In Response to Recent Concerns

That’s what this thread is for: for you to voice your concerns. If there is a specific concern you would like to address publicly you are more than welcome to voice it. Our intention for this post was to open the floor to concerns about how we are running our community, so as much as we can address these specific concerns publicly and respectfully we want to.

That is why his post was hidden and why we have not linked to his Tumblr. The post itself was the author inserting himself into questions of moderation, which is against forum rules.

However, when he approached Jason privately and iterated his four core grievances—which were systemic in nature—a productive and fruitful conversation was held. We decided to use those four grievances and the salient points from his post as the starting point for this discussion. Again, this conversation helped to focus the overall concern users have been bringing up and felt like a good way to directly address the community’s concerns.

The system for accountability is for users to appeal to Choice of Games staff.

As for directions on how to handle common situations, we are guided by norms and customs, not by a legal code. And, of course, if you have specific questions, you’re welcome to ask. However, I would suggest you use hypotheticals or discuss moderation actions involving you, because again, we don’t discuss moderation decisions with third parties.

Apologies to whom? As we said previously, we are not going to make a blanket overturning of suspensions or blanket undeletion of posts, because out of the instances that we have reviewed, we agree with the disciplinary actions that were taken. We’re also not going to issue a milquetoast and unspecific apology, as that would be disingenuous.

As of today, very few people have ever appealed a moderation decision to Choice of Games. As we stated above, if someone would like to appeal a decision, we invite them to do so. If someone feels as though their comment or post was overzealously deleted, again, we invite them to appeal to Choice of Games. As we also said above, very few people have ever appealed an under-moderation—where a user was allowed to say bigoted things and went unpunished.

If someone appeals to Choice of Games and we agree that a moderation decision was made in error, we will apologize to that user for that action. If an under-moderation needs to be redressed, we will take swift action.

8 Likes

This is a bit funny. I can’t speak on behalf of the community as a whole but I believe that suspensions are fine as long as they are valid and with good intentions. It seems as though suspensions are handed out for lesser “crimes” whilst users who say and act in ways that the community as a whole does not stand for are allowed to stay is the problem. I believe this was referenced in Mogolas’s post

There were many voices in the previous threads that were reasonable and voiced valid complaints. Is the difference between whether a concern is taken seriously dependent on if it is privately messaged to a moderator or not? Users should be able to voice concerns on a public platform and be heard.

This is fantastic, but doesn’t always happen. A user who deleted their post in the No Shaming thread had it quoted and used as an example of unacceptable behaviour. A moderator who believes in private punishing would have spoken to that user in private. Or, better yet since they deleted the post, said nothing at all.

Also, since I have just read the comment above, I’d like to clarify something. Are quotes like these:

worth a suspension or a post deletion? This is clearly a joke. Would a moderator who saw this post immediately delete it because they simply don’t it, or would they talk to the user and clarify their intentions? Intent comes across differently in public forums, so I would hope going forward that everyone is given consideration when we see posts like this that come off in a jokey manner. This is why users have been saying that the FAQ is vague: what one moderator constitutes as rude, a user may not. Who makes that choice? How is a user to know that something they’re posting can be considered rude when to them they’re making jokes, or saything something that sounds rude but is actually in good faith?

I’m simply trying to clarify how things are going forward. I really do appreciate this thread but clearly from the amount of replies we’re seeing in this thread and the previous ones on similar topics, many users are confused. Things like “questioning moderator decisions will result in a ban” are vague and may put users off speaking up against moderating decisions. Again, this thread is a step in the right direction and I appreciate the time you’re putting into this.

38 Likes

I think the tempers in the thread have risen a tad more than they should, and it has led to some snipping and turns of phrases that can definitely be perceived as insulting towards other users. As I understand it, this thread was created for the purpose of informing and discussing some of the new reforms that CoG wants to introduce into its moderation and handling of the forums. I am aware, of course, that we all care very much about this community, and most disagreements are borne out of the passion that we hold for it, or because of our wish for it to be improved upon.

