Address MOD Questions....?
#26
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: Address MOD Questions....?
For the longest time there has been a rule about not discussing [BANNED] members because they cannot answer back. To some extent that has been the case with suspended members, also, although clearly there are ways of having one's say on/regarding a forum from which one has ostensibly been temporarily prevented from posting.
I can't recall a time when a mod has posted details of private correspondence - although from time to time I have tentatively suggested that harassed members of the moderating team should be allowed to post some of the messages that are sent their way just to illustrate the nonsense they have to deal with.
I'm not going to go through the rights and the wrongs of this current situation but it seems to me that we are sometimes damned if we do and damned if we don't.
What I would remind fellow members is that none of us are not on here 24/7, we are not monitoring our email boxes full-time and that it would be nice if it was understood that conversations on the mod forum themselves do take some time. That is just how it is with volunteers.
I've lost track of the number of times during the past decade that particularly vocal members have called me out when I've said words to the effect that I need to consult with fellow mods and that I would appreciate it if they could give me the time to get on with this. Receiving message after message demanding immediate and conciliatory responses from someone who is clearly not reading what you have already taken the time to send out by way of an interim response can be... dispiriting.
Anyway, I can only say that things are not as black and white as some may decide they are and that considerable efforts are made to put personal opinions to one side and try to keep members on board and within the rules; ideally without suspension and with a BAN only in extreme circumstances. It ain't always easy, that's for sure
<font color=blue>To the previous poster: am I missing something? Your question appears to be phrased in the worst possible way. And we have had and do still have a female presence on the moderating team although for how much longer could be in some doubt.
I can't recall a time when a mod has posted details of private correspondence - although from time to time I have tentatively suggested that harassed members of the moderating team should be allowed to post some of the messages that are sent their way just to illustrate the nonsense they have to deal with.
I'm not going to go through the rights and the wrongs of this current situation but it seems to me that we are sometimes damned if we do and damned if we don't.
What I would remind fellow members is that none of us are not on here 24/7, we are not monitoring our email boxes full-time and that it would be nice if it was understood that conversations on the mod forum themselves do take some time. That is just how it is with volunteers.
I've lost track of the number of times during the past decade that particularly vocal members have called me out when I've said words to the effect that I need to consult with fellow mods and that I would appreciate it if they could give me the time to get on with this. Receiving message after message demanding immediate and conciliatory responses from someone who is clearly not reading what you have already taken the time to send out by way of an interim response can be... dispiriting.
Anyway, I can only say that things are not as black and white as some may decide they are and that considerable efforts are made to put personal opinions to one side and try to keep members on board and within the rules; ideally without suspension and with a BAN only in extreme circumstances. It ain't always easy, that's for sure
<font color=blue>To the previous poster: am I missing something? Your question appears to be phrased in the worst possible way. And we have had and do still have a female presence on the moderating team although for how much longer could be in some doubt.
#28
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Benedict, I understand that and all of us here do appreciate the work you all do to keep order around here.
I can only speak for myself though in saying I have never sent anything to a mod that I can remember
But if I was suspended for anything I would hope to have a fair response if I did send an email
To a mod. I think this is the major issue here.
No fair and reasonable responses from mods to those who are suspended most recently and notably Tatantini.
It comes across as petty and " I'm the mod so what I say goes and that's the end of that and if you ask me again you'r banned."
I don't say this is you Benedict but it appears this has happened to suspended people.
I can only speak for myself though in saying I have never sent anything to a mod that I can remember
But if I was suspended for anything I would hope to have a fair response if I did send an email
To a mod. I think this is the major issue here.
No fair and reasonable responses from mods to those who are suspended most recently and notably Tatantini.
It comes across as petty and " I'm the mod so what I say goes and that's the end of that and if you ask me again you'r banned."
I don't say this is you Benedict but it appears this has happened to suspended people.
#30
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 8,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I just got a suspension warning via PM from exactly who I would have suspected and it was threatening in it's very demeanor. What are the suspension/ban protocols, or can someone (even a mod or admin) just send a threatening PM at their whim....?
