Advertisement
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:53 pm
by Bluth Corporation » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:54 pm
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:54 pm
by Katganistan » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:02 pm
Bluth Corporation wrote:Katganistan wrote:The judges in this case are not inviting only one party. A group of moderators, that is, the legal experts, who were not involved in the dispute are invited to the conference. They look at the evidence, they discuss it, they come up with an answer. The original moderator is barred from a vote in the discussion and answers questions if asked.
Rather like a defendant, I'd say.
Are you serious? You're comparing the moderator who made the original ruling to the defendant? Seriously?
That's absolutely ludicrous!
The original moderator doesn't stand to be sanctioned in any way if his or her original ruling is overturned, assuming it was the result of an honest error of fact or logic rather than any sort of malice or dishonest intent. He or she isn't the one with anything to lose or gain by it.
The person being ruled against is the one most easily comparable to the "defendant," for the obvious reason that he's the one who stands to lose from the proceedings if a ruling is made that is not in his favor. He's not the one who has "made his ruling and now must stand by it"--he's the one challenging the ruling, so if anyone needs to be present to make a case it's him.And again, are cameras allowed in the jury room? Is anyone allowed to hear their discussion before the decision? Because honestly, if this is the argument that people are making, that it should be more like a legal proceeding, and that there should be unlimited transparency, if we're going to be honest, that's not what happens in a courtroom.
Again, an absolutely awful analogy, so much so that I have trouble believing that someone with your education and background could honestly think it was legit. The jury room is where decisions are made, sure, but it's not where arguments are presented. All that is being asked is that the arguments being presented, which will later be deliberated upon, are made in public with the individual bringing the appeal having the full opportunity to make his case in public. No one's expecting deliberations to be made in public--but we should certainly be able to make our case in public.
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:05 pm
Katganistan wrote:
This is a fairly simple concept, and making ad hominem attacks about my "education and background" simply because you may disagree with a question I asked and an analogy I made is singularly unnecessary. I asked a civil question, and made an analogy. The responses have been less than civil. Why?
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:06 pm
Czardas wrote:Neo Art wrote:
Thanks for proving my point.
Okay, what do you view as the primary difference between you contacting the mods privately to explain why you are appealing a decision, and me contacting the mods privately to explain why I made a decision?
Apart from the fact that I'm a moderator and you're not, that is, since when one of my decisions is under question I cannot rule on it -- rendering the issue of authority moot in this case.
Telegramming a moderator is not advised. You are encouraged to use the three official channels that we have, the Getting Help page, the Moderation forum and the IRC channel (#themodcave). If you telegram a mod, chances are your request will not get a respond and likely be ignored. You may also be referred to either the forums or Getting Help because typically moderators will not field complaints or queries from telegrams. The latter varies from moderator to moderator. It is always a prudent idea to use the official channels.
by Geniasis » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:07 pm
Czardas wrote:Frequently the reason a decision is appealed is because not enough information is supplied by the mod making the decision. Note the average length of a mod ruling (one line or so: "That's not acceptable. You are warned for flaming. Consult the OSRS to avoid a longer forumban in future.") as compared to court proceedings, where evidence is exhaustingly presented, intent must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, judges write multi-page decisions full of references to legal precedent etc etc. Thus, particularly when the mods disagree with the original ruling, they'll ask the original mod what the hell he was thinking to get a sense of why the decision was made in the first place.
Rulings are not expected to be justified when they are made because, well, there's rarely much to justify. "He called some guy a douchebag, so I warned him for flaming." Rarely is an appealed ruling so straightforward, but if the mod making the ruling thinks it's straightforward, that's about all that will be said until it's called into question.
Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.
Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou
by Bluth Corporation » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:10 pm
Katganistan wrote:Bluth Corporation wrote:Are you serious? You're comparing the moderator who made the original ruling to the defendant? Seriously?
That's absolutely ludicrous!
