Helpdesk is a joke

Daysha

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If they have made an error, don't you want them to admit it? Having arguments aired infront of the mob makes for better drama I will admit - but if genuine resolutions are your goal, a discussion backdrop that discourages openness and makes the parties involved weary of 'losing face' is certainly not the best way to achieve it.

Fair enough. I just can't recall many other forums having official complaints viewable for every single poster on the site to read.

ShooterSF

minime1 wrote: »

In the case I linked to, ShooterSF was able to stand his ground & get his complaint across.

My point is however, in that case another user might have felt intimidated by the amount of mods replying.

I think the point here is not whether the op of a helpdeask thread has a valid complaint or not but the fairness of the whole thing.

Btw I know not all mods have the ability to reply in the helpdesk forum but if they are giving access once is that access for ever?

I'd like to point out it was SectionF, I have no problem with the soccer mods other than their lack of taste in teams they support

LuckyLloyd

minime1 wrote: »

I think the point here is not whether the op of a helpdeask thread has a valid complaint or not but the fairness of the whole thing.

Hmm, I disagree on both aspects of this sentence:

- Helpdesk exists for registered users to raise technical problems or queries / voice concerns about poor general moderation or individual moderation decisions that are perceived as unfair - in a section of the website that will definitely be read by SMods. As such, the point is surely to have the problem / complaint in question reviewed by someone who is extremely tuned into how the site works and operates so that they can fix the problem / reverse the decision; directly explain why the problem does not require a fix / why the decision will not be furthered or reversed. In essence, to discuss the validity of cases where a user feels hard done by;

- As such, this raises the question of whether Helpdesk is an adequate space for things to be highlighted and dealt with where necessary in a fair and transparent manner. In thinking about that question, it is probably worth remembering two things: 1) Regular mods posting there cannot edit the posts of a user 2) SMods have no reason to side with moderators if they are actually in the wrong. Therefore, if the user has a real gripe that is clearly communicated* - once it is posted in Helpdesk the replies of a million forum specific mods can't diminish it, and can't prevent a just outcome. There is no logical reason for a user to be intimidated, and nothing that says they can't take hours (or days even) to consider and refine their position (or consult about it with mods / other users) and argument before they post in Helpdesk;

*'Clearly communicate' doesn't demand you to be a wizard of words. And in any case, beautiful English won't help you if you are blustering over **** all - just as it won't help a mod who is inescapably wrong. Though to some extent, this is a post board where English is the means of communication - so one assumes that if you were participating on the site to the extent where you had something to raise in Helpdesk, you are capable of engaging in discussion and getting points across to others via the written word!

minime1 wrote: »

Btw I know not all mods have the ability to reply in the helpdesk forum but if they are giving access once is that access for ever?

Not sure. Though I think it is reasonable to assume that if a mod posted in a Helpdesk thread that doesn't concern them that ability would be withdrawn sharpish - and a ban would follow.

K-9 wrote: »

If 5 mods are in a Helpdesk forum against 1 poster, surely the above applies?

The noise ratio is the same, except it's moderators posting?

Don't really follow. The part of my post you quoted concerns whether people are afraid of being objective and willing to admit mistakes because they are involved in a debate within a high visibility thread that has attracted it's own entourage of petty side arguments and score settling. The Helpdesk format keeps all of those potential disruptions to a minimum.

And, at the end of the day, the presumption is that the mods of any forum are operating by consensus as a group. So a complaint against an individual mod is, by extension, a complain against his fellow forum specific mods. As such, they should be given the right of reply as a group.

K-9

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Don't really follow. The part of my post you quoted concerns whether people are afraid of being objective and willing to admit mistakes because they are involved in a debate within a high visibility thread that has attracted it's own entourage of petty side arguments and score settling. The Helpdesk format keeps all of those potential disruptions to a minimum.

My point is, are moderators afraid of being objective and willing to admit mistakes because they are involved in a debate within a thread that attracts petty arguments and score settling. A Mod isn't going to see that Helpdesk can be like that. YEP, Some threads on HD get sidetracked, why?

LuckyLloyd wrote:

And, at the end of the day, the presumption is that the mods of any forum are operating by consensus as a group. So a complaint against an individual mod is, by extension, a complain against his fellow forum specific mods. As such, they should be given the right of reply as a group.

No, a complaint against an INDIVIDUAL Mod, is not one against a GROUP.

Is every single decision by consensus?

I'd like proof if it is.

therecklessone

minime1 wrote: »

I agree with the op. He does have a point. In this thread I've counted seven mods replying!!

