Address MOD Questions....?
#251
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I think you'd have to talk to Geoff about any notification as he would be the only one to receive one, if any. However, Geoff is well aware of forum rules, so would notification be necessary? I kind of doubt it. It would be like a Mod posting a self-serving message about their new website, and then being surprised and shocked if they were suspended.
#252
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
#253
#254
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I think this board really dropped the bomb here. Alienate all the longtime members, ban the founder, etc. I checked out the other site, no annoying ads yet, in post ads, stupid pop ups etc. certainly not what I'd call competition to this place. And looking at everyone that's there now I didn't realize just how many long time members here, myself included, had been nothing more than lurkers here for years. It was nice to see all those people active again.
Never alienate you revenue stream.
Never alienate you revenue stream.
#255
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
ty.
I realize now why I did not see it. I guess my default only shows threads with posts in the last two days so I just did not see it.
#256
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Unknown
Posts: 4,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Benedict,
I just wanted to say thanks for answering my question (in the thread you split off) and being up front about why you locked it. It is appreciated.
I just wanted to say thanks for answering my question (in the thread you split off) and being up front about why you locked it. It is appreciated.
#257
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
#258
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Unknown
Posts: 4,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Obviously the problems are bigger than the two events that sparked the mass exodus. With that being said, I find it interesting that the suspensions of two long time members for what essential amounted to 'daring to question mah authoritah!" are apparently still in effect, no apology, no sorry we could've handled that better. I think this might have been avoided or at least the damage significantly mitigated if that was taken care of right away, then take all the time you need to anoint new mods and amend processes. The fact that this wasn't done, doesn't really inspire much confidence that much is going to change.
#260
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 24,687
Received 560 Likes
on
404 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Obviously the problems are bigger than the two events that sparked the mass exodus. With that being said, I find it interesting that the suspensions of two long time members for what essential amounted to 'daring to question mah authoritah!" are apparently still in effect, no apology, no sorry we could've handled that better. I think this might have been avoided or at least the damage significantly mitigated if that was taken care of right away, then take all the time you need to anoint new mods and amend processes. The fact that this wasn't done, doesn't really inspire much confidence that much is going to change.
#261
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
No offense, but that's just being petulant. The rules need some clarification because there are some technicalities, and there's another thread here discussing that.
It should be obvious why Geoff's post was deleted and why he was temporarily suspended. You can argue whether he should have just gotten a warning, or the thread be locked and not deleted, or whether he should have been notified sooner (although from the posts, it seems like it was within hours), but on a case by case basis this one isn't difficult to judge, site founder or not.
It should be obvious why Geoff's post was deleted and why he was temporarily suspended. You can argue whether he should have just gotten a warning, or the thread be locked and not deleted, or whether he should have been notified sooner (although from the posts, it seems like it was within hours), but on a case by case basis this one isn't difficult to judge, site founder or not.
Because I would have thought it painfully obvious that a dude giving a heads up about a sale at place in the Hot Deals section wasn't spamming the forum but instead that led to a suspension because it violated the letter of the law. And here we are.
#263
DVD Talk Godfather
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I actually have to disagree with you on this. gcribbs's questions are about the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law - and that was precisely the point of interpretive disagreement that provoked this whole thing. If the mods are going to enforce the letter of the law rather than recognize that the spirit of the law, then no, we can't leave things at being "obvious" regardless of how painfully clear that ought to be.
Because I would have thought it painfully obvious that a dude giving a heads up about a sale at place in the Hot Deals section wasn't spamming the forum but instead that led to a suspension because it violated the letter of the law. And here we are.
Because I would have thought it painfully obvious that a dude giving a heads up about a sale at place in the Hot Deals section wasn't spamming the forum but instead that led to a suspension because it violated the letter of the law. And here we are.
The moderators and administrators should simply clarify or admit error on the infraction in question.... which still hasn't been done, which dave-o alludes to above.
#264
Mod Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Outside of the U.S.A.
Posts: 10,674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Squaring the circle
I should preface my reply by saying that, although I don't want to give the impression that issues in this and other theads are being ignored, I do need to be clear that I lack the resources to give a blow-by-blow account of any imminent changes &/or ongoing discussions. So this is by way of a compromise and the best I can do in the circumstances...
I can confirm that when absolutes have been posted in the past, these inevitably resulted in criticism from particular members for one reason or another.
The point is that, with some of the rules that Geoff (co)created, mods and admins originally were able to ask him directly what he had in mind and whether he felt a particular member-action represented an infraction.
