A Critique of NS Moderation Policy

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

If Max Barry and the mods indulged in their natural inclination to be skinhead neo-nazi punks then so be it, one can decide to participate or not.

This isn't a country one is born into, with rights of abode and the need for colorful passports. One can freely join or freely leave.

So while one can voice opinion, and I genuinely think the Mods tend to listen, aside from Blaatie whose job is to bleat but not hear, there''s no inherent need for them to do so.

I do believe that raising issues is important and useful but, to be fair, this whole shebang is laid on for you - and while you might say the community makes the business, the individual can absolutely choose not to take part.

Oddly, given the preference of many a member, it's a benevolent dictatorship not a participatory democracy.

Choose your pill.

Sadly there is no consistency pill...

[Bombadil]

If Max Barry and the mods indulged in their natural inclination to be skinhead neo-nazi punks then so be it, one can decide to participate or not.

This isn't a country one is born into, with rights of abode and the need for colorful passports. One can freely join or freely leave.

So while one can voice opinion, and I genuinely think the Mods tend to listen, aside from Blaatie whose job is to bleat but not hear, there''s no inherent need for them to do so.

I do believe that raising issues is important and useful but, to be fair, this whole shebang is laid on for you - and while you might say the community makes the business, the individual can absolutely choose not to take part.

Oddly, given the preference of many a member, it's a benevolent dictatorship not a participatory democracy.

Choose your pill.

Sadly there is no consistency pill...

Boo hoo?

[The World Famous Octagon]

The majority cannot deny rights, and ergo, is incapable of committing "tyranny" in that sense.

It can't?

You do know who was democratically elected into power, don't you?

What do you mean by "best"? I certainly wouldn't agree it would be the wisest decision perhaps, or the most constructive to an intellectual environment. But it would most definitely be the most just.

Despite the rules that every member of the community agreed upon when signing up and creating a nation?

The community determines what is lawful and unlawful. A community therefore cannot "break" it's own rules; it changes them.

I don't see the rules having been changed. And refer to my link above.

It has been explained to you very clearly several times now what the difference is. What more do you want me to say? Every time I show you a difference, you just keep saying they're the same. You're close-minded.

And every time I explain otherwise you seem to ignore my arguments. It appears we are at an impasse.

That statement doesn't even make sense within the context of our discussion. If you're going to try and be snarky, at least be good at it.

It very much does. I am explain to you why "the majority" doesn't mean "the most just", and "the best".

I've given to you an example of forum politics, I'm now giving you above an example of international politics.

That is, actually, precisely what it means. And it's one of the reaosons why so many people throught history have been fearful of democracies, and instead elect for republics.

Democracy is about the people's will, full stop. That is, by definition, the majority. If you don't like that, maybe you don't like democracy.

You would do well to read this.

And that's why I'm telling you why this shouldn't be.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

Sadly there is no consistency pill...

Boo hoo?

Perhaps...its one thing to have x as defined by y but when y is also a b and c depending on the mod it makes things a bit silly.

[Dyakovo]

From The NSG Culture thread...
viewtopic.php?p=15788059#p15788059
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=254256&p=15784310#p15784310

Thank you.

Happy to be of service.

Edit: It's worth noting two things about my ideological bias comment...
1: I've been wrong before about it and
2: I see it as a problem despite having (mostly) the same bias.

[The Serbian Empire]

I think most are trying their best to make the right decision.

I don't.

Sometimes I think they don't try. In that case, I'd prefer they didn't bother at all and let someone else deal with it.

Granted, there have been many cases where they did act correctly, which admittedly go a little unnoticed compared to any gaffes, but I'd prefer it if they only modded when they're feeling up to it and actually want to pass the right judgement and do some digging to find the context. If not, take a day on sick leave and let the other mods deal with things while you contemplate why the hell you accepted this unrewarding job.



Also, bringing something else up: "If it's not offensive to me, it's not offensive to anyone else" is possibly the worst motivation for a ruling ever. Some people have a thicker skin on average. They should try looking at it from other people's point of view.

On the flipside, reporters should bother to provide motivations and context rather than just say "it's X", because as we've all seen, the rules don't get applied too strictly here, so motivate why you think that particular post breaks a certain rule and the mods' job will be so much easier. People can't see it from your POV if you don't even supply it, so being mad at them because you failed to provide details isn't justified.

I report often, not because my skin is thin but for my astute eye for spotting violations. I personally claim to have it at 91% accuracy for resulting in moderator action. Fortunately as summer break has ended so has most of my duty of reporting rule violations as we all know fewer violations occur when the fifteen year olds are in school.

