[Discussion] Why do mods get all the shit?

[Caninope]

This. It seems to me like the vast majority of "mod supporters" have only been on the site for a few months.
Stay a while, follow the rabbit hole, and prepare to hear the "I told you so"s when you hit the spike pit at the bottom.

Wait, this is the matrix and the mods are Agents? If that's true, where's Neo?

On your point, though, this is how I see it:

Everything's cool with the mods until you're attacked. When you're attacked, you get angry at the Mods and blame them. When you blame them, you get into more trouble. When you get into more trouble, you get Da Boot. When you get Da Boot, you get even more mad. When you get even more mad, people look on and say "Now kids, don't be like that person."

In other words, it's all fun and games till you get the full brunt.

Actually, that's not it.

I've had a clean record (with the exception of a ban that was retracted), and I most definitely have fundamental problems with the way that things are done here. I feel as if there's a lack of transparency (although discussion threads are a step in the right direction), a lack of consistency, and I feel as if many mods, justified or not, do not act with an appropriate level of respect towards the player base.

EDIT: To bring this in line with the topic, that's why I give them "shit".

[Reploid Productions]

So explain why we all think it fit to be blatantly ignorant and rude to them on a big scale.

My theory is it's the same reason police officers catch so much shit: because they are authority figures and often encountered in that role when the other person is already upset or pissed off; thus making them an easy target to lash out at. Even when you KNOW you were in the wrong doing 70 in a 25 zone, you're still not going to be thrilled to get smacked with that speeding ticket, and if you get busted for doing just 26 in that 25 zone, it's even worse, nevermind an instance where you get erroneously dinged and then have to deal with the headache of fighting it.

Is anyone happy when they get a warning, or when someone they're friends with gets hit with a ban? Unlikely, and the ones that issue said warning are the best available target to direct that anger at. Especially when it comes to the extremely subjective calls where it's very easy to try and blame it on bias or some misconception of being "targeted" by a vindictive force, and thus continuing to react in an extremely antagonistic manner to that perceived persecution.

[Caninope]

So explain why we all think it fit to be blatantly ignorant and rude to them on a big scale.

My theory is it's the same reason police officers catch so much shit: because they are authority figures and often encountered in that role when the other person is already upset or pissed off; thus making them an easy target to lash out at. Even when you KNOW you were in the wrong doing 70 in a 25 zone, you're still not going to be thrilled to get smacked with that speeding ticket, and if you get busted for doing just 26 in that 25 zone, it's even worse, nevermind an instance where you get erroneously dinged and then have to deal with the headache of fighting it.

Is anyone happy when they get a warning, or when someone they're friends with gets hit with a ban? Unlikely, and the ones that issue said warning are the best available target to direct that anger at. Especially when it comes to the extremely subjective calls where it's very easy to try and blame it on bias or some misconception of being "targeted" by a vindictive force, and thus continuing to react in an extremely antagonistic manner to that perceived persecution.

May I just point out that this is absolutely not the basis of my criticisms of Moderation, given that I've frequently talked about a lack of consistency (or perceived lack of consistency, at any rate), such that DLN has told me off for wanting Moderation to be too heavy handed?

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Wait, this is the matrix and the mods are Agents? If that's true, where's Neo?

On your point, though, this is how I see it:

Everything's cool with the mods until you're attacked. When you're attacked, you get angry at the Mods and blame them. When you blame them, you get into more trouble. When you get into more trouble, you get Da Boot. When you get Da Boot, you get even more mad. When you get even more mad, people look on and say "Now kids, don't be like that person."

In other words, it's all fun and games till you get the full brunt.

Actually, that's not it.

I've had a clean record (with the exception of a ban that was retracted), and I most definitely have fundamental problems with the way that things are done here. I feel as if there's a lack of transparency (although discussion threads are a step in the right direction), a lack of consistency, and I feel as if many mods, justified or not, do not act with an appropriate level of respect towards the player base.

EDIT: To bring this in line with the topic, that's why I give them "shit".

Caninpope, let me rephrase what I said, because I probably didn't convey it in the best way possible.

Everyone is fine UNTIL the Mods make a mistake. More specifically, a mistake regarding you in general. I know that if I had gotten an "unfair" warning, I wouldn't be too pissed. If I got an unfair ban, though, I'd be a little more ticked off. But if I wasn't notified of the warning prior, (which I hope I am. Just a nice tele would be fine), I'd get a little more defensive. Sure, I'd be mad. But I'm not going to go give them the figurative shit we're talking about.