I assume this place is trying to run things professionally, but is this acceptable/professional moderation:
Title of PM: "I assume you're looking for a suspension?"
Body of PM:"All the Tarantino stuff you're doing will have you joining him if that's your goal."
What kind of passive/aggressive threat is this, and exactly how am I supposed to interpret this? We're not little children (although we have tendencies to act like it at times).
Fine, I'll abide and stop referencing a banned member via protocol, but what the fuck is IB's protocol with regards to threatening PMs sent by other members/moderators....?
I assume this place is trying to run things professionally, but is this acceptable/professional moderation:
Title of PM: "I assume you're looking for a suspension?"
Body of PM:"All the Tarantino stuff you're doing will have you joining him if that's your goal."
What kind of passive/aggressive threat is this, and exactly how am I supposed to interpret this? We're not little children (although we have tendencies to act like it at times).
Fine, I'll abide and stop referencing a banned member via protocol, but what the fuck is IB's protocol with regards to threatening PMs sent by other members/moderators....?
Honestly, moderating the Other Forum seems like a stressful job (one that I would not want to do). It does sorta sound like a Mod may be getting burned out a bit. I think everyone looking at this impartially would agree. It stands to reason that even mods can fall victim to internet-rage.
Do the mods themselves have a policy for this? Perhaps a vacation to a lesser part of the board may be a good idea? I dunno... but maybe something I'd do if in the same situation.
#31
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
For the longest time there has been a rule about not discussing [BANNED] members because the cannot answer back. To some extent that has been the case with suspended members, also, although clearly there are ways of having one's say on a forum from which one has ostensibly been temporarily prevented from posting.
I can't recall a time when a mod has posted details of private correspondence - although from time to time I have tentatively suggested that harassed members of the moderating team should be allowed to post some of the messages that are sent their way just to illustrate the nonsense they have to deal with.
I'm not going to go through the rights and the wrongs of this current situation but it seems to me that we are sometimes damned if we do and damned if we don't.
What I would remind fellow members is that none of us are not on here 24/7, we are not monitoring our email boxes full-time and that it would be nice if it was understood that conversations on the mod forum themselves do take some time. That is just how it is with volunteers.
I've lost track of the number of times during the past decade that particularly vocal members have called me out when I've said words to the effect that I need to consult with fellow mods and that I would appreciate it if they could give me the time to get on with this. Receiving message after message demanding immediate and conciliatory responses from someone who is clearly not reading what you have already taken the time to send out by way of an interim response can be... dispiriting.
Anyway, I can only say that things are not as black and white as some may decide they are and that considerable efforts are made to put personal opinions to one side and try to keep members on board and within the rules; ideally without suspension and with a BAN only in extreme circumstances. It ain't always easy, that's for sure
<font color=blue>To the previous poster: am I missing something? Your question appears to be posted in the worst possible way. And we have had and do still have a female presence on the moderating team although for how much longer could be in some doubt.
I can't recall a time when a mod has posted details of private correspondence - although from time to time I have tentatively suggested that harassed members of the moderating team should be allowed to post some of the messages that are sent their way just to illustrate the nonsense they have to deal with.
I'm not going to go through the rights and the wrongs of this current situation but it seems to me that we are sometimes damned if we do and damned if we don't.
What I would remind fellow members is that none of us are not on here 24/7, we are not monitoring our email boxes full-time and that it would be nice if it was understood that conversations on the mod forum themselves do take some time. That is just how it is with volunteers.
I've lost track of the number of times during the past decade that particularly vocal members have called me out when I've said words to the effect that I need to consult with fellow mods and that I would appreciate it if they could give me the time to get on with this. Receiving message after message demanding immediate and conciliatory responses from someone who is clearly not reading what you have already taken the time to send out by way of an interim response can be... dispiriting.
Anyway, I can only say that things are not as black and white as some may decide they are and that considerable efforts are made to put personal opinions to one side and try to keep members on board and within the rules; ideally without suspension and with a BAN only in extreme circumstances. It ain't always easy, that's for sure
<font color=blue>To the previous poster: am I missing something? Your question appears to be posted in the worst possible way. And we have had and do still have a female presence on the moderating team although for how much longer could be in some doubt.
