I think its been awhile since we have had a constructive discussion about the moderation on this site....I think what we have seen thus far today are orgers taking moderation personal and taking it out by creating additional threads that could be seen as baiting us moderators...

On the flipside of the issue I will admit its sometimes hard to be told you are doing something wrong and that often results in us moderators not listening to recommendations when they are given....

So, I'd like use this thread for those who would like to share any suggestions they might have. Heck, if your happy and you know it raise your hand too...

But lets keep this constructive folks...This isnt time to bash the mods!!! Im personally interested in suggestions and recommendations for the p&*r forum.....so heres your chance to speak...(not that you cant speak up any other time but..oh well, you know what i mean )

It's funny, last time around this was hashed I was one of the people taking moderation decisions personally and now I'm on the other side of the fence.

I think EVERYBODY need to take into account that the key word here is moderation. That means not only for the moderators but for the posters as well. If posts are made in in moderation these problems will occur much more rarely because people actually backed the hell off for a second before posted. I've made my share of inane, stupid, ridiculous and shitstirring posts and threads on the Org and when I look back at them now I feel like somebody else made those posts cos it's so head over heels that I laugh at myself. Just try putting yourself beside you for a sec before you post, and realise that by doing so you prolly save the moderators some work and you might also save your "whateveryoufeelishurt" by having flames snipped or threads locked or deleted.

Also I feel that most of you posting this way now are way smarter than this, to get swept away by a website. People on this site can be so cool and understanding but also stupid and stubborn, acting like kids when they get chastised. Take a look out your window, take a walk if you can and see what's out there. It's all a website, nothing to get upset about. Many of us move the interaction on from the site and then it's different, but PLEASE keep the inane shit off the boards!

Again I'd like to repeat that I have acted just like the people who are offended now, as late as last time this was brought up. Either I grew up some in the meantime or the Org took a step back. Whichever is the case, move along people and stop bashing on people who're doing their job.

Oh, and Tom rocks

This site is one of the freest and most open sites on the Internet. Nothing is taboo, everything is discussed, and the mods are doing a great job. Sure they're not perfect, but no one is.

I think the mods do a great job, and when threads are locked for controversial reasons, they're still usually too extreme to merit any reasonable argument.

It takes a lot of flaming and bickering for a thread to get locked. Or, a thread has to be absolutely useless and pointless for it to get locked. And, when people say "why'd I get locked, but this other guy didn't?", that usually indicates to me that both threads were stupid, so you shouldn't be complaining that your stupid thread was locked.

The mods are incredibly liberal on this site (contrary to popular belief, that term represents a good thing), and I hope they keep up the good work.

ditto the above. kudos to the moderators for not walking off the job.
thanks guys

I'd shag all the moderators!



But not at the same time, that's dirty!

Teacher said:

Why thank you again!

Tom said:

Can I have all of them?

This is off topic, sorry

I think i said enough all my views are on the other threads and I'm in a good mood today and i don't want to go back.

yesterday was yesterday

Thanks sosgemini for setting up this thread. Even though the level of contribution is not exactly what I was expecting, but maybe that just goes to show it was maybe somewhat of a storm in a teacup.

Having said that I don’t want to dilute the main focus of the “grievance” though. I didn’t start any of the threads but I felt strongly regarding the sentiment behind them, and thus contributed to most of them. However, what I am about to write is my opinion or interpretation of the grievance and other people might have slightly different takes on what went on.

Teach is absolutely right, up to a point. This is only a website but it is also a place where most of the members feel part of something, and a part of peoples lives whatever they use it for. Otherwise why moderate at all, if it's "only" a website? So to go unheard or overlooked diminishes that feeling and dilutes the overall strength/attraction of the place. In much the same way as a website with truly offensive material would dilute its appeal. So it is about moderation and where to draw the line. Having said that it might only be a website but its main function is for discussion, and these are after all discussion forums, it would be pointless to loose sight of that.


There is a constant undercurrent of criticism that GD is full of puerile, sex related threads on meaningless subjects. So when a thread from this exact melting pot of silliness is started and sparks a genuine debate it is quite refreshing, entertaining and even educational.


The points:

1.To dampen down discussions is fine, bring them under control if they enter the realm of objection, moderate a thread. But locking them just destroys their potential. Especially if nothing offensive has YET been said.

2.If threads are locked because of a certain level or interpretation of racism (lets not beat around the bush here) then that should be standardised for all threads and not made preferential to those who appear over sensitive. In other words, just because people don’t complain it doesn’t mean it not offending someone.


But better than these can we not wait a while and let people DISCUSS the issue. We are mostly adults and understand when a thread is getting over serious, until that point the protagonists ideally should be allowed to discuss. I, for one, would like to discuss the opinion of those who felt they had to report the threads in question. Not because I want to piss someone off who is on the other side of the world, but because I want to understand their grievance. I want to know what is perceived as offensive. In turn I will be better informed next time I make a thread or post a comment. We are certainly not all born understanding; we all have to be educated. What better way to educate than to share opinions and discuss our feeling on them with people who are better informed, from different cultures and backgrounds – one of the best features of this site!