For me, personally, I agree with the idea of expanding the mod team (and congrats to the trio, I know they’ll do a kick ass job), but I, too, would like a bit more of an explanation on what could be done to ensure that Mods/Staff will treat everyone equally. For myself, I’m friends with some mods, and would say that my interactions with all of them have been civil, even pleasant, but I understand that is not the case with everyone (regardless of who is to blame in the respective scenario, I understand there are some… less than civil disagreements sometimes), and an idea of how the users could be assured (or at least, start to be assured, gaining trust is a long process), that the treatment will be equal for everyone. I don’t mean an audit log, or just an open and public process (On the places I do moderate, I tend to go for PMs/DMs when a warning or heads-up is needed), but just a general explanation/list of ideas that has been worked on by Mods and Staff on how they could ensure equal treatment for everyone.

As I understand, this thread was created in order for normal users to also discuss and participate in these new changes that have been brought up, so I think this would be a perfect chance (as long as it remains civil, obviously) for those willing to chip in and offer some suggestions/opinions on the ideas for ‘equalization of moderation’.

27 Likes

Whoa baby i am coming here after reading 90+ replies few questions few suggestions and few of opinions

Concerns :

Moderators - few people want justice,few people want reform and most people want both in this field

Scepticism / lack of trust in moderation

I would like to say if people doesnt trust a specific moderator due to their past actions or are afraid of talking to them then i would say please try atleast once to converse and making your case by citing evidence in a rational manner and if it doesnt satisfy you then you can ask for a different moderator i would request people to consider each case differently independent of past actions and dont be hesitant in aprroaching relax moderator wont ban you for approaching them but if you will disrespect them and wont make a rational case then moderator do have to take actions appropriately i think there should be an option that if a person take cognisance of their mistake or their actions and appologize and promise to be more responsible in the future then their the warning or restrictions should be relaxed or retracted unless breach of guidelines is too grave - eg death threats, abusive language etc

And if user is not satisfied then the person can approach the email given and also banning/suspension of 1 year or 1000 i agree that there should be something in the guidelines that these things will result in suspension like a statement that activities including this but not restricted to these like this a, b, c will result suspension, however suspension wont be restricted to these if a user tries circumvent the wordings mentioned etc from here comes questions i say this so people get general idea that if they tread waters in these areas a suspension might be coming but question comes how much to tolerate before suspension i think there should x number of warnings if matter (unofficial if person is new or has done it without an intention to disrupt the proceedings in the forum), official if they do it repeatedly after the unofficial warning is given and if the users arent satisfied with unofficial/official warning given to them then and sees it as an personal attack by moderators (which is grave issue as moderators are expected to be unbiased) or an attempt to restrict their freedom of expression there should be an option to appeal for reinstatement of their post if found clean and an action against moderator who misused his/her powers i understand moderator take down many posts which doesn’t allign with guidelines but atleast the minmum forum could do is provide an option for direct appeal for those who have higher ranks in the forum cause they have put their time and energy by being part of this forum keeping it alive atleast for regular this should be a thing cause i have seen a post where a person is saying a regular member was wiped out clean and all his work was deleted and response to that post was lets not derail from the topic and dont take out incidents that are from pasts or years ago (i was like really :confused:) it felt that if i became a regular, or started a thread there was some disagreement between me and moderators and after that my whole work was wiped clean i am having a feeling that even regulars arent safe and moderators are all powerful

Transparency - @KaiDeleon said moderation is an art and not something like following strict code/laws or something i agree but (cause even artist train and follow some basic methods that are essense of the art) i would like to see more info on how moderators are trained or are they even trained or just they are expected to read the guidelines and learn from experience (that is risky)

A lot this issue revolves around discretion

I want to know on what topics moderators have discretion and to what extent moderators can use their discretion and how much value does their discretion holds explicitly

Next subject is idealism and absolute inforcer

People expect moderators to be epitome of unbiasedness and they forget moderators also get angered even if they dont accept this and also have feelings which may or may not reflect in their actions against you depending on your behavior however it is expected and and often seen our moderators are rational in their decisions and do stand up to the task pretty well which i do appreciate considering these guys arent getting paid and they are doing this due to their commitment and love for cog community but if instances of biasness occur from moderator side and if someone has enough evidence to prove it then their should be a platform given to users that it cause it hurts user sentiments too

I also think standardization in moderation is need of the time tbh eg if one moderator leave a person with warning and other outrightly suspend the user for the same actions it does feel a little unfair don’t you think cause that high discretion in moderation draws a line between moderators with high tolerance / those who give people second chance vs those moderators who are no nonsense and wont tolerate anything from a minor breach to a larger breach in guidelines which i call them absolute inforcer this type of thing creates a divide by different moderator treating same situation differently and makes user feel confused and discriminated