[Free Tristania]

My main critique would be that they are not-neutral and themselves protective of ideologies that suit their own ideas.

[Bombadil]

Boo hoo?

Perhaps...its one thing to have x as defined by y but when y is also a b and c depending on the mod it makes things a bit silly.

I was 'victim' to one of the least consistent rulings.. viewtopic.php?p=136078#p136078

What was the real cost to me, 7 days of not posting later reduced to 3,

Frankly I blame Obama for not stepping in and making things right.

In reality I did't post for 3 days and life went on.

Truth is the Mods do seem to try and listen, and improve, truth is inconsistency is easy to point to but doesn't accept that it's a volunteer job, doesn't receive too much credit by nature, truth is we're allowed a 30+ page thread to run on improvement.

Give a po' man a break.

[Caecuser]

My main critique would be that they are not-neutral and themselves protective of ideologies that suit their own ideas.

Good luck finding a single person who does not fall under that description ever.

[Free Tristania]

My main critique would be that they are not-neutral and themselves protective of ideologies that suit their own ideas.

Good luck finding a single person who does not fall under that description ever.

From Staff members one should expect better.

[Luveria]

I don't.

Sometimes I think they don't try. In that case, I'd prefer they didn't bother at all and let someone else deal with it.

Granted, there have been many cases where they did act correctly, which admittedly go a little unnoticed compared to any gaffes, but I'd prefer it if they only modded when they're feeling up to it and actually want to pass the right judgement and do some digging to find the context. If not, take a day on sick leave and let the other mods deal with things while you contemplate why the hell you accepted this unrewarding job.



Also, bringing something else up: "If it's not offensive to me, it's not offensive to anyone else" is possibly the worst motivation for a ruling ever. Some people have a thicker skin on average. They should try looking at it from other people's point of view.

On the flipside, reporters should bother to provide motivations and context rather than just say "it's X", because as we've all seen, the rules don't get applied too strictly here, so motivate why you think that particular post breaks a certain rule and the mods' job will be so much easier. People can't see it from your POV if you don't even supply it, so being mad at them because you failed to provide details isn't justified.

I report often, not because my skin is thin but for my astute eye for spotting violations. I personally claim to have it at 91% accuracy for resulting in moderator action. Fortunately as summer break has ended so has most of my duty of reporting rule violations as we all know fewer violations occur when the fifteen year olds are in school.

It's very easy to get +90% accuracy during summer. It's like boosting your K/D ratio by pwning n00bs instead of dealing with skilled players.

[The Serbian Empire]

I mean, if you people really want an example of why non-elected mods are a bad thing, I know there was a very nasty issue that went down recently involving a recently banned member. The fact that I have to talk about it like this is a direct result of non-democratically elected mods. They function like gangsters.

Well, go elsewhere and you will see that it's either flaming on 4chan which in reality actually approaches on civil lawsuits if they weren't named anonymous or you'll see far more tyrannical moderation.

[Dyakovo]

My main critique would be that they are not-neutral and themselves protective of ideologies that suit their own ideas.

Care try to give examples?

[Free Tristania]

My main critique would be that they are not-neutral and themselves protective of ideologies that suit their own ideas.

Care try o give examples?

They basically let a thread a racist thread run riot and then take it out on those that criticise the racists. The thread is here on this forum.

[Caecuser]

Good luck finding a single person who does not fall under that description ever.

From Staff members one should expect better.

I don't - and they do a pretty good job.

I'm just glad they aren't Nazi's.

And if you have any particular complaints, have you made them to the Mods themselves?

[The Serbian Empire]

I report often, not because my skin is thin but for my astute eye for spotting violations. I personally claim to have it at 91% accuracy for resulting in moderator action. Fortunately as summer break has ended so has most of my duty of reporting rule violations as we all know fewer violations occur when the fifteen year olds are in school.

It's very easy to get +90% accuracy during summer. It's like boosting your K/D ratio by pwning n00bs instead of dealing with skilled players.

The noobs are the violators most of the time in the first place or long term users feed up with the youthful Summertime No Posts Army. Summer is a prime season for people running afoul of the rules.

[Aurora Novus]

The majority cannot deny rights, and ergo, is incapable of committing "tyranny" in that sense.

It can't?

You do know who was democratically elected into power, don't you?

And your point? That does not even begin to make an argument against what I've said.

And yes, tyranny of the majority cannot deny rights. As righs are determined by people, what makes a right a right withi society is whether or not the majority of that society believes in it. If the majority doesn't believe in it, it's not a right.

The only time rights can be denied are in situation where the majority believe in a right, but do not have the power to recognize it, because a minority holds power over them. Only minorities can deny rights.

