Fussy moderation in 'Sustainability & Environmental issues'

samsham

I would like to see a lot less fussy Moderation on Boards.ie but I have to say this topic so far is not doing a lot for the cause. verbal diarrhea comes to mind. Half of conversation going on here would only stimulate the person writing it. You have to keep other people interested.

nesf

samsham wrote: »

I have seen posts shut down because they were going on too long or going off the topic or in the wrong category. Discussions closed because they are about an ongoing Garda assault case. This despite every newspaper in the land discussing it. I think its gone a little crazy here, That's why I rarely visit these days. But instead of offering to look at this issues the moderators are throwing mud around, hoping some sticks on those who dare to complain.

With regard to the Garda Assault case, I'm afraid we have to clamp down on discussion of ongoing court cases because always some muppet comes along and says something that could screw with the jury's neutrality and could bring down a court case. It's different with newspapers since they (are supposed) to be clever about these things and not stray into that territory with on-going cases.

This is site-wide policy due to a few idiots ruining a topic that the majority would be interested in talking about in a reasonable fashion.

Amateurish

I'm all for a little argument and was looking forward to one with Easychair recently regarding global warming. I reckon its a real threat to us, Easychair probably reckons its a fabrication by vested interests. I think I could have shown some solid basis for AGW. No need, the last 2 pages of the thread were comments by mods shooting him/her down. I guess my posts weren't needed with the mods to post everything that needs saying. I guess the impression is that we are filler material for them.
Also its very disappointing to see old threads locked when someone revisits them. We weren't all here 5 years ago. Most of us come here for a debate not to read old threads.

Overheal

@djpbarry I know you've responded to me and indicated that you're open to consideration on these issues but I've just been sitting back reading the back and forth between you and your regulars and all I see is an argument. I can't honestly help but get the feeling that the Debate and the Moderation have gotten mixed together. And what you have to realize is whether entirely true or not, that appearance is what will hurt SEI's credibility.

Maybe you should all spend less time trying to put each other on Trial and more time sitting down and sorting out what is going to occur going forward.

One of the reasons politics works so well is because the content is debated, not the individual. You yourself are breaking what would be your own charter by attacking the posters here. On one hand you're talking about reformatting the charter this and that and on the other you're getting into personal arguments with people.

To be perfectly frank, if you can't keep yourself from being combative here and even within the forum, perhaps you should consider stepping down.

djpbarry

Overheal wrote: »

I know you've responded to me and indicated that you're open to consideration on these issues but I've just been sitting back reading the back and forth between you and your regulars and all I see is an argument.

On reflection, I have over-stepped the mark on a couple of occasions in recent posts.

Overheal wrote: »

Maybe you should all spend less time trying to put each other on Trial and more time sitting down and sorting out what is going to occur going forward.

Ok, here’s what I’m going to do...

Clean slate – everyone is a newcomer to the forum as far as I’m concerned. I have never before encountered the names Chloe Pink or easychair.

Furthermore, in an effort to combat the apparently intimidating atmosphere in the forum, I will refrain from posting anything in SEI for one month from today, either as a poster or moderator. I will however continue to act as a moderator “behind the scenes”, acting upon reported posts, etc. – it would be unfair to Macha otherwise.

Mothman

I have just come across this thread, read a bit of it and decided to express some of my feelings...but have just read the latest post from djpbarry which I think is a good acknowledgment that there are issues.

Back to what I was going to say. I was a small contributor to the then Green Issues. I have an interest in sustainable and environment issues but have not posted to forum since djpbarry was enrolled as mod. The place has an unfriendly atmosphere, just not a very welcoming place for me with poor debating skills to be in. So I've stayed cleared...dropped in occasionally to see it still the same.

I do think that the forum was going like this before djpbarry became Mod.

Amateurish

djpbarry wrote: »

On reflection, I have over-stepped the mark on a couple of occasions in recent posts.
Ok, here’s what I’m going to do...

Clean slate –.

Good move, I hope its enough for everyone and that its a two way street.. After almost 20 pages of bitching at you (including from me) I hope you know you have some support, thanks for the work.