That's probably what a lot of people do. They freak out because they think they're better than that. And while the Mods can be harsh and blunt sometimes, if you have a reason not to have a specific mod judge you, then tell them. I'm sure they'd be happy to oblige.

Edit: Aww, I was Ninja'd by the Ninja Mod...
And the Pope.

[Caninope]

Everyone is fine UNTIL the Mods make a mistake. More specifically, a mistake regarding you in general. I know that if I had gotten an "unfair" warning, I wouldn't be too pissed. If I got an unfair ban, though, I'd be a little more ticked off. But if I wasn't notified of the warning prior, (which I hope I am. Just a nice tele would be fine), I'd get a little more defensive. Sure, I'd be mad. But I'm not going to go give them the figurative shit we're talking about.

No, this unfair ban was last month, and I've been trying to beat this dead horse for several years now.

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Everyone is fine UNTIL the Mods make a mistake. More specifically, a mistake regarding you in general. I know that if I had gotten an "unfair" warning, I wouldn't be too pissed. If I got an unfair ban, though, I'd be a little more ticked off. But if I wasn't notified of the warning prior, (which I hope I am. Just a nice tele would be fine), I'd get a little more defensive. Sure, I'd be mad. But I'm not going to go give them the figurative shit we're talking about.

No, this unfair ban was last month, and I've been trying to beat this dead horse for several years now.

I wasn't talking about you specifically, if that's what you mean. I meant the collective you.

[Bezombia]

So explain why we all think it fit to be blatantly ignorant and rude to them on a big scale.

My theory is it's the same reason police officers catch so much shit: because they are authority figures and often encountered in that role when the other person is already upset or pissed off; thus making them an easy target to lash out at. Even when you KNOW you were in the wrong doing 70 in a 25 zone, you're still not going to be thrilled to get smacked with that speeding ticket, and if you get busted for doing just 26 in that 25 zone, it's even worse, nevermind an instance where you get erroneously dinged and then have to deal with the headache of fighting it.

Is anyone happy when they get a warning, or when someone they're friends with gets hit with a ban? Unlikely, and the ones that issue said warning are the best available target to direct that anger at. Especially when it comes to the extremely subjective calls where it's very easy to try and blame it on bias or some misconception of being "targeted" by a vindictive force, and thus continuing to react in an extremely antagonistic manner to that perceived persecution.

Uh, no.

[Belzia]

The mods are usually good, but sometimes, tehy make stupid, oddball, hypocritical or (dare I say it?) corrupt decisions. But that's rare, oh, and I'm leaving some cookies for you to fight over

[The Equal Peoples State of Steelia]

Well this has actually gone great no flames yet.

Keep going guys more viewpoints please.

[Paddy O Fernature]

While I generally don't have a huge problem with most of the moderation staff, I do feel that two current serving mods are well past prime, and are long overdue for "retirement" as (to me at least) they seem to carry a "I'm burned out therefore don't give a shit" attitude everywhere they go.

We get it, honestly, being a mod sucks. It's like being a Honey Bucket cleaner, where all your going to do is catch shit all day from the moment you show up at work. However, instead of getting to the point where your professionalism standard goes out the window in your dealings with the public at large, don't you honestly feel that it would be better to just hang up the towel and call it a day?

Nobody is perfect, people make mistakes, all that jazz granted. However, that excuse starts to get very thin and hold less water, when it is constantly brought up against the same people over, and over, and over again by multiple people.

My two cents on the matter.

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

My theory is it's the same reason police officers catch so much shit: because they are authority figures and often encountered in that role when the other person is already upset or pissed off; thus making them an easy target to lash out at. Even when you KNOW you were in the wrong doing 70 in a 25 zone, you're still not going to be thrilled to get smacked with that speeding ticket, and if you get busted for doing just 26 in that 25 zone, it's even worse, nevermind an instance where you get erroneously dinged and then have to deal with the headache of fighting it.

Is anyone happy when they get a warning, or when someone they're friends with gets hit with a ban? Unlikely, and the ones that issue said warning are the best available target to direct that anger at. Especially when it comes to the extremely subjective calls where it's very easy to try and blame it on bias or some misconception of being "targeted" by a vindictive force, and thus continuing to react in an extremely antagonistic manner to that perceived persecution.

