Forum - View topicI Loathe Inconsistent Moderation
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Nagisa
Moderator
 Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||
Personally, what I've always done in cases like that, where the person quoting a troll went on to make a very valid point in the same post, was to simply edit out the quoted text and leave the rest of the post intact. We shouldn't punish or censor users if they have something relevant to say just because they quoted the wrong person. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||||
Tedious, isn't it? I can't imagine mods going around and editing comments for the sake of being nice. Having a post deleted for clean-up is something we users should accept as part of the moderation process and not make it an issue when they're deleted to maintain consistent moderation. Yes, it sucks when it happens, but it's not the end of the world. What's a little work to re-write it, especially if it's important? I can't imagine anyone's running around tallying their post count as a trophy. If so, they're definitely at the wrong forum. Users are more than capable of following the rules, but not when they seem to change by the hour and are enforceable only upon the whims of who's moderating during that hour. (Note: I'd cite examples, but don't want to make this a "personal" attack on any user or mod.) I can't say what goes on within the PM world regarding warnings, but post deletions state a clear message: Break the rule and all references are deleted (quotes should then clean up as well if users want to have their posts protected). What the mods do after that is up to them. Just my two yen. |
||||||
|
||||||
Tony K.
 SubscriberModerator  Posts: 11304 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
|||||
Ah, youth. If this were 4 years ago when I actually started being a mod, I'd definitely follow that path again. But PetrifiedJello is right, it's tedious to be nice. I'll try to be more discrete, though. |
||||||
|
||||||
Sentire
 Posts: 981 |
|
|||||
I doubt Littlegreenwolf cares about post count, like some others around here. Also, you and I don't know the time she spent on her reply to casually assume it will just take a little work to re-write it. She has a valid point that if she posted something of substance, why would it be removed? Tony K. already gave the reason why and said he was sorry. In this case, it was "linked to a post to a post to a post to a troll post." Hmmm.... maybe the problem is too many trolls roaming around? Something to think about... |
||||||
|
||||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||||
Agreed, and as one who has had some threads deleted (by my own account in some cases), this is where a little maturity comes in. Boils down to: is the thread going to entice the "trolls"? If so, how much is it worth it to post? Take a look at the story regarding the 14 year old girl. Yikes. Posting in there almost screams a possible deletion. If it happens, is it worth rewriting the post?
Agreed, but at the same time, think of the mod who has to deal with it. By the time they hit the page, there could be over 10 posts continuing the offensive remark (and everyone adding their two cents). NO WAY would I expect a mod to clean this up for the 1 or 2 good posts. Nice, yes. But not expected. Users should maintain some responsibility to clean up a quote before posting if they're that concerned. No offense to littlegreenwolf's opinion by any means, but I don't see a "cake and eat it too" solution for the mods who need to clean the mess quickly, rather than nicely.
Are these the users who are accused of not reading, then spewing their own opinion, despite it being misinterpreted or accusatory in nature? Uh oh. Feed me. 
I don't, for the record, consider myself such. It's just my... personality isn't understood. Sadly, I'm like this in real life too. Que sera sera, right? 
|
||||||
|
||||||
littlegreenwolf
 Posts: 4796 Location: Seattle, WA |
|
|||||
|
Pfft, I don't give a damn about post count. I just don't like the feeling I'm being censored for no good reason. I understand now why it was deleted, and I'm ok with it. I don't recall the post I was replying to being much of a troll, or me actually quoting it, but whatever.
PetrifiedJello, don't go around accusing me of immaturity now because I wanted to know why a post of mine was deleted. And also quit trying to set yourself up as a victim when past issues you may have had with me have nothing at all to do with the topic. This is a prime example as to why some people could mistake you for a troll. |
||||||
|
||||||
Keonyn
Subscriber Posts: 5567 Location: Coon Rapids, MN |
|
|||||
Well, we don't want people to refuse to post simply because a thread might attract some trolls. Generally we try to avoid deleting legitimate posts because of a troll. Often times if I find a post responding to a troll that still has some other valid material, I'll simply clear that part of the post (particularly if the troll post is quoted), and leave the rest.
I'll try to clean threads as best I can without damaging the legitimate discussion. As you said though, sometimes things have gone way out of hand by the time we get there and a more surgical approach to cleaning the thread is just completely impractical. Of course, usually if things get that bad I'll simply clean up the worst offenders and then post a warning that the thread will be locked if it keeps up. A few pages is not too hard to sort through, but if it does get to something like 10 pages before a mod finds it, unfortunately that could take hours to sort through just to do the nice option. That's just not realistic, but luckily one of us usually shows up before it gets that bad. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||
Um, no? It's like one extra click and an extra tap of the delete key; it's another fifteen seconds at most and it doesn't disrupt an otherwise intelligent discussion.
I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't want to continue posting on a forum where entire parts of the conversation are likely to be obliterated because of something someone else did that I played no real part in. After a while, that sort of spontaneous censorship against innocent parties could get to be very frustrating. Why post at all when there's a pretty good chance it'll just be deleted?
This isn't about post count at all. It's about having a valid point silenced just for making the horrible mistake of quoting someone. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||||
|
[Enough. Sarcastically mocking littlegreenwolf before proceeding to rebut her is extremely uncalled for and I will not allow it.
