A Critique of NS Moderation Policy

[Tekania]

The line between an offensive opinion and a deliberate attempt to offend is often a very difficult one to judge and we moderators aren't perfect. And to be completely honest, It's one of the few parts of this job that actually sucks. I for one don't like having to try to determine what someone's intentions are. I am still trying to figure out my own.

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

Tacos.... lots and lots of tacos..... a plethora of tacos.

[Dakini]

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

Tacos.... lots and lots of tacos..... a plethora of tacos.

Followed by a trip into a mud puddle.

[The Black Forrest]

I am not seeing the attempt to end the argument.

You don't see saying "All Communism is Y, and if you don't agree, you're lying" as attempting to shut down argument?

Well then I'm sorry, but we have a fundamental disagreement of what constitutes "attempting to shut down argument".

That person argued with anybody who would argue with him. One of those people even suggested you be careful as you could be called for flaming.

The mere act of arguing does not mean one is not attempting to shut down argument. Indeed, it is the unique trait of trolls to try and rile people up, and get them to argue, by shutting down argument.

It could be. Again a simply reply to the comment of "Again Stalinism is not communism" would avoid it.

There is no functional difference between the two. My post was not infalamtory, so to call it trolling is simply ludicrous. To call it trolling while not calling the former trolling is absolute insanity.

You are free to believe that.

[Cerillium]

I'll weigh in. It won't be favorable I suppose. This is only what I've observed:

Mods are volunteers. They log on to find a plethora of reports. Some of these reports are asinine. I'd call it "thin skinned". What offends one person doesn't offend another; Mods gauge the post based upon their own experiences.

I don't agree with every ruling they've made. Some rulings leave me perplexed. Most aggravating are the "Look at the OSRS" responses. We did look at it; we're posting for clarification. That said - Mods herd yowling cats.

Why is one thing deemed actionable by the general membership while another is not? Why is a negative opinion of Trans* seen as flaming while entire threads that delve into "zombie Jesus" and atheist mockery of "sacred things" seen as PC? How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"? It's what that person believes. Why report them or harass them for it? Unpopular views expressed by low-post-count players can result in a snide dog pile from those well-versed in forum etiquette, as well.

We can best help moderation by policing ourselves. Debate is integral to our forums. We need that confrontation - we crave it. It's up to us to not take it to a personal level. No one can insult you without your permission. You give them permission when you take offense.

The NS moderation policy could use an overhaul but it won't matter much if we don't make an attempt to grow a thicker hide and accept the fact that people have views which don't line up with popular views.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

I'll weigh in. It won't be favorable I suppose. This is only what I've observed:

Mods are volunteers. They log on to find a plethora of reports. Some of these reports are asinine. I'd call it "thin skinned". What offends one person doesn't offend another; Mods gauge the post based upon their own experiences.

I don't agree with every ruling they've made. Some rulings leave me perplexed. Most aggravating are the "Look at the OSRS" responses. We did look at it; we're posting for clarification. That said - Mods herd yowling cats.

Why is one thing deemed actionable by the general membership while another is not? Why is a negative opinion of Trans* seen as flaming while entire threads that delve into "zombie Jesus" and atheist mockery of "sacred things" seen as PC? How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"? It's what that person believes. Why report them or harass them for it? Unpopular views expressed by low-post-count players can result in a snide dog pile from those well-versed in forum etiquette, as well.

We can best help moderation by policing ourselves. Debate is integral to our forums. We need that confrontation - we crave it. It's up to us to not take it to a personal level. No one can insult you without your permission. You give them permission when you take offense.

The NS moderation policy could use an overhaul but it won't matter much if we don't make an attempt to grow a thicker hide and accept the fact that people have views which don't line up with popular views.

[Dakini]

Why is one thing deemed actionable by the general membership while another is not? Why is a negative opinion of Trans* seen as flaming

As we've already established, suggesting to brand trans* people's faces was already deemed non-actionable.

How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"?

Any examples of that?

[Torisakia]

It's mainly just a double-standard. Players who have been around for a long time don't get in much trouble as newer player would.

i.e A new player mildly calls someone an "idiot", they get a 7-week ban. An older player calls someone an "idiotic [insert homosexual slur here]", they get a slap on the wrist.

[Regnum Dominae]

It's mainly just a double-standard. Players who have been around for a long time don't get in much trouble as newer player would.

i.e A new player mildly calls someone an "idiot", they get a 7-week ban. An older player calls someone an "idiotic [insert homosexual slur here]", they get a slap on the wrist.

Can you give some specific examples?

[Torisakia]

It's mainly just a double-standard. Players who have been around for a long time don't get in much trouble as newer player would.

i.e A new player mildly calls someone an "idiot", they get a 7-week ban. An older player calls someone an "idiotic [insert homosexual slur here]", they get a slap on the wrist.

Can you give some specific examples?

Sure.

It was a joke.

[Vakolic]

My biggest gripe with moderation is the lack of roleplayers on the list (Jen and the dread lady are exceptions, but even they aren't that active.)