Uh, no.

"I can shake my tiny fists and swear I wasn't wrong, but whats the sense in arguing, when I'm all alone?"

Just saying, do you have any evidence to support that theory? From here, its a sound theory. Its so sound, in fact, that you can build a house on it.

Maybe not a house... a tent, perhaps...

While I generally don't have a huge problem with most of the moderation staff, I do feel that two current serving mods are well past prime, and are long overdue for "retirement" as (to me at least) they seem to carry a "I'm burned out therefore don't give a shit" attitude everywhere they go.

We get it, honestly, being a mod sucks. It's like being a Honey Bucket cleaner, where all your going to do is catch shit all day from the moment you show up at work. However, instead of getting to the point where your professionalism standard goes out the window in your dealings with the public at large, don't you honestly feel that it would be better to just hang up the towel and call it a day?

Nobody is perfect, people make mistakes, all that jazz granted. However, that excuse starts to get very thin and hold less water, when it is constantly brought up against the same people over, and over, and over again.

My two cents on the matter.

Here's four. Its good, alright.

BTW, there IS a mod who just got deleted. March 22nd. This year. GMC Arms Dealer?

[Zaolat]

I tend to read through this forum often. We (gameplay) tend not to be in here that often. Outside of the occasional roleplay section posting here or every so often a member of gameplay, it's general complaining about someone or about getting warned/banned/DEAT, etc.

Gameplay, people get a lot of shit and snark all the time. Sometimes it gets more personal, but I think it doesn't get that bad because people differentiate between playing a game and the people behind the computer screen. In general's case it's not the same. I think the mods do fine, people just need not to take things personally. Just move on.

[Mike the Progressive]

Uh, no.

"I can shake my tiny fists and swear I wasn't wrong, but whats the sense in arguing, when I'm all alone?"

Just saying, do you have any evidence to support that theory? From here, its a sound theory. Its so sound, in fact, that you can build a house on it.

Maybe not a house... a tent, perhaps...

I got banned for a day because the mod who issued it misread my forum history and thought he had already given me a warning earlier. Nobody apologized and that ban would still be a marked down on my record as a ban if I didn't appeal it.

The police analogy is correct to an extent, but to carry it further, it's the same reaction people get when the cops shoot an unarmed black guy or a child answering the door with a Wii gun is shot or when the cops do a stop and frisk targeted at minority groups. If you take into account all of that, then yes, the police analogy makes sense.

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

"I can shake my tiny fists and swear I wasn't wrong, but whats the sense in arguing, when I'm all alone?"

Just saying, do you have any evidence to support that theory? From here, its a sound theory. Its so sound, in fact, that you can build a house on it.

Maybe not a house... a tent, perhaps...

I got banned for a day because the mod who issued it misread my forum history and thought he had already given me a warning earlier. Nobody apologized and that ban would still be a marked down on my record as a ban if I didn't appeal it.

The police analogy is correct to an extent, but to carry it further, it's the same reaction people get when the cops shoot an unarmed black guy or a child answering the door with a Wii gun is shot or when the cops do a stop and frisk targeted at minority groups. If you take into account all of that, then yes, the police analogy makes sense.

You have to understand, though. Some times they are freaked and get scared. They have to make split second decisions.

And that analogy? Doesn't really make sense at all. In fact, you took it to the point where it doesn't even fit in. You got your ban appealed, did you not? If you didn't get it appealed, you'd have a point.

[Euroslavia]

I got banned for a day because the mod who issued it misread my forum history and thought he had already given me a warning earlier. Nobody apologized and that ban would still be a marked down on my record as a ban if I didn't appeal it.

The police analogy is correct to an extent, but to carry it further, it's the same reaction people get when the cops shoot an unarmed black guy or a child answering the door with a Wii gun is shot or when the cops do a stop and frisk targeted at minority groups. If you take into account all of that, then yes, the police analogy makes sense.

You have to understand, though. Some times they are freaked and get scared. They have to make split second decisions.

And that analogy? Doesn't really make sense at all. In fact, you took it to the point where it doesn't even fit in. You got your ban appealed, did you not? If you didn't get it appealed, you'd have a point.

For the record, it was appealed and granted.

[Mike the Progressive]

I got banned for a day because the mod who issued it misread my forum history and thought he had already given me a warning earlier. Nobody apologized and that ban would still be a marked down on my record as a ban if I didn't appeal it.

