Moderators

tbh

ReginaII wrote: »

I've noticed before that any criticism of boards seems to be taken quite personally

that's because a lot of the criticism is meant personally. Typical case is a user who's been banned or infracted signing up a new account and pretending they are making a general point when in fact they are talking about a specific issue. They are talking about a specific mod, usually, and trying to appear like they are a disinterested party when really they have a specific agenda. A shill, if you like. And people tend not to like shills.

ReginaII

Papa Smut wrote: »

lol

*1: We aint the police. We're janitors.

*2: And we are definitely not workers

Point 1 is semantics. No janitor I know of has the power to censor others, or to suspend them for a period or even to banish them forever.

The point was not about the moderators, many of whom are excellent.

Wibbs

ReginaII wrote: »

I've noticed before that any criticism of boards seems to be taken quite personally, and the apparent aim of the mods etc who post in here, and in the helpdesk, seems to be to prevent criticism and "manage" any member who makes a criticism, whether constructive or otherwise.

Like TBH said though, a lot of the time it is personal. Criticism is great, but very rarely constructive and even more rarely solution driven, so people naturally have a tendency to batten down the hatches. Which is a pity when an actual problem and solution may be missed.

Some moderators now openly admit to being drunk when on duty here, and the attitude of boards.ie to moderators who are drunk appears to be that it is fine to be drunk when moderating on their site.

Many users are drunk too.

Is it a sign of good management, or poor management, which tolerates workers who are habitually drunk on duty?

Yea but as has been pointed out we're not workers. Though sometimes it can feel like that. I would agree with you and say we're not janitors either. I never quite agreed with that comparison, though a lot of the role is more janitorial than you might expect. Like you said janitors can't censure people. But without some sort of control going on, this place would be a hive of madness.

Offy

How many us against them threads have I seen on Boards? Here we go again up ya bhoy!!!!!!!
This debate has run for years now, the OP makes a fair point that has been made many times before and all the 'we are perfect crew' get hot and bothered. Thats my two cents regardless of who likes it and who doesnt!

Offy

Wibbs wrote: »

But without some sort of control going on, this place would be a hive of madness.

And it isnt a hive of madness?

Wibbs

Offy wrote: »

And it isnt a hive of madness?

Well..... dribbling speaking for myself I have to agree.

Jazzy

oscarBravo wrote: »

We keep hearing that over-moderation will kill off boards.ie, but it keeps not happening.

it does make it less interesting and very grey though

Tom Dunne

Jazzy wrote: »

it does make it less interesting and very grey though

For somebody who finds it less interesting and very grey, you sure spend a lot of time on the site.

coletti

Tom Dunne wrote: »

For somebody who finds it less interesting and very grey, you sure spend a lot of time on the site.

That does appear to be a dichotomy. However, your answer appears to enable you to avoid discussing the point the poster was making.

Remember, people who don't use this site will never make a complaint, it's only users of the site who will ever do that. The only way any site, or business, will improve is by listening to complaints from its customers or users.

oscarBravo

coletti wrote: »

That does appear to be a dichotomy. However, your answer appears to enable you to avoid discussing the point the poster was making.

In fairness, there wasn't much to discuss. If someone is claiming that the site is being over-moderated, and that that over-moderation is make the site uninteresting and grey, then fair enough: they clearly find the site uninteresting and grey, and blame that on over-moderation.

Unfortunately, that's just arguing from a conclusion. As I've already pointed out, the statistics suggest that way, way more people find the site interesting and colourful than find it uninteresting and grey, and - based on that - I personally don't believe that over-moderation is a problem.

Now, if Jazzy or anyone else wants to actually discuss the issue, then they're going to need to come up with some convincing evidence that the exponential growth the site has seen over the past several years would be even more impressive were we to moderate the site less.

Remember, people who don't use this site will never make a complaint, it's only users of the site who will ever do that.

Remember also that tens of thousands of people who do use the site are not complaining about over-moderation.

