A Critique of NS Moderation Policy

[The Blaatschapen]

This^. 10 posters quoting the same thing and writing "troll" is annoying.

Here's the issue: the trollnaming rule has not decreased spam. In fact, it has worsened it. Responding to a troll is worthless, ergo spam. I'd much rather take a forum outright dismissing someone and that person being ignored in perpetuity than several people all questioning if someone is a troll or not a responding to them as if they are not.

Well, isn't that up to everyone to restrain themselves from responding to a troll? If you think someone is trolling, report it and/or ignore it. If you think a debate is worthless, don't engage in it

[Geilinor]

This^. 10 posters quoting the same thing and writing "troll" is annoying.

Here's the issue: the trollnaming rule has not decreased spam. In fact, it has worsened it. Responding to a troll is worthless, ergo spam. I'd much rather take a forum outright dismissing someone and that person being ignored in perpetuity than several people all questioning if someone is a troll or not a responding to them as if they are not.

The best idea would be to just ignore trolls instead of allowing more vitriol to be posted in reply.

[Edlichbury]

Here's the issue: the trollnaming rule has not decreased spam. In fact, it has worsened it. Responding to a troll is worthless, ergo spam. I'd much rather take a forum outright dismissing someone and that person being ignored in perpetuity than several people all questioning if someone is a troll or not a responding to them as if they are not.

The best idea would be to just ignore trolls instead of allowing more vitriol to be posted in reply.

But a) no one actually ignores trolls because admittingly the line is narrow sometimes b) suggesting that other posters do so through the most efficient method (that is the ignore function) can run afoul of the nebulous "ignore gloating" rule and c) dismissing a stupid or trollish argument as stupid and trollish doesn't require any vitriol and is often the most sensible action.
If the ignore function was used more, we wouldn't have this problem. But posters were discouraged from advising others to actually put the trolls on ignore.

[Lost heros]

This^. 10 posters quoting the same thing and writing "troll" is annoying.

Here's the issue: the trollnaming rule has not decreased spam. In fact, it has worsened it. Responding to a troll is worthless, ergo spam.

That's why calling someone a troll not in moderation is spam, because it's pointless.

I'd much rather take a forum outright dismissing someone

That isn't what happens though. People don't dismiss them; people respond to them and call them trolls, hence spam

and that person being ignored in perpetuity than several people all questioning if someone is a troll or not a responding to them as if they are not.

If you think someone is a troll don't respond to them and report them. If a mod tells you someone isn't a troll don't treat them as a troll. If mods tell you someone is a troll, than you have nothing to worry about because the mods will take care of it.

[The Black Forrest]

On the comment of forced mod retirement.

This is a silly idea if not lazy idea.

If you have a problem with mod rulings, then complain about it as there is a mechanism.

If many people are involved in or observed an incident, why not Telegram each other and offer a petition of the actions and why a mod needs a break or to be replaced?

A group response rather then bitching or individual complaints, tends to get more attention.

Now having said that; it might not hurt to have a mechanism in place to submit complaints against mods versus mod rulings. For example; when I did mod work for a game company; the web master was in charge of the mods and told the community if a mod was being improper, let him know with evidence.

Some times a mod needs a break and sometimes it needs to be suggested to the mod as a community such as this can get tiring when you consider the personalities which have wondered by through the ages.

Something to consider when judging a mod. How many good rulings do you remember? The bad ones are always easiest. Usually for ever bad ruling; many good ones go unnoticed or are quickly forgotten?

NSG at times is about emotion. Be it the mods are picking on me. Be it the mods not liking the very people they are supposed to take care of.

Sometimes it's a good idea to simply take a break. Even a small one to reduce emotion and evaluate with a cooler mind. Maybe the ruling was fair or the genrealite isn't really wanker?

Now I think I might retire to the refurbished chamber that was once bad!

[Forsher]

That doesn't even make any sense.

It's a chart. It's not meant to.

And posts like this are why NSG is at 10...

... It's a bar graph and it should make sense.

That is a recent policy change. Dakini's comments (aside from being contexually very different) relate to events further back than September 2013 (although, I am sure there have been a few like this recently).

AVFM wasn't banned because it's anti-feminist, it was banned because they encourage gathering information on women they don't like and posting it online while not-so-subtly encouraging others to take this information and harass these women. There are other websites which have been declared part of the same network of hate groups and those have not been banned.

That's what I meant by contexually very different.

Because one of the mods refused to revise a locked thread they were supposed to, someone who had admitted to serious criminal offenses wasn't punished until much later when the topic was brought up again in the first version of this thread.

Can I have an unbiased explanation please?

Shit that required the notification of his local law enforcement for very very serious charges. That's all that needs to be said.

Thank you for clearing it up enough for me to know not to ask again.

That leaves out the important bit. There was a moderator cock up but that was compounded by spamming moderation on the part of the reporter (I believe) and the reported. Additionally, the player was DOS'd a few days before NSG Culture. In the previous Mod critique thread it transpired that said player had managed to sneak back in undetected but when it was brought to the attention of the mods (Euroslavia) that was dealt with promptly.

Both incidents are used primarily to make mod-critical points although the latter points more at issues within the player-base than the mods. See my explanation of that here.

I just read this thread and I think NSG never made me so mentally confused.

Regardless, I have to keep a keen on it, because I stopped reading the NSG Culture on the 15th page and when it turned out to be the thread of the year it was too late.

