Legitimate question. If one mod takes a certain action against you and is ignoring your inquiries, is there a "higher-up" mod that may be able to mediate? Or someone else you can go to if you and a certain mod have differences that can't seem to be resolved?

No one is perfect, and some people just don't get along no matter how hard they try. I'd just like to know what the procedure is if you feel you are being treated unfairly. Or if there is a procedure.

You can speak to another mod for something minor and they can check in with that mod for you. Or you can also contact/orgnote Ben.

I didn't do it...

sosgemini said:

What if you have contacted another mod who after having all the facts agreed with you in the first place, and then when you heard from them again, they were like..."Just deal with it?"

I mean, are certain mods "higher" than others and have to be deferred to? What if Ben just doesn't answer you?

noimageatall said:

Exactly.

noimageatall said:

I know this seems strange, but we have an agreement and rules within the mod community to adhere to a moderator's decision on an action they've taken. If we disagree with such an action, we will contact them and express our concerns with how a situation was handled. On occasion, we've managed to get a decision overturned by the moderator who took action originally. It is rare if we, ourselves, will blatantly overrule a moderator's action without their knowledge or approval... and is actually considered uncool if we do so behind their back. We cannot have a successfully running "machine" if we do not support eachother's decisions. Just to let you know... we aren't going to go around overturning other moderator decisions on a whim. Not good policy.

All we ask is that the moderator who took the action take the time to let the alleged offender know why their thread was acted upon in the first place. If you do not agree with the action taken, of course you are requested to take it up with Ben. If Ben does not answer you, well... then that's the end of it.

Hope that helped.

noimageatall said:

There is no mod hierarchy, no mod is "higher" than any other.

If you don't get a response from Ben you can always try a second time. If still no response, well, I guess that's kind of your answer.

noimageatall said:

im going to disagree with the tone of june7's post above (no shocker there)...i think more people need to be questioning mod's decisions and we mods need to pick up the internal discussion of our actions.

i have a major concern that we old time mods are becoming arrogant about our actions the longer we hang around....are we bad people? no...but i do get concerned from time to time that we might think we have the answer and are not taking the time to try to look at the situation from other's perspectives simply because we have been in our roles for a lengthy period (excluding mach and carrie) ...that's why i am soo excited about the new mods joining...gives us some time to reassess our own roles and how we handle situations....

so while, yes, we mods try not to override each other's actions (as june7 has said) it will at least generate an internal discussion between the mods....if a mod refuses to engage in that discussion then that mod needs to be removed...and even if the mod stubbornly refuses to modify their action at least it will get them thinking about their actions and hopefully be more careful next time out.

let me repeat something: if a mod doesn't engage in discussions...they need to go!!! (that includes when orgers ask them questions too.)

i'd like to clarify one point...when i say more people need to question mods, i want to qualify that. more people need to question mods decisions when they feel they are being unfairly treated, harassed or antagonized by a mod.

everyone deserves a pleasant experience on this website...if you feel you have been unfairly treated then share your concerns with another mod so that we as a group can discuss the situation.

sosgemini said:

Appreciate the clarification.

And yes, I agree whole heartedly.

sosgemini said:

Thanks for clarifying and kudos to you sosg.

CarrieMpls said:

And that's where the problem comes in at that gets people here frustrated; the whole "No response". It's like having an issue with your supervisor and so you go decide to over their head - yet there's no one there .

I try to always respond to each orgnote - answer questions the best I can

and a key point - I listen and think about what is being said

I often times can not answer the questions because they may deal with a fellow Mod and not ME

I remind users to write the Mod in question and then to also write Ben if they are not seing answers to their questions

I am open to hearing peoples suggestions to me as a Mod on my weaknesses and strengths and how I could possibly make this place better for all.

I make mistakes every day as each of us does. I try each day to learn from them and move forward

sosgemini said:

What about Mods that do not Mod period Do you feel inactive Mods should "go" as well ?

Mach said:

i wonder if i will get in trouble for answering this question in public

sosgemini said:

YES



I would not think any more trouble then saying
"let me repeat something: if a mod doesn't engage in discussions...they need to go!!! (that includes when orgers ask them questions too.)"
in public

Mach said:

true dat!!

oh what the hell (im only speaking on my own behalf and not the group and i have a right to my opinion) so... yes!!!

i do think if mods are gone they should be removed from the list...it can lead to confusion.

sosgemini said:

I agree

Mach said:

I can certainly dig all of that, Mach. Thanks.

sosgemini said:

I agree with that. I've been confused with that right there recently.

sosgemini said:

Who has jacked sos' account?


Just kidding ...thanks for the answer. That's been a problem. Not getting an answer at all from a mod.

Mach said:

noimageatall said:

Ya Mods are not perfect

I know what your talking about.
All in all we have good mods. Ben is good at responding to emails and problems if you have any.

sosgemini said:

agreed !

Deja Vu.

June7 said:

what about threads like this http://prince.org/msg/3/266291

where two mods have already posted on it... one numerous times... and you just decide to come and lock it... without it having spiralled into anything more negative than it's original post

surely the fact that they've let the thread remain is in essence a decision to let it stay

seems laughable to me... and like you're power trippin'

[Edited 4/5/08 4:55am]
[Edited 4/5/08 4:55am]

lowdownbutta said:

Good point. Why was that thread locked?

i'd just like to say i've buried the hatchet with sos and i'm looking forward to moving in a new direction.

ehuffnsd said:

huh? what chu talkin about? i know nothing 'bout burthing no babies!!

sosgemini said:

Excellent points. Also, mods that take things personal against particular orgers and seem to trail those same orgers' threads, by snipping and snapping their posts constantly.

In my opinion only, I feel when a mod responds towards some members, when deciding to lock a thread, handle a complaint from an orger, disagree with an orger's response, take an orger's response to their actions personal, snip comments or respond to orgnotes with arrogance and a "power-tripping-CEO-over-the-top-there's-only-one-chief-in-here-and-what-I-say-goes-so-if-you-don't-like-it-then-maybe-you-should leave-for-a-while-or-just-don't-come-back-here" attitude, it shows absolutely no professionalism at all and lack of communication skills as a moderator, [bait snipped, unneccessary - June7]..just my humble opinion....
[Edited 4/9/08 7:41am]

[b][Edited 4/9/08 7:43am]

In response to Sos' post about power tripping: I can honestly only see that in one mod that is currently active, I will not mention the name cos obviously that would be flaming. There will always be the issue of the human factor but I can say that I think having "mod grades" wouldn't be the worst idea in the world, Matt and Deja were labeled "senior mods" at one point, maybe Matt still is. I think that there should be two mods for the mods so to speak, to monitor the regular ones - they should be the ones to complain to about mods decisions, lack of warnings issued etc. I'm also willing to bet that if all members were allowed to hold a closed vote as to which two to pick from the current batch of mods, there would be a great concensus (sp). They shouldn't be allowed to change a moderator's decision without conferring with each other AND Ben but they should be allowed to change them. This would, though obviously not to a 100%, keep the workload more even and keep the "regular" mods from feeling that they're stepping on another's toes. Now ask me if the people potentially appointed for this would like to take the job cos they WILL, at times, step on toes. I just think this is something worth considering because to be honest Ben has no idea what goes on here day-to-day, he has a whole life to live and we don't expect him to know but when mods come to him with shit he has to be and might not make the right decision, especially if, dare I say it, the mod presenting the problem is less than candid about their own role in the situation at hand.
Just an idea