You've not, you've counted 5 mods of the forum that SectionF was complaining about, plus two SMods who are supposed to post on Help desk as it is one of the tasks they perform.

I think the OP does the SMods a great disservice with his complaint here, from what I've seen they are capable of sifting through replies to get to the crux of a matter, and make a judgement. If you have a valid complaint, it will be listened to. Even if your complaint is judged invalid, they will engage with you and explain why that is the case.

I fail to see how some "supporters" will change that process. If there are others who have been involved in the incident who have something of worth to add to the discussion, there is nothing stopping them from contacting the SMod who replies to the thread and putting forward their viewpoint.

minime1

ShooterSF wrote: »

I'd like to point out it was SectionF, I have no problem with the soccer mods other than their lack of taste in teams they support

Ooops my apologies ShooterSF & SectionF. It was late, sorry again.


As regards 5 mods 2 Smods, meh, it still looks to me to be unfair. How anyone thinks thats balanced is beyond me

I'm not here to get into a big debate, I ujsually lurk rather than post. All I'm saying is how it looks to an outsider when a user makes a complaint in the helpdesk & then has 7 mods replying (5 mods & 2 Smods if you want to be pedantic).

therecklessone

minime1 wrote: »

All I'm saying is how it looks to an outsider when a user makes a complaint in the helpdesk & then has 7 mods replying (5 mods & 2 Smods if you want to be pedantic).

I'm not being pedantic. You're new to this forum, so perhaps you're not aware of the distinction between a Mod and an SMod. One of the roles assigned to SMods is to monitor the Help Desk forum and respond to threads there. In the case you've highlighted, the second reply was from an SMod who continued to engage with the OP throughout the thread. At no point was his complaint overlooked simply through weight of opposition, and as a contributor to the thread my motivation at all times was to deal with the complaint and explain my own actions.

People in general need to look beyond the number of people posting, and look at who is posting on a particular thread, and what role they fulfil.

Ponster

minime1 wrote: »

As regards 5 mods 2 Smods, meh, it still looks to me to be unfair. How anyone thinks thats balanced is beyond me

I really think you ahave both misunderstood the purpose and workings of Helpdesk.

minime1

Well then do you not think that the two Smods and perhaps one soccer mod would have been enough?

muffler

minime1 wrote: »

As regards 5 mods 2 Smods, meh, it still looks to me to be unfair. How anyone thinks thats balanced is beyond me

I'm not here to get into a big debate, I ujsually lurk rather than post. All I'm saying is how it looks to an outsider when a user makes a complaint in the helpdesk & then has 7 mods replying (5 mods & 2 Smods if you want to be pedantic).

I know you are only citing that particular thread as an example and while I haven't read it I have to say that yes I would agree with you (on face value anyhow). I think we can eliminate Smods from the equation as several of them can get involved in trying to get a problem resolved.

However I wouldnt have seen the need for input from 5 different mods unless it was requested by the Smods or that the thread involved the OP having interacted with the said mods in the past.

On your point of access to the Help Desk mods have been given access in order to respond to any complaint in relation to either themselves or the forum they moderate but while it was left open initially a couple of mods abused the privilege afforded to them and their access has been removed.

Steve

minime1 wrote: »

As regards 5 mods 2 Smods, meh, it still looks to me to be unfair. How anyone thinks thats balanced is beyond me

minime1, the complaint SectionF had was against the moderation of soccer in general, not about any one moderator.

Do you not think the soccer mods have the right to reply to that complaint?

If SectionF's complaint was about a single mod or incident then only that specific mod would be given access to reply.

If someone, for example, started a thread complaining about you, would you not feel hard done by if you were refused access to reply?

LuckyLloyd

K-9 wrote: »

No, a complaint against an INDIVIDUAL Mod, is not one against a GROUP.

Is every single decision by consensus?

I'd like proof if it is.

Well, in the example thread - this applies:

Steve wrote: »

minime1, the complaint SectionF had was against the moderation of soccer in general, not about any one moderator.

Do you not think the soccer mods have the right to reply to that complaint?

If SectionF's complaint was about a single mod or incident then only that specific mod would be given access to reply.

If someone, for example, started a thread complaining about you, would you not feel hard done by if you were refused access to reply?

As for whether all decisions are taking by consensus, I would say no. But from what I have seen, any contentious decision that would have the potential to end up in Feedback or Helpdesk would be double checked and discussed amongst mods as a group.

minime1

I think we'll have to agree to disagree I still think one user v 5 mods is unfair! A lot of users may have felt intimidated by this, luckily in that case SectionF was strong enough to get his point across.