Above conclusion are drawn from multiple opinon people raised at the forum however i didn’t have any issue with the moderators they seemed rather cooperating and helping if you follow proper guidelines with a sense of responsibility

1 Like

As someone who has been visibly and vocally been critical of the way moderation has been handled in the past, I’m here to voice my support for the changes and my sentiment that this is in fact a good direction that is being taken. It’s too early to tell where things will end up, but none of the changes discussed are objectionable to me, and I feel as if concerns are being addressed, and I’m grateful for that.

26 Likes

It is getting to the end of the workday for Choice of Games so our team is turning in for the evening. I will continue to read your comments as I am able, but will hold our replies until tomorrow. I also would like to ask for some patience with me as we are releasing a title (woohoo!) so replies may not kick in until tomorrow afternoon CST.

Edit: I said “tomorrow” one too many times lol

11 Likes

Can we at least agree on the fact that users banned in error are likely to be apprehensive about wanting to come back, especially if the onus of their return is placed on them? I understand that it’s not feasible to review all the bans and the decisions that led to them, and all I’m asking for is acknowledgment that it’s a lot to ask of from banned users.

I didn’t disagree with the existence of permanent bans and definitely do agree that in some instances they are required for the continued wellbeing of the community. I’m just concerned at their frequent application and the apparent lack of intermediate durations between “one month” and “the rest of your life”. I’ve seldom seen bans last for a moderate amount of time, and I definitely disagree with permanent bans being handed for reasons that can be summed up with “a moderator disliked the tone you were making your point with”.

With all due respect (and I do mean that), I have neither the time or emotional bandwidth to go back into threads I frequented days or weeks ago to point out comments that were either already flagged by the community or that I flagged myself and where no (visible) action was taken. When I am privately chastised by a mod for ending an educational reply about transphobia with a request for self-reflection, but the person who called being trans a “kink” (which is actively harmful and dangerous rhetoric) is left to continue posting, it reduces my faith that issues will be properly dealt with. I understand that we’re all members of the community and therefore all have some involvement and interest in ensuring the good functioning of the forums, but

I don’t think this is a one-and-done type of solution, rather that there needs to be a culture shift on the part of consumers. There is a difference between “I would’ve liked to be able to make X choice in Y scene because of these reasons” and “I thought the pace of scene X was a bit too quick” vs “Your writing style is amateurish and I don’t like it”, “You don’t have enough female love interests” and “The lesbian in your story should actually be attracted to men”. This isn’t a request for an increased amount of bans or even a comment on moderators themselves, I just think there needs to be a discussion within the community at large of what is acceptable communication with people who, at the end of the day, are providing folk with free entertainment out of their own passion.
I think maybe having clearer examples of how to structure a comment, and perhaps some examples of good comments to leave would be useful to have. Right now I find the We Respect Each Other’s Stories section to be a bit bare. I definitely do agree with all the points that are there, and think they’re useful points, so it’s a great start! But a lot can be said and then passed off as “If you don’t like a game, don’t just say you don’t enjoy it. Offer constructive ways to improve the game”, and not all of it is necessarily appropriate or welcome.
I am definitely not asking for an increased amount of bans, and I apologize if my post could be misconstrued as that. The only thing I am asking is for consistency in how the bans are applied.

54 Likes

But if it’s continuing to come up over and over again, because the community at large has lost trust, is it not easier to just have the conversation publicly? Why open the discussion up for public discourse, if the answer is always just going to be “you can DM us or email us for answers”.

Private conversations are incredibly intimidating for a lot of people, and some people like to have the accountability of a public discussion, particularly with the addition to the FAQ that screenshots can be a bannable offense.

Is the best way to regain trust not to be transparent? I don’t think anyone is asking for specific moderation and disciplinary actions to be opened up for community input, but rather an acknowledgement that some bad stuff has happened, and that it continues to happen.

There is one moderator, in particular, that I feel breaks the rules (including ones mentioned in the FAQ, such as not tagging/quoting someone who has requested to no longer take part in the conversation). If you want specifics, I would be happy to provide them, but I, personally, fear repercussions, as this moderator seems to be very emotionally charged and potentially even passive aggressive.

