Should mods be able to deactivate PM's?

Slidey

Anytime I got abuse as a mod I just laughed at it.

I would be of the firm opinion that it is vital for all mods to have PM's turned on.

The ignore feature may be a little different. Personally whenever some tard annoys me enough to put them on ignore I continually view their posts anyway to back up my view that they are in fact a tard so it defeats the purpose.

If you have a known trouble maker who posts in a forum you mod having them on ignore is a bad situation. It means you are relying on someone reporting the post if it is actionable

bonkey

gandalf wrote: »

bonkey in the old days (as I am sure you remember ) if someone sent you an abusive PM you dealt with it one of two ways. You extended their ban and/or you engaged with an admin to take action.

Or both. I liked both.

I don't think that has changed much.

It certainly shouldn't have....

Sharpshooter

I have never turned off PM's in all my time here, being a user or a Mod.

There is no need to do it imo.

If you receive a PM that you consider to be abusive then report it.

I have, modding AH will attract PM's like that, if it's mild abuse I just read and ignore.

If it's OTT then I will hit the report button, I think I did that two maybe three times.

I don't see where you can mod a forum, ban someone who get's your auto PM and then finds themselves unable to contact you.

I have issued bans where the user has PM'd me and apologised and I have shortened the ban because of that apology, had I had my PM's turned off that could not have been settled amicably.

ivanthehunter

Is there a way to know if your PM has hit an ignore list wall?:)

If so- at least you'd know that you're flogging a dead'un and could plan another route of action or stick on the TV or give the wife a hug:rolleyes:

Magenta

Is there any update on this?

FarmerGreen

Filed under
May cause problems>Too trickey>do later.

Other in tray names may be
Oh Jeez
Now
Next
Before dinner
Today
Tomorrow
Lets hope it goes away
Send to DeV

Sharpshooter

RopeDrink wrote: »

Alternatives:

Post a PM towards the Co-Moderator (If any - By rights there always should be for public forums). If you're unhappy with time lapsed without response, hit the Cat-Moderator upside the face with a PM and so on.

Good advice, send a Pm to all Mods of the forum and receipt it so you know if the Mod/Mods/ have read it.

Do give some time for a reply though, just because a Pm has been read doesn't mean the Mod /Cat Mod hasn't other pressing things that need attention first.

pickarooney

RopeDrink wrote: »

Again, it's a possible alternative, not a solution I know - A lot of people presume they absolutely MUST deal with the Moderator who handled whatever situation that person was in - This isn't (always) the case so do keep Co-Mods in mind.

The official dispute resolution procedure states explicitly in step 1 that the user must contact the moderator with whom he/she has a dispute. Anyone who skips any part of the DRP is immediately rebuffed from helpdesk. It's a no-win situation for the user and can only lead to increased frustration all round.

bonkey

pickarooney wrote:

The official dispute resolution procedure states explicitly in step 1 that the user must contact the moderator with whom he/she has a dispute.

Does it?

Here's the text of point 1 the Dispute resolution procedure, with a bit of emphasis added.


1. If you have a problem with a post, thread or a ban from a forum, the first step should be a PM to the moderator in question. If you are not comfortable with PM'ing that particular mod, you can PM the other mods of that forum. You will find the list of the mods at the bottom of the forum in question. If you have been banned from a forum it is still possible to enter it to see who the mods are by logging out of boards.ie first.


It seems to me that this is pretty explicitly saying that you don't have to contact the mod in question.

On a forum with one mod, if the user contacted the CMod directly or came to the Helpdesk and said they didn't want to PM the mod, but had no other mod, I'd be very surprised if they were turned away on the grounds that they didn't follow the procedure to the letter. Indeed, if that has happened, count me amongst those saying we need to change that.

Dohnny Jepp

bonkey wrote: »

Does it?

Here's the text of point 1 the Dispute resolution procedure, with a bit of emphasis added.


1. If you have a problem with a post, thread or a ban from a forum, the first step should be a PM to the moderator in question. If you are not comfortable with PM'ing that particular mod, you can PM the other mods of that forum. You will find the list of the mods at the bottom of the forum in question. If you have been banned from a forum it is still possible to enter it to see who the mods are by logging out of boards.ie first.