A representative or two of the soccer mods would have sufficed.

Oh btw thank you Muffler for the clarification on mods access to the helpdesk, it was just something I wondered about

K-9

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well, in the example thread - this applies:



As for whether all decisions are taking by consensus, I would say no. But from what I have seen, any contentious decision that would have the potential to end up in Feedback or Helpdesk would be double checked and discussed amongst mods as a group.

Are there always 2/3 mods about when a quick decision has to be made?

I think though when it's one user posting and 5 mods often the original point gets side tracked as a user gets quoted on side issues and the general point often gets lost.

Often it becomes a quoting match of you said this, he said that, if you know what I mean and the general point gets lost.

Eg. the question I ask about the 2/3 mods isn't really that important and side tracks the thread!

therecklessone

K-9 wrote: »

Are there always 2/3 mods about when a quick decision has to be made?

Not always, no. It's a bit difficult to say we do X, Y and Z every single time a decision needs to be made, but if for some reason we're unsure of how to act we'll look for opinions and advice from the other soccer mods. There are other options open to us, such as deleting certain posts or closing a thread that can help delay the decision making process sufficiently, or we can tidy things up after a consensus has been arrived at (which is what happened in the thread referenced here)

K-9 wrote: »

I think though when it's one user posting and 5 mods often the original point gets side tracked as a user gets quoted on side issues and the general point often gets lost.

Often it becomes a quoting match of you said this, he said that, if you know what I mean and the general point gets lost.

The two points I made earlier still apply IMO:

I think the OP does the SMods a great disservice with his complaint here, from what I've seen they are capable of sifting through replies to get to the crux of a matter, and make a judgement. If you have a valid complaint, it will be listened to. Even if your complaint is judged invalid, they will engage with you and explain why that is the case.

And

People in general need to look beyond the number of people posting, and look at who is posting on a particular thread, and what role they fulfil.

I think sceptre and Beruthiel made positive contributions to the thread in question, and it is their posts that should stand out , not the original complainants or the soccer forum mods replies. That for me suggests that the Help Desk works well, which is the point of this thread, no?

GuanYin

minime1 wrote: »

I agree with the op. He does have a point. In this thread I've counted seven mods replying!!

That thread has the OP of the helpdesk thread questioning the rules in the forum and how the mods apply the rules.

We could have nominated one of us to speak and then discussed the matter behind closed doors, maybe we should do so in future, I feel if we did, we'd be accused of a lack of transparency.

We all gave our point of view and the thread gives an overall view, for better or worse, on our modding thought processes.

When the query is about general modding, why should only one of us bear the brunt of the complaint?

Now, if the OP was referring to one mod in particular, well maybe only the mod in question and any mod involved should respond. But we haven't had much clarity on that.

muffler

GuanYin wrote: »

When the query is about general modding, why should only one of us bear the brunt of the complaint?

Now, if the OP was referring to one mod in particular, well maybe only the mod in question and any mod involved should respond. But we haven't had much clarity on that.

fair points.

K-9

therecklessone wrote: »

Not always, no. It's a bit difficult to say we do X, Y and Z every single time a decision needs to be made, but if for some reason we're unsure of how to act we'll look for opinions and advice from the other soccer mods. There are other options open to us, such as deleting certain posts or closing a thread that can help delay the decision making process sufficiently, or we can tidy things up after a consensus has been arrived at (which is what happened in the thread referenced here)

I accept that and I do know decisions aren't taken lightly and I've seen threads that were locked reopened. Anyway, I dont want to take away from the thread and side track it!

therecklessone wrote:

The two points I made earlier still apply IMO:



And



I think sceptre and Beruthiel made positive contributions to the thread in question, and it is their posts that should stand out , not the original complainants or the soccer forum mods replies. That for me suggests that the Help Desk works well, which is the point of this thread, no?

I've no particular problem with the thread, my problem is more that the thread was probably more suited to Feedback to get more opinions.

GuanYin wrote: »

That thread has the OP of the helpdesk thread questioning the rules in the forum and how the mods apply the rules.

We could have nominated one of us to speak and then discussed the matter behind closed doors, maybe we should do so in future, I feel if we did, we'd be accused of a lack of transparency.

We all gave our point of view and the thread gives an overall view, for better or worse, on our modding thought processes.

When the query is about general modding, why should only one of us bear the brunt of the complaint?

Now, if the OP was referring to one mod in particular, well maybe only the mod in question and any mod involved should respond. But we haven't had much clarity on that.

I accept that too. The thread probably would have benefited from being moved to Feedback to see if there were more users with the same complaint.