The only way any site, or business, will improve is by listening to complaints from its customers or users.

We do listen to complaints, but it's not exactly feasible to act on a generalised complaint that, frankly, comes across as grumbling. If there are specific instances where a moderator acts inappropriately, we'll address them.

Barname

tbh wrote: »

That's not strictly true. I banned a user on the radio forum. You then sent me a message, demanding to know why i had banned this user, calling my actions shameful and accusing me of stifling debate. Later, on thread, you commented on the ban again, and said that "the truth hurts some people". I took that then, and still do, as another dig at the ban. I asked you to explain your remark. You sent me a pm, which I am happy to publish, in which you denied any reference to my moderation and did not explain the remark. Unwilling to spend my time in a pathetic game of verbal ping pong, I banned you. I then decided that was unfair, lifted the ban and stepped down as radio mod. Not exactly the actions of a power tripper I would suggest. Since then you have been banned by the other radio mod, something I had no knowledge about, or influence in. You sent me a message accusing me of getting you banned, accsing me of having a vested interest on rte and of stifling debate. In short, in your one month in the radio forum, you made the moderation job so unpleasant that I turned my back on four happy years doin the job, rather than have to deal with you any further. I see you've decided to set up camp on feedback now, in
Much the same style as you posted in radio. It'll be interesting to see how you fare.

FTR

The 'other' radio mod famously 'thanked' every 'Ban/Judgement' that you posted

Very immature on their behalf IMO

Orim

Barname wrote: »

FTR

The 'other' radio mod famously 'thanked' every 'Ban/Judgement' that you posted

Very immature on their behalf IMO

Most mods will thank other mods when they issue a ban or a warning as a way of showing that they agree with the decision.

This is a site wide convention in general and has nothing to do with radio, tbh or anything else in this thread.

coletti

oscarBravo wrote: »

In fairness, there wasn't much to discuss. If someone is claiming that the site is being over-moderated, and that that over-moderation is make the site uninteresting and grey, then fair enough: they clearly find the site uninteresting and grey, and blame that on over-moderation.

Unfortunately, that's just arguing from a conclusion. As I've already pointed out, the statistics suggest that way, way more people find the site interesting and colourful than find it uninteresting and grey, and - based on that - I personally don't believe that over-moderation is a problem.

Now, if Jazzy or anyone else wants to actually discuss the issue, then they're going to need to come up with some convincing evidence that the exponential growth the site has seen over the past several years would be even more impressive were we to moderate the site less. Remember also that tens of thousands of people who do use the site are not complaining about over-moderation. We do listen to complaints, but it's not exactly feasible to act on a generalised complaint that, frankly, comes across as grumbling. If there are specific instances where a moderator acts inappropriately, we'll address them.

I'm not attempting to argue the case either way. I just noticed that Tom Dunne's answer effectively allowed him to ignore the issue.

You seem to say above that, because the site has grown , then that justifies the way it is moderated. You may be right, and it may be that if the site was moderated differently it may have grown even more.

In my experience, a management style which ignores complaints from customers, claiming they are doing so well that they can, effectively, ignore their customers complaints, does not bode well for the future of that business. Many Irish companies, who did just that in boom times are, if they are still in business, regretting that they did not pay more attention to customers which they lost in boom times who may well have contributed to keeping the business afloat in recession.

Remember, a customer who complains is saying "I want to remain a customer, and use your service or product, and here is way to make it better for me".

In Ireland we have traditionally seen complaints as negative, rather than welcoming complaints and using them as a means to make the product or service better for all customers, which has the double benefit of improving sales and making your customers feel better and becoming more loyal to your company.

The corporate world is littered with casualties who thought they did not have to take their customers complaints seriously, and not a single company in the top 500 companies of any country in the world does not take customer complaints extremely seriously. Thats illuminating.

Success is dependant on customers returning to use the same products or services again and again, and to do that they have to feel valued and feel they are taken seriously and their views taken seriously.