The police analogy is correct to an extent, but to carry it further, it's the same reaction people get when the cops shoot an unarmed black guy or a child answering the door with a Wii gun is shot or when the cops do a stop and frisk targeted at minority groups. If you take into account all of that, then yes, the police analogy makes sense.

You have to understand, though. Some times they are freaked and get scared. They have to make split second decisions.

Give me a break. The mods are volunteers and if they don't have the time (say they've got work or school) to say double-check a ban to make sure, uh you know, that it's justified, then they shouldn't be moderators or they shouldn't be moderating that thread/post. Because there are players out there who are ignorant of the appeals process (wait, are we talking about the US justice system or NS moderators?) and feel that they have to take it as is.

And that analogy? Doesn't really make sense at all. In fact, you took it to the point where it doesn't even fit in. You got your ban appealed, did you not? If you didn't get it appealed, you'd have a point.

Sure it does (though I'm not the one who originally compared the mods to the police), I just got shot in this case and lived to sue. If you seriously think every mod decision has been correct or justified, then you've got to seriously re-think what correct or justified means. Because mods are people, clearly, and they make mistakes. The problem is those mistakes results in deletions, bans, warnings, etc.

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

You have to understand, though. Some times they are freaked and get scared. They have to make split second decisions.

Give me a break. The mods are volunteers and if they don't have the time (say they've got work or school) to say double-check a ban to make sure, uh you know, that it's justified, then they shouldn't be moderators or they shouldn't be moderating that thread/post. Because there are players out there who are ignorant of the appeals process (wait, are we talking about the US justice system or NS moderators?) and feel that they have to take it as is.

And that analogy? Doesn't really make sense at all. In fact, you took it to the point where it doesn't even fit in. You got your ban appealed, did you not? If you didn't get it appealed, you'd have a point.

Sure it does (though I'm not the one who originally compared the mods to the police), I just got shot in this case and lived to sue. If you seriously think every mod decision has been correct or justified, then you've got to seriously re-think what correct or justified means. Because mods are people, clearly, and they make mistakes. The problem is those mistakes results in deletions, bans, warnings, etc.

US Justice system, of course.

Yes, they make those mistakes. But giving them shit isnt the way to go.

[Nazi Flower Power]

A month ago, I might have agreed with you. But then you get banned for a day because apparently that warning you got earlier that month, you know the warning that you actually didn't get earlier that month but was a fluke because the moderator read your forum history incorrectly, just wasn't stern enough. So yeah nobody likes getting F'ed in the A when it's not in the good way. But in the as you sail down the Cahulawassee River, hear the banjo playing, hey, Bobby, "squeal like a pig boy" kind of way. And guess what? there's no Burt Reynolds.

To be honest, I like a few of the mods. But overall I'd say many of them are incompetent and arrogant, short on time, which results in what? Mistakes that usually go unfixed.

So give it some time. You like them now. You sympathize with them now, until you're banned for a day because the moderator misread your posting history. Then you'll know what it's like to get F'd in the A, but not in the good way.

This. It seems to me like the vast majority of "mod supporters" have only been on the site for a few months.
Stay a while, follow the rabbit hole, and prepare to hear the "I told you so"s when you hit the spike pit at the bottom.

I've been here since 2010, and I still think the anti-mod factions need to calm the fuck down. A lot of players have been making their own problems. Someone gets a ban they didn't think they deserved, or sees their friend get a ban that seems unnecessarily harsh, but instead of moving on, they bitch at the mods about it until the sheer volume of bitching gets unmanageable and the mods are forced to start deleting the bitch threads and handing out more bans and deleting nations. At some point it's counterproductive to keep arguing, and really not the mods' fault that someone decided to react to a ban as if their whole family was murdered by the mods.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

May I just point out that this is absolutely not the basis of my criticisms of Moderation, given that I've frequently talked about a lack of consistency (or perceived lack of consistency, at any rate), such that DLN has told me off for wanting Moderation to be too heavy handed?

That's a new one on me. I haven't been terribly keen on some of your methods, and some of your statements, but I don't recall 'telling you off for wanting Moderation to be too heavy handed'. Of course, perception is reality for most folks, and your perception and mine may vary somewhat.