Despite the rules that every member of the community agreed upon when signing up and creating a nation?

That every member clicked "agree" does not mean they actually agree that it should be that way, nor does it mean thei opoinion may not change at a later date. Agreeing to abide by preexisting rules does not mean you agree with those rules.

I don't see the rules having been changed.

Currently? Well duh. The community does not have the power to change them. That's the problem with totalitarianism.

And every time I explain otherwise you seem to ignore my arguments. It appears we are at an impasse.

I don't ignore your arguments. I address them, and explain to you why they are flawed. Simply put, I'm right, you're wrong. There is a differene, and your refuse to recognize it. This is not a matter of opinion, but of fact.

It very much does. I am explain to you why "the majority" doesn't mean "the most just", and "the best".

Justness deals with the feulfillment of societal expectations. Justness deals with the upkeep of rights. As I've explained to you previously, rights cannot be violated by the majority.

If justice is your definition of "best", then by definition, democracy is "the best".

You would do well to read this.

And that's why I'm telling you why this shouldn't be.

What's your point? That a majority of a society does things you don't like? Okay. Bu they aren't violating rights. Rather, they are denying the existence of those rights within their society. Big difference there.

If you don't like that they don't recognize those right, the solution is to enagge in argument with members of that society, and attempt to change their minds. Not force them to conform to your will by oppressing their ability for self-determination.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

Perhaps...its one thing to have x as defined by y but when y is also a b and c depending on the mod it makes things a bit silly.

I was 'victim' to one of the least consistent rulings.. viewtopic.php?p=136078#p136078

What was the real cost to me, 7 days of not posting later reduced to 3,

Frankly I blame Obama for not stepping in and making things right.

In reality I did't post for 3 days and life went on.

Truth is the Mods do seem to try and listen, and improve, truth is inconsistency is easy to point to but doesn't accept that it's a volunteer job, doesn't receive too much credit by nature, truth is we're allowed a 30+ page thread to run on improvement.

Give a po' man a break.

Because wanting consistency is a bad thing. Check.

The Obama schtick was old in 2008.

Truth is that while we have these threads...nothing is done to address root issues. Truth is that volunteering is a thankless task in virtually all areas of volunteering. If you are volunteering for any other reason than to make something better then give it up. You are not only deluding yourself but you are also damaging that which you are professing to assist.

[Luveria]

It's very easy to get +90% accuracy during summer. It's like boosting your K/D ratio by pwning n00bs instead of dealing with skilled players.

The noobs are the violators most of the time in the first place or long term users feed up with the youthful Summertime No Posts Army. Summer is a prime season for people running afoul of the rules.

I've fallen victim to it more than once from how utterly idiotic the Summer Jugend posts can be.

[The Serbian Empire]

Care try o give examples?

They basically let a thread a racist thread run riot and then take it out on those that criticise the racists. The thread is here on this forum.

I bet that was for posting in the thread in the first place.

[Dyakovo]

Care try o give examples?

They basically let a thread a racist thread run riot and then take it out on those that criticise the racists. The thread is here on this forum.

I asked for an example...

[Free Tristania]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=263933 Racist title. Racist ideas. All aimed against one particular group who gets the blame for everything that has happened to mankind. And where did we hear that before ? 1930s maybe ?

[Aurora Novus]

I mean, if you people really want an example of why non-elected mods are a bad thing, I know there was a very nasty issue that went down recently involving a recently banned member. The fact that I have to talk about it like this is a direct result of non-democratically elected mods. They function like gangsters.

Well, go elsewhere and you will see that it's either flaming on 4chan which in reality actually approaches on civil lawsuits if they weren't named anonymous or you'll see far more tyrannical moderation.

Not really. I've been around the net for awhile now, and I've seen plenty of communities that run on the basis of democratically elected staff, and function just fine.

Though admittedly, I tend to hang around small communties. It's atypical for me to be an active member of a forum like this.

[The Serbian Empire]

The noobs are the violators most of the time in the first place or long term users feed up with the youthful Summertime No Posts Army. Summer is a prime season for people running afoul of the rules.

I've fallen victim to it more than once from how utterly idiotic the Summer Jugend posts can be.

I haven't, but then I have a window open to Moderation and another to the General forum at all times. A real professional of how to contain the out of hand summer crowd.

[Caecuser]

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=263933 Racist title. Racist ideas. All aimed against one particular group who gets the blame for everything that has happened to mankind. And where did we hear that before ? 1930s maybe ?

Are you trying to somehow connect this to Hitler?

The thread in question is locked btw.