Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The "too many moderators" myth.

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    tbh wrote: »
    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?

    I often do that... whats yer point?


  • Options
    #33
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    tbh wrote: »
    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?

    Ah but while forums and communities differ and the sytle of moderation
    the basics too do not change.


  • Options
    #34
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Boston wrote: »
    I often do that... whats yer point?

    my point is that Talliesin said that "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?"

    I'm assuming by "people" he means "users". I'm saying that some mods seem to take it upon themselves to explain moderating decisions or policies for issues or forums that they themselves have never read or contributed to. So, it's no surprise that some "users" have this attitude, because, in some cases, they are right.

    I guess the nub of my point is that mods shouldn't be commenting on issues with moderation that they are not involved in. Maybe we could start a forum for this? We could call it "killdesk". or "Helpspace" or something like that.


  • Options
    #35
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    Ah but while forums and communities differ and the sytle of moderation
    the basics too do not change.

    the only basics as I can see them are the mcd rule, the no posting porn rule, and the "if a mod tells you to do something and you don't do it, you'll be banned" rule. The semantics between forums are completely different, and generally come down to the mods attitude.


  • Options
    #36
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    tbh wrote: »
    the only basics as I can see them are the mcd rule, the no posting porn rule, and the "if a mod tells you to do something and you don't do it, you'll be banned" rule.

    And yet we have feedback thread after feedback thread with posters who can even grasp those basics or just don't like'em.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    --amadeus--
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,096 ✭✭✭--amadeus--


    "Mods aren't Mods in Forums they don't Mod"

    So if I am "just" a user in here why can't I post an opinion on a moderating decision?


  • Options
    #38
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    --amadeus-- wrote: »
    "Mods aren't Mods in Forums they don't Mod"

    So if I am "just" a user in here why can't I post an opinion on a moderating decision?

    you can, but it just might not have any value (say if I posted my opinion on moderation in marathon/triathlon, how much value would you give it?)


  • Options
    #39
    --amadeus--
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,096 ✭✭✭--amadeus--


    tbh wrote: »
    you can, but it just might not have any value (say if I posted my opinion on moderation in marathon/triathlon, how much value would you give it?)

    Depends if you are agreeing with me or not :P

    Unless you have a monumentally large ego you'd need to be pretty dim not to take all comments on your moderating on-board. Particularly if that commentary comes from someone impartial (and more so if they are an experienced Mod or User).

    If someone feels teh need to comment on moderation or moderations styles then that's either because there has been a controversial decision or controversial content (you don't get threads complaining about mods deleting spammers, for example). And if someone ever got het up enough to post a feedback thread about a moderating decision I made then I would want to hear from other mods to see if I had made teh right decision or not. After all the content of the forums changes but people are people and it's the same problems in all forums, just different names.


  • Options
    #40
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Some very quiet forums only have one Mod.

    It says under the Mod's avatar what they mod. How hard is that?

    Some people it ONLY says it there, as they have custom descriptions under their name

    <
    EXAMPLE of both


    Simple Really, no change needed.


  • Options
    #41
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Otacon wrote: »
    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.

    Actually the key problem on a forum like Politics is that the mods don't agree with each other all the time. As is, we have to co-ordinate to a certain extent to make sure we aren't overruling each other in threads (which would only confuse people and make posters in the forum unsure over what is and what isn't ok to do and/or say). The more moderators you add the bigger a problem this becomes. Too many cooks spoil the broth etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    GoneShootin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,478 ✭✭✭GoneShootin


    True - but a counter argument to that would be that if you have a good number of mods that are active then the combined opinion may be more fair and just over the voice of a single mod. Kinda "jury of peers" effect.


  • Options
    #43
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    GoneShootin wrote: »
    True - but a counter argument to that would be that if you have a good number of mods that are active then the combined opinion may be more fair and just over the voice of a single mod. Kinda "jury of peers" effect.