Hal Emmerich

reallyrose wrote: »

I’ve been following this thread in a half-hearted manner, mostly because it keeps popping up on the “New Posts” page.
I don’t post in the forum in question here so all I am doing is providing a bit of outside perspective.

I totally appreciate that Green issues can be ... controversial. However, whether or not the X report is accurate or whether climate change is being caused by humans or unicorns from space isn’t the issue brought up in the opening post.

The issue is moderation.

The issue seems to be moderation is quite heavy-handed, so new posters don’t feel welcome. The ability to debate an issue needs to be developed and practiced. So a new poster who isn’t able to debate and discuss to the same level as other regular posters gets a bit scared and runs away.

It’s totally understandable that the mods may not see that how their actions are viewed by other people.
The tone of a forum can be quite hard to sum up in a few example posts, so maybe the regular posters who claim ‘fussy moderation’ are quite correct in their opinions.

Could I suggest that despite the moderator’s opinion of their own moderating abilities, perhaps they could take a step back and try to take the feedback into account? Maybe for the next few weeks, before the smack is handed down for infractions, the mod with the smack could take a moment out to think about it.

Another suggestion could be to add the relevant quote from the forum charter to infractions, so that the poster will understand why they are being chastised.

Also, the use of bold text for modly declarations could be changed to coloured text? Red for naughtiness, leaving the bold text free to be used for emphasis, without posters feeling as if they are being given out to for partaking in debate.

As I mentioned at the start of my post, I don't post in the S&EI forum and I don't know anyone posting in this thread too well, (I think I've met one of ye!). So I don't have any emotional investment in this!

Good post, but pretty much ignored to carry on the bitchin'....

After 20 pages of bitching and not the first thread iirc on the topic either, I'm really curious to know the perks of being a Mod, I know it's unpaid but if I was a Mod and had all this complaining about my modding I'd be long gone!

Steve

Hal Emmerich wrote: »

I'm really curious to know the perks of being a Mod

Sometimes we get free cake. Not often nowadays though, recession and all..

Scofflaw

Steve wrote: »

Sometimes we get free cake. Not often nowadays though, recession and all..

You get cake? Whoah!

jealous,
Scofflaw

nesf

Mothman wrote: »

The place has an unfriendly atmosphere, just not a very welcoming place for me with poor debating skills to be in.

Internet forums in general aren't very nice if you're not good at debating in my experience. There's just too much chance that whatever you're posting about will descend into an argument.

nesf

Hal Emmerich wrote: »

I'm really curious to know the perks of being a Mod

A gigantic e-peen.

Cicero

djpbarry wrote: »

On reflection, I have over-stepped the mark on a couple of occasions in recent posts.
Ok, here’s what I’m going to do...

Clean slate – everyone is a newcomer to the forum as far as I’m concerned. I have never before encountered the names Chloe Pink or easychair.

Furthermore, in an effort to combat the apparently intimidating atmosphere in the forum, I will refrain from posting anything in SEI for one month from today, either as a poster or moderator. I will however continue to act as a moderator “behind the scenes”, acting upon reported posts, etc. – it would be unfair to Macha otherwise.

I've been following this thread for a while and I'd like to say:

That's a very courageous thing to do- I think it will work well and why you may find it difficult to "hold your whist", you might be pleasantly surprised how other posters "sort each other out" in a good way as opposed to a mod intervening-

threads will go OT from time to time for a few posts, some posters may post some comment that they can't back up- but have some faith in the other posters to challenge those posts and bring back the forum to an "equilibrium" ..