It seems to me that this is pretty explicitly saying that you don't have to contact the mod in question.

On a forum with one mod, if the user contacted the CMod directly or came to the Helpdesk and said they didn't want to PM the mod, but had no other mod, I'd be very surprised if they were turned away on the grounds that they didn't follow the procedure to the letter. Indeed, if that has happened, count me amongst those saying we need to change that.

Actually what it says if we want to get this specific, is that the only reason you do not contact the mod in question is "IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE". To me this means that the mod in question has to be available to you whether you want to discuss it with him or not.

K-9

bonkey wrote: »

Does it?

Here's the text of point 1 the Dispute resolution procedure, with a bit of emphasis added.


1. If you have a problem with a post, thread or a ban from a forum, the first step should be a PM to the moderator in question. If you are not comfortable with PM'ing that particular mod, you can PM the other mods of that forum. You will find the list of the mods at the bottom of the forum in question. If you have been banned from a forum it is still possible to enter it to see who the mods are by logging out of boards.ie first.


It seems to me that this is pretty explicitly saying that you don't have to contact the mod in question.

On a forum with one mod, if the user contacted the CMod directly or came to the Helpdesk and said they didn't want to PM the mod, but had no other mod, I'd be very surprised if they were turned away on the grounds that they didn't follow the procedure to the letter. Indeed, if that has happened, count me amongst those saying we need to change that.

Being pedantic, but that is only if you aren't comfortable pm'ing them. In this, it doesn't matter as comfortable or not, you can't pm the mod anyway.

Magenta

RopeDrink wrote: »

Forums have CoMods for a reason - If one is busy, the other can step in, or even just get onto the Mod and give them a reminder that someone is looking for a matter to be resolved (if unable to handle that situation themselves).

How do you suggest the Co-Mod gives the original mod "a reminder" when the original mod has deactivated PMs? You are relying on the assumption that the mods all speak outside of Boards.

RopeDrink wrote: »

Still - I'd also like to think that if a User had an issue with me or felt that I was being unreasonable then they could get a second opinion before taking it higher - I can't see how that would effect their HelpDesk request assuming they HAVE still kept in contact with the original Moderator on the matter as per procedure.

And how do you suggest the user "keeps in contact with the original moderator" when the original moderator has deactivated PMs?!?!

Magenta

RopeDrink wrote: »

My replies were posted on the assumption a Mod has their PM's enabled, obviously.

As said in my previous replies (Somewhere on Page 1) nobody in their right mind can honestly believe that a Moderator role can be performed competantly with PM's disabled... It's not possible and goes against simple common sense. In short, anyone with PM's disabled (or thinks it's ok to turn them off) should not be a Moderator at all.

But to give my point a little meat, a Mod/CoMod/CatMod could post a thread in the Moderators forum to get the attention of the person in question or, failing that, a member of the Admin team who could possibly fix the issue somehow.

EDIT:
Seeing as we've been given no official word on whats acceptable or not I do stick by saying that PM'ing a CoMod / CatMod is a possible alternative - If they can guage wether the official Moderator a User has to deal with definately has PM's disabled then surely the User can be given some leeway when it comes to dispute resolution, beit allowing them to deal with the matter properly through a CoMod or not having their claim snubbed in HelpDesk. Wouldn't be very nice if a User can't resolve a matter because someone higher up the chain claims they broke procedure when in reality they simply couldn't get through to the Moderator at all.

I'm not trying to answer your questions because there is no real answer at the moment, just trying to help by offering different angles. I've never been in that situation so take it for what it's worth.

I see what you're saying.

Personally I think it's incredibly lazy and selfish for a mod to disable their PMs. The mod does the banning and their co-mods and admins have to deal with the aftermath. Team playing all the way :rolleyes:

5starpool

Has there been any official discussion among admins on this?

This is probably something that should be official policy, unlike some of the other things that have been put forward.

nesf

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

Actually what it says if we want to get this specific, is that the only reason you do not contact the mod in question is "IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE". To me this means that the mod in question has to be available to you whether you want to discuss it with him or not.