Newsflash: It all depends on your view of things, and what control you feel you do or do not have. When people lack control, they tend to want more of it. When they get in trouble, or even find themselves at odds with those who are perceived to have control, there's often friction. Everyone's an expert when it's someone else at the helm, and it's all fun and games when there's a new face on the party ticket - until that person does something someone else doesn't like, and it's the same old all over again. Human nature. It is what it is, and it is what we make it.

A mistake is made, is owned, and next thing you know every action is a mistake, clearly, and people should be called to account for it. A controversial call is made, and soon everyone is out for blood. Heads need to roll. Another 'regime' needs to be called in, because clearly, nothing the current group does can possibly be right.

Folks, it's an online forum. One that granted, a lot of us have put a lot of time and effort into, have made a lot of friends on, and found a sort of home and community to be a part of. It's a private site, with it sown set of rules, and whether or not I'm one of the people keeping an eye out for them, or another person is, most of those rules don't change. Certainly not the spirit of them. If anything, moderation has gotten more lenient, less inclined to heavy-handed actions, showed a tendency to take more time to review prior to making a final call, and been more worried about public perception than I've seen in most of my time here - and that goes back to May 2003.

Do decisions need to be made faster? I'd say so, yes. Ought we be concerned with what the player base thinks? To a point of reasonableness, of course - it's the public we're supposed to be trying to work with. Should we listen to what the players have to say on things? Obviously, or we wouldn't be having any of these conversations. Will they always be implemented? No - some can't, some don't make enough sense in the system as some might have us think, some don't serve the overall player base, etc. Do we need to have constant us vs them squabbles where we attempt to belittle, snipe, and accomplish nothing but pissing one another off?

Hell no.

If there's some viable suggestions and solutions, make 'em. I'd like to hear 'em, see what might be done to help. If this is going to be more gnawing old bones and harping on old grievances, I've got no time for it. If you have an individual issue to address, make a report of it.

[Sdaeriji]

So explain why we all think it fit to be blatantly ignorant and rude to them on a big scale.

My theory is it's the same reason police officers catch so much shit: because they are authority figures and often encountered in that role when the other person is already upset or pissed off; thus making them an easy target to lash out at. Even when you KNOW you were in the wrong doing 70 in a 25 zone, you're still not going to be thrilled to get smacked with that speeding ticket, and if you get busted for doing just 26 in that 25 zone, it's even worse, nevermind an instance where you get erroneously dinged and then have to deal with the headache of fighting it.

Is anyone happy when they get a warning, or when someone they're friends with gets hit with a ban? Unlikely, and the ones that issue said warning are the best available target to direct that anger at. Especially when it comes to the extremely subjective calls where it's very easy to try and blame it on bias or some misconception of being "targeted" by a vindictive force, and thus continuing to react in an extremely antagonistic manner to that perceived persecution.

I like this analogy, so I want to expand on it:

It's more like people getting pissed because they got pulled over going 70mph in a 65mph zone in the right lane while following the flow of traffic, while two lanes over there's a bunch of cars having rolling gunfights at 120mph.

[Torisakia]

May I just point out that this is absolutely not the basis of my criticisms of Moderation, given that I've frequently talked about a lack of consistency (or perceived lack of consistency, at any rate), such that DLN has told me off for wanting Moderation to be too heavy handed?

That's a new one on me. I haven't been terribly keen on some of your methods, and some of your statements, but I don't recall 'telling you off for wanting Moderation to be too heavy handed'. Of course, perception is reality for most folks, and your perception and mine may vary somewhat.

Newsflash: It all depends on your view of things, and what control you feel you do or do not have. When people lack control, they tend to want more of it. When they get in trouble, or even find themselves at odds with those who are perceived to have control, there's often friction. Everyone's an expert when it's someone else at the helm, and it's all fun and games when there's a new face on the party ticket - until that person does something someone else doesn't like, and it's the same old all over again. Human nature. It is what it is, and it is what we make it.

A mistake is made, is owned, and next thing you know every action is a mistake, clearly, and people should be called to account for it. A controversial call is made, and soon everyone is out for blood. Heads need to roll. Another 'regime' needs to be called in, because clearly, nothing the current group does can possibly be right.

Folks, it's an online forum. One that granted, a lot of us have put a lot of time and effort into, have made a lot of friends on, and found a sort of home and community to be a part of. It's a private site, with it sown set of rules, and whether or not I'm one of the people keeping an eye out for them, or another person is, most of those rules don't change. Certainly not the spirit of them. If anything, moderation has gotten more lenient, less inclined to heavy-handed actions, showed a tendency to take more time to review prior to making a final call, and been more worried about public perception than I've seen in most of my time here - and that goes back to May 2003.