I get a feeling, (and I may be wrong) that complaints and complainants are not welcomed on boards.ie, and that those who complain are tagged as troublemakers. Its a shame if thats true, and I may be wrong.

How does anyone think the poster feels after being told off in this post http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67504009&postcount=39, effectively being told he will not be allowed to discuss his point in this thread, and threatened that if he starts another thread that it will also be disallowed because this particular moderator appears to believe that his duties extend to preventing them from a discussion on the grounds that he, personally, might not find it interesting? It's not a good way to treat someone else and particularly leaves a bad taste in my mouth to see someone else treated in such a cavalier fashion.

Wibbs

Orim wrote: »

Most mods will thank other mods when they issue a ban or a warning as a way of showing that they agree with the decision.

Or just simply to say "oh right you're handling it". after you click on a reported post link. Don't take thanks or not as any indicator. Of pretty much anything. Plus some people thank more than others. I'd tend to thank much more than the average. I often use it as an acknowledgement, "I seeyour point, appreciate the read but I may or may not agree" kinda thing. Maybe I should dial that one back TBH :)

coletti wrote: »

You seem to say above that, because the site has grown , then that justifies the way it is moderated. You may be right, and it may be that if the site was moderated differently it may have grown even more.

Oh possibly, but there's no way of knowing. Personally I'd take the view if enough people see an issue and make it plain and suggest solutions, then that can only improve things. I would also agree that just saying "well that's that, like it or lump it" can and has on occasion caused strife and people to leave. That said I can also see how hard it can be to figure out if its a genuine and solvable issue, or people who want to see things burn, or indeed people getting frustrated at some little things, not seen to be heard and blowing off steam. It's easy in hindsight of course.

Remember, a customer who complains is saying "I want to remain a customer, and use your service or product, and here is way to make it better for me".

I agree, but more often I have to say, it's along the lines of, "I'm not sure what's wrong, but I'll tick the usual boxes" Or "I don't like change, so I'll tick the usual boxes" Or "one mod/cmod/admin went OTT on me/others, so that means the whole system is rotten and I'll tick the usual boxes". In all those cases it's rare for the latter part of your spiel to be attached IE "here is way to make it better". Hey mea culpa and hands up and all that, I've been guilty of two of the above. Sometimes I was wrong and sometimes I have been right, but I usually suggested some solution or other.

The problem is that because most complaints are one offs at best or just complaining for the sake of it, people tend to assume the worst and good points can and have been lost. The reversal of the old saw about hearing hooves and expecting zebras. The odd time it is a zebra.

In Ireland we have traditionally seen complaints as negative, rather than welcoming complaints and using them as a means to make the product or service better for all customers, which has the double benefit of improving sales and making your customers feel better and becoming more loyal to your company.

Cool, but having dealt with complaints in business with folks from all over the world, the Irish are noticeably worse at making valid complaints. Usually you have to wait until the blood cools before you find out what the actual issue is. Often its of their own making too. Its taken me years to ignore the horses and listen for zebras.

How does anyone think the poster feels after being told off in this post http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67504009&postcount=39, effectively being told he will not be allowed to discuss his point in this thread, and threatened that if he starts another thread that it will also be disallowed because this particular moderator appears to believe that his duties extend to preventing them from a discussion on the grounds that he, personally, might not find it interesting? It's not a good way to treat someone else and particularly leaves a bad taste in my mouth to see someone else treated in such a cavalier fashion.

Now that you've linked the post in question IMHO they were right. Indeed they were being polite in one way. That thread subject is a shoe in for "dey toook ur jerbs" unmeasured hassle posts within the first page of posting.

My 3 cents anyway.

bobbysands81

oscarBravo wrote: »

With respect, you haven't really made a case.

You claim that moderators over-moderate. Do you have any specific examples? You've suggested that the quality of moderation is detrimental to the site, but the statistics show otherwise.

I'm willing to have a conversation, but it needs to be two-way.

Well I would have thought that the infraction you gave me recently was OTT, I took it to higher levels and it was dutifully ignored.

bobbysands81

snyper wrote: »

Thats what i used to do quite alot when i was 13.

Make very broad arguements, once the attention has been given i would quote the above.

You were simply asked for an example, of where you consider threads to be locked without adequet reason, its not a challenge - its merely to enable discussion.

Correct me if I'm wrong but were you not the fella that trawled through my posts on here posting personal details about me? Was that something you did a lot when you were 13 as well?

oscarBravo

coletti wrote: »

You seem to say above that, because the site has grown , then that justifies the way it is moderated.

Not exactly, no. I'm countering the suggestion that the way it's moderated is stifling growth by pointing out that growth is exponential, and there's no sign that anything is stifling growth.

You may be right, and it may be that if the site was moderated differently it may have grown even more.

Maybe, but in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I'm still confident that the level of moderation on the site is not inhibiting its growth. I'm open to reasoned argument.

In my experience, a management style which ignores complaints from customers, claiming they are doing so well that they can, effectively, ignore their customers complaints, does not bode well for the future of that business. Many Irish companies, who did just that in boom times are, if they are still in business, regretting that they did not pay more attention to customers which they lost in boom times who may well have contributed to keeping the business afloat in recession.

Remember, a customer who complains is saying "I want to remain a customer, and use your service or product, and here is way to make it better for me".

Sure, but let's bring it back to Jazzy's comment, which you complained about Tom Dunne ignoring: the problem with it is that it contains no trace of constructive feedback; merely a comment that, as Tom pointed out, is belied by the amount of time Jazzy spends here.

How does anyone think the poster feels after being told off in this post http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67504009&postcount=39, effectively being told he will not be allowed to discuss his point in this thread, and threatened that if he starts another thread that it will also be disallowed because this particular moderator appears to believe that his duties extend to preventing them from a discussion on the grounds that he, personally, might not find it interesting? It's not a good way to treat someone else and particularly leaves a bad taste in my mouth to see someone else treated in such a cavalier fashion.

The converse argument is that if we were to expressly forbid moderators from ever taking any action that could possibly offend anyone in any way, we would have a very different type of environment here, and one which - in our judgement - wouldn't be as conducive to discussion.

Moderators make judgement calls as to how best to manage discussion in their forums. People won't always be happy with individual moderator judgement calls, but the net effect of the way the site is moderated is that it's a vibrant and friendly place to talk about stuff.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Well I would have thought that the infraction you gave me recently was OTT, I took it to higher levels and it was dutifully ignored.

Can you PM me details? I honestly can't remember, and you shouldn't have been ignored.

Jazzy

Tom Dunne wrote: »

For somebody who finds it less interesting and very grey, you sure spend a lot of time on the site.

doesnt mean im wrong now though does it? some sections are still very good, but others are just so bad and boring.

Otis Driftwood

Jazzy wrote: »

doesnt mean im wrong now though does it? some sections are still very good, but others are just so bad and boring.

Then dont read the sections you think are bad and boring and read the sections you think are very good.

Lenny Lovett

coletti wrote: »

I get a feeling, (and I may be wrong) that complaints and complainants are not welcomed on boards.ie, and that those who complain are tagged as troublemakers. Its a shame if thats true, and I may be wrong.

Yes. I believe that's the case too. Maybe it's unintentional but that's how it comes across.

coletti wrote: »

How does anyone think the poster feels after being told off in this post http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67504009&postcount=39, effectively being told he will not be allowed to discuss his point in this thread, and threatened that if he starts another thread that it will also be disallowed because this particular moderator appears to believe that his duties extend to preventing them from a discussion on the grounds that he, personally, might not find it interesting? It's not a good way to treat someone else and particularly leaves a bad taste in my mouth to see someone else treated in such a cavalier fashion.

