As mean as it may seem to you mods, I am happy that more people than I now air their problems with mod performance or lack thereof. I felt pretty alone when I posted my thread on the topic of too few/biased mods, even though I was so very sure my sentiments were shared by many many members.

There is definitely something in what both Fauxie and Ivy are pointing out - that on the one hand you have as users agreed to abide by the rules but on the other hand you're in essence God in your actions. "for any reason" covers ALL bias as well.
Fauxie has also raised the thing I was most berated for mentioning - the possibility of fabricated offenses. My grievance with that is admittedly many years in the past but I wouldn't hold it for impossible now either because notes made are, when personal problems occur between a mod and a user, undoubtedly coloured by the mods' opinion of what happened. None of us regular users know what your mod notes look like, I freely admit that, but what they should look like is this:
User X. Warning issued XX/XX/XX for thread org/XXX reply #XX comment verbatim "flameblabla". The end.
I doubt we'll ever get to know what they do look like, but what I put there is all that needs to/should be there. Nothing else. Of course we'll never know what they look like, even if we ask to see our own record we're not allowed to - all that's allowed is knowing how many strikes you're on.
[Edited 2/5/09 21:25pm]

You're just about dead on with the notes.

The problem is, no matter what, the minute a decision goes against a user or one of their friends, they will see bias. It doesn't matter what the circumstance is or which mod did it. Ultimately a decision needs to go one way or the other. One side is going to be disappointed.

Sorry I'm so late in getting involved with this discussion. I have read this thread from top to bottom, and have come to this conclusion. No matter what is said on an action a moderator takes against an orger, someone will not be pleased. If it's against you, you will not be pleased. If it's against a friend of yours, you will not be pleased. If it's against a family member or girlfriend or boyfriend (or whoever), it's not going to please you.

I've done this long enough to know this. I also disagree with the whole "one moderator can fuck it up for the others" thingy that was said earlier on. Now more than ever before, we share information amongst each other. We bounce ideas off of each other, take consideration of each other's input and so on and so forth. The end result of an action taken is something that we are usually all aware of prior to the action being taken (unless it's a rare occurance where we must act rapidly based on the seriousness of the issue at hand). We take this very seriously, and Ben would not have put us in this position if he didn't think we were up to doing the job.

And yes... we know that we stand above other orgers. We know we have the power to shape or change this site and utilize that authority given us to make it a better site. We all care deeply for this site or we wouldn't be doing what we do. Oh, and don't forget, we also allow threads like these to continue even though we usually take a beating on them.

I resent the posts that accuse us of being one-sided or unable to moderate fairly. Posts like these usually pop up after an unpopular decision is made against an orger who has many friends here. But, I've said this before, we are obviously not in this position for popularity. We will make these decisions against any orger who continuously decides to break the rules.

Warnings are just that - warnings. If they go unheeded, then action will eventually take place. I refuse to compare orgers for moderation purposes. I will continue to moderate those who break the rules whether you are Black, White, Mexican, Chinese, Middle Eastern, etc... and will do so as I see fit, not as YOU see fit.

Those of you who do NOT moderate on this site will never see the notes, the actions, the warnings the comments, locked and hidden threads that we have access to. We are not compelled to share with you the information in these files or answer questions based on actions taken. This is also in the rules.

So yes, we can do what we need to do to ensure that this site is not running amuck and we will do it whether the decision is popular or not, and we will do it whether it's your best friend or your worst enemy, or even if it's you.

I thank all my fellow moderators who work tirelessly on this site without appreciation or expectation of such, and I thank them for posting on this thread. I thank all you the members who post within the rules and make this place a better place to chill. I thank Ben for keeping this site going when it could drop off the web because of all the headaches that come with it.

Thank you. My

June7

^^True from beginning to end.
[Edited 2/5/09 23:16pm]

June7 said:

Not all moderators feel the same level of heat from disgruntled members. There is a reason for that and no amount of 'we' this and 'we' that can change that. Some mods simply make consistently better decisions than others. I don't believe the mods work together as a team as much as you say they do. I'm counting on my fingers here and I'm thinking things would be quite different if they really did.

Fauxie said:

There will never be anything we can say to make you believe otherwise. You'll just have to take my word for it. We get along better now, discuss matters more often, actually hold meetings and conference calls, and agree more now than we ever did before. That is a fact, whether you believe it or not.

June7 said:

I would like to believe that, and I appreciate the time that mods devote to this site, and for free. However, just because I'd do it for nothing, you wouldn't want me fixing your roof. Metaphorically speaking, the votes are in already, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

.
[Edited 2/6/09 0:05am]

Fauxie said:

I didn't know there was an election in progress.