Keep a civil virtual tongue or I'll cut it off. --Nags] |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16939 |
|
|||||
I have to agree with Nagisa. Funny since he was the first mod I disagreed with when I joined years ago. Ironic. But I digress. Why post if a post of your can be deleted for "clean-up" when the post does not violate the rules? Why be punished for quoting someone that is a on a black list basically without even knowing they are? The post could have taken minutes or maybe an hour+ to make. Then it's gone simply because the poster quoted someone and not because there was anything wrong with their actual post. Why is the world should we accept that? That is hardly "clean up" right there in my opinion. I understand why Tony did it but I hope it does not remain a continuous practice from any mod. If nothing else it's hardly fair to the poster who made a perfectly legitimate post.
Oh I can think of 2 people here that fit that bill......though I do agree with the latter sentiment. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||||
Okay, I see the breakdown in communication of my reply, so I'll clarify. First, maturity was the wrong word. Brain fart. Instead, how about "understanding the way forums work"? From my personal experience, and not to call anyone out, I often see people reply using quoted posts. This means all threads tied to that quote are now "bound", unlike the option of adding a new reply. Thus, to a mod, it can be (note: not "is" with every situation) tedious to clean up offending threads to protect a few that are decent, non-rule breaking when the scope gets too large to deal with because of the quotes. We can't delete our posts once a reply is attached to them because of this binding rule. It's just the way the forum is built. So, with that, my intent of the reply for posters is to read the thread (which is a rule), scan the quotes, and take a little time to determine how to post rather than jump on the "Quote" option. This "clears" one's thread out of the line of fire and it helps out the mods. My apologies for this confusion.
Another one of my comments misinterpreted, because I often see what appears people replying for the sole purpose of garnering a new increase in this number while producing nothing relevant to the thread discussion. Abunai has stated many times "one liners" aren't discussion and that's the target of the post count remark. You only see two? I see quite a bit more than that, and what's worse, is these "+1" lines are often the ones that spark conversation, leading to disputes, and thus... getting deleted or edited by the mods. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||
I still don't see this side of the argument, and I'll tell you why. Back when I first started out on ANN's forums, and was first made a moderator, I was the only moderator. I was the only actual dedicated moderator the forums had (as in, the only person with those sort of powers that wasn't also performing another vital function for the website elsewhere), and this was back in a time when nobody followed the rules and the regular site staff simply didn't have the time to really police the forums and maintain the high standard of quality that ANN as a site carries. So I was the only one around to really enforce the rules, lock threads, bring problem members to the staff's attention, delete problem posts, all that jazz. And it was a lot of work. However, I still made it a point to not disrupt the flow of discussion and infringe on the right of innocent members to freely hold conversations. Fast-forward to now. Now we have what, five, six dedicated forum moderators? Give or take? All collectively doing what was once a one-person job? On a much more well-behaved forum? If removing problem posts from an otherwise proper thread was ever tedious, it was back when there was only one of us managing the whole mess. Now that there are several of us with the workload spread out evenly between us, there really shouldn't be an excuse to censor members who aren't doing anything wrong, because handling that sort of thing when it comes up shouldn't nearly be as much of a hassle. So no, I still don't see the justification for punishing the innocent for the transgressions of the guilty. |
||||||
|
||||||
Blood-
 Bargain Hunter Posts: 23818 |
|
|||||
|
Holy crud. I'm trying to imagine there only being one moderator for all of ANN. Presumably, there were far fewer posters then compared to now.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar Posts: 16939 |
|
|||||
Oh I see more then 2 don't get me wrong. There are just 2 very....prolific ones that come to mind. Hell they even basically openly posted they were trying to beat the other out for most amount of posts. I never understood the logic behind needing to have more posts then someone else. What do you win? Even in terms of pointless internet bragging having the highest post count to me is even low on that list. I mean being the first poster in a thread....now that's something different lol.
Well obviously there were fewer as the number of members has risen since. I know what you mean though, and from my time here....it really varies. The site does has rises and falls in terms of active members posting. Ignore the actual amount of registered members cause that means nothing. I do think ANN has grown in terms of constant regular activity since the days Nagisa was talking about but it was still busy. Granted I've only been here since 06 and that is after the much fabled "forum crash" back in 04 (right year?). Imagine though even just half of the active day to day posts that we have now being handled by one moderator. Imagine the Talkback section handled by just one moderator. I can only imagine the amount of "I love You's" and "Thank the Lord's" Nagisa gave Tempest when he added Tony as a mod too. Now I do remember those days when those 2 were the only real active moderators. It's funny though because even then I remember people bitching about how Tony and Nagisa moderated differently.
|
||||||
|
||||||
Richard J.
 Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||||
|
Personally, although I sometimes think that there are one or two forumites who seem able to somehow remain around when the vast majority of their posts are just. . . well, the kind that get Mods involved in the first place, I'm grateful for the work the best Mods do around here. abunai and Nagisa especially since they usually manage to make their Mod posts into something extra special. Most of the time, everyone is very professional too.
Just wonder why certain posters are still allowed to post when they troll so much. I'd name who I think the worst offenders are but honestly, I'm sure my accusations would be unnecessary as their actions are generally self-evident and likely highly reported already. I'm just glad I don't screw up much and get Mod posted. Though on occasion I get stupid and post something I really shouldn't have. I kind of wish the troll posts weren't deleted though. It might sound strange but I actually enjoy reading them for lulz. (Ooh, net speak.) On rare occasion, a completely moronic troll post will actually be unintentionally hilarious for the sheer stupidity and/or wanton abuse of the English language. Though sometimes the sheer guts required to so blatantly ignore teh rules is just awesome, in a contemptible way. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group