    Considering the split second nature of moderating decisions it's less applicable I think. When discussing what should or should not be in the charter or general rules on behaviour discussion between moderators of varied opinions is very beneficial but if before locking any thread or sanctioning any user a moderator had to discuss it with all their peers then the system just wouldn't work.


  • Options
    #44
    Karl Hungus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,130 ✭✭✭✭Karl Hungus


    The Economist wrote: »
    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.

    I agree with some of your post, The Economist, but this little section here I take exception to. The problem with it, is that a lot of people who are pissed off with mods, either directly or indirectly, often do return... Again and again, under different guises, wielding a vendetta because they didn't like being told off, or being infracted, or for sheer mischief, who knows? But my point is, you see a lot of complaints, but often from the same group of people who have some daft vendetta.

    Take the someone like Polmki for example, someone who just keeps on coming again and again, under many different names, for the sole reason of ****ing with the site. Why? Who knows, but the point is, there is a lot of times when someone who's claiming they've been wronged, try to kick up a sh*tstorm, and it's someone who's been banned constantly before, and keeps coming back just to troll and to get attention. Not sure why people would keep returning to a place they're not welcome, but they do, probably because they thrive on the negative attention.

    That said, it's a two headed dog of an issue, and a lot of newer users are put under suspicion and scrutiny. Of course, it's vastly unfair to genuinely new users, but it's also a necessity on the part of mods and admins who all too often see the same people constantly create new accounts and troll. People like that are a problem for boards, and they also seem to have the most "complaints" so it's clear why people can be put under scrutiny on feedback, even if it isn't fair to new users. It's a Catch 22 really, and it does put mods in a hard position.


  • Options
    #45
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    Karl Hungus wrote: »
    I agree with some of your post, The Economist, but this little section here I take exception to. The problem with it, is that a lot of people who are pissed off with mods, either directly or indirectly, often do return... Again and again, under different guises, wielding a vendetta because they didn't like being told off, or being infracted, or for sheer mischief, who knows? But my point is, you see a lot of complaints, but often from the same group of people who have some daft vendetta.
    That's a very good point that I completely overlooked.

    However, there are probably what.... about twelve polmkis? As far as I am concerned these are the twelve saddest people in all of Ireland. Polmki/merc/bubbles/whoever are twelve not so much out of the 150,000 members, but closer to out of the 4 million population. You're always going to get them. Pain in the arse as they are to deal with, just be happy you're not them tbh.

    I think most of my original point still stands though: there are undoubtedly normal people who have been scared off from Boards that would have been good contributors. I don't think we're talking about 12 people either, I'd say we're talking several hundred. I have no cogent, factual evidence of this; it's just a bit of an inclination based on what I think the general populace thinks of Boards. There's certainly a feeling of "that place is over-moderated" when I talk to people about it casually. Boards has come up in conversation with quite a few people who know me in real life but don't know I post here and, well, let's just say I've never heard anyone say "that place needs tougher mods."

    So what am I yapping on about? Am I saying we do a bad job? No. Am I saying that we might improve if we experiment a bit and try taking it easy for a while? Yes. Finally my main point is that when evaluating how well we're serving the community, we should consider those invisibles who may have left rather than simply patting ourselves on the back for "converting" donegalfella. I think that could help our focus a good bit in helping Boards along.


  • Options
    #46
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    See I don't think boards is for everyone, people either get the ethos of the site and figure it out or it rubs them up the wrong way. I don't think it should be watered down to be palatable for everyone.


  • Options
    #47
    Catari Jaguar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,649 ✭✭✭Catari Jaguar


    *throws 2 cents*

    Some mods manage to rack up about 20,000 posts each.. hmm
    I don't think it's that there are too MANY moderators. I think that maybe some mods have more clout.

    And if it's so busy modding say, just AH or PI, why give the same mod another 2 or 3 forums to moderate?

    *Well they mod and their post count is high and their join date is earliest therefore they know more about the interweb than everyone else...* :rolleyes:

    That's how it appears to be.

    But what do I know really.