K-9 wrote: »

Being pedantic, but that is only if you aren't comfortable pm'ing them. In this, it doesn't matter as comfortable or not, you can't pm the mod anyway.

As a Cat Mod I can confirm that it's perfectly ok to PM me if you haven't gotten a reply off the forum mods. You'd want to give them a few days to reply though, otherwise I'll just tell you to wait a while before assuming they're not going to respond!

First step, co-mods, second Cat-Mod.

Rules are applied reasonably not legalistically people, you should all know this!

Dohnny Jepp

nesf wrote: »

Rules are applied reasonably not legalistically people, you should all know this!

Tell that to the people getting turned away from help desk :P

K-9

nesf wrote: »

As a Cat Mod I can confirm that it's perfectly ok to PM me if you haven't gotten a reply off the forum mods. You'd want to give them a few days to reply though, otherwise I'll just tell you to wait a while before assuming they're not going to respond!

First step, co-mods, second Cat-Mod.

Rules are applied reasonably not legalistically people, you should all know this!

Of course, I was being pedantic!

I'd like the option to sort it out amicably with the mod involved first though. Keep it between ourselves if you will, in private. I've had a ban rescinded that way and I'd prefer to have the direct option first.

If a mod was getting hassle from a particular poster, I'd understand the specific use of the blocking pm option.

Sharpshooter

K-9 wrote: »

If a mod was getting hassle from a particular poster, I'd understand the specific use of the blocking pm option.

I wouldn't tbh.

Mods have the report button there too, as I said before if I receive a pm of abuse but I know it's just that user is letting of steam I will do nothing about it, and in After Hours that can happen a lot.

But if it's out of line and worth reporting then I will.

Mods need to keep the line of communication open.

There is no need for any mod to turn off PMs.

-Chris-

Before I became a mod I had my PMs turned off for various reasons. When I became a mod I asked in the mod forum whether I should turn them on or was it fair to leave them turned off.

I got the advice from an Admin that it would be better to have them on, and in retrospect I believe that advice was correct and that it should be official policy that all mods/cmods/admins are required to have PMs enabled.

dr.bollocko

I don't understand how this thread is going on so long.
Mods need to have PMs turned on!
End of story! Right?

The Hill Billy

Correct Herr Doktor. On all counts.

Bonito

dr.bollocko wrote: »

I don't understand how this thread is going on so long.
Mods need to have PMs turned on!
End of story! Right?

We're sorry for keeping you on hold. Your call is important to us and one of our representatives will be with you as soon as possible.


*jingle*

Please continue to hold.

*WiMax Jingle*

Thanks for holding, unfortunately all of our operators are busy at this time, please leave a message after the tone or try calling back later.


*Beep*

bonkey

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

Actually what it says if we want to get this specific, is that the only reason you do not contact the mod in question is "IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE". To me this means that the mod in question has to be available to you whether you want to discuss it with him or not.

I'm not questioning that the mod has to be available. I'm pointing out that the DRP doesn't tell you that you must contact the mod in question.

I take your point.

If someone were to read that the way you did, they may feel that they had to try and contact the mod in question. That might fail, and may then interpret "If you are not happy with the outcome of the above" (from point 2) to mean that they could only progress with an outcome after contact was made...and that failure to get a response wasn't an outcome. Point 3 beginning with "Failing that" may also not be interpreted as an option of last resort.

Generally, we don't expect people to be so utterly literal....but as I said...I take your point. It can almost-certainly be worded better.

Any suggestions for such would be welcome, but are probably material for a seperate thread.

Overheal

Bonito wrote: »

We're sorry for keeping you on hold. Your call is important to us and one of our representatives will be with you as soon as possible.


*jingle*

Please continue to hold.

*WiMax Jingle*

Thanks for holding, unfortunately all of our operators are busy at this time, please leave a message after the tone or try calling back later.


*Beep*

Now thats service.

I have to normally deal with that as well as

*your call may be monitored for quality assurance purposes*
*your position in queue is "One"*

*music*

*your position in queue is "One"*

*music*

*click*
*click*



.....and then I have to call back