I don’t want to initiate a reporting war either, I have reported things I felt were wrong to me and that thread continued, so I joined in on the thread with my comment and left it. This was a health related thread, it was maybe more discussable and not instantly seen as offensive, I saw it as actually being harmfull to someone. But race is a sensitive issue, and rather than moderate a thread, and let in pan out, maybe it is easier to just lock it; I certainly don’t want every thread on race to be locked though.

There are some extremely intelligent people on this site from all backgrounds of culture and class; I would like to hear what they have to say. Sensitive issues are those that need very careful moderation. Snip an offensive comment; warn the orger either on the thread or by orgnote. But please don’t lock a thread because oversensitive people complain. Let them express their opinion for discussion, if they can’t do that then maybe they don’t REALLY have a valid point or grievance.

Snipping and warning used to be much more commonplace, it lightened the mood, made people realise, sometimes caused a laugh but the discussion continued. Locking just aggravates people and the situation, as illustrated perfectly by what happened yesterday.

But... it's just a website.

PREDOMINANT for President.
You said it all.
I can't top that.
And I do hope it brings about some change.
I find it ironic that we all visit this site because of our love for Prince, the most outspoken artist in our history, and then act sensitive about what other people have to say. It's hypocritical.

PREDOMINANT said:

There's a difference between starting an intelligent discussion about race and stereotypes, and starting a thread about what color women get wads blown in their face the fastest. There have been many great discussions on sensitive subject matter such as race here on the org, but the longevity and sucess of those threads depend just as much on the people starting them and posting on them, as it does the moderation.

I like lighthearted and goofy threads just like anyone else, but there are some days when I log in, and go to a particular forum such as GD, and the whole first page is just filled with BS threads, and/or multiple threads about the same subject. The quality of the discussions(s) can really go downhill from time to time.

I have to wonder why people will put so much effort in writing lengthy dissertations of what they expect of the mods, yet frequently disregard the forum rules and requests of the moderators to first contact us directly with your problems, and share your comments about the site in the Prince.org site discussion forum. You gotta give some to get some...
[Edited 10/29/04 7:25am]
[Edited 10/29/04 7:26am]

Regardless of anyone's intention, the end result is a filtering.
I will no longer post the first thing that pops in my head, regardless of how funny or interesting it would be.
In the end - you guys win.

But no hard feelings.

Tom said:

I think the important question is what are you trying to achieve with your moderation? We often hear "it's only a website, get over it" or words to that effect, but that shouldn't that apply to moderators too?

I've seen threads locked because they were in the wrong forum? Threads locked because they had the potential to break the rules? Threads locked because they were weird?

Were these actions necessary?

There is a difference between an intelligent discussion on race and a lighthearted thread on white women in porn. But is that difference important? Does it need moderated? I saw nothing offensive in that thread, except possibly for a post about moderation!

The GD is full of `BS` threads all the time. But so what? There's plenty of quality discussions to be found for those who want to find them.

I don't think you are heavy-handed in your moderation, perhaps just a little trigger-happy.

Having said all that, this comment was invited, the points I've raised are very minor (to me) and in they in no way spoil my enjoyment of this site. I also think you are all doing a very good job. I think without exception. Keep it up.

Thanks.








(this is NOT directed at Tom)-edit
[Edited 10/31/04 8:01am]

The moderation around here has improved a thousandfold.

doctormcmeekle said:

i'm sorry, that just wasn't quite funny enough to be one of your posts

2the9s said:

I agree ... but there is definitely room for improvement in the P&R forum.Im aware that of all forums tho, it is probably the hardest to maintain...esp at election time.....

Boy, I really missed something... was there... drama on the Org???




The potential for extremes in any category, based on any subject matter, is obviously a reality we are all aware of.

It is our job merely to sort out which 'extreme' requires moderation... sometimes it's not easy.

Orgers, if you're upset over a decision, go directly to the mod who took action.

Moderatin' Orgers, if you moderate a thread or post, make a small statement to that effect -
Example: "[Snipped or - June7]".

This gives the Orger the ability to directly ask the moderator a question.

I think this will help... but, creating a thread blasting a moderator's decision will never go over well; and will most likely be locked or hidden.

And yes... it is just a website... but, it's the only one I log onto more times than I call a family member... any family member... so that says something. It's a living, breathing, loving, hating part of us.

L O V E 4 O N E A N O T H E R

My

GrayKing said:

But, I had a full month's quota of rhetorical questions to use up.

This seems a little on the defensive side.

Anxiety said:

So I'm not sure how to take this with this last sentence and the wink. Should I assume you're joking or do I go with the thought that you're very defensive?

I really don't want to comment because I wouldn't want to be outta line or something like that.

