[Discussion] Critique of DEAT/DOS mod policy

[The New California Republic]

Don't you think that maybe if the moderators explained what someone did to earn the punishment, their friends might not be quite as pissed off by the decision?

No not at all. If anything it might make it worse. When warnings are dished out on the forums, which are a very public affair, there is a real tendency for the person's friends and acquaintances to try to weigh in on it even when a reason is given, often especially because a reason is given. If the Mods started answering queries from them as to why someone was DOSed then it would not solve the problem of folk being pissed off that their friend is gone from the site.

[Imperial-Octavia]

You see, it isn't about Wuchu really as it is about general transparency. As I said, I don't know the guy but I think that it would be easier for all parties if the mods just explained more. The same thing happened with the LDTW and RDTW threads which the mods snapped out is existence seemingly out of the blue with no community input. That is not a good way to moderate anything. And for this incident itself, all one of them would have to say is that he was DOS'ed in the past which would clear up the problem. That literally reveals nothing except for why it was done while also explaining to the community why a prominent member has been deleted so harshly without any further details. Or maybe explain why they are unable to talk about why people have been DOS'ed which would also clear up the problem

I've modded a few places before and the way the mods here handle things is far too secretive for the things they do this over. I really don't think a bit of transparency would hurt at all, if anything it would help massively with maintaining community trust.

They don't need your trust, nor are they beholden to you. If you do not like how moderation comports itself, you're more than welcome to find other websites upon which you can RP.

Asking the moderators to improve their policy does not mean that I should leave the site because of my disagreements with them. This is a non-argument as the problem of the RDTW and LDTW being deleted with little notice to the community still exists

[Godular]

They don't need your trust, nor are they beholden to you. If you do not like how moderation comports itself, you're more than welcome to find other websites upon which you can RP.

Asking the moderators to improve their policy does not mean that I should leave the site because of my disagreements with them. This is a non-argument as the problem of the RDTW and LDTW being deleted with little notice to the community still exists

Mayhap, perhaps you should note how the moderation here operates and consider whether the websites on which the moderation team was purportedly more forthcoming was in point of fact a more expedient system.

[Imperial-Octavia]

Asking the moderators to improve their policy does not mean that I should leave the site because of my disagreements with them. This is a non-argument as the problem of the RDTW and LDTW being deleted with little notice to the community still exists

Mayhap, perhaps you should note how the moderation here operates and consider whether the websites on which the moderation team was purportedly more forthcoming was in point of fact a more expedient system.

1. I'm not asking them to let the community vote on everything, I simply want them to either consult the community on their controversial decisions or explain themselves when they do something which may be necessary, but does not appear that way to the community (this situation). Are those really such radical demands?

2. I would rather have better decisions than faster decisions if that's what you mean by that last part.

[The New California Republic]

RDTW and LDTW

...Right Discussion Thread Wing? It's RWDT and LWDT, just to clarify, in case folk don't know what you are referring to.

[Imperial-Octavia]

RDTW and LDTW

...Right Discussion Thread Wing? It's RWDT and LWDT, just to clarify, in case folk don't know what you are referring to.

I think my brain died a bit there, yeah I was talking about RWDT and LWDT

[Indo-Malaysia]

Could you not contact this 'Shtet' offsite, and ask them to file a GHR to find out the reason?

If you dont hear back.... well

[Godular]

Mayhap, perhaps you should note how the moderation here operates and consider whether the websites on which the moderation team was purportedly more forthcoming was in point of fact a more expedient system.

1. I'm not asking them to let the community vote on everything, I simply want them to either consult the community on their controversial decisions or explain themselves when they do something which may be necessary, but does not appear that way to the community (this situation). Are those really such radical demands?

This decision was not controversial when it was first made. If I understand the sequence of events as put forward by Shtet, it went for years without anybody giving a shit, and was most likely a gameside DoS against the other player using the same VPN (Were I a betting man). They do not need to speak on such issues to any Johnny Q Thirdparty, and if Shtet wishes to get to the bottom of this on their own and mayhap seek a means of freeing himself from that DoS there are means by which they can do so... though I honestly do not hold out much hope.

So to me... I see asking for information about somebody else's DoS ruling as being nosy. Yes, I recognize that you might have enjoyed talking with this individual, but things like this are quite capable of happening. It is unfortunate, but such happens.

2. I would rather have better decisions than faster decisions if that's what you mean by that last part.

No, it is not what I mean. I specifically speak of whether the mod team at those other locations was perhaps more forthcoming than they should have been.

[Reploid Productions]

Alrighty, this one's already gone right off the rails and haring into the underbrush.

1) Shtet/Wuchu's case is presently under review since an appeal was filed via the proper venues.
2) We are not going to change policy about spilling the beans on "Why was X DEAT/DOS?" if the reason wasn't already public (such as a guy who gets himself blasted forumside after a history of rulebreaking there for example.) That information is between site staff and the affected user, not the peanut gallery. In cases of mod error, would you want your good name smeared for all and sundry to see? Plus that's a policy handed down to the team by Max Almighty himself, not one the mod team came up with. Site owner's wishes for the beans to remain stored away kinda sorta trumps player transparency wishes for spilled beans.
3) While the average DOS discussion starts after somebody's had 3 DEATs, circumstances can warrant going straight to DOS on a first offense, just like factors such as time elapsed can push a DOS vote out beyond the third DEAT.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Admin
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku