[Jessica.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Why did not you - as THE Mod in question then - not pm me as the member whose Right To Reply was denied him by my INNOCENT and perfectly valid posts being repeatedly removed?

In addition, WHY was I given a Warning for simply AND truthfully responding with;

"My proof keeps on being removed"

When YOU yourself invited proof to corroborate Jaxies claim that you were not 'playing by the rules' (or words to that effect) - which you were most certainly not Dezzy.

Should a Moderator leap in and take sides in any debate which he was not previously involved in, by making UNTRUE allegations against one member in defence of another who is on the opposing side of an argument?

WHERE are the lines drawn?

On the subjects of pm's to Mods, I have only ever had the courtesy of TWO replies whenever I HAVE pm'd Mods with a grievance concerning Warnings, Infractions etc; and those have been one from Josy and the other from James.

You don't have a right to reply though.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Jessica.

It's not their job though, it's something that they do in their free time.

And? That doesn't mean they don't have to do it to the best of their ability

[Jessica.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Did anyone on the thread apply to be a mod? I'm asking for a explanation, you never know it might foster some mutual respect, not everything has to be negative

You and a few others who have been complaining in this thread have been on a warpath against the mods, especially Dezzy, recently. This thread just contains some of many recent posts which are trying to point out that the mods are biased, unfair and judgemental. Don't start acting like you made this thread with positivity at the forefront of your mind.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

I can see both sides because it's probably really frustrating when you have posts deleted - I remember once I noticed Vicky (I think) edited a post of mine, and she left a comment in the 'edit reason' bit, and I appreciated that, so yeah it's a good idea and everything... but I wonder if sometimes inviting a conversation around posts that have been deleted, through PM or in the thread itself, would sometimes lead to further derailment? And are there the mod resources to increase workload? I know it doesn't apply to everyone but a mod comment about a post being deleted could be seen by some as an invitation to discuss it more instead of drop it after seeing the comment. I don't know if a set rule is the way to go with it, but a judgement call on the part of the mod and maybe PMing them if you're not sure why posts have been deleted?

The point of a PM explanation is not resolve all user dissension. That will always occur. It's encouraged by our democracy after all. Uprising against the establishment.

I truly believe the PM system is designed to have a ripple effect on rapport... on forums I've been active on and forums I've modded, this worked better because both mods and reasonable users didn't require as many explanations... it means focus on the real hard cases... it also reduced nastygrams between both sides imo because the system tells you pretty much... write a professional alert to the user the decision... if they respond, reply the rule that is significant and why and leave it there. Other than that, take it to the admin. I would not have my mods arguing back and forth with users with personal commentary (much less in threads). It can be very well intentioned and they could very well be in the right, but it just looks biased... they after all are only following the rules.

The nice thing about PMs too from a mod perspective. Most complaints could be reduced down to accusations, which were harder to prove on the user end... so then easier to justify escalation (if even just to ourselves) as needed to infractions and possibly eventually be banned... eventually people give up and change their ways and move on.... make it personal and they will never give up. You'll have a counter forum developed behind your back and lots of drama could ensue off-site... I know this from experience!

On the front end, it will help filter between the reasonables, the unreasonables and the plain undesirables (trolls who you know will get themselves permabanned eventually). It invites a response, and by no means, does a mod have to respond to that response exhaustively, much do they need to respond to the response of the response... most places that did this, they left a note saying they would take their objections into consideration after the initial response... and if needed, reiterating a stated rule so that they understood that some decisions would be more final than others... nothing personal, nothing exhaustive. Because frankly, mods are a volunteer cast and they can't afford the time to provide an exhaustive explanation to how they mod the forum... most is based on personal judgement and a thick skin and you just sometimes hope you've made the right decision that won't cause too many problems with users.

The work in my field is based on communication through the design of information. So for a living, I have to take into consideration the psychological behind the appearance and presentation of information on websites... small things like changing from infractions to a PM system feels more personal to the user and more inviting than merely leaving a time bomb in the explanation box... it depends on the situation though and eventually some users will exhaust their courtesy PM's and we move to an infraction and then eventually a ban situation... but in general, I think the system is good because it builds rapport with the core user... that's the main benefit from an administrative perspective... not to stop all dissension.

[MTVN]

In all of 2016 I have had two PMs asking about moderation on here and the most recent one was in March

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..also I think it's the thing as well that it could just encourage negative attention and gossipy stuff from others with...'why was Jamie's post inflammatory then../what did he say../spill the tea..'...that's not good for the general forum vibe I personally don't think....

