bkw said:

I'm sorry you don't what I said, but ultimately it is the truth... This service we are providing is as good as we can possibly make it. I can accept that the way we run things won't suit everyone, but there's nothing we can do about that. We can't do any more. If it doesn't suit some people (i.e. they want more freedom to post flames etc) then this isn't the site for them - and I respect their decision to go elsewhere. That's not an ultimatum, it's just common sense. Ultimately, you get what you pay for.

I take exception to your comment about my moderation Brett, for the simple reason that you aren't qualified to judge. I've never had any problems with you and I've rarely if ever had to moderate your posts - so you wouldn't have any idea or experience of how "arbitrary" my moderation is, or otherwise. We don't choose to share details of every moderation decision we make, because we simply don't have the time. Certainly, some people will disagree with moderation decisions, but you can't please everyone. Someone has to make the decisions. It's not a popular job, but I took it on because the site needed some organising.
On an individual basis, we try to answer every question put to us regarding a moderation decision, when time allows.

I'll say one thing - and it will sound arrogant, but it is true. You won't ever find a better moderator than me. You might find someone less abrasive and with better "people skills", but in terms of what I do here - giving up huge hours every day, giving up weekends, doing all I can to help people with problems on the site, dealing with people who've been deactivated and trying to sort out the issue so we can get them back on the site ASAP... I've done more than anyone. As long as Prince.org is a free site, run by volunteers, you'll never be in a position (as users) to get a good idea of what is involved in moderating this site, because we don't have the time or resources to explain and justify each and every little decision we make. Our moderation is far from perfect, but it is as good as we can provide, and it is as good as it is ever likely to be. People will always disagree with moderation decisions, but that is the nature of of moderation. Someone has to make a judgement call, as best they can. Whether you agree with it it or not is hardly relevant - in each individual moderation decision, when we are asked a question about a decision we do our best to explain it to the user concerned. They may still disagree, that is their perogative, but it doesn't matter. Someone had to make the call, and that's what I do every day.

People will always find fault with moderation decisions. So what. Is it an indication of moderator bias? Hardly, all of my time here is spent running things, I have no time to engage in Org politics or to make allegiances or friendships here. I'm the most hands-on moderator by a long shot (with all due respect to my colleagues) so I am generally first in the firing line when someone decides to throw a little tantrum because they don't like some decision or other, or because we don't permit them to harrass and bully the people they dislike. No big deal, I can handle it

Ian, I and nearly everyone else here appreciates the enormous ammount of time that you put into this place and the sacrifices made. As I said, it is a thankless task.

Yes, you are right, you have barely had to moderate me and I've only had the odd warning but I do have knowledge of alot of the moderating you have done to others. I have observed some directly and been informed by some involved. I can only talk on my observations. However, I would say that the blow-up over the past few days would suggest that people think that things arn't honky dory.

I'll leave it at that. I need to get some sleep.

cheers Brett

Since a few people seem to be bitching about me, I would like to point out that I have been banned and that it was IAN who banned me. I have not flamed anyone in months, since Ian and I discussed the terms of my being reinstated.

Also... Ian has sent me some REALLY choice orgnotes where he read me the fucking riot act for doing shit that was wrong.

It all comes down to two words: grow up.

bkw said:

Hi Brett,

Thanks, I appreciate your response.

By your own admission therefore, you don't really have an adequate knowledge of the standard of moderation of this site, if you are basing it on what you see (i.e. not much, because we prefer to handle these matters privately) and biased one-sided arguments from disgruntled users (e.g. "that bastard ian is so biased, he banned my account for flaming but some other guy who flamed me that I didn't report didn't get banned").

As for the "blow-up" in the last few days - this was all caused by a handful of individuals who had their own agenda, and it had nothing to do with the quality of the moderation. They just wanted to chase the people they disliked off the site, but they couldn't give any valid reason why we should remove that person for them, so they got angry when we wouldn't do their bidding and tried to dish out some vigilante-style justice.

Drama over, and the Org is back to business as usual.

With all respect for Matt who started this thread, I feel this is very circular discussion so with that in mind I'm going to lock it (but I won't remove it, so you can all come back and re-read the details if you wish). If anyone has further comments or questions, I and the rest of the Prince.org staff remain available as always to answer your questions, if they are addressed to us privately over Orgnote or email.

Kind regards

Ian

Please forgive me for unlocking a thread so I can reply and then immediately relocking it. I know it might look as if I'm trying to get in my two cents while preventing others from responding, but I wish to clarify something while at the same time respecting Ian's decision to lock this thread.

Aerogram said:

I think my original message was too vague, probably because I referred to those personal issues that I'm not (yet) comfortable discussing in a public forum that the whole world can access. Maybe I just shouldn't have done that and instead narrowed my post to its core message: one of utter confusion and frustration.

If I've been too harsh with someone lately, I'm not aware of it. Have I taken moderation actions in the past that, in hindsight, I would have handled differently? You bet. (Best example: the events of last summer, right before the Celebration, that led to the temporary shutdown of General Discussion.) But I can't think of anything I did recently to contribute to this blow-up.

Here's how things looked from my perspective. Over this past weekend, I was mostly away from the .org because we had a guest (a fellow .orger, actually) staying with us. I did log on at some point Sunday evening/night, and it seemed like business as usual. A few avatars to approve and maybe four messages that had been reported for moderator review, but that was pretty much it. I did read a message from Ian about a semi-organized attempt to run an .orger off the site (the "Lord of the Flies" behavior, as Ian refers to it), but I didn't think too much of it because I've seen that kind of thing happen before, and I wasn't aware of just how bad the situation was. I figured we could take care of it as we usually do: by reviewing messages and, if appropriate, taking moderation action.

Monday evening I logged back on, and it seemed as if General Discussion had turned into chaos overnight. Several prominent .orgers were announcing their departures from the .org, and although I tried to gather and put together the details so I could figure out exactly what had happened, I just couldn't do it. One .orger announcing his or her departure usually doesn't trouble me (perhaps because I know that he or she will likely be back ), but I'd never seen anything like this.

It hit me pretty hard. I'd had a nice weekend, and when I saw what had happened here, the other issues that had been troubling me came back. Maybe I didn't do it very well, but what I posted was an attempt to express what I was feeling at the time: the sense of wondering, "What the heck has happened?"; the frustration of not being able to understand what had happened; and the understanding that whatever had happened was serious (or at least it seemed that way).

It's funny... back when I was in college, I worked for one year as a Resident Assistant ("R.A.") in the dorms. One of my supervisors sent an email about me to, I believe, someone at IU's Counseling and Psychological Services. He accidently cc'ed me on the email, which was probably a pretty embarassing mistake for him. The gist of the message was, "Matt doesn't express his emotions; instead, he intellectualizes them."

Well, my original message was pretty much a raw expression of emotion. I think he'd be pleased.

Time to relock the thread... but I'd be happy to discuss this privately if anyone wishes. Just blast an orgNote my way.

Best always,

Matt