The original moderator doesn't stand to be sanctioned in any way if his or her original ruling is overturned, assuming it was the result of an honest error of fact or logic rather than any sort of malice or dishonest intent. He or she isn't the one with anything to lose or gain by it.
The person being ruled against is the one most easily comparable to the "defendant," for the obvious reason that he's the one who stands to lose from the proceedings if a ruling is made that is not in his favor. He's not the one who has "made his ruling and now must stand by it"--he's the one challenging the ruling, so if anyone needs to be present to make a case it's him.
Again, an absolutely awful analogy, so much so that I have trouble believing that someone with your education and background could honestly think it was legit. The jury room is where decisions are made, sure, but it's not where arguments are presented. All that is being asked is that the arguments being presented, which will later be deliberated upon, are made in public with the individual bringing the appeal having the full opportunity to make his case in public. No one's expecting deliberations to be made in public--but we should certainly be able to make our case in public.
Again: the appeal is made publicly. That is part of the function of the moderation forum: for people who believe they were unfairly treated to say so. Yes?
To question policies publicly, as has been done in this thread and in the one on loosening moderation policy in the General forum. The cases are made publicly.
Clearly the thrust of the thread about loosening moderation policy was quite public, the cases were made, and then policies were loosened after private discussion that took into account everyone's side. Yes?
This is a fairly simple concept, and making ad hominem attacks about my "education and background" simply because you may disagree with a question I asked and an analogy I made is singularly unnecessary. I asked a civil question, and made an analogy. The responses have been less than civil. Why?
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:15 pm
Czardas wrote:Neo Art wrote:Why should you have an opportunity to justify your position twice, When I can only argue against it once?
Your decision stands or falls on the record you leave when you made it. If you failed to do that then you failed to do your job.
Let me ask you. Why should you be afforded the opportunity to explain your ruling a second time. In private?
Frequently the reason a decision is appealed is because not enough information is supplied by the mod making the decision. Note the average length of a mod ruling (one line or so: "That's not acceptable. You are warned for flaming. Consult the OSRS to avoid a longer forumban in future.") as compared to court proceedings, where evidence is exhaustingly presented, intent must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, judges write multi-page decisions full of references to legal precedent etc etc. Thus, particularly when the mods disagree with the original ruling, they'll ask the original mod what the hell he was thinking to get a sense of why the decision was made in the first place.
Rulings are not expected to be justified when they are made because, well, there's rarely much to justify. "He called some guy a douchebag, so I warned him for flaming." Rarely is an appealed ruling so straightforward, but if the mod making the ruling thinks it's straightforward, that's about all that will be said until it's called into question.
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:16 pm
Czardas wrote:*snip*
See, what confuses me slightly is that the four of you have continued to argue against something that doesn't happen. The idea that mods can make decisions on appeals of their own rulings seems to be something of a misinterpretation of what we're saying: while the view of the mod who made the original ruling is considered, just as that of the player appealing it is, neither one has any direct control over the outcome. "Private access" doesn't give the mod an advantage over the player since mods don't have a vote on their own appeals; nor does having the private phone number of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court give you any greater weight in the next case at vote.
*snip*
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:16 pm
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:18 pm
The Cat-Tribe wrote:
2. I will take you at your word that the Mod whose decision is being appealed does vote on the appeal, but they are directly involved in the discussion of the appeal. That is a bit more access than merely having Chief Justice Roberts telephone number.
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:21 pm
by Katganistan » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:22 pm
The Cat-Tribe wrote:Katganistan wrote:The judges in this case are not inviting only one party. A group of moderators, that is, the legal experts, who were not involved in the dispute are invited to the conference. They look at the evidence, they discuss it, they come up with an answer. The original moderator is barred from a vote in the discussion and answers questions if asked.
Rather like a defendant, I'd say.
And again, are cameras allowed in the jury room? Is anyone allowed to hear their discussion before the decision? Because honestly, if this is the argument that people are making, that it should be more like a legal proceeding, and that there should be unlimited transparency, if we're going to be honest, that's not what happens in a courtroom.
With all due respect Kat, you are being disingenuous in several ways.
If you want to make a legal analogy, you utterly fail.
1. The Moderator is not the defendant. He/She is the judge below. As such he/she would never be allowed to participate in the appeal in any facet whatsoever.
2. An appeal is not a trial. It is an appeal. You are mixing and matching legal terms and concepts haphazardly. (For example, there is no jury on appeal.)
3. The "defendant" (actually the "appellant") would be the party who filed the appeal. They would be allowed to present their case and answer questions from the appeals judges.
4. No one has, to my knowledge, called for "unlimited transparency" - so that is a cute strawman.
I thought we were having a productive conversation, that got slightly derailed by Melkor's perception that an appeal is an attempt to "punish" the Mod making the original ruling. I note in all your clever sophistry about flaws in our suggestions (which don't really address our actual suggestions -- with which at least some Melkor agreed), you don't defend that position.
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:25 pm
Neo Art wrote:Czardas wrote:Frequently the reason a decision is appealed is because not enough information is supplied by the mod making the decision.Note the average length of a mod ruling (one line or so: "That's not acceptable. You are warned for flaming. Consult the OSRS to avoid a longer forumban in future.") as compared to court proceedings, where evidence is exhaustingly presented, intent must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, judges write multi-page decisions full of references to legal precedent etc etc. Thus, particularly when the mods disagree with the original ruling, they'll ask the original mod what the hell he was thinking to get a sense of why the decision was made in the first place.
Rulings are not expected to be justified when they are made because, well, there's rarely much to justify. "He called some guy a douchebag, so I warned him for flaming." Rarely is an appealed ruling so straightforward, but if the mod making the ruling thinks it's straightforward, that's about all that will be said until it's called into question.
The bolded is exactly the point. Either:
1) the issue is simple, and thus the ruling is simple, and as such, the rationale for that ruling should be obvious on its face, and no further conversation with that mod should be necessary, or;
2) the issue is complex, and the moderator took sufficient time to explain his rationale in such a way that the record leaves no doubt as to his reasoning, and no further conversation with that mod should be necessary, or;
3) the issue is complex, but the moderator failed to leave a sufficient record to explain the rationale of his decision.
In the first two examples, the moderator did their job sufficiently well so no contact is needed. In the third example, this is the moderator failing to do his job right. If the appellate moderators can't get a sense of why the moderator made his decision the way he did from the explanation the moderator left, then that moderator failed. Plain and simple.
Why in the world should a moderator be afforded the opportunity a second bite at the apple, and be allowed to further justify himself when he didn't do so in the first place? Your entire reasoning is "we have to let the mod explain his decision because he might not have done a good enough job in the first place".
That's not a good answer. Sorry, it's not. Especially as I, the player, often am not even afforded the opportunity to explain myself ONCE. If I HAPPEN to see a report in moderation, and HAPPEN to respond to it before the mod weighs in, then maybe I get a chance. Provided a report is made in the first place and the mod happens to see allegedly violating conduct and make a decision then and there. Your entire justification for the system as is basically boils down to "well, we can't trust the moderators to explain their decision well, or give proper consideration the first time".
I'm sorry, but if you can't trust the moderator to do his/her job right the first time, that person shouldn't be a moderator. Perpetuating a system that rewards bad moderation isn't a good one.
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:31 pm
Katganistan wrote:I don't think I am being disingenuous at all. The moderator is accused of wrongdoing, as a defendant is -- in that they are having their judgment called into question.
It seems as if the feeling here is that the person whose judgment is being called into question should never get a change to explain oneself.
I am curious to see how this will be justified. Because honestly, I'm not feeling like we're having a problem listening to players.
Given the age and education range here, the one thing I can say without reservation is that our forum-goers are pretty darned smart.
by Geniasis » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:34 pm
Katganistan wrote:I don't think I am being disingenuous at all. The moderator is accused of wrongdoing, as a defendant is -- in that they are having their judgment called into question.
Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.
Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:42 pm
by Katganistan » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:44 pm
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:46 pm
Katganistan wrote:No, honestly, what is eloquent about this is that oftentimes, the accusation of mod bias is made first and foremost when a ruling is disagreed with, and that we take everything personally, and that it is a vendetta.
by Muravyets » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:48 pm
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:50 pm
Katganistan wrote:The Cat-Tribe wrote:
With all due respect Kat, you are being disingenuous in several ways.
If you want to make a legal analogy, you utterly fail.
1. The Moderator is not the defendant. He/She is the judge below. As such he/she would never be allowed to participate in the appeal in any facet whatsoever.
2. An appeal is not a trial. It is an appeal. You are mixing and matching legal terms and concepts haphazardly. (For example, there is no jury on appeal.)
3. The "defendant" (actually the "appellant") would be the party who filed the appeal. They would be allowed to present their case and answer questions from the appeals judges.
4. No one has, to my knowledge, called for "unlimited transparency" - so that is a cute strawman.
I thought we were having a productive conversation, that got slightly derailed by Melkor's perception that an appeal is an attempt to "punish" the Mod making the original ruling. I note in all your clever sophistry about flaws in our suggestions (which don't really address our actual suggestions -- with which at least some Melkor agreed), you don't defend that position.
I don't think I am being disingenuous at all. The moderator is accused of wrongdoing, as a defendant is -- in that they are having their judgment called into question. The person who brought the charges -- that is, the player who is pointing out what may or may not be wrongdoing, gets to do it publicly. The group of uninvolved moderators need to gather information about what happened, then deliberate on whether wrongdoing happened or not. If it did, and a ruling was unfair, it is rescinded, usually by the moderator who gave it. If there was no wrongdoing, and the ruling was fair, it is upheld.
It seems as if the feeling here is that the person whose judgment is being called into question should never get a change to explain oneself.
And again, why is it that a few questions and an analogy are dismissed as "ingenuous" and "sophistry" when I ask for clarification -- why is it that there is open hostility to my attempting to discuss this and get more understanding? Why the insults about my intelligence and the unfair characterization of me and the rest of the mods not listening?
I am curious to see how this will be justified. Because honestly, I'm not feeling like we're having a problem listening to players. I feel like we're having a problem with a few players even entertaining the notion that we might have something to contribute to the process. And I would say that the fact that for every one post I've made, there are four or five picking at them and not even allowing any kind of coherent answer... well, that's pretty much a very public record from which other posters can draw their own conclusions.
Given the age and education range here, the one thing I can say without reservation is that our forum-goers are pretty darned smart.
by Bluth Corporation » Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:58 pm
Me, earlier in this thread wrote:The original moderator doesn't stand to be sanctioned in any way if his or her original ruling is overturned, assuming it was the result of an honest error of fact or logic rather than any sort of malice or dishonest intent.
by The Cat-Tribe » Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:01 pm
Katganistan wrote:No, honestly, what is eloquent about this is that oftentimes, the accusation of mod bias is made first and foremost when a ruling is disagreed with, and that we take everything personally, and that it is a vendetta. Those perceptions and accusations have been a great deal of the content of this thread. And yet, I have not been disrespectful to anyone here, but have been very eloquently and eruditely been accused of bias, of being uncaring and unhearing, of equivocating, and have been treated with hostility. I've also had the enduring pleasure of having no fewer than four people employed in this sport at the same time, rendering it impossible to answer any one person. And still, I am having difficulty in understanding why, if the purpose of the thread is to reform moderation, that some appear to feel that the moderation team should not express themselves or have any input into the process.
I say again: our forum-goers are quite intelligent, and I agree: they CAN read between the lines.
by Neo Art » Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:06 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ioudaia
Advertisement