Correct, but is there any form of standardization for moderators? Any scripts they’re supposed to use for warnings? Any training that takes place? It would be nice to know that moderators are expected to treat all instances, with all users, equally, and that if an erroneous action is found to have taken place, through appeals or otherwise, that the moderator is reprimanded in some way.

This is what I keep trying to get at, exactly.

45 Likes

This is all I could think of while I was reading this thread. Even if it’s not the intent, prohibiting “questioning moderation in public” tends to comes across (and, as a matter of fact, has come across in numerous occasions) as silencing opposing thoughts and censorship. Why shouldn’t Mogalas’ Tumblr post be linked here? It ends up sounding like you’re afraid of more people finding out what was the reason for so many complaints, particularly since you still refuse to give an actual apology.

Something else that has been bugging me - I remember an user getting a warning by one of the mods for criticizing the forum publicly in a space that wasn’t the forum. Apparently, it’s against the forum’s policies to do such a thing (since it falls under questioning moderation), which sounds ludicrous to me. Once again, even if that’s not the intent, it comes across like you’re trying to police what people say about COG even when it’s not in a space you can control.

This quote is one of the reasons why I’m finding it hard to believe things will change around here. You agree with the disciplinary actions? I know people who were banned for a thousand years (yes, it’s the system, I get it) for criticizing the forum publicly in a very matter of fact, polite way that was not trying to spread hate or shamepost or whatever term you’d like to use. And I know you’ll probably say…

I’m willing to guess a lot of people don’t appeal because they get scared. They get silenced and mistreated by the very same people who are supposed to protect them in a place that’s supposed to be safe. Why would they want to come back? Or, in some cases, why would they feel secure enough to contact someone else from this place after their previous bad experience?

64 Likes

I can’t speak of how we deal with problems individually. I personally follow Gower’s norm-list when trying to break up a situation.

And, based on my experience, cases are handled first come first served. We don’t often do a recheck if a Leader handled a situation with the exception it requires official yellow-msg warning or, when it the situation calls for it, a ban. We’re volunteer, after all; if I deem a situation is already handled by a mod, I have no need to jump in (I have group projects to do, after all. And also gaming time). We’re not “trained” and also not paid, and the only de facto document to refer when taking moderation actions is the FAQ.

That’s why if you feel something is happened and miscomm is occured, the best you can do is “PM us”:tm:. Yes, I heard you, not everyone feel safe PMing us, but listen me: if it happened, how else we should handle the situation without direct messaging? Going public about an action, the way I see it, can quickly fan the fire in the discourse and end up into a flame war without any solution that can be productively produced with the exception of, you guessed it, the fall of the ban hammer.

Summary

I’m a goddam true-blooded introvert and PMing a mod, once, takes a lot of nerve (it was one of the good 'ol early days). I believed what I did is on the right but not with the method (I even had a name-calling explicit in that thread. whoops), so you could imagine how it’s nerve wracking when I write a PM trying to right things that weren’t right (my chest basically thumps over that entire period of typing). Well, what do you know, the mod accepted my apology and explanation and we ended up becoming best friend in the forum (or, just friend, if you read this and is cringing at the thought? :grimacing:).


If the reason you’re afraid of tagging @moderators is because the mod you’re having issues with are in them, let it be known that there are also other mods in the same group. Say, if mod X is the one you’re having problems with and they try to delete your appeal messages in a PM, all of us would see that a message is deleted (Discourse never truly deletes a post and will leave a footprind behind). The @moderators tag put a blue-ping notification to each of mods’ interface and the only way to rid of that is to open the notif and read the message. We will know that someone is abusing power and mod X will soon be rooted out (yay Disney happy end). This only happens if you send a PM (to @moderators specifically).

So, please please pls, for the goddamned love of heavenly beings, I beg you. Beg you, PM us! Use @moderators in your PM or, if you’re still weary about it, PM one of the Leaders (like yours truly). We’re not fully-fledged moderator, but I’m willing to act as a proxy and reach out to the mods in your stead. Look, I even tagged @moderators five times; haha, take that ping you silly humans!

We non-mod Leaders can also solve some minor issues that don’t require a moderation action (such as unlocking a locked thread), so there’s also that.

20 Likes

I don’t know how you want people to pm you if they’re banned, do you accept Luigi board pms? Spiritual connection pms? Oh wait silly me I forgot we have the ultimate corner of bad behavior - the email. That’s why nobody bothers. Even when someone pm’s, I’ve seen cases where the moderation/ volunteers didn’t listen to the one pming them and blatantly blocked them after they hard a conversation.

That’s why you need to acknowledge that you and the mods are indeed prone to mistakes. The affected community wants an apology, even a fake glossed over apology will do, but somehow that fact keeps slipping. Somehow it is required from users to admit their mistakes but not from mods or volunteers - bless their souls, the heroes of this community that defend people supporting pedophilia. How do you want us not to be irked by that fact?

The ban hammer falls on us even without fires, there doesn’t need to be a heated discourse for a person to be sent to gulags that is the actual problem.

33 Likes

If it’s alright, can I ask what everyone would prefer as a form of communication over pms, email, and tagging? We understand that that form of communication can be flawed, but due to the limits of technology it is difficult to think of alternative ways to contact moderators in order to address issues on the forum or appeal a ban.

I am uncertain as to when someone here defended pedophilia, but I think I can safely speak for the moderation team that no one there supports such a horrid thing.

I’m going to try to sum up what I have noticed over the last three threads. I came into this issue very late, so I apologize if I miss anything.

  • A disagreement on what an apology can be. For a lot of people, an apology is simple: you just say sorry. There’s also a lot of people who would consider “I understand I did x. I will do y to prevent such a thing from happening again.” an apology as well, or in replacement of the former. As far as I can tell, the latter has been done, but the word “sorry” has not been said. This has caused people to disagree on whether or not an apology has been given at all. A significant number of people would appreciate an apology that explicitly uses the words “We are sorry” and proves that the team understands everyone’s grievances.
  • A disagreement on when someone is deserving of a permanent ban. People would appreciate more transparency in regards to being banned, easier ways to appeal a decision, and/or expanding the warning system the moderators use.
  • Transparency in regards to when and why things are deleted. Would it prove more palatable for our forumgoers if we try to be explicit about the factors we consider in deleting a post? Perhaps explaining the reasoning mods use in the FAQ would help things, overall?
16 Likes

I think the issue is less that these are options for appeal and more that, instead of having the advertised conversation about wrongdoings by people in positions of power, we are just told “contact us!” It’s like calling the DMV about a letter you received, saying they’re going to revoke your license in two weeks, unless you contact them, but then having the representatives tell you, “Sorry, you need to fill out these forms privately, then come in person. Contacting us over the phone isn’t the right way to discuss things”.

Like, that isn’t even the best analogy, since everyone with an issue is speaking in broad terms, rather than specifics, but it’s the same general feeling I get. The forum is opened up, the issues aren’t adequately addressed (clearly), then the same canned response is given over and over again.

I agree. I also would like to see moderators who’ve been found to do certain things regularly (whom I would happily publicly name, if I didn’t think it would result in a permanent ban) disciplined in some manner. A three strike system being implemented would be ideal. Why can forum-goers be banned, but when moderators break rules, they just…continue to be allowed to break rules, including publicly shaming people, continuing conversations/tagging people after being asked not to, brigading, etc.?

Yes. It would also be ideal to know that moderators are being held to a standard and cannot just permanently keep their moderator status, even when found to be bad at the job

37 Likes

I’m not as active on the form and not really good speaker, when it comes to things on my mind that i want to speak.

But i have to say, if you can clearly see that people are unhappy with certain moderators, who were clearly seen to not do their job appropriately, maybe it is a good idea to consider taking away this position from people who are unable to do it and brining people, who can and want to do this better.

I apologize, but what kinda sentence “Moderation is art”? This is the first time i hear this.
It is not art, you have clear rules of the forum that you uphold everyone and yourself.
If you don’t have these rules, then make them and not “art” your way through.

If the position is too hard for you, because you not get paid, then maybe it is a good idea to step down and not develop a hero complex?

I apologize if this sounded rude, but some of these statements simply baffle me.

59 Likes

No system of rules is self-interpreting; and no system of rules can capture all the kinds of behavior that destroys communities and forums. Corners of the internet that try to moderate themselves on a rule-set alone generally turn toxic, because it doesn’t take too much cleverness for trolls to wreck things while staying within the rules. Part of the “art” of moderation is judging when someone is constantly skirting the edge of the rules in bad faith or because they just don’t know better, and responding accordingly.

A forum that wants to have a certain character to its discussions – e.g. “welcoming”, “safe”, “kind”, “inclusive”, or in CoG’s maybe slightly idiosyncratic metaphor, “clean and well-lighted” – can’t rely on rules alone to get there. If you want people not to be rude to each other, there’s no rule set that tells you what is and isn’t “rude” or what degree of rudeness deserves what level of consequence. Ditto for what constitutes racism, sexism, transphobia – any list of behaviors you come up with for those negative things won’t capture the scope of what could fall into that category. Mods need to use norms rather than rules and make judgment calls; and “art” is what we call it whenever something extensively needs the exercise of judgment, more than just applying a recipe or law.

That’s why the art of moderation is pretty easy to get wrong, and why mods need to be open to criticism and reflection. It’s also one reason why you can’t boil mod “accountability” down to a rule set for mods, like some people on these threads have suggested. Gower’s enriched the forums by setting out his norms so clearly, but there will always be calls that need to be made outside what’s been written so far.

I’m not a forum mod any more, so I know the confusion of seeing a conversation rendered incomprehensible by deletions or the sudden millennium-long disappearance of one party. I used to be a mod, so I also know how much blood sweat and tears can go into these decisions behind the scenes. The image some forum members have of authoritarian mods lightly dishing out bans without consideration, discussion, or mutual accountability is I’m sure mistaken – though I’m glad this has provided an occasion for Jason and the mod team to reflect on moderation practices that have contributed to giving people that impression, and changing some of the more easily adjusted ones.

I’m sorry that my terse comment yesterday made it sound like I disagreed with this part. I don’t, and I’m glad both this thread and the moderation norms one exist.

I’ve seen online communities go into a spiral of self-referential agony where too much of what they talk about is themselves, rather than the thing that originally brought them together – in our case, IF. I don’t want to see CoG go that way. But there are times when some self-referential conversation is necessary, this is clearly one of them, and on reflection I apologize for being inclined to wave us on too quickly.

I do hope the discussion gets less fiery. On that, we may genuinely disagree. :slight_smile:

24 Likes

Discretionary Moderation

I think the moderators are misunderstanding what we’re saying. I’ve explicitly stated in my own reply (even though this isn’t a reply to me, but the moderators glossed over the fact that I stated this when they replied to my post) that there is no way to account for everything that happens, and I acknowledge that fact. However, I said that clear, common violations, (ex. bumping old threads with “bump,” bringing up something off-topic in a thread) should have clearer guidelines.

Elaboration

Here is what I’ve read in the FAQ:

Moderators have special authority; they are responsible for this forum. But so are you. With your help, moderators can be community facilitators, not just janitors or police.

It acknowledges that moderators are, indeed, enforcers of rules, in addition to supposedly being community facilitators. If we apply the real world once more, laws are upheld through the justice system, and the justice system has clear rules as to how people should be punished accordingly. There are clear policies because it allows moderators to be accountable when they aren’t following their own policies that they’ve set out for themselves (and as someone previously mentioned, they don’t even follow simple rules like “don’t tag people who don’t want to speak anymore”). Moreover, it ensures that people who did the same violation consistently get the same punishments. No special treatment, no “art.”

Guess what? Just because there’s more standardization in moderation does not mean that mdoerators lose their agency or their discretion. I hope moderators on the forum know a common violation from another issue that clearly constitutes more sensitivity.

I’ll give you an example.

An Example

Let’s say we made the rule, “Okay, if someone pressures an author for an update, the general rule is give them a warning first via PM before they receive a suspension.”

Example A

Someone asks, “Hey, can you please update? I’ve been waiting on this for so long!”

Here, it’s clear that there is no real malicious intent, or that they’re not informed about the forum rules. In this case, it only warrants a warning. You can even use your discretion! Maybe a simple reminder if they’re clearly new and inexperienced with using the forum. However, it still stands by the guideline, which, at heart, is meant to ensure that forum users are educated on the rules, not to punish them or berate them.

Example B

Somemone says the same thing in Example A—but clearly insulting the author to badger them into doing it, and violating not only the rules about not pressuring authors, but also the rules about being respectful to other members and personal insults.