If a post is inflammatory then I presume the poster would get an infraction though

[Mokka]

It's not about whether it is a paid position or volunteer. I volunteer on many organizations and committees in my city... and I still am accountable for my actions there...and have to address concerns from people there as well...and I do it as professionally as if it was my paid job

And I am personally tired of being told I am on a war path against the mods. I have said seversl times i wouldn't want to mod... because I realize it is a sucky job... but those doing it signed up to do so... so they are accountable for their actions in that position. I am against censorship, dictatorship, and abuse of authority.

[Amy Jade]

Just to give a bit of balance a thread I made got deleted a while back and I asked a mod why and they got back to me and as it happened it waspretty fair.

Also I've asked a few mods why I was infracted and gotten a satisfying reply. We all get passionate sometimes and make posts that could be seen as baiting or just causing drama in general.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Jessica.

You and a few others who have been complaining in this thread have been on a warpath against the mods, especially Dezzy, recently. This thread just contains some of many recent posts which are trying to point out that the mods are biased, unfair and judgemental. Don't start acting like you made this thread with positivity at the forefront of your mind.

I don't agree with your assessment of my state of mind when I posted, Josy has agreed to discuss it and that's good enough for me

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Cherie

If a post is inflammatory then I presume the poster would get an infraction though

..that was just an example Cherie of a comment in an edit which may have been made by a moderator...../I have no idea what the reason for an edit would be but I'm confident that there would be felt to be a reason...

[Kizzy]

I sent Josy a PM once about a warning... No reply.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I sent Josy a PM once about a warning... No reply.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by MTVN

In all of 2016 I have had two PMs asking about moderation on here and the most recent one was in March

Is that because you are never here.

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Maru

The point of a PM explanation is not resolve all user dissension. That will always occur. It's encouraged by our democracy after all. Uprising against the establishment.

I truly believe the PM system is designed to have a ripple effect on rapport... on forums I've been active on and forums I've modded, this worked better because both mods and reasonable users didn't require as many explanations... it means focus on the real hard cases... it also reduced nastygrams between both sides imo because the system tells you pretty much... write a professional alert to the user the decision... if they respond, reply the rule that is significant and why and leave it there. Other than that, take it to the admin. I would not have my mods arguing back and forth with users with personal commentary (much less in threads). It can be very well intentioned and they could very well be in the right, but it just looks biased... they after all are only following the rules.

The nice thing about PMs too from a mod perspective. Most complaints could be reduced down to accusations, which were harder to prove on the user end... so then easier to justify escalation (if even just to ourselves) as needed to infractions and possibly eventually be banned... eventually people give up and change their ways and move on.... make it personal and they will never give up. You'll have a counter forum developed behind your back and lots of drama could ensue off-site... I know this from experience!

On the front end, it will help filter between the reasonables, the unreasonables and the plain undesirables (trolls who you know will get themselves permabanned eventually). It invites a response, and by no means, does a mod have to respond to that response exhaustively, much do they need to respond to the response of the response... most places that did this, they left a note saying they would take their objections into consideration after the initial response... and if needed, reiterating a stated rule so that they understood that some decisions would be more final than others... nothing personal, nothing exhaustive. Because frankly, mods are a volunteer cast and they can't afford the time to provide an exhaustive explanation to how they mod the forum... most is based on personal judgement and a thick skin and you just sometimes hope you've made the right decision that won't cause too many problems with users.

The work in my field is based on communication through the design of information. So for a living, I have to take into consideration the psychological behind the appearance and presentation of information on websites... small things like changing from infractions to a PM system feels more personal to the user and more inviting than merely leaving a time bomb in the explanation box... it depends on the situation though and eventually some users will exhaust their courtesy PM's and we move to an infraction and then eventually a ban situation... but in general, I think the system is good because it builds rapport with the core user... that's the main benefit from an administrative perspective... not to stop all dissension.

Oh yeah I totally see all that, but do we really have the resources for all of that? Tibbs only a small site so I sort of think if something's not necessary, as much as it would be a nice to have, then is it worth putting mod resource into it? I imagine the infraction system is a much easier method of moderating (granted, I'm sure it also leads to mistakes or unfair judgements on occasion too), but I dunno, what you've described sounds like it would take a lot of mod time that isn't really available, and considering the size of the site would it be worth introducing a whole new administrative process?

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Is that because you are never here.