#34
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I've never had a problem with any mods in my 10 years here. Only one PM that I can recall, about an old avatar picture, and the mod was really cool about it.
My main issue here is a lack of communication. If you leave us to assume the worst, we will.
I think a good moderator is like a good sports ref/umpire: keep the peace, enforce the rules, but never make it personal.
My main issue here is a lack of communication. If you leave us to assume the worst, we will.
I think a good moderator is like a good sports ref/umpire: keep the peace, enforce the rules, but never make it personal.
#36
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Has benedict always been an admin? Thought he was a mod.
If that is a new development, it gets a big from me. As a longtime MusicTalk poster he has always handled things in a fair and appropriate manner. His contributing constructively to this thread is just another example of that.
If that is a new development, it gets a big from me. As a longtime MusicTalk poster he has always handled things in a fair and appropriate manner. His contributing constructively to this thread is just another example of that.
#38
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: Address MOD Questions....?
[...]I can only speak for myself though in saying I have never sent anything to a mod that I can remember
But if I was suspended for anything I would hope to have a fair response if I did send an email to a mod. I think this is the major issue here.
No fair and reasonable responses from mods to those who are suspended most recently and notably Tatantini.
It comes across as petty and " I'm the mod so what I say goes and that's the end of that and if you ask me again you'r banned."
I don't say this is you Benedict but it appears this has happened to suspended people.
But if I was suspended for anything I would hope to have a fair response if I did send an email to a mod. I think this is the major issue here.
No fair and reasonable responses from mods to those who are suspended most recently and notably Tatantini.
It comes across as petty and " I'm the mod so what I say goes and that's the end of that and if you ask me again you'r banned."
I don't say this is you Benedict but it appears this has happened to suspended people.
However, I'm not sure everyone has the full details/timeline as to what happened in the case under discussion.
I have to turn in now (gone midnight where I am) but maybe those participating could take a step back and consider whether they are getting the full picture, if they are aware of any back-story and if some credit should be given to the mod/admin involved for all the behind-the-scenes stuff he does to keep things running as smoothly as possible in sometimes difficult circumstances.
I'm not trying to be enigmatic so much as discreet but there's lots of smart people around here who could do some digging and decide how much weight they want to give to any particular version of events.
#39
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 8,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#41
Challenge Guru & Comic Nerd
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Minor Threat is suspended now? Oh wait, I guess I get one for asking that?
You've always seemed reasonable to me Benedict, but the last two suspensions seem extremely unreasonable to me. Can't you and every other mod/admin see that too?
You've always seemed reasonable to me Benedict, but the last two suspensions seem extremely unreasonable to me. Can't you and every other mod/admin see that too?
#42
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Formerly known as "n8boss87".
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I just got a suspension warning via PM from exactly who I would have suspected and it was threatening in it's very demeanor. What are the suspension/ban protocols, or can someone (even a mod or admin) just send a threatening PM at their whim....?
I assume this place is trying to run things professionally, but is this acceptable/professional moderation:
Title of PM: "I assume you're looking for a suspension?"
Body of PM:"All the REDACTED stuff you're doing will have you joining him if that's your goal."
What kind of passive/aggressive threat is this, and exactly how am I supposed to interpret this? We're not little children (although we have tendencies to act like it at times).
Fine, I'll abide and stop referencing a banned member via protocol, but what the fuck is IB's protocol with regards to threatening PMs sent by other members/moderators....?
I assume this place is trying to run things professionally, but is this acceptable/professional moderation:
Title of PM: "I assume you're looking for a suspension?"
Body of PM:"All the REDACTED stuff you're doing will have you joining him if that's your goal."
What kind of passive/aggressive threat is this, and exactly how am I supposed to interpret this? We're not little children (although we have tendencies to act like it at times).
Fine, I'll abide and stop referencing a banned member via protocol, but what the fuck is IB's protocol with regards to threatening PMs sent by other members/moderators....?