I have one suggestion that may help- a "stickied" "Off topic" thread- where posters can throw out ideas/comments related to Sustainability and Environment that may not be as well thought out or referrenced as demanded by the charter or individual thread labels - every forum needs a "release valve" of some sorts so this might help- you can then direct the posters to the "pub talk" thread where they can spout as much verbal diaroea as they wish, happy in the knowledge that they won't be taken to task by the mods on thier views..:p

BryanF

I've been threatening to post here for a while now. While I see the conflict between personal opinion and moderation, I think there are certain topics that at this stage should be taken for granted and a certain posters that need to realise that the S&EI is not for conspiracy theory's or theorists. To allow for debate on certain topic's (by some of us less scientific'ly minded), links and articles other than peer-reviewed literature is allowed, however with out mentioning the main contributors, peer-review literature such as the IPCC for example should get the respect it deserves. On several occasions I have not bothered responding or indeed not bothered with the S&EI forum because of certain unsubstantiated or incorrectly deduced BS of conspiracy contributors.

P. Breathnach

I offer a general opinion: where a mod is active in a thread as a participant in discussion or debate, and a need for moderator intervention arises in the thread, that intervention should not be undertaken by the mod who is active in the thread; the problem should be referred to a co-mod or cat-mod. Otherwise it can look as if one person is both playing in and refereeing the game -- which, of course, is what is happening. The problem is that it can feel unfair, even if the mod is operating with absolute fairness. It's a perception problem.

It looks to me, on a casual reading, as if djpbarry has been in such situations. But I repeat what I said earlier: I have no opinion on whether there is anything wrong with the moderation in S&EI. It is clear, however, that some people think there is. It could be down to perception.

Macha

P. Breathnach, that is a suggestion that has come up before. It's something we both try to do insofar as possible and I recognize that this is, ideally, what would happen.

The problem is that there are just two mods and it's a quiet forum so we do both frequently get involved as regular posters in discussions. So it gets a bit tricky.

P. Breathnach

I am sure a cat-mod would step in if one mod were involved in a thread and the other mod were unavailable to deal with a problem post.

Mothman

nesf wrote: »

Internet forums in general aren't very nice if you're not good at debating in my experience. There's just too much chance that whatever you're posting about will descend into an argument.

Indeed, and it may well be the case that my focus has shifted towards the renewable energies forum and I wouldn't have much to contribute here anyway. But I would still lurk and with the proposal by djpbarry I will subscribe to this forum.

nesf

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I am sure a cat-mod would step in if one mod were involved in a thread and the other mod were unavailable to deal with a problem post.

The Cat Mods have already offered this to the Mods as an option.

Ludo

Simple solution seems to move the current mods to another forum and replace them with mods who are not so involved in the subject matter of the forum.
That is no reflection on the current mods but just a reasonable suggestion. Then they can be as involved in the discussion as they want with no possibility of accusations of power abuse. Or is that too simple a solution?

nesf

Ludo wrote: »

Simple solution seems to move the current mods to another forum and replace them with mods who are not so involved in the subject matter of the forum.
That is no reflection on the current mods but just a reasonable suggestion. Then they can be as involved in the discussion as they want with no possibility of accusations of power abuse. Or is that too simple a solution?

It's a forum where not having technical knowledge about climate change and related topics would put you at a serious disadvantage as a moderator.

Ludo

nesf wrote: »

It's a forum where not having technical knowledge about climate change and related topics would put you at a serious disadvantage as a moderator.

Why? It isn't a science category forum. It is in soc.

nesf

Ludo wrote: »

Why? It isn't a science category forum. It is in soc.

It's a Soc forum with a lot of technical discussion in it, mainly because we don't have an Environmental forum in Sci. If we had a Sci forum dealing with Environmental Science many of the discussions could be moved there, but since it doesn't exist they can't and this is the best home for them.

An environmental forum in Sci might be a good idea though.

Ludo

nesf wrote: »

It's a Soc forum with a lot of technical discussion in it, mainly because we don't have an Environmental forum in Sci. If we had a Sci forum dealing with Environmental Science many of the discussions could be moved there, but since it doesn't exist they can't and this is the best home for them.