Similarly, when a moderator closes down a thread that, in his/her opinion has run it's course. If people are still willing to contribute to a thread then there's life still in it. At the same time many thousands of threads are left unlocked and never contributed to.... Strange logic.

Otis Driftwood

Any complaints about moderation are treated the same way and as long as Ive been posting on boards its always been that way.Of the thousands of people that post on boards,how many are unhappy with the moderation I wonder?

Id bet my life that its only a small handfull.On helpdesk,the majority of complaints are from new users that didnt familiarise themselves with the charters of the fora they post in and they have gotten infracted or banned.

If they walked into a pub and started throwing glasses and beers around the place would that be stood for by the owners?Not a hope in hell and boards isnt any different.

If people want free for all forums there are millions of sites online that will cater for shytehawkery.One of the reasons I started posting on boards in the first place was because there has always been an air of civility and respect and the over whelming majority of users conduct themselves impeccably.Yes,on occasion we all get het up and post something regrettable,get a slap on the wrist/infraction etc and take it on board,I certainly have,its the ones that cant see they did anything wrong that invariably start crowing about mod conspiricies.

There are always going to be dissenters but why should a few blades of grass be allowed to set the tone for the whole field?

AckwelFoley

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong but were you not the fella that trawled through my posts on here posting personal details about me? Was that something you did a lot when you were 13 as well?

Was i?

I never heard of you.. ive heard of a lad with a similar name in the 80's that rubbed poo on the walls to make a point.. ive never heard of you

Tom Dunne

coletti wrote: »

I get a feeling, (and I may be wrong) that complaints and complainants are not welcomed on boards.ie, and that those who complain are tagged as troublemakers. Its a shame if thats true, and I may be wrong.

It's never going to be true as long as I am on this site.

Have a look at any of the Help Desk threads I have dealt with. I always ask for both sides of the story and try to reach a compromise, without prejudice, as do all the admins.

Users make mistakes, mods make mistakes (and I would include admins in that too, I've made plenty of howlers) - that is part of being human. As long as we don't lose sight of that and adhere to the rule of not being a dick, then there will be no repercussions.

If, however, somebody dives in and starts insulting people, making demands, throwing out threats, well then yes, they will be marked as a troublemaker and will be treated accordingly.

coletti

oscarBravo wrote: »

The converse argument is that if we were to expressly forbid moderators from ever taking any action that could possibly offend anyone in any way, we would have a very different type of environment here, and one which - in our judgement - wouldn't be as conducive to discussion.

Well, I'd have thought that it was good policy to try to avoid giving offence. To take the argument to an extreme by saying moderators should be "forbidden" isn't the argument. You are answering a point which has not been made and an argument which has not been put forward.

oscarBravo wrote: »

Moderators make judgement calls as to how best to manage discussion in their forums. People won't always be happy with individual moderator judgement calls, but the net effect of the way the site is moderated is that it's a vibrant and friendly place to talk about stuff.

You seem to be saying that its ok for any moderator to decide what is going to be interesting to others and what is not going to be interesting to others, and to prevent any discussion of anything that he, personally, thinks he might not find interesting. Is that really the policy of boards.ie?

nedtheshed wrote: »

There are always going to be dissenters but why should a few blades of grass be allowed to set the tone for the whole field?

That’s the point I was making, some who make a complaint seems to be labelled a “dissenter”.

The grass/field analogy is interesting insofar as there are always a few blades of grass (ie the moderators etc) who set the tone for everyone, and that’s how it should be. Would you really have it that the members should run the site without the “few blades of grass” (ie moderators) being made redundant?

oscarBravo

coletti wrote: »

Well, I'd have thought that it was good policy to try to avoid giving offence.

It is, and that is policy on the site.

You seem to be saying that its ok for any moderator to decide what is going to be interesting to others and what is not going to be interesting to others...

That is part of the role of a moderator, yes.

...and to prevent any discussion of anything that he, personally, thinks he might not find interesting. Is that really the policy of boards.ie?

No, because you're mis-characterising the role.