And the fact that the team is so small that the more active people seem to get sick of moderation and make bad judgements, and then lock threads by players claiming dodgy moderation.
If you're not going to listen to people saying what's wrong, how do you expect to improve?

[The Black Forrest]

My biggest gripe with moderation is the lack of roleplayers on the list (Jen and the dread lady are exceptions, but even they aren't that active.)

And the fact that the team is so small that the more active people seem to get sick of moderation and make bad judgements, and then lock threads by players claiming dodgy moderation.
If you're not going to listen to people saying what's wrong, how do you expect to improve?

Ok? So mods abusing their position?

Example?

[The Alexanderians]

I've noticed the mods being more lock happy when compared with other forums. Overall the mods here are less...authoritarian than other forums and will often listen to reason especially if approached in a manner that one would present another human being in person, ya know: the way everyone should be treated. But still, I've noticed a couple of the mods (Not naming names even if you ask me) are partial to locking threads at the drop of a hat. In fact around Christmas time last year there were a few Factbook treads popping up, and I mean more than usual. One of the mods (the same one every time) went on a locking spree stating (I'm paraphrasing from memory this isn't identical): "Seriously, why are you all making these useless threads? Stop spamming the forums with the meaningless crap. LOCKED" I immediately thought: isn't that what the forums are for? Like seriously are you trying to kill this section of the forums? While there are shining examples in the mods, the others come off as "i do it cause I can" drunk with power types. I've even seen one of those mods trolling another player in the forums! Publicly! I mean the mods that actually do their jobs can't be expected to do this all on their own. There are groups that are pick on constantly on the forums and often things are handled completely wrong and often times being ignored altogether (whether this is a fault of the mods or just people not reporting anything isn't always clear). Like really? How may threads have been opened up where someone is trying to have a serious discussion on religion only for trolls and/or ignorant ranters thread jacking it to something like "You God doesn't exist, get over it"? Or God forbid someone try to have a serious thread NOT about politics. Often times even if it is reported, mods won't even consider looking into it unless you painstakingly describe the situation or if the situation undoubtedly breaks a rule. It does help if enough people whine at once, though. I suggest a recruitment drive for new mods from trusted players, and if necessary a "code of conduct" for the mods that if broken would result in a revoking of credentials so as to not allow the new found power go to peoples' heads.

[Cerillium]

Why is one thing deemed actionable by the general membership while another is not? Why is a negative opinion of Trans* seen as flaming

As we've already established, suggesting to brand trans* people's faces was already deemed non-actionable.

How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"?

Any examples of that?

It's not a flame. That was my point. People tend to go a little nuts in their replies to it, however.

These sorts of posts often lead to everyone feeling the need to chime in - some intelligently and others not as nicely. Their hackles are up over an opinion. The threads turn into a blustering dog pile. Some people respond in a way that could open up dialog. Others hammer out wounded replies.

As I stated in my prior post, How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"? It's what that person believes. Why report them or harass them for it? By "harass" I mean snide comments about their religion in general, rude opinions regarding their god, dismissive posts that leave them frustrated because they can't further explain their opinion and so on.

It's up to us to respond intelligently or else to ignore the people who hold moronic, backwater opinions.

[Luveria]

It's mainly just a double-standard. Players who have been around for a long time don't get in much trouble as newer player would.

i.e A new player mildly calls someone an "idiot", they get a 7-week ban. An older player calls someone an "idiotic [insert homosexual slur here]", they get a slap on the wrist.

If you've been reading the thread, you would notice it's actually the reverse, with examples having been provided of how it's borderline-official policy for mods to go easy on newbies.

[Dakini]

As we've already established, suggesting to brand trans* people's faces was already deemed non-actionable.


Any examples of that?

It's not a flame. That was my point. People tend to go a little nuts in their replies to it, however.

These sorts of posts often lead to everyone feeling the need to chime in - some intelligently and others not as nicely. Their hackles are up over an opinion. The threads turn into a blustering dog pile. Some people respond in a way that could open up dialog. Others hammer out wounded replies.

As I stated in my prior post, How is "My religion believes that homosexuality is a sin" in any way a "flame"? It's what that person believes. Why report them or harass them for it? By "harass" I mean snide comments about their religion in general, rude opinions regarding their god, dismissive posts that leave them frustrated because they can't further explain their opinion and so on.

It's up to us to respond intelligently or else to ignore the people who hold moronic, backwater opinions.

Do you have any examples of a mod warning someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin" or indeed someone reporting someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

[Cerillium]

My biggest gripe with moderation is the lack of roleplayers on the list (Jen and the dread lady are exceptions, but even they aren't that active.)

And the fact that the team is so small that the more active people seem to get sick of moderation and make bad judgements, and then lock threads by players claiming dodgy moderation.
If you're not going to listen to people saying what's wrong, how do you expect to improve?

I agree. I haven't run across Jen often. Nathi does an awesome job but she can't be everywhere at once.

It would be nice if they were broken down by forum. Some mods make excellent rulings in General but are lousy in P2TM or Diplomacy because they don't have the time or patience to sort things. That's just the feeling I get.

[Cerillium]

Do you have any examples of a mod warning someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin" or indeed someone reporting someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Dakini, respectfully, I believe you're missing my point. That's reflective of my inability to explain; I see where you're coming from, however. Offhand, I don't have links. I can recall one or two times where someone's reported a link (ergo I can't search the Mod thread by word to find the topic) and a Mod has looked and said "not a flame/troll/whatever".

[Dakini]

Do you have any examples of a mod warning someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin" or indeed someone reporting someone for saying "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Dakini, respectfully, I believe you're missing my point. That's reflective of my inability to explain; I see where you're coming from, however. Offhand, I don't have links. I can recall one or two times where someone's reported a link (ergo I can't search the Mod thread by word to find the topic) and a Mod has looked and said "not a flame/troll/whatever".

So you don't have any examples of someone reporting a person for flaming when they said "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Which means that I have no way of knowing that you're not making it up.

[Luveria]

Dakini, respectfully, I believe you're missing my point. That's reflective of my inability to explain; I see where you're coming from, however. Offhand, I don't have links. I can recall one or two times where someone's reported a link (ergo I can't search the Mod thread by word to find the topic) and a Mod has looked and said "not a flame/troll/whatever".

So you don't have any examples of someone reporting a person for flaming when they said "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Which means that I have no way of knowing that you're not making it up.

Here's a preconfigured search for anyone interested.

search.php?keywords=homosexuality&fid%5B0%5D=16

[Cerillium]

Dakini, respectfully, I believe you're missing my point. That's reflective of my inability to explain; I see where you're coming from, however. Offhand, I don't have links. I can recall one or two times where someone's reported a link (ergo I can't search the Mod thread by word to find the topic) and a Mod has looked and said "not a flame/troll/whatever".

So you don't have any examples of someone reporting a person for flaming when they said "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Which means that I have no way of knowing that you're not making it up.

The only one I could find in a search in Moderation was Tsmida Eri. The reported person wasn't anywhere near his level. There are so many reports without topic titles or that simply ask, "Is this actionable?" Perhaps one of the Mods would remember?

Edit: Thank you, Luveria. How on earth did you do that?

[Esternial]

Dakini, respectfully, I believe you're missing my point. That's reflective of my inability to explain; I see where you're coming from, however. Offhand, I don't have links. I can recall one or two times where someone's reported a link (ergo I can't search the Mod thread by word to find the topic) and a Mod has looked and said "not a flame/troll/whatever".

So you don't have any examples of someone reporting a person for flaming when they said "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Which means that I have no way of knowing that you're not making it up.

Let us not forget the big difference between "homo fags should burn in hell" and "I believe homosexuality is a sin, because X"

Most people who get reported and justly punished are of the first variety. People can share their opinion in a manner befitting of a normal human being or not share it at all. Take it or leave it. That's my take on it.

This also counts for every person* on this forum, which some don't seem to grasp.

(*even the almighty wise majority)

[Marcurix]

Understanding that moderators are volunteers, they do receive a lot of flak.

Rules, laws, all these things are open to interpretations and exceptions. Officially or otherwise, these things exist and can make their enforcement tricky.

Furthermore, things can be missed. This is especially true of longer threads, mistakes happen.

Has moderation ever publicly admitted fault for a decision or post made by a moderator?

Every time a review of a ruling reversed or changed a previous decision by a moderator would probably count.

As it stands, we have a moderation team that, by and large, has decided that they can unilaterally make up rules and break them,

Now I need proof of that.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

I too have experience with odd rulings.
I started a threads a while back, about interesting spots to see in Southern Europe, and others vacations there. We had a good conversation going about it, yet a certain mod deemed it too blog like, and locked it. They then ignored a telegram I sent them to explain the ruling.
Sometimes I feel like mods are a little unreasonable.

[Dakini]

So you don't have any examples of someone reporting a person for flaming when they said "my religion says homosexuality is a sin"?

Which means that I have no way of knowing that you're not making it up.

Let us not forget the big difference between "homo fags should burn in hell" and "I believe homosexuality is a sin, because X"

Most people who get reported and justly punished are of the first variety. People can share their opinion in a manner befitting of a normal human being or not share it at all. Take it or leave it. That's my take on it.

This also counts for every person* on this forum, which some don't seem to grasp.

(*even the almighty wise majority)

That's actually why I wanted a source. I find it hard to believe that someone would be reported for saying "in my religion, homosexuality is a sin" since this is something that can be simply a statement of fact.

[Cerillium]

Let us not forget the big difference between "homo fags should burn in hell" and "I believe homosexuality is a sin, because X"

Most people who get reported and justly punished are of the first variety. People can share their opinion in a manner befitting of a normal human being or not share it at all. Take it or leave it. That's my take on it.

This also counts for every person* on this forum, which some don't seem to grasp.

(*even the almighty wise majority)

I suppose that's really what it boils down to: wording and application no matter the topic. Mods face a tough task in determining intention? That grey line between "die homos!" and "my religion says it's a disorder/disease that can be cured" perhaps?

(My English vocabulary vanishes this late at night.)