If I'm not posting it doesn't mean I'm not here

[MTVN]

Although don't try get me on weekends

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Why did not you - as THE Mod in question then - not pm me as the member whose Right To Reply was denied him by my INNOCENT and perfectly valid posts being repeatedly removed?

In addition, WHY was I given a Warning for simply AND truthfully responding with;

"My proof keeps on being removed"

When YOU yourself invited proof to corroborate Jaxies claim that you were not 'playing by the rules' (or words to that effect) - which you were most certainly not Dezzy.

Should a Moderator leap in and take sides in any debate which he was not previously involved in, by making UNTRUE allegations against one member in defence of another who is on the opposing side of an argument?

WHERE are the lines drawn?

On the subjects of pm's to Mods, I have only ever had the courtesy of TWO replies whenever I HAVE pm'd Mods with a grievance concerning Warnings, Infractions etc; and those have been one from Josy and the other from James.

It's not down to me to do that. If you have a query you have to PM a mod to get an answer. You've been on the forum long enough to know that.

If you choose not to do that then that's on you. You agreed to follow a set of rules when you signed up, this 'right to reply' you keep mentioning isn't part of it.

As the rules you agreed to stated, We are allowed to make changes without notifying you. It's up to you to get clarification on things you don't understand.

Finally, mods are allowed to have an opinion on things, we're allowed to take part in discussions and that isn't going to change any time soon.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by MTVN

In all of 2016 I have had two PMs asking about moderation on here and the most recent one was in March

Not from me Matt.

I actually keep forgetting that you are a mod.

I am a grown man and can take my bruises, not only when I have deserved them, but also on quite a few occasions when I have not deserved them, but there is a REAL and recurring problem on this forum with unfairness, favouritism, and unethical behaviour from a Mod.

Bitontheslide - an intelligent, knowledgeable and moderate member - has quit the forum because of it , despite my personal plea to him not to, and other 'Senior' members are genuinely so aggrieved by the above and feel so strongly about it, that they too are on the verge of quitting.

For the most part, those who dismiss this problem, and who attack those complaining about it, are NOT even regular contributors to Serious Debates - the 'arena' where most complaints stem from, and they are also basing their dismissiveness and denials of such complaints, on the fact that that the Mod in question is a 'nice sweet guy' who plays games with them and holds similar political and other views.

No ONE is saying that the Mod in question is NOT a nice guy, or that he is constantly at fault, but there ARE problems which need addressing.

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Cherie

If a post is inflammatory then I presume the poster would get an infraction though

The one of mine I remember seeing, I think I made a comment within a post that Vicky felt could have been seen as being inflammatory, but not directly, or not intended... or something. Not worthy of being infracted for basically but taken out to be on the safe side in case it caused any unnecessary drama

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

Oh yeah I totally see all that, but do we really have the resources for all of that? Tibbs only a small site so I sort of think if something's not necessary, as much as it would be a nice to have, then is it worth putting mod resource into it? I imagine the infraction system is a much easier method of moderating (granted, I'm sure it also leads to mistakes or unfair judgements on occasion too), but I dunno, what you've described sounds like it would take a lot of mod time that isn't really available, and considering the size of the site would it be worth introducing a whole new administrative process?

It depends on the situation, but in some cases, I've had to modify the forum internally to accommodate for lack of staff. I've gone as far as to modify language/add language/behavior of code to code if needed to make things clearer (some systems make it easier than others)... but again, we don't know the situation with TiBB staff and how many are available to do the job and what is technically feasible with the forum itself as they are running on an older version, so plugins may not even be compatible (though vB is pretty common)... my comments are more consultative rather than critical given there's those unknown circumstances. I think that your concerns are very fair.

[Jessica.]

Ugh, I don't want a notification every time a mod does something, that's so tedious.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Not from me Matt.

I actually keep forgetting that you are a mod.

I am a grown man and can take my bruises, not only when I have deserved them, but also on quite a few occasions when I have not deserved them, but there is a REAL and recurring problem on this forum with unfairness, favouritism, and unethical behaviour from a Mod.

Bitontheslide - an intelligent, knowledgeable and moderate member - has quit the forum because of it , despite my personal plea to him not to, and other 'Senior' members are genuinely so aggrieved by the above and feel so strongly about it, that they too are on the verge of quitting.

For the most part, those who dismiss this problem, and who attack those complaining about it, are NOT even regular contributors to Serious Debates - the 'arena' where most complaints stem from, and they are also basing their dismissiveness and denials of such complaints, on the fact that that the Mod in question is a 'nice sweet guy' who plays games with them and holds similar political and other views.