I guess it is the luck of the draw. Some mods tell you to report things that you find offensive or against the rules, others get upset when you hit the report button.
I am confused, I guess it is all about timing and luck.
I must say that I appreciate the work that Mar23 has done so far. I appreciate that he takes the time to look at the whole picture. Some times we agree, some times we don't but I respect his final decision because I know that he has taken the time to be non judgmental.
He does not judge me or my posts by who I am married to, it is obvious, and I have proof that some do.
Shame really.

June7 said:

You should listen to orgers more. You might learn something.

Truth is, some people only consider you listening to orgers when it's only them you're listening to. Hugs and kisses are sent if you moderate in their favor, and reversed when you don't.

It's okay though, I know where I stand and I stand by my decisions, and I've also made it clear when I've fucked up... I'm cool with it. I'm sure Mars23 will eventually piss someone off in here and he'll get lovely innuendos and metaphores as well... in fact, it's already happened.

Honeymoons are shortlived. But, we learn to deal with it.

June7 said:

For me it is not about pissing ppl off. I can disagree with ppl and still respect them and their judgment when I know that they are looking at it fairly.

These moan-fests always make me smile. Like this ---->

I think folks need to step back and look at the big picture here.

I'll set you off on the road to enlightenment: FREE website, VOLUNTEER moderators.....

June7 said:

Great post.
It must not be easy being the 'bad guy' though.

June7 said:

I think you and Luv4u are not as good at moderating as some of the other mods. Unify all you like, if in rhetoric only, but that's the problem as I see it. It's possible other orgers feel the same way. It's not a complicated situation as I see it and doesn't need to involve general statements about the nature of moderating because the problem is quite specific.

Mars23 said:

Exactly exactly exactly.


For what it's worth, we mods ARE working together as a team more now than ever since I started as a mod. We have another mod meeting this weekend. I'm going to Anxy's house and making dinner and bringing my laptop. We're gonna sing kumbaya over yahoo chat with the other mods. Ok, we won't really sing (except maybe Ben) but the rest is true. And yes, we mods disagree from time to time as well. But we do come to an understanding with each other and support each other.

CarrieMpls said:

Maybe sometimes you shouldn't.

p.s. If you don't sing kumbaya over yahoo chat then don't bother doing it at all. Do you love prince.org or not??

CarrieMpls said:[quote]

Vendetta1 said:

I agree Carrie

Mars23 said:

Well stated and so true - SOMEONE is going to complain no matter what action or lack of action is taken

and that's exactly what happens almost each and every time

I personally have been seriously threatened by unhappy members about mod actions I took in P&R

CarrieMpls said:

I sing during our live chats just no one can hear me

I agree - in the time I have been a Mod we are talking things through more together - brain storming all that jazz far more now then before. Even Ben has been more involved now in our talks

Fauxie said:

Yes, the problem is quite specific. There are good orgers and bad orgers. The bad orgers who get moderated almost always have problems with the specific moderators who take action. You speak in specifics to a generalized problem.

wildgoldenhoney said:

Meh... I never thought of it that way. I moderate what needs moderating. If doing something unpopular makes me the "bad guy", well... so be it.

The basis of those who are complaining... well, this time anyway, all have a common goal. It's human nature. I understand this. The same people who are complaining now have sent me orgnote hugs before when things went their way on other issues. Again, human nature. But, in my belief, it's by those around you who stay friendly to you even when moderation affects them negatively that demonstrates the true value of a person... or a friend.

shanti0608 said:

yep

Lack of communication is the key problem that I have noticed personally.
Several late actions that I've been involved in were not notified to the person the action was against. These kinds of actions, and refusing to discuss them, reminds me of the behavior of a bully. It's a shame when someone with so much power, uses it without the will to discuss things with the member involved.

I hope that notifying a member of an action against him would turn also into a rule, and not just a common courtesy.

ArielB said:

Didn't you know? It's NEVER happened that a user hasn't been notified, we're all just making that up to mess with the mods. Some mod said it's impossible to take an action and not send an orgnote and that has to be true! Obviously, since there are no known Org bugs and there are only like 2 people who've ever experienced this.

:IRONY:

June7 said:

You're not the bad guy, I didn't mean it that way; I like that you keep a positive and understanding attitude in this though.


The way I try to view warnings and such is as in a place of employment where I'm subordinate to my boss.
If my boss warns me about something I'm doing counter to company policy,
I know I've got to get my act together otherwise there will be consequences to pay.


(This is not to say anything concerning any particular situation here, but take from it what you will.)

The moderating in chat is inconsistent and shows clear signs of favouritism and an abuse of power. On occasions moderators even join in the flaming of chatters and encourage it, rather than diffusing the situation.

Feel free to orgnote me if you need me to clarify. I imagine posting screencaps from the chat in here is against site rules.

June7 said:

Does this mean I don't need to forward the orgnote I sent to you to the other mods? I would greatly appreciate your combined attention being given to the matter and that accountability Mach spoke of. I've been polite and straightforward in addressing the topic and given clear examples so as to be understood.

ArielB said:

What she said .

MuthaFunka said:

Who is 'she'?