It's fair enough saying pm a mod to ask to post but Helpdesk is quieter than Feedback and many wouldn't think of it.

PS. I don't think it is unreasonable to say 1 user posting versus 5 mods is a difficult scenario.

GuanYin

K-9 wrote: »

I accept that too. The thread probably would have benefited from being moved to Feedback to see if there were more users with the same complaint.

Well really, with respect, that is for the SMODS to decide and not mods. So your complaint would be on their moderation.

It's fair enough saying pm a mod to ask to post but Helpdesk is quieter than Feedback and many wouldn't think of it.

Again, the Admins and SMODS run these fora, you need to ask them about it.

PS. I don't think it is unreasonable to say 1 user posting versus 5 mods is a difficult scenario.

My opinion would be that if the complaint is reasonable, then does it matter if 1 or 20 mods reply. Truth will out.

In my experience, reasonable complaints, presented in a fair manner, are dealt with fairly.

K-9

GuanYin wrote: »

Well really, with respect, that is for the SMODS to decide and not mods. So your complaint would be on their moderation.

Again, the Admins and SMODS run these fora, you need to ask them about it.


My opinion would be that if the complaint is reasonable, then does it matter if 1 or 20 mods reply. Truth will out.

In my experience, reasonable complaints, presented in a fair manner, are dealt with fairly.

YEP, I think Dev himself posted that he has thoughts on the way Feedback and Helpdesk are working. While it may be working ok, improvements aren't impossible.

therecklessone

K-9 wrote: »

I accept that too. The thread probably would have benefited from being moved to Feedback to see if there were more users with the same complaint.

To be honest, it really wouldn't. Help Desk is a better forum to deal with a complaint precisely because it doesn't invite more users to contribute. Search back over the last few months of Feedback, there are countless examples of complaints being lost in the noise created by lolcat pics, and epic fail pics, and facepalm pics, not to mention the examples of other users seeing a complaint and tacking on their own (unrelated) complaint to the thread.

Help Desk allows a user make their point, and allows the SMods make a judgement on that point, without encouraging all of the other silliness I've mentioned above.

PS. I don't think it is unreasonable to say 1 user posting versus 5 mods is a difficult scenario.

I think that is only an issue if people fail to gasp the process behind posting a Help Desk thread, in fairness that process could probably do with being stated a little clearer so that people understand the roles played by SMods and Admins in deciding the merits of a complaint.

K-9

therecklessone wrote: »

To be honest, it really wouldn't. Help Desk is a better forum to deal with a complaint precisely because it doesn't invite more users to contribute. Search back over the last few months of Feedback, there are countless examples of complaints being lost in the noise created by lolcat pics, and epic fail pics, and facepalm pics, not to mention the examples of other users seeing a complaint and tacking on their own (unrelated) complaint to the thread.

YEP, but is just one poster the answer. One extreme to another?

therecklessone wrote:

I think that is only an issue if people fail to gasp the process behind posting a Help Desk thread, in fairness that process could probably do with being stated a little clearer so that people understand the roles played by SMods and Admins in deciding the merits of a complaint.

Agreed.

What is the main difference between HD & Feedback though for complaints?

I mean this genuinely, so no LOL Catz!

Seems to be one noise replaced by another.

eagle eye

Look what I'm trying to point out here is that this system is not fair to someone who has been banned for instance.

No matter where you go in the democratic world its normal to find a proper system in place for appeals. You are entitled to have someone represent/assist you in this appeal. I know this a private forum before you go barking about democracy, but really there should be some fairness.

My main gripe is that nobody here has that opportunity in helpdesk.

We could even start a new forum where appellants put up a thread looking for someone to assist them. Wouldn't that be fun?:)

I just see a lot of members who are looking to appeal and its clear very early that they are unprepared or lack the ability to make the case themselves. A lot of people feel intimidated by moderators, well certain mods anyways, and they have lost their appeal before they even get started.

My refusal to put up links here is because I don't want to choose people who I feel have been weak in their appeals as I don't want to insult anybody. There are plenty of threads where its the case though.


In general though I think it would a fairer system for all and would improve boards.ie.

GuanYin

K-9 wrote: »

Seems to be one noise replaced by another.

Noise?

I rarely, if ever see anything more than sincere answers or at least direct retort. At least in Helpdesk everyone posting is directly involved in the issue.

Unlike here, which is effectively street theater with any passer by can pretend to speak with authority, whether real or not.

Helpdesk isn't perfect. It is a better option than Feedback has ever been.

GuanYin

eagle eye wrote: »

No matter where you go in the democratic world its normal to find a proper system in place for appeals. You are entitled to have someone represent/assist you in this appeal.

