****OFFICIAL NVG MODERATION DISCUSSION THREAD****
This has been requested in the past, and now it's here! As regular NVG users know, questions about moderator actions are usually told to PM the mod or post in ATF. Now, there's a third option - this thread. You can still PM the mod or start an ATF thread if you don't like the response/decision you received.
This thread is not for mod bashing, trolling, flaming, or general idiocy. But if you have a question about why X disappeared, or some other mod issue/action, fire away.
***
Edit/MH: A post of note, for consideration by all:
... For a variety of reasons NVG mods have been notoriously hesitant to perma-ban posters. I think there have been only a handful of cases in the past six years. And in each case I would say that the poster essentially banned himself by flagrantly posting in direct violation of recent mod messaging warning that a perma-ban would result.
But rest assured that NVG mods are committed to trying to maintain an enjoyable, informative, entertaining, and positive forum. Mods are part of and reflective of
When you look at the bigger picture, a forum is a forum. No, they're not all exactly the same, but it's true that forums are on the decline overall. Young people don't use forums to a great extent, so it's not surprising that traffic has gradually decreased. I'm not going to say that "rude regular posters and mods being very strict" absolutely couldn't be factors, but if they are, I'd suggest they're minor ones. I'd also be a little surprised if moderation on the site as a whole is on a trend of
while this is not wrong, i strongly believe it's much more so an invented crutch to explain away major failures in management
it loses all merit once you start browsing old threads and see 1/4 of the posters in them have "banned" under their username
regular cullings of posters who are banned not for spam or hate but just simply having a different opinion over taste is never going to end well if you are searching for growth
Comparing a poker forum to a baseball bulletin board doesn't seem to be a fair comparison.
Sorry, I think I worded that poorly. I was talking about the sports of NASCAR and baseball. They're frequently used as examples for sports where the average fan is getting 6+ months older every year.
On top of all existing issues, internet forums lost a lot of their visibility over the last year or so. Thanks to Google's deal with Reddit to use their data for model training in exchange for cash and higher visibility people now see Reddit when they search on Google instead of relevant messaging boards like they did in the past.
regular cullings of posters who are banned not for spam or hate but just simply having a different opinion over taste is never going to end well if you are searching for growth
Growth? The goal of every messaging board still in existence is to retain as much of their user base as possible. There's no path for growth if you can't attract new users which in this case means a younger audience.
There's a valid argument to be made that the best way of achieving that is catering to the largest existing group of members. Even if that means losing dissenting opinions.
while this is not wrong, i strongly believe it's much more so an invented crutch to explain away major failures in management
it loses all merit once you start browsing old threads and see 1/4 of the posters in them have "banned" under their username
regular cullings of posters who are banned not for spam or hate but just simply having a different opinion over taste is never going to end well if you are searching for growth
I would be curious how many of the banned posters you are thinking about are on my ignore list 😀 It's not that big these days. So maybe not that much overlap.
while this is not wrong, i strongly believe it's much more so an invented crutch to explain away major failures in management
Only, it's not invented in any way, as you acknowledge in the start of the sentence.
it loses all merit once you start browsing old threads and see 1/4 of the posters in them have "banned" under their username
Do you think that over time, there will be more, or less posters in any particular thread that show up as "banned"?
I have my doubts about your 1/4 figure being accurate in a significant number of threads, but I've never examined it all that closely.
regular cullings of posters who are banned not for spam or hate but just simply having a different opinion over taste is never going to end well if you are searching for growth
Well, your experience seems a lot different than mine around here, but admittedly when I was here more regularly I was only on one portion of the site. Perhaps there are other forums I don't visit here that have "regular cullings of posters who are banned not for spam or hate but just simply having a different opinion over taste". Regardless, your complaint doesn't seem all that related to NVG moderation, so I'll try to leave it at that.
bobo i've seen countless members banned over the years not because they were mean to people or spammed but rather because their ideology fundamentally clashed with the sanitized utopian vision of moderation
people like lagtight and phresh come to mind as recent cullings who were never violent towards others, just had believes, mainstream ones at that, which clashed with what was considered acceptable by moderation
There have always been, and will always be, bannings that some people don't agree with - especially in the politics forum. Given what I've seen in my almost 20 (yikes!) years here, I've always found the idea that moderation was the main factor in declining traffic on these forums quite silly. But I can't prove it to you, and this really isn't an NVG moderation topic, so I'll leave the last word to you.
bobo i never said it was the main reason, i in fact agreed as i opened up with "while this is not wrong"
it's a cheap move to create strawmen like that to simply dismiss the point out of hand like that
to act as if needless bannings hasn't had any measurable impact in expediting the decline of this place is just a wild take - go look at any decade old thread and you'll find many banned users who were actively posting in a positive manner
it may not be the root of the problem, but 100% we have many posters who would still be here today if they weren't banned for simply having a viewpoint a mod found distasteful
phresh's viewpoints were the literal platform of our newly elected president, to dismiss them as bannable is simply out of touch and irresponsible, he should be reinstated, as should lagtight
fwiw, i'm not friends with either, nor do i agree with their perspectives, i in fact argued with lagtight all the time and i'm sure he genuinely hates me, but i found it atrocious that both received bans
I don't even know who those banned people are and certainly didn't ban any of them.
Was one of them banned by a current moderator of NVG? Otherwise I honestly don't see the relevance for the NVG mod thread and would ask to take the conversation to the appropriate forum please.
I don't even know who those banned people are and certainly didn't ban any of them.
Was one of them banned by a current moderator of NVG? Otherwise I honestly don't see the relevance for the NVG mod thread and would ask to take the conversation to the appropriate forum please.
Sounds like this is more relevant to the politics forum?
bobo i never said it was the main reason, i in fact agreed as i opened up with "while this is not wrong"
it's a cheap move to create strawmen like that to simply dismiss the point out of hand like that
Just to clarify, this wasn't the intent - I had the impression you thought it was the main reason, so my apologies if that's not the case.
please provide a list of terms and types of statements that are deemed political so they can be avoided.
also, please provide a list of offences, e.g. being a nazi propagandist, for which it is the case that the offence is irrelevant for whether the offender has a huge NVG thread, whilst mentioning the offence gets you censored.
Why do people need to be dicks about stuff like this? Yeah, the rule's not perfect, and never will be. And it will always be at least somewhat subjective. And there are going to be threads where not allowing politics derails will limit the discussion, as has been the case with other poker personality threads in the past. Oh well. The alternative gets pretty messy, obviously NVG mods don't want to deal with it, and they're not the only ones - threads going political always get complaints.
context is he said that bilzerian was antisemitic in the bilzerian thread and that got nuked because "politics"
so it's a valid clarification because i'm sure many were surprised by that deletion decision
Ah, right, it's very reasonable to ask for a "list of terms and types of statements that are deemed political". 🙄
Not liking the "no politics" rule I can understand even though I don't agree (IE I think the rule is good in this forum). Asking for lists of what is or is not across an obviously subjective line is ridiculous.