A moderator will make a decision as to whether there's anything to be gained from an old thread being dragged back up, which inevitably leads to old arguments being re-hashed. If something genuinely new and interesting is added, it may be worth while. That's a judgement call, and it's one that we entrust to the moderators.

Are you arguing that we shouldn't let moderators make judgement calls as to what is suitable material for discussion?

That’s the point I was making, some who make a complaint seems to be labelled a “dissenter”.

Sometimes people who make complaints are dissenting, and not actually suggesting any improvements. That's not constructive criticism.

Sometimes people who make complaints have specific grievances that they want addressed, but are adjudged not to have a valid case.

And sometimes people who complain are considered to have a valid case, and the complaints are upheld.

Lenny Lovett

nedtheshed wrote: »

Any complaints about moderation are treated the same way and as long as Ive been posting on boards its always been that way.Of the thousands of people that post on boards,how many are unhappy with the moderation I wonder?

Well, it would be easy to find out. Put up a poll and we'll see.

nedtheshed wrote: »

If they walked into a pub and started throwing glasses and beers around the place would that be stood for by the owners?Not a hope in hell and boards isnt any different.

That's a silly comparison. There's a hell of a difference between being disorderly on a licenced/public premises and posting here.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Users make mistakes, mods make mistakes (and I would include admins in that too, I've made plenty of howlers) - that is part of being human. As long as we don't lose sight of that and adhere to the rule of not being a dick, then there will be no repercussions.

Yes but when a user 'makes a mistake' (s)he is banned at the discretion of the moderator who, as you correctly state may be mistaken.

Tom Dunne

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

Yes but when a user 'makes a mistake' (s)he is banned at the discretion of the moderator who, as you correctly state may be mistaken.

And if that is the case, it can be appealed to CMods and Admins who can (and have) asked that the ban is overturned.

I have overturned/reduced a number of bans where I have felt it was overly harsh.

Otis Driftwood

Its the users that set the tone of every forum,the mods are there to keep the peace should it be required.

Of the forums I frequent,the majority of mods have a genuine interest in the topic eg film,music,soccer etc,first and foremost,mods are users too,they signed up for this forum the same as most,to interact with like minded people about their interests.

The line you mentioned

You seem to be saying that its ok for any moderator to decide what is going to be interesting to others and what is not going to be interesting to others, and to prevent any discussion of anything that he, personally, thinks he might not find interesting. Is that really the policy of boards.ie?

is frankly baloney.I have never,ever seen a thread locked for the reason cited above.Some threads do run their course.For example,a poster starts a thread about a particular subject,other users reply until the avenues of discussion are exhausted.Other users dont read the full thread and post replies echoing what has been already addressed,rinse and repeat.Some threads get closed because they turn into a merry-go-round of pointless posts re-hashing what has gone before.Threads like that clutter up forums and sometimes need to be locked.

There are instances when threads can be a problem from the outset.

Eg,I start a thread "all foreigners are leeches".Im sure there are more than a few people that would be interested in this topic but all it will do is start a flame war with the usual racist rethoric being trotted out.

The above example is a very cut and dry one and there are some topics that are up to the mods discretion,thats the reason they were asked to be mods in the first place.

Nobody is fool proof and on occasion errors in judgement are made but most of the time decisions to lock threads or infract users are spot on.

Otis Driftwood

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

That's a silly comparison. There's a hell of a difference between being disorderly on a licenced/public premises and posting here.

Why?

A pub is something that is owned by private individuals,they allow the public to use their facilities and users are expected to conduct themselves in an acceptable manner.

Boards is owned by private individuals,they allow the public to use their facilities and users are expected to conduct themselves in an acceptable manner.

Same difference,no?

Jazzy

nedtheshed wrote: »

Then dont read the sections you think are bad and boring and read the sections you think are very good.

but then I cant form an opinion on them can I ? ya'll seem very blasse about someone reading the site, it seems you have to like the content to read it. Why can't I read it and not like it?