It was probably in part because of these kind of interactions that the idea of repeatedly skating on thin ice (or "envelope-pushing" as some of us call it) was added to the list of infractions i.e. excessive/repeated discussion concerning a particular member in the mod forum - and maybe with Geoff being brought in - was seen as indicating someone who was due for a posting holiday.
Now, with regard to the procedures for suspension, I thought that someone had already said that this was being worked on. Multiple mods and admins are involved, as well as IB, and I very much hope that the results will be publicised within the week.
Concerning the particular rule that appears to have precipitated some of the current discontent, this too is under discussion. Any final decision regarding its letter and spirit will be for the site owners - as they have the commercial interest.
One of the suspended members to whom you allude was returned to the fold within the announced timescale i.e. yesterday. My understanding was that this represented his third or fourth suspension and that the on-board actions resulting in this suspension created hours of work for one of our mod/admin team. I would hope that we (you, me, the member in question, everyone) can now put this element of recent events behind us. That said, I am conscious that, by even mentioning matters here, there is the risk that folk will want to subject them to minute analysis. All I can say is that this illustrates the difficulties of determining how transparent one can be...
As I have said, my time here is limited and I would very much prefer to spend it getting things right for the future rather than continuing to rake over the past. However, I fully appreciate that other folk have their concerns and may well wish to continue to discuss them here.
The point is that, with some of the rules that Geoff (co)created, mods and admins originally were able to ask him directly what he had in mind and whether he felt a particular member-action represented an infraction.
It was probably in part because of these kind of interactions that the idea of repeatedly skating on thin ice (or "envelope-pushing" as some of us call it) was added to the list of infractions i.e. excessive/repeated discussion concerning a particular member in the mod forum - and maybe with Geoff being brought in - was seen as indicating someone who was due for a posting holiday.
Now, with regard to the procedures for suspension, I thought that someone had already said that this was being worked on. Multiple mods and admins are involved, as well as IB, and I very much hope that the results will be publicised within the week.
Concerning the particular rule that appears to have precipitated some of the current discontent, this too is under discussion. Any final decision regarding its letter and spirit will be for the site owners - as they have the commercial interest.
One of the suspended members to whom you allude was returned to the fold within the announced timescale i.e. yesterday. My understanding was that this represented his third or fourth suspension and that the on-board actions resulting in this suspension created hours of work for one of our mod/admin team. I would hope that we (you, me, the member in question, everyone) can now put this element of recent events behind us. That said, I am conscious that, by even mentioning matters here, there is the risk that folk will want to subject them to minute analysis. All I can say is that this illustrates the difficulties of determining how transparent one can be...
As I have said, my time here is limited and I would very much prefer to spend it getting things right for the future rather than continuing to rake over the past. However, I fully appreciate that other folk have their concerns and may well wish to continue to discuss them here.
#265
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Unknown
Posts: 4,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Squaring the circle
I should preface my reply by saying that, although I don't want to give the impression that issues in this and other theads are being ignored, I do need to be clear that I lack the resources to give a blow-by-blow account of any imminent changes &/or ongoing discussions. So this is by way of a compromise and the best I can do in the circumstances...I can confirm that when absolutes have been posted in the past, these inevitably resulted in criticism from particular members for one reason or another.
The point is that, with some of the rules that Geoff (co)created, mods and admins originally were able to ask him directly what he had in mind and whether he felt a particular member-action represented an infraction.
It was probably in part because of these kind of interactions that the idea of repeatedly skating on thin ice (or "envelope-pushing" as some of us call it) was added to the list of infractions i.e. excessive/repeated discussion concerning a particular member in the mod forum - and maybe with Geoff being brought in - was seen as indicating someone who was due for a posting holiday.
Now, with regard to the procedures for suspension, I thought that someone had already said that this was being worked on. Multiple mods and admins are involved, as well as IB, and I very much hope that the results will be publicised within the week.
Concerning the particular rule that appears to have precipitated some of the current discontent, this too is under discussion. Any final decision regarding its letter and spirit will be for the site owners - as they have the commercial interest.
One of the suspended members to whom you allude was returned to the fold within the announced timescale i.e. yesterday. My understanding was that this represented his third or fourth suspension and that the on-board actions resulting in this suspension created hours of work for one of our mod/admin team. I would hope that we (you, me, the member in question, everyone) can now put this element of recent events behind us. That said, I am conscious that, by even mentioning matters here, there is the risk that folk will want to subject them to minute analysis. All I can say is that this illustrates the difficulties of determining how transparent one can be...
As I have said, my time here is limited and I would very much prefer to spend it getting things right for the future rather than continuing to rake over the past. However, I fully appreciate that other folk have their concerns and may well wish to continue to discuss them here.