No ONE is saying that the Mod in question is NOT a nice guy, or that he is constantly at fault, but there ARE problems which need addressing.

...no one is dismissing and no one is attacking anyone Kirk..and the bit in bold is simply not true at all...and it does actually insult members in saying it, that it factors in at all when we view things on the forum...we often do so as 'observers' in a thread ..(in any section..)...so participating is not really relevant.../in fact observing and non-participation often gives a more balanced perspective rather than involvement...

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Not only have I had COMPLETELY INNOCUOUS posts removed without ANY genuine reason, I have had subsequent posts INSTANTLY removed which simply asked "Why has my innocuous post been removed when it has breached no rules at all?"

I recently had 6 posts removed - ONE AFTER THE OTHER - just as soon as I posted them:

The first was a civil rebuttal response to a Mod who had made accusations against me in a post.

When it was removed not a nano second after I had submitted it, I posted a benign post asking why it had been removed.

When THAT was instantly removed, I posted a STILL civil post asking why my posts were being removed and along with them my Right To Reply.

Later on that thread, the Mod involved asked another member for 'proof' to her allegation that he was not 'playing by the forum's own rules' or words to that effect" and in response to his invitation for 'proof', I posted simply that "My proof keeps being removed".

I see a pattern here...

For the record posts asking why other posts have been removed will also be removed. If you haven't realised this by now...

[Maru]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Not from me Matt.

I actually keep forgetting that you are a mod.

I am a grown man and can take my bruises, not only when I have deserved them, but also on quite a few occasions when I have not deserved them, but there is a REAL and recurring problem on this forum with unfairness, favouritism, and unethical behaviour from a Mod.

Bitontheslide - an intelligent, knowledgeable and moderate member - has quit the forum because of it , despite my personal plea to him not to, and other 'Senior' members are genuinely so aggrieved by the above and feel so strongly about it, that they too are on the verge of quitting.

For the most part, those who dismiss this problem, and who attack those complaining about it, are NOT even regular contributors to Serious Debates - the 'arena' where most complaints stem from, and they are also basing their dismissiveness and denials of such complaints, on the fact that that the Mod in question is a 'nice sweet guy' who plays games with them and holds similar political and other views.

No ONE is saying that the Mod in question is NOT a nice guy, or that he is constantly at fault, but there ARE problems which need addressing.

Kirk, as you know, I'm a fairly new user, so don't have the time invested that some do... but I've never been modded or had an infraction. Though I do refrain from potential flamewars... (which I think is the true problem more than language issues)... it needs to be made clearer in language the decisions are not personal, so that they can effectively deal with the larger issues... such as verbal abuse that gets tossed around unencumbered.

I remember a time when we used the tools too much and there was so much complaint. Now it seems as if some establishments are afraid to use the tools, fearful of the outcry. There is no perfect solution, but I think that the mods need to be able to put to sleep matters effectively so that they can actually make headway with some of the larger issues in S&D... such as the constant verbal sniping and personal attacks... and not face dissession everytime for choosing a path...

What would have to change to satisfy you and others? There are people who I have seen that float on your side (and often mine as my views are sometimes in line). LT being a big proponent for this (though not the only name I'd name), posting divisive commentary, openly trolling those they perceive to embody the core arguments of opposition and are making weaker arguments (when they are just another innocent user making courtesy commentary)... who are there clearly there purely to cause controversy, not to discuss... those users float hide behind myself and your comments when convenient... then attack others when the coast is clear... and that might be a big reason why you have potentially received infractions, because of a certain crowd....

Imo, not enough has been done about those users, and there needs to be give and take, both sides to resolve the problem... so Kirk, if they ban some of those users and have to act.... and you coincidentally receive infractions from a mod whose comments are not so eloquent, it may still potentially look very biased... but in fact, could be focused on other underlying problems in the forum... and I agree with you, a can of worms has been opened here because some very poor decision making and personal commentary has been made and cannot be undone... and that drives the discussion behind dissension.

We need an agreement as to what the problems actually are so both sides feel safe to post... personally I avoid problem users and their threads like the plague and they're in my squished users list (ignore). It's possibly why I avoid infractions and why your posts are moderated... when we often have very similar viewpoints.

[Vicky.]

However, on other sites I used to receive PMs when posts were removed, edited, when threads were moved etc... some places the edits were made on the post and an explanation towards the end... (probably should poll users before doing this to see if it is appropriate)

You realise, with this you would have a full inbox within an hour of it being implemented?