I see what you are saying and understand your point, but in those systems the representation speaks for you. You yourself are would have a speak when spoken to role.

What would be the point of that here? If you both speak, you're just suggesting allowing someone who has no part in the incident being discussed to post agreeing with what you are saying. It would be rather transparent that the persons interests would be vested and make their role pointless.

We could even start a new forum where appellants put up a thread looking for someone to assist them. Wouldn't that be fun?:)

I understand you intentions but believe it would ultimately reduce the appeals process into a charade where people wanting attention and a chance to make a name for themselves would now have a platform to do so.

I just see a lot of members who are looking to appeal and its clear very early that they are unprepared or lack the ability to make the case themselves. A lot of people feel intimidated by moderators, well certain mods anyways, and they have lost their appeal before they even get started.

You could be right, or they simply may not have a case to make. Either way no SMOD is intimidated by any mod on this site. Nor should they be. We're talking about posting text and opinions. Why would anyone be intimidated.

At present both sides make there case and the smods give their opinions or often try and explain the system. Maybe they should be more straightforward and just say, sustained or over-ruled, but I guess the idea is to help everyone understand how the site works.

I have seen many cases where smods over-rule a mod. Or when mods, on reflection, over-turn their own decisions, or reduce them.

K-9

GuanYin wrote: »

Noise?

I rarely, if ever see anything more than sincere answers or at least direct retort. At least in Helpdesk everyone posting is directly involved in the issue.

Unlike here, which is effectively street theater with any passer by can pretend to speak with authority, whether real or not.

Helpdesk isn't perfect. It is a better option than Feedback has ever been.

Feedback has access for everybody and opinions from everybody.

Obviously by its very nature there will be street theatre but it is still the best place for a general discussion on moderators, not Helpdesk were only the OP can post. Democracy is like that!

(Yes, I know it's a private site but the point still stands!)

therecklessone

K-9 wrote: »

Obviously by its very nature there will be street theatre but it is still the best place for a general discussion on moderators, not Helpdesk were only the OP can post. Democracy is like that!

It all depends on what one's motivation is for complaining in the first place:

Would I like my concerns addressed by somebody who has the authority to do something about them? I'll post in the Help Desk

Would I like to complain in public, and invite all sorts to pile in with their own problems? I'll post in Feedback.



Seriously, I don't know why people feel that a complainant needs the support of other posters to make their point, unless the other posters were somehow involved in the exchange?

I'll say again for clarity:

SMods are adept at sifting through replies to identify the crux of a matter, and respond in the appropriate manner. The Help Desk is a more deliberative forum than Feedback, it works precisely because it is not weighed down by unrelated arguments and point scoring.

auerillo

eagle eye wrote: »

Right I've been reading the helpdesk lately and imo its not fair to the complainant and all advantage lies with the moderators.

The reasons I believe this are as follows.

1. There is no way for anybody who supports the complainant to assist them in the thread.
2. More than one moderator can reply to his complaint.

It looks to me like a case of divide and conquer all complainants by seperating them.


How is this fair?

Or is fairness not part of Boards.ie?

Surely there must be a fairer way for someone to air their complaints regarding moderators. Maybe allowing access to two supporters of the complainents choosing for the duration of the thread would solve the problem. If that can't be done then surely there must be some other way to make it fair to the complainent.
Its worse than the old diplock court system.

I think that many would agree with you, with the exception of some moderators who feel their place is to back up other mods at all costs.

Check out http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055375700 to see the response of mods to a complaint which was designed to make boards a better place, and see the reaction of some mods....

GuanYin

auerillo wrote: »

I think that many would agree with you, with the exception of some moderators who feel their place is to back up other mods at all costs.

Check out http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055375700 to see the response of mods to a complaint which was designed to make boards a better place, and see the reaction of some mods....

Oh please.

You started a campaign against a mod that deteriorated into "lots of people hate him, I can't name names, but they all say they hate you in PMs to me, I'm just telling you what they all said".

You then sent unsolicited PMs to users to attempt to rise a mob. Users complained to me about it so you got banned.

If you had a reasonable complaint, you didn't in any way present it.

tbh

the problem is with the type of thread.

Someone says "you're ****". What are you going to say? "No, I'm not, why am I ****?" "you just are, everyone thinks it".

So, how does that thread progress? If you look at threads that take the format:

I was banned for posting this: <>, because the mod said it was a breach of this rule:

I contest that (I didn't mean it that way / I didn't say those things / the rule is interpreted wrongly)

they almost always get worked out.