The difference between it and the many threads of its ilk was that it sparked a moderation recruitment drive. Other than that it was nothing special and not really different to this thread. The DEATions of a few notable-ish players at roughly the same time helped.

[Shaggai]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

[The Black Forrest]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

-edit-

Read the statement as suggesting an auto-ban which is not the case. Comment withdrawn.

[Bezombia]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Like Kerfluffen.

Not a Verbluffen alt, just someone who picked a similar name.

[The Serbian Empire]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

Sounds interesting. Some people can be spotted by their writing style... People like myself although my record has little more than unofficial warnings.

[Shaggai]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Why would that specifically be an issue? I genuinely want to know.

[The Black Forrest]

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Like Kerfluffen.

Not a Verbluffen alt, just someone who picked a similar name.

Indeed. But we also have had some rather uncreative types who made an effort to keep a reference in new names. Anybody remember the red arrow?

[Edlichbury]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Then the player would be reported, found to not be the DoS player, and life moves on. It's not like Shaggai suggested automatic banning for them.

[Shaggai]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

Sounds interesting. Some people can be spotted by their writing style... People like myself although my record has little more than unofficial warnings.

Writing style was apparently how Karrgath was detected. That was why I thought of it.

[The Black Forrest]

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Why would that specifically be an issue? I genuinely want to know.

Well? You stumble on Nation States. Create "The Whisper" and later get a notice DoS. Would you want to stay?

[Luveria]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

So that's why I didn't like Karrgath at all...

[The Black Forrest]

What about cases where somebody happens to pick a similar name?

Then the player would be reported, found to not be the DoS player, and life moves on. It's not like Shaggai suggested automatic banning for them.

Ahh. I read it as such. Never mind then.

[Forsher]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

You'd be better off looking at what typified them. Which now after I finished the below I see is your point... oh well. Not a bad idea but a little impractical.

Take Moving Forwards Inc. As far as I know they've never come back but their nations were very different with the names (Acireman is nothing like MFI). The same with Choronzon (who, as far as I know, is DOS but he may not be). The Whispers was previously Yootopia/Yootwopia/Yehohohopia so that was a straight out change. The only person this would likely catch out is FST who has a tendency to go for long names like Conformal Veal Theory on returning.

[Shaggai]

Why would that specifically be an issue? I genuinely want to know.

Well? You stumble on Nation States. Create "The Whisper" and later get a notice DoS. Would you want to stay?

I never suggested autoban. You might get reported, the mods would check if you were a puppet, and everyone would move on when they found you were not.

[Dakini]

Like Kerfluffen.

Not a Verbluffen alt, just someone who picked a similar name.

Indeed. But we also have had some rather uncreative types who made an effort to keep a reference in new names. Anybody remember the red arrow?

Ugh. Why did you have to remind me about that?

[The Serbian Empire]

Sounds interesting. Some people can be spotted by their writing style... People like myself although my record has little more than unofficial warnings.

Writing style was apparently how Karrgath was detected. That was why I thought of it.

Mine is rather obvious, it's has a bit more inner significance to it for me.

[Radiatia]

Usually I stick up for the mods whenever this thread comes around (it does every few months), and of course I respect anyone who would volunteer to police a website ridden with 15 year old internet trolls such as this.

That said, having been on NS for a while now, I will admit that my respect for the moderators has declined considerably, given the fact that increasingly their decisions seem to be either arbitrary, at odds with the site rules or alternatively ignoring site rules altogether.

Obviously there's a huge variation in the quality of the moderators, all being individuals with lives outside of here and as such my criticism isn't necessarily of moderation policy but rather of certain moderators who I feel should not be in such a position, though I won't name names as I've already just spent the day at work yelling at my boss about my incompetent co-workers, and don't have the energy to bitch about people who are nothing more than volunteers on a website that I volunteered to be part of.

Long story short: I agree with the OP, I agree with claims that the moderation on this site leaves a lot to be desired, but I have a life outside of NS and don't care enough to spend all my time and energy moaning about people who I highly doubt I will ever meet in real life anyway.

[The Black Forrest]

Indeed. But we also have had some rather uncreative types who made an effort to keep a reference in new names. Anybody remember the red arrow?

Ugh. Why did you have to remind me about that?

Should I emit a deranged laugh?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I don't think anyone ever knows LG's intentions.

Nobody is safe!

[Shaggai]

So, an idea I've had since the Karrgath incident (fo those who don't know, Zeonic came back and nobody noticed fqor a while). How about a list of DoS players and known usernames under which they have seriously posted? It could be stickied in Moderation, so people could more quickly notice if a poster seems to be one of them. Known usernames other than the original could be added so people who never saw a certain poster in one form could recognize another (i. e. Karrgah, The Whispers, etc.), but only usernames under which they have seriously posted would be listed (i. e. no usernames which were only used for gorespam). Would this be possible or are there just too many DoS players/usernames?

You'd be better off looking at what typified them. Which now after I finished the below I see is your point... oh well. Not a bad idea but a little impractical.

Take Moving Forwards Inc. As far as I know they've never come back but their nations were very different with the names (Acireman is nothing like MFI). The same with Choronzon (who, as far as I know, is DOS but he may not be). The Whispers was previously Yootopia/Yootwopia/Yehohohopia so that was a straight out change. The only person this would likely catch out is FST who has a tendency to go for long names like Conformal Veal Theory on returning.

My point was, if they never knew, say, Yootopia, but did know The Whispers, they could recognize that The Whispers came back.