It's VERY interesting to see that the people who screamed and bitched the loudest in the GD and in the chat are nowhere to be seen on this thread. Cowards I say, bitching and dumping on the mods left and right but not having the guts to say it here. I suggest these people now forever hold their peace, they have been given the opportunity to speak but chose not to. Just ban their asses (and I mean ban and not deactivate) next time they stir shit up.

Teacher said:

WTF are you talking about?
ALL of us spoke up in this thread.
Oh, sorry. Maybe you can't read.

you all deserve credit

i dont envy the task

nor could i ever do it

your all after all

one of us and that makes being a moderator

no easy task





vooms

to

yall

Fleshofmyflesh said:

No you didn't, the people I'm referring to said nothing on this thread, unless you're one of two men I'm talking about, hiding behind a female account. So unless you know what I'm talking about, save it.

Edit cos I thought the stupid was a man. Was wrong, even worse.
[Edited 11/3/04 14:22pm]

okay, this is my honest opinion, and i don't want anyone to take this as a personal slight, because it isn't meant to be.

But.

Yesterday was a difficult day for the Mods, what with the US elections, and some people saying some dumb and inflammatory things. I flamed someone, and got a warning - which is fine. I still think they deserved it, because what they were saying was outrageously offensive, but I'm also aware that i deserved to get my wrist slapped.

So, it was a difficult day, and the Mods had a lot to do in P&R especially. But given the high emotion of the day, I think that probably should have been a mitigating factor, rather than a catalyst in terms of Moderator response. 2the9s voiced his concern in a thread about what someone had said, and had made his point. Maybe it should have been done in orgnotes, i don't know. It just seems to me to be extremely heavy-handed to deactivate his account as a result.

That's all i have to say. I hope very much his account is re-activated on reflection.

I have a couple of points I'd like to make.

Yesterday in a thread discussing why an orger (2the9s) was deactivated, the moderator concerned by his own admission stated that he had been "trigger happy" in his moderation. Does this mean that his decision to deactivate this orger was not made in accordance with the site rules but was in fact a knee jerk reaction?

My second point is that, is it procedure to discuss an orgers personal mattters in public? as Matt did yesterday in his response to my question.

Finally, Shouldn't a moderation decision be based on the CURRENT issue at hand rather than banning an orger for previous disputes which have ALREADY been resolved?

Yesterday was admitedlly a fraught day, but a trigger happy moderator (by his own admission) is not the kind of moderation I have come to expect from this site, as overall I think the moderation here is well done.


....
[Edited 11/4/04 3:53am]

Lleena said:

I have to say that I agree with all that. "Trigger happy" moderator makes me a bit uneasy and paranoid.

Lleena said:

2the9s banned, eh?

Why does Whack-a-mole spring to mind?

Lleena said:

My choice of words wasn't the best, but I don't think that's an accurate account of what I posted. Here's what I said:

"So if I seem a little trigger-happy today, it's because I'm trying to keep P&R from turning into a flame pit" (emphasis added).

Perhaps I should have worded it like this: "If it seems as if I'm doing a lot of moderation today, it's because there's chaos in P&R that warrants a lot of moderation, lest the forum become a flame pit." I don't think I was trigger-happy in your sense of the term, but I can understand why others might think I was yesterday. I chose that particular term (unwisely, in hindsight) because doctormcmeekle used it earlier in this thread to describe his perception of at least some of the moderation here.

2the9s did break the rules; specifically: "Under no circumstance attempt to start a 'debate' about specific moderation decisions in a public forum." After he tried to do just that, I asked him to follow the rules and contact me privately. Instead, he followed up with a second post (now deleted) where he indicated that he wasn't going to follow the rules and attempted to continue the debate.



I don't agree that I discussed his "personal matters." What I did discuss was his ".org matters"; i.e., his status as an .org member and what he's done on the .org to get himself deactivated. We've done that in the past, generally for two reasons:

1) When a prominent .orger disappears, people start asking questions. It's better to provide an answer instead of having people vanish without explanation.

2) If we don't explain why someone has been deactivated, people start speculating and assuming the worst. Frankly, it doesn't help when people post things like, "Is it in the rules to deactivate everyone who questions a moderation decision then?" That's a gross oversimplification and misleading account of what happened.



Unless somebody does something really bad, we generally don't deactivate people for their first offense. Instead, when deciding what action to take against a user, we look at his/her past history. Banning is more likely to occur after a user has shown, through his/her actions and/or words, that he/she is unwilling and/or unable to follow the rules. 2the9s' history aside, he openly stated that he wasn't willing to follow the rules. It shouldn't be surprising, then, that he's been banned, at least for the time being.

For a place that doesn't pretend to be a democracy, the moderation ain't bad. I've disagreed with more thread-lockings since the new mods came on board --I'd prefer that a thread not be locked just because it's stupid, you know?-- but oh well, overall it's been good.

And I WOULD like shag all of the moderators at once, even if the good doctor does think it's dirty. Line, up, you sexy bitches!