  • Options
    #48
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Lil Kitten wrote: »
    *Well they mod and their post count is high and their join date is earliest therefore they know more about the interweb than everyone else...* :rolleyes:
    It's nothing to do with their post-count - why do people always bring that up? And if I'm an example to go by, it's certainly nothing to do with their internet knowledge.
    Length of time - not essential. WindSock, for instance, wasn't here long at all when she became moderator of the Ladies' Lounge. However, it helps, as someone who's been a member a while will get a sense of the site's ethos and the other mods/admins will get to know a bit what they're like.

    Often, members who aren't known at all sitewide become moderators - e.g. in the Photography forum. They proved themselves, pretty much only on the Photography forum, as posters who seemed capable of moderating.


  • Options
    #49
    Dub13
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,252 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    RE post count,I think there have been a couple of cases over the years of people 'been made' mod with less than 500 posts.


  • Options
    #50
    eVeNtInE
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭eVeNtInE


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #51
    javaboy
    Registered Users Posts: 15,094 ✭✭✭✭javaboy


    eVeNtInE wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Sure that Vexorg fella hasn't even got 700 posts and they made him an admin. Must be some kind of fasttrack scheme or something.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    Dub13 wrote: »
    RE post count,I think there have been a couple of cases over the years of people 'been made' mod with less than 500 posts.

    Convert, the mod of Equestrian, currently has 328 posts to his name.


  • Options
    #53
    GoneShootin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,478 ✭✭✭GoneShootin


    javaboy wrote: »
    Sure that Vexorg fella hasn't even got 700 posts and they made him an admin. Must be some kind of fasttrack scheme or something.

    :D


  • Options
    #54
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Lil Kitten wrote: »
    *throws 2 cents*

    Some mods manage to rack up about 20,000 posts each.. hmm
    I don't think it's that there are too MANY moderators. I think that maybe some mods have more clout.

    If people listen to what I've got to say it's not because of my postcount, join date or the forums I mod. Or at least, I should sincerely hope not.
    Lil Kitten wrote: »
    And if it's so busy modding say, just AH or PI, why give the same mod another 2 or 3 forums to moderate?

    Because it doesn't cost much effort to answer a handful more reported posts each week? I'd barely notice the difference in my inbox if I dropped every other forum apart from Politics.


  • Options
    #55
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #56
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    no matter what you do people will moan. the more people something attracts the moaners there are.

    maybe when people sign up to boards they should be made read karl's post or something so they know what system is here...


  • Options
    #57
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,235 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Sure Nerin wasnt here long at all before he made Mod for his own new forum. The criteria for picking mods has always been very fluid.


  • Options
    #58
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure Nerin wasnt here long at all before he made Mod for his own new forum. The criteria for picking mods has always been very fluid.

    Don't speculate on a process you know nothing about.
    I was made a mod with in 5 months of joining boards.ie it is a lot more then just about join date.


  • Options
    #59
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Lil Kitten wrote: »
    *Well they mod and their post count is high and their join date is earliest therefore they know more about the interweb than everyone else...* :rolleyes:
    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure Nerin wasnt here long at all before he made Mod for his own new forum. The criteria for picking mods has always been very fluid.
    Thaedydal wrote: »
    Don't speculate on a process you know nothing about.
    I was made a mod with in 5 months of joining boards.ie it is a lot more then just about join date.


    In fairness Thaed, overheals comments were made in relation to Lilkittens. As such, he's making exactly the same point as you ;)


  • Options
    #60
    Nerin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,523 ✭✭✭✭Nerin


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure Nerin wasnt here long at all before he made Mod for his own new forum. The criteria for picking mods has always been very fluid.

    It was a mixture of awesome and favours. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,235 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Sexual?

    Sure thaed i dont pretend to 'know' the process, no need to get holier than thou. I just am pretty sure the criteria changes over time, its not exactly like playing The Game now is it?

    PS I just lost the game (and so did you)


Advertisement