I've been on both sides of this coin. I've been a mod for an IB-ran site, and I've had serious encounters with mods of other sites. The basic rule for most moderation gigs is to maintain some level of impartiality when it comes to doling out the justice, as it were, but I know for a fact that there is no such thing as neutrality. The job sours people. One does get tired of dealing with the shit from one person who just doesn't get it and either won't abide by the rules or feels above them.
The protocol concerning a mod pretending he/she is Dirty fuckin' Harry has nothing to do with IB. The rules for sites vary between IB brands, and as such, that isn't an IB question as much as it is a DVDTalk question. Though, to be fair, one does have to address IB when it comes to employees, be they paid staff or even just unpaid volunteers as mods usually are, threatening a member with that kind of PM that the OP has claimed (keyword claimed).
I don't know if this thread is now ironic seeing as OP is suspended, or if it was always that way, but normally the way to go about this shit is to contact the moderation level ABOVE whoever or whatever mod one feels is in the wrong with details, in depth, and screencaps if possible as fwd'd pms can be altered (though, honestly, certain layers of higher up moderation CAN access your account to prove validity, and trust me on that). If there's 6 super-mods or super-dupers, or even super-pooper troopers, or wtfever they want to call themselves, send out as many pms as necessary so they see it.
It's good the public, ie regular forum members, see the threats, so they know who or what to avoid, but going about this shit the right way is the only way it ever gets fixed. the wrong way only makes shit worse.
#46
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
#48
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Playa del Rey, CA
Posts: 2,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
I think some of the mods occasionally make mistakes similar to what I and other parents do. I can get very frustrated with my daughter, her occasional bouts of arguing or rule-bending getting me worked up to the point where I'm a bit too quick to wield my power over her. I give out punishments or rule interpretations just to put her in her place and make me feel 'in charge'; instead of loving her and making sure her viewpoint is considered.
#49
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
Originally Posted by iBobi
Let's go over what a moderator is. A mod is first and foremost a member of this forum community. They have usually been so for quite a long time before they have an opportunity to become a moderator and be trusted with the few additional tools at their disposal.
Second, moderators are volunteers. They are giving their time and energy to the community, often for years at a time, because they believe in the site, love the community, and want everyone to have the same opportunity to enjoy DVDTalk that they did.
Lastly, moderators are part of a team -- one that confers internally on difficult issues, before acting. Often, as recently, that action begins with a post that is against the site's rules and TOS; the member is apprised of the violation, perhaps warned or suspended, and the issue is done with. If the member continues to violate policy, or worse, exacerbates the situation by calling out the moderator in the public forums rather than handling the situation through PM, more extreme action is called for. In one recent instance, after long deliberations, a 3-month suspension was called for.
This is a drawn-out way of saying: Be Nice. The moderator team is here to help everyone enjoy DVDTalk. The more we help them do their job, the less of a job they will have to do, and the more we can all enjoy this passionate community.
Best,
Paul O'Brien
Community Manager"
Second, moderators are volunteers. They are giving their time and energy to the community, often for years at a time, because they believe in the site, love the community, and want everyone to have the same opportunity to enjoy DVDTalk that they did.
Lastly, moderators are part of a team -- one that confers internally on difficult issues, before acting. Often, as recently, that action begins with a post that is against the site's rules and TOS; the member is apprised of the violation, perhaps warned or suspended, and the issue is done with. If the member continues to violate policy, or worse, exacerbates the situation by calling out the moderator in the public forums rather than handling the situation through PM, more extreme action is called for. In one recent instance, after long deliberations, a 3-month suspension was called for.
This is a drawn-out way of saying: Be Nice. The moderator team is here to help everyone enjoy DVDTalk. The more we help them do their job, the less of a job they will have to do, and the more we can all enjoy this passionate community.
Best,
Paul O'Brien
Community Manager"
It's a nice reminder that mods are forum members first. However, in reality, very few mods seem to actively participate in discussion around here. The only ones I see with regularity, and I realize I don't visit every particular forum, are wendersfan and Suprmallet. Any coincidence that they've received praise in this thread? Folks around here would be much more receptive to the actions of moderators if they were deemed to be one of us, wouldn't they?