Do decisions need to be made faster? I'd say so, yes. Ought we be concerned with what the player base thinks? To a point of reasonableness, of course - it's the public we're supposed to be trying to work with. Should we listen to what the players have to say on things? Obviously, or we wouldn't be having any of these conversations. Will they always be implemented? No - some can't, some don't make enough sense in the system as some might have us think, some don't serve the overall player base, etc. Do we need to have constant us vs them squabbles where we attempt to belittle, snipe, and accomplish nothing but pissing one another off?

Hell no.

If there's some viable suggestions and solutions, make 'em. I'd like to hear 'em, see what might be done to help. If this is going to be more gnawing old bones and harping on old grievances, I've got no time for it. If you have an individual issue to address, make a report of it.

Except...those report we make aren't handled properly.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Except...those report we make aren't handled properly.

According to a handful out of the hundreds we deal with constantly, some with an ongoing axe to grind. Not everyone is going to like the outcome. It's also a hazard of the entire system.

[Mike the Progressive]

Give me a break. The mods are volunteers and if they don't have the time (say they've got work or school) to say double-check a ban to make sure, uh you know, that it's justified, then they shouldn't be moderators or they shouldn't be moderating that thread/post. Because there are players out there who are ignorant of the appeals process (wait, are we talking about the US justice system or NS moderators?) and feel that they have to take it as is.



Sure it does (though I'm not the one who originally compared the mods to the police), I just got shot in this case and lived to sue. If you seriously think every mod decision has been correct or justified, then you've got to seriously re-think what correct or justified means. Because mods are people, clearly, and they make mistakes. The problem is those mistakes results in deletions, bans, warnings, etc.

US Justice system, of course.

Yes, they make those mistakes. But giving them shit isnt the way to go.

I was being sarcastic. I realize you were talking about the justice system, in return I was sort of poking fun at the vast ignorance of criminals and their rights, and those who violate NS rules and their ability to appeal (many of which don't know).

And I agree. Giving them shit isn't the way to go. But neither is saying everything is hunky-dory, which is what this thread seems to be. That those who have the audacity to not shower them with praise are just a bunch of whiners who break rules and shit and need to let it go. Maybe we do. This isn't the real world after all, and we don't really have rights.

[Venico]

I remember the raid of Roman Empire when they installed Insta-WA and I was taken out of the delegacy due to the new code despite me not breaking any rules. I appealed and was initially brushed off and told not to multi and it was at that point that I began to fear that my cause was lost. Defenders piled into the region and in minutes had more endorsements than we could overcome. Mahaj got the delegacy and I tried appealing again. I not only got WA back but Sedge came in and fixed the region, owning up to the mistake and basically turning back the clock the best he could on the region. He left a message on the RMB and even telegrammed me the apology.

That was the day I kind of nodded and went, "These folks are humans, but they're cool humans who do their best." And that's all we can ever ask of the admins and mods.

Thanks for all of the time you guys sink into this crappy game to deal with our shenanigans. *tips hat*

[Ovisterra]

Because some of them have, on occasion, done some things I personally would really rather they hadn't done. Yes, they're human. Yes, it's reasonable to make mistakes from time to time. Yes, I appreciate that they have a thankless job and they do it voluntarily. That said, some things are hard to write off as mistakes:

-Indefinitely and silently banning a poster for "spamming" (when the thing he "spammed" was posted just once - and he'd had a clean record before then) He was unbanned, but it took more than week and a half and two GHRs.
-Deleting questions asked of them in these new "moderation discussions" for being asked "in bad faith" and deleting attempts to rephrase said questions with no further explanations.
-Consistently failing to reply to GHRs about the recent "secret ban" kerfuffle (just after placing a ban on discussion of moderation policy and telling people to direct suggestions and complaints to the GHR page, funnily enough)
-Some other stuff I legit can't post here because when people posted about it before they were banned without explanation

...and I could probably recall some more stuff, given a bit of time.

Don't get me wrong, I like the mods. Nice bunch of people. They do a difficult and essential job and I'm grateful for it. But at the end of the day, some things have happened that have been pretty dodgy and very much deliberate and I don't see why I or anyone else shouldn't mention those things in legitimate, calmly-worded complaints when they happen.