The point is that, with some of the rules that Geoff (co)created, mods and admins originally were able to ask him directly what he had in mind and whether he felt a particular member-action represented an infraction.
It was probably in part because of these kind of interactions that the idea of repeatedly skating on thin ice (or "envelope-pushing" as some of us call it) was added to the list of infractions i.e. excessive/repeated discussion concerning a particular member in the mod forum - and maybe with Geoff being brought in - was seen as indicating someone who was due for a posting holiday.
Now, with regard to the procedures for suspension, I thought that someone had already said that this was being worked on. Multiple mods and admins are involved, as well as IB, and I very much hope that the results will be publicised within the week.
Concerning the particular rule that appears to have precipitated some of the current discontent, this too is under discussion. Any final decision regarding its letter and spirit will be for the site owners - as they have the commercial interest.
One of the suspended members to whom you allude was returned to the fold within the announced timescale i.e. yesterday. My understanding was that this represented his third or fourth suspension and that the on-board actions resulting in this suspension created hours of work for one of our mod/admin team. I would hope that we (you, me, the member in question, everyone) can now put this element of recent events behind us. That said, I am conscious that, by even mentioning matters here, there is the risk that folk will want to subject them to minute analysis. All I can say is that this illustrates the difficulties of determining how transparent one can be...
As I have said, my time here is limited and I would very much prefer to spend it getting things right for the future rather than continuing to rake over the past. However, I fully appreciate that other folk have their concerns and may well wish to continue to discuss them here.
"oops, I got a little heated and overreacted. Sorry about that."
One line at the start could've avoided most of this. I'm sorry but, the lack of any sort of apology by people who are representing this site seems to speak volumes about how much will be changed. Probably too late at this point anyways as the damage was done.
#266
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Squaring the circle
One of the suspended members to whom you allude was returned to the fold within the announced timescale i.e. yesterday. My understanding was that this represented his third or fourth suspension and that the on-board actions resulting in this suspension created hours of work for one of our mod/admin team.
#267
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 24,687
Received 560 Likes
on
404 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Locking threads where there is ongoing discussion that is not against forum rules is exceedingly lame. But I guess that's always been par for the course.
#268
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
#269
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 24,687
Received 560 Likes
on
404 Posts
Re: New Moderator SOP regarding Suspensions/Bannings/etc
It's kind of funny. More than anything, a simple apology (for the wrongful suspensions/bans, the autocratic manner in which people have been treated, etc) would have done way more than the silly pandering that's going on now, yet that is the one thing that we haven't seen.
#270
Mod Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Outside of the U.S.A.
Posts: 10,674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: New Moderator SOP regarding Suspensions/Bannings/etc
It's kind of funny. More than anything, a simple apology (for the wrongful suspensions/bans, the autocratic manner in which people have been treated, etc) would have done way more than the silly pandering that's going on now, yet that is the one thing that we haven't seen.
#271
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Unknown
Posts: 4,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: New Moderator SOP regarding Suspensions/Bannings/etc
You are entitled to your opinion and to read things or, indeed, not read things, as you see fit.The whole advertising and self-promotion side of things remains under active discussion, has been for the last couple of weeks, and I think we'll have something out there very soon. Just a few more tweaks and we should be done.
#272
DVD Talk Legend
Re: New Moderator SOP regarding Suspensions/Bannings/etc
It's kind of funny. More than anything, a simple apology (for the wrongful suspensions/bans, the autocratic manner in which people have been treated, etc) would have done way more than the silly pandering that's going on now, yet that is the one thing that we haven't seen.
#273
Challenge Guru & Comic Nerd
Re: New Moderator SOP regarding Suspensions/Bannings/etc
Avatars probably are a good thing for everyone to have for free, but for years they've been the only real perk for those of us who pay to support the site. Refunds? New tangible benefits?
Usernames were perhaps ruled with a slightly iron fist, but I think everyone agrees that the current open period could have been handled better.
#274
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Ask for the things you want, but don't dismiss the things you got as silly. I don't mind avatars going to the "masses" - I am sure there will be perks for premium members. If not, you are free to opt out at the next cycle. Why hold other people down so you feel more special?
#275
DVD Talk Godfather
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I like the small changes that have been put in; pandering maybe, but in the end they're positive changes.
But I have to agree with dave-o and Trevor; the information about new rules and moderation policies seems like a way to avoid directly admitting fault for a few years of poor administrative decisions.
But I have to agree with dave-o and Trevor; the information about new rules and moderation policies seems like a way to avoid directly admitting fault for a few years of poor administrative decisions.