And that's the problem. There are many mods (volunteers as we've been reminded), who don't have the time/interest to be as active as they need to be. Just this week, there's been a thread from a mod who hasn't been here in a long time. Why would this person still carry that title? The recent disciplinary issues have been mishandled--mainly by a lack of communication to those affected. How hard would it be to contact people and say, "you'll get more information in 'x' number of days--using 'x' simply as a variable here --as this is discussed internally. I have noticed several suspended members in recent weeks whose titles/user id's haven't even reflected that they have been disciplined. The moderation has just gotten a little sloppy and I don't think that's an isolated opinion.
My suggestion would for the higher ups to step back and take a look at things, much like benedict has requested others to do in this thread. Make an effort to have adequate moderation, utilizing folks who are active in this community. Without making some changes, the statement about the moderator team wanting everyone to enjoy DVDTalk seems to be a bit hollow.
#50
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Address MOD Questions....?
My $.02:
I can see both sides of this. A member got suspended, and there was a general feeling amongst fellow members that the suspension was unwarranted. The members' response to that has been a little childish and not very productive. "Subversive" posts in threads throughout the site showing support for the suspended member, posts that were known to be undesirable by site administration (under the "discussion of suspended/banned members" mantra or on a questioning/flouting of authority basis). That means that mods, and not even necessarily the mod responsible for the original suspension or who might even disagree with that decision, have to spend their volunteer time going in and cleaning up those posts. Then there have been some honest and open and respectful comments in this thread regarding moderation, but an equal number of snarky asides or pictures which do nothing to foster an open dialogue. Those posts put the moderation team on the defensive, and are likely to accomplish the exact opposite of what the posters are hoping for. If you put yourself in the position of the moderation team, these tactics a) piss you off in general because they take up your time, and b) can make you refuse to change your mind on principle for fear of encouraging the same behavior anytime someone popular is suspended.
On the user side, I can see the frustration that there doesn't seem to be any effective way to question or challenge moderation decisions. Discussion of the specifics of what got someone banned or suspended is immediately closed (at best), and, from reports, emails and PMs are frequently either not responded to or are curtly replied to, cutting off further communication. Polite threads get ignored, or given a "we'll take it under advisement" response that never (visibly) goes anywhere. There's a lot of snark and subversiveness because that seems to be the only way to provoke any kind of serious response or notice, positive or negative (and it also happens to be the general tone of the forums in general). The top level of moderation on this site also hasn't banked a lot of credibility or goodwill with its members, which otherwise would lead to a more patient attitude in feedback situations.
I can see both sides of this. A member got suspended, and there was a general feeling amongst fellow members that the suspension was unwarranted. The members' response to that has been a little childish and not very productive. "Subversive" posts in threads throughout the site showing support for the suspended member, posts that were known to be undesirable by site administration (under the "discussion of suspended/banned members" mantra or on a questioning/flouting of authority basis). That means that mods, and not even necessarily the mod responsible for the original suspension or who might even disagree with that decision, have to spend their volunteer time going in and cleaning up those posts. Then there have been some honest and open and respectful comments in this thread regarding moderation, but an equal number of snarky asides or pictures which do nothing to foster an open dialogue. Those posts put the moderation team on the defensive, and are likely to accomplish the exact opposite of what the posters are hoping for. If you put yourself in the position of the moderation team, these tactics a) piss you off in general because they take up your time, and b) can make you refuse to change your mind on principle for fear of encouraging the same behavior anytime someone popular is suspended.
On the user side, I can see the frustration that there doesn't seem to be any effective way to question or challenge moderation decisions. Discussion of the specifics of what got someone banned or suspended is immediately closed (at best), and, from reports, emails and PMs are frequently either not responded to or are curtly replied to, cutting off further communication. Polite threads get ignored, or given a "we'll take it under advisement" response that never (visibly) goes anywhere. There's a lot of snark and subversiveness because that seems to be the only way to provoke any kind of serious response or notice, positive or negative (and it also happens to be the general tone of the forums in general). The top level of moderation on this site also hasn't banked a lot of credibility or goodwill with its members, which otherwise would lead to a more patient attitude in feedback situations.