Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic failed, and it became a general discussion thread with almost no moderation related posts at all. And those that were posted were so buried in non-mod posts that it became a huge time drain on the mods to sort through them. Then, when off topic posts were deleted posters complained about that.
This led to the closing of the mod discussion thread, replaced by the post report/pm approach. This has filtered out lots of noise, but has resulted at times in the General Discussion Thread turning into a quasi-mod thread. This is not desirable, but going back to the old mod thread is also not a workable option.
Therefore, I have created this new moderation thread, but with a different purpose and ground rules than previous mod threads. The purpose of this thread is to provide a place for posters to pose questions to the mods about how policies are applied; to bring to the mods attention posts they think are inappropriate and reach the level of requiring mod action; and for mods to communicate to posters things like changes or clarifications to policies, bannings, etc.
Now let me tell you what this thread is NOT a place for. It is not for nonmoderation related posts, even if the discussion originates from a comment in in a mod related post. It is not for posters to post their opinions about other posters or whether a poster should be banned. It is not to rehash past grievances about mod decisions from months or years ago. The focus of this thread will be recent posts that require action now. Or questions about current policies and enforcement.
So basically, this is a thread to ask mods questions. Which means, pretty much that only mods should be answering those questions. If a poster asks why a particular post was deleted or allowed, only a mod can answer that. Everyone else who wants to jump in with their opinion or their mod war story needs to stay out of it. It just increases the noise to signal ratio and does nothing to answer the question.
Everyone needs to understand that this thread has very different rules than the old mod thread and any other thread. Any non-moderation post will be deleted on sight. Not moved to the appropriate thread, just deleted. So don't waste your time crafting a masterpiece post about wars or transgender issues or the presidential election and then post it in this thread. It will be gone. Also, this isnt a thread for general commentary about our mods performance. Posting "browser sucks as a mod" or any such posts that don't actually ask about a policy or request a mod action will be deleted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the moderation of this forum. But this thread isnt for complaining about mods. You are free to go to the ATF forum and make your concerns about modding in this forum there.
So with that intro, this thread is open for those who need to bring questions about mod policies or bring inappropriate posts to the mods attention. Again, it is NOT a thread for group discussions about other posters or for other posters to answer questions directed to mods.
We'll see how this goes. If you have what you feel is an open issue raised in the General Discussion Thread, please copy that post or otherwise reintroduce the issue here.
Thanks.
Your requests at least concern what you perceive to be substantive discussion. I was referring more to people who want to know exactly how much they can insult people, exactly how much they can discuss banned posters, exactly how long they can continue after being told to move, exactly how much loaded language they can use, or exactly how much mischaracterization or misrepresentations they can engage in before they are banned.
The second, not the first. Before the recent change in moderation he was posting about how some sets of humans are no better than animals.
I bet you can't guess which sets? /s
jbouton really must want to get perma'd.
Also, what are these images supposed to mean?
Your requests at least concern what you perceive to be substantive discussion. I was referring more to people who want to know exactly how much they can insult people, exactly how much they can discuss banned posters, exactly how long they can continue after being told to move, exactly how much loaded language they can use, or exactly how much mischaracterization or misrepresentations they can engage in before they are banned.
Or you could just follow the rules and stop trying to make up your own.
Your preferences aren’t rules. Do you need help with that idea?
trying to outlawyer an ues lawyer is a bold strategy cotton
so you're penciled in for high noon tomorrow, glgl
Yes but do you *just* follow the rules?
Or do you go above and beyond and try to make more rules
Just as well because trying to read moderators' minds on what is or isn't acceptable is already taxing enough.
I am no longer a moderator. I'm not making any rules.
But my point stands. If a moderator request is reasonable, isn't that good enough? We aren't writing a tax code here.
I think that the very same politeness that makes it ok for a moderator to ask me to stop doing something
Is the same politeness that allows me to tell the moderator no ty
I think that the very same politeness that makes it ok for a moderator to ask me to stop doing something
Is the same politeness that allows me to tell the moderator no ty
You don't need to explain your attitude. I understand. You will do as you please unless there is a specific rule. And if you get banned for doing something isn't expressly prohibited, you will cry foul.
You don't need to explain your attitude. I understand. You will do as you please unless there is a specific rule. And if you get banned for doing something isn't expressly prohibited, you will cry foul.
To be clear, your take is that I have an attitude for not wanting to do what others want me to do. And that if something isn’t prohibited then I shouldn’t call foul for being banned etc