In this case, moderators can use their discretion. Although it would still be best to stick to the rule and give them a warning in the hopes that would allow them to apologize for their behavior to the author and allow for growth, depending on how severe their insults are, it may warrant a suspension right off the bat (such as making clearly bigoted remarks to shame the author).

The Takeaway

Moderators have a brain. I’m sure that the mod team knows that the best, of course, and I’d like to believe that you all do. What I’m saying is, just because you agree to do something more consistently together, doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourselves as to when you have to use more discretion.

There’s danger in making guidelines that are strict to the letter that people find loopholes in it, of course, but there’s also danger in making guidelines too much like “art.” Again, I have to reiterate myself, it leads to the inconsistencies in moderation that you are all seeing, which means some things go unpunished, some things are overly-enforced. There’s too much subjectivity in moderation as it is now, and having more standardization does not mean that you lose having any sense of discretion whatsoever. If I believed so, then I would have suggested having a moderation team full of bots, and Automod does everything. I didn’t, though, because I know that would be ridiculous.

I’m just asking that there should be a rule of thumb, or a points system as @ashestoashes08 stated. There’s such a thing called flexibility. Just because you have a more standardized system does not mean there isn’t ambiguity or space to be more interpretive. It just lends itself to more consistency for more common violations, and in being transparent with your procedures, we can be better informed as to what we should hold moderators accountable for. If we have a concern as to when a moderator is acting unjustly, having the knowledge as to the policies they behold themselves to would help us better understand what exactly we should be disputing.

I have a feeling that the moderators, however, will stand their ground on this one, and again refuse to make any sort of changes to the way they’re moderating. Unless the reply to this will be anything but the same nonstatements I’ve been hearing over and over from this thread, I won’t be engaging any further as to this particular point.

These two statements I feel are extremely important, so I’m bringing them here.


Shameposting and Bias

On a different note.

This is another issue. We can’t bring up any evidence that moderators have done this because previous posts from this specific user do not exist on the forum anymore. However, their posts have been up longer than the constructive criticism brought up in Moderating Norms and the Shameposting threads, at least long enough for someone to compile them for evidence.

Moreover, screenshotting someone’s messages, even if they do not exist on the forums anymore, can constitute as “shameposting.” Even if it’s clearly to use as evidence against pedophilia.

Also, they are still alive and kicking on the forums. And people have been permabanned for much, much less.


When to Discuss Issues Publicly vs Privately

I think the moderators are misunderstanding the argument, “We should be able to talk about this
publicly.” This will also be in reply to,

Elaboration

There is a clear difference between an issue that only concerns one person, and one mod. If it’s an isolated case of someone acting out of conduct and they want to dispute this issue that only concerns themselves, yes, private messaging is clearly better.

However, if the issue is about moderation, which is forum-wide and affects all forum users, that discussion should be public. And yet, from the two threads, any criticism of the mod team as a whole and the way they mishandled multiple cases are taken down. We’re not talking about the specifics of each case, we’re talking about mishandling in general.


Moreover, I’d like to dispute against the argument, “We could have been more productive if people just PMed us like Mogalas did.”

The reason that it only became productive when they discussed it in private, was because it was the only time moderators actually chose to listen. For some reason, when it’s publicly discussed, moderators are unwilling to engage properly. I know the argument is that they do not want to discuss these sorts of issues in public, but as I said before,

if the issue is about moderation, which is forum-wide and affects all forum users, that discussion should be public.

You can’t say that talking in public proved to be unproductive because the only reason it was, was because the moderator team chose to be unproductive. You chose not to listen to people when they talked in the previous two threads, clearly stating their grievances. The only time you decided to give the slightest scrap of attention to the issue is when Mogalas actually played in your court. If he hadn’t, would you have ever considered playing in ours? Or is the moderator team incapable of being the bigger person in the argument?


There is so much more that I want to reply to, but other people have already eloquently stated what I believe as well. I hope the mod team will respond to them properly.

We don’t want to be heated in this discussion. Honestly, it would have all been over if the moderators could simply express any remorse over mistakes they’ve made, and instead of cherrypick information from people’s post and continue to stand their ground in response to people’s posts, say, “Okay, we will do better. Here is how we’ll do it.” Sure, the original post may have those sentiments, but the replies decidedly do not.

I would like to say that we don’t want to be hostile. If we are, I’m sorry, but the moderator team should be more mature and understand that their actions have angered people. Instead of taking it personally, or seeing it as people having the worst intentions, they should instead properly listen to why they’re angry.

