »

why would anyone need to know about them to work out how a run of the mill discussion board works?

I'm talking about the bare basics.

Forums.

Mods.

Threads...

They simplest of concepts on a forum seem to be very confusing to a lot of people

Wires have been crossed here obviously - I presumed what was being referred to was behind-the-scenes discussion between moderators on troublesome users etc.

Dub13

Good post.

Also alot of the mods down as forum moderates are Category mods and don't take a active role in the day to day running of the forum.

Take the Soccer forum as an example we have 7 mods but 2 are Category mods,so we have 5 mods who are responsible for the day to day running of the forum.KdjaCL is taken some time out at the moment so we really only have 4 mods,thats 4 mods for one of the busiest forums on the site.We have a good team and it worked out well with us all in different country's (me in Dublin,T4TF UK,GuanYin US & Xavi6 in Australia).So we have night and day covered.

Acacia

I think there's a good level of moderation here. God help us if this place turned into youtube or some such site, where there are no debates, just personal abuse.

Talliesin

Daithi McGee wrote: »

So would it be Ok, if when you posted here, it didn't show you as being a mod?

It doesn't. It says directly opposite the word "mod" which forums someone moderates.

I've never had much time for people who think the expression "mod: Gambling" must mean someone has a direct authority over the Jazz & Blues forum. Really, how do you even argue with someone who is drawing that sort of conclusion?

Now, there is a reasonable social argument for not displaying that someone is a moderator of gambling at all in the Jazz & Blues forum (to continue the two forums I picked completely at random before), but at a technical level vBulletin already deeply, deeply sucks at how much different sources of information it puts into processing each HTTP request, which is why it sucks so much at scalability, which means boards' techies already have to put a lot more work and hardware into keeping it going than they perhaps theoretically should. Making vBulletin less scalable is not a win.

Zaph

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I remember when you started posting and it was, by your own admission, an inauspicious start. So much so that when I saw you first appearing in The Ladies Lounge my mod senses went on high alert and I was waiting for the shít to start flying. However it quickly became apparent that you had learned a lesson from your previous ban and taken on board whatever criticisms had been levelled at you. You're now a good contributor to tLL, one who is able to argue your case well and provide references and facts to back them up. I only wish that more people who started off the same way as you here would follow a similar path and become useful contributors to the site rather than remaining the complete pains in the arse that they are.

Boston

Zaph wrote: »

What always amuses me about threads complaining of too many mods/over moderation, is that they're rarely from long-term, active posters. Take the two we have currently on the go. Started by two posters with less than 50 posts between them, with one having signed up in November and the other this month, although of course these people are always "long time readers". Yet given this relative newness to Boards they feel both qualified and compelled to tell people where the site is going wrong in terms of moderation, despite there being thousands of active members who are quite happy with the way things are.

There are too many moderators, forums and threads. I demand a reduction to approximately 20,000 users 50 forums and 100 moderators.

GoneShootin

The simplest solution is to make me the ONLY mod on boards.

I think it's viable.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GuanYin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I've noticed too
Honestly, you are rare shining light I've taken from a feedback forum thread.

brendansmith

GoneShootin wrote: »

The simplest solution is to make me the ONLY mod on boards.

I think it's viable.

Very good point, I say this as i have never noticed you until I read this post.

Time Magazine

Zaph wrote: »

What always amuses me about threads complaining of too many mods/over moderation, is that they're rarely from long-term, active posters.

I agree with the general idea of your post, but there's a problem of selection bias with it imho. There are no complaints from long-term, active posters because they're not the ones who have been pissed off by a mod and never returned.

It's possible that there is a form of moderation that could work on the donegalfellas and also those who fled. Now I'm not suggesting that I know thE secret to this balance but the poor rep that Boards mods have seems we're not all that great. Maybe we are good, but simply noting that the people who haven't gone away doesn't shed much light on that.

There have been many improvements (automatic PMs when banning is a definite plus, well done CuLT) and I know we'll never be able to keep everyone happy. However I still reckon the modding on this site could be a bit better.

IMHO some mods are too quick with the ban-hammer. Yes, all these bans can be justified and no mod should be removed for them. But I wouldn't dismiss all claims of "get out more you stupid mods with your stupid power-trippin' hats and get a life" as being completely stupid. I will put my hands up here and admit openly that my favourite little forums are small and quiet and have intelligent posters so I might be biased here, but they both seem to tick along fine without much moderation at all. Usually telling people to cop and be civil does the trick. If they ignore that, I tend to send them a polite PM. Only if I'm convinced a thread has run its course or is bound to be a total trainwreck will I lock it. Nearly nobody gets banned. And, as I say, they seem to be grand.

Again, I'm not saying "my modding winz urs" or anything like that, but it might be something some mods should try out in their fields for a while.

Oh and I'd suggest a far less sympathetic ear from admins if/when mods completely muck up. Everyone makes mistakes and oversteps the mark, yes. But if somebody does something with even a hint of malice then I wouldn't hesitate to remove them. There are plenty of people happy to mod this site.

tbh

Talliesin wrote: »

I've never had much time for people who think the expression "mod: Gambling" must mean someone has a direct authority over the Jazz & Blues forum. Really, how do you even argue with someone who is drawing that sort of conclusion?

excellent point. however, it doesn't only apply to users, some mods are guilty of this as well. How many comments on the moderation of particular threads/forums have you seen from mods who've never read that particular thread/forum?