An environmental forum in Sci might be a good idea though.

erm...there is a forum called environmental science in sci already:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1404

Personally (as someone with zero interest in either forum) I find it confusing. They appear the same to me and from a just looking at their categories, I would assume that the science one would be more demanding of sources and peer-reviews etc whereas the soc one would be more "chat" for want of a better term. General discussion about environmental issues which would include those who don;t exactly buy into climate change. If this is not the case (which it appears not to be from this thread) then why not merge them into one forum which would be more science oriented. That might also make it a slightly busier forum rather than the 2 quietish ones.

nesf

Ludo wrote: »

erm...there is a forum called environmental science in sci already:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1404

Personally (as someone with zero interest in either forum) I find it confusing. They appear the same to me and from a just looking at their categories, I would assume that the science one would be more demanding of sources and peer-reviews etc whereas the soc one would be more "chat" for want of a better term. General discussion about environmental issues which would include those who don;t exactly buy into climate change. If this is not the case (which it appears not to be from this thread) then why not merge them into one forum which would be more science oriented. That might also make it a slightly busier forum rather than the 2 quietish ones.

Heh, I didn't know that. Well it's up to the mods of the two fora, but personally I'd move the more technical discussions to sci and leave the soc forum for more general discussion like whether setting up a windmill at home is a good idea and such.

That said, the Sci forum might not want those particular discussions for some reason.

Capt'n Midnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

On the topic of global warming


The job of scientists is to observe, measure, report, and model the phenomena of climate change
The job of engineers is to make use of the science to make technologies to achieve aims such as reducing CO2 emissions


It is not the place of either scientists nor engineers to put forward and defend policies such as carpeting a whole country in windmills
that is the area for decision makers in business, politicians and economists.

worked well for fishing didn't it ?

business, politicians and economists ignored the scientists and lots of fisheries were fished out. ( they also ignore the reality that modern trawlers are vastly more efficient and so fewer boats and far fewer fishermen are needed to catch the same amount of fish )


point is that the decision makers have got it wrong even when presented with the best evidence (these are the same decision makers that are in part responsible for the economic mess )



the decision makers you mentioned react most to short term economics, hence carrots and sticks are helpful if you want to change behaviours rather than make a quick buck

Capt'n Midnight

Chloe Pink wrote: »

You posted this while I was posting msg 61. Please see msg 61.

61 noted.

Amateurish

Apparently (sadly) the moderation of the forum is of more interest than the forum itself, there's a lot of input (here) from people who have no intention of contributing (there) and a mod who doesn't know where related forums are. Hang your head in shame Nesf.
There are threads on the first page discussing backyard burning, noise pollution, fracking, and biodiesel to mention a few, all interesting and gathering dust for want of input. Please dont move stuff around until the offers made by Djpbarry have at least been given a trial run.

nesf

Amateurish wrote: »

Apparently (sadly) the moderation of the forum is of more interest than the forum itself, there's a lot of input (here) from people who have no intention of contributing (there) and a mod who doesn't know where related forums are. Hang your head in shame Nesf.

I'm a Cat Mod, not a moderator of the forum.

djpbarry

BryanF wrote: »

While I see the conflict between personal opinion and moderation, I think there are certain topics that at this stage should be taken for granted and a certain posters that need to realise that the S&EI is not for conspiracy theory's or theorists. To allow for debate on certain topic's (by some of us less scientific'ly minded), links and articles other than peer-reviewed literature is allowed, however with out mentioning the main contributors, peer-review literature such as the IPCC for example should get the respect it deserves. On several occasions I have not bothered responding or indeed not bothered with the S&EI forum because of certain unsubstantiated or incorrectly deduced BS of conspiracy contributors.

This is the balance that is tricky to strike. We want the forum to be somewhere people can either get advice on small day-to-day issues (like recycling, for example), discuss news events pertaining to sustainability/environmentalism, but also consider the big picture – for example, what’s happening at a policy level with regard to tackling climate change and how does it affect me (and/or, what can I do)? So, while we don’t expect everyone to be an expert and we certainly would not demand that all sources be peer-reviewed, there are technical issues being discussed, so the bar has to be kept high enough to keep a lid on the “climate change is bollocks” contributions, but not so high as to discourage people from posting and asking genuine questions – obviously we’ve not got it quite right just yet, but we’re trying to do something about it.