49 Likes

I will take it under the cut, so people are not forced to read through walls of text.

Ramble.

I did moderation, still do moderation is some places. I completely understand different people have different emotions, but blood sweat and tears?
I’ve seen the things that go “behind the scenes”.

I apologize, but i’m not sure you are suited for moderation if making these decisions make you cry and bleed. It can be hard to deal with a person, who your thought was your friend, or who was a long time participant and then their colors come out, i deal with that, other moderators have dealt with that.

Take a break or step down completely, if it is taking a tall on you.
Searching for excuses for yourself instead of doing things, will not make thing better for you.
Nobody talking about being rude to each other, i believe people talking about a complete inaction toward clearly extreme people.
I still see user, who made me extremely uncomfortable and posted some extreme stuff, posting around.
Because “art” moderation didn’t find it problem enough.
Nothing is perfect, no person is perfect, but this forum’s moderators, let it fester long enough to have come to these topics.

You can’t “art” these things, this “art” brought this forum to this state, where staff is making these topics.

You always have rules that you use as a guide line and add more if needed.
If the decision was puzzling to me, we always talked it with other mods and made a decision and added new rule after if needed.
If you want to keep this forum a safe place, as you claim, you would addressed it long ago.

People can correct me of course, i’m not the best voice of reason.
Also i apologize some of it may have gone off the topic.

I will be extremely sad to lose this forum, i’m grateful for people who made this place.
You can’t keep making excuses for yourself. You want for people to treat moderators like people, but have no desire to see that your users are people themselves.

I’m sorry, i will not feel remorse for my words, will not feel sorry for moderators. You have a job, that you agreed to do, and did it poorly, still do it poorly and expect people to take that.
Teach these moderators how to moderate or make them step down.
You will have these things pile on you more and more, until you ban all people who show you your mistakes and will have the swamp that is left.
I don’t have any energy to speak of this again and again.
Staff will deal with it, or they will not.

19 Likes

I just want to note two things:

“Blood, sweat and tears” is an English idiom that just means “hard work.”

When someone says there is “art” rather than a “science” to moderation, what it means is that the work is subjective by nature. I’d like us to not be hung up on idiomatic usage here.

16 Likes

The issue is, it is become TOO subjective, to the point where users get confused about the rules because each does things differently. Its like looking at a picture and everyone has their own interpretation of it, but thats the problem, in a forum where communication between mods and users is the key - such subjectiveness leads to the situation we have today

27 Likes

Can there not be a subjective nature to a set of generalized guidelines, as @chocolatemix pointed out? There are always going to be situations that rules won’t cover, and, as has been pointed out already, strict rules can and will make it so that loopholes are found. I don’t think anybody wants super strict rules. I’ve only seen mentioned that there should be a set of guidelines that moderators should follow, as well as consequences for if they repeatedly break moderator or forum/user guidelines.

I don’t feel that, just because someone is seen as trustworthy by other mods or by staff, that they should be permitted to be above the law, so to speak. That’s corrupt. Moderators that break forum rules on a regular basis (particularly if they’ve shown they like to repeatedly break one rule, rather than they accidentally broke 3 different rules once, each) should no longer be permitted to be moderators.

I’ve said it before, so I’ll say it again: moderators are supposed to be the leaders of this community. They are supposed to be moral guideposts, as well as people meant to help keep the forum welcoming for everyone. At the moment, it really seems like, as a whole, neither of those two guidelines are being met.

Are there any consequences for moderators breaking rules? Because, if so, I have one particular moderator in mind whom I would like to report, either publicly or privately, for their poor judgement, breaking of forum rules, etc. If nothing’s going to even happen, I won’t bother reporting, since the status quo will just remain the same.

I don’t believe anyone is being vitriolic. I’d be very careful with statements like this, as attributing meaning to others’ words, when they aren’t being outright rude/angry, is a very good way to escalate things. I think everyone commenting has been very respectful and careful not to cross any lines of civil discourse. See below.

There isn’t much more for me to say that hasn’t been said already by myself, @Sinnie, @chocolatemix, or @DinkyWink, and I’d rather not constantly repeat myself, so I will avoid commenting/participating in the conversation until such time as I have something further to add. :slight_smile:

30 Likes