A Vicious Cycle - Time for Change?

.:.

I would like to make the point that the mods and I are all accountable to the company (Jill and Jaime specifically) with regards to what we edit.  If we edit something, it is because we can justify that editing to someone else.  We work as a team and make joint decisions.  

If I edit a post for being OT, it is because I feel that the poster is intentionally being OT or because it is *completely* unrelated to the conversation.  Natural progressions/detours of conversations aren't OT, simply the result of developing thoughts.  I don't edit that.  

Don't be rude, nasty, baiting, insulting or belittling - or intentionally drive the conversation OT.  If you see a problem with a post, report it rather than reacting yourself.  Take private matters to PM.  If a person gets edited, it's because they did one of those things, and the matter is between a mod/admin and the member in question.  It is no one else's business and won't be discussed with anyone else. 

There are 2 sides to every story, at least.  Members might see mods stepping in with red ink...mods might see members clearly trying to see just how far they can push things.  It would be a big help if members did not always assume that they see the whole story or set of circumstances.   

ETA:  We're (mostly) adults here and capable of both common sense and common courtesy.  Those things are required here, and no one should need a detailed rulebook on being polite, even in disagreement.   

pndhounds

Want to know what I remember?  The "Jim" from i-dog, with solo moderator days when we didn't have 3 foot sized signatures, we self-checked ourselves, and many people "rescued" each other from misguided and retaliatory dog training.  Ideas were suggested, maligned, reinforced, questioned, researched, celebrated, and  debated....often times it was heated   and it always ran the gamut.  Today... What has changed?  The degree to which folks will express their ideas, and the degree to which they will not agree to see others expression.

 Fear not.  I learn from all, and filter well, and wish all the moderators patience and perserverance.

 

*sigh*...i remember those days. and then i was gone for a while, and i returned and nothing was like it was. i absolutely loved those days. and i learned a lot more on that forum than i do on this one.

what drives me away from a thread isn't the arguing. it's the "red ink". i start seeing a lot of edits and deleted and i leave that thread. i don't expect everyone to get along and i don't want everyone to agree. i can't learn from agreement and uniformity.

it does seem that it is the same people who keep getting red inked. if there are people who are continually baiting, insulting, flaming, or otherwise causing disruption, then maybe they should be banned for a few days. if they return and continue the prior behavior, then another and longer ban.

the entire dog community, on and off the forums is devisive. i would love for that to change, but it probably never will.

I see in that alpha thread two separate situations where someone was pretty nasty.  And, the only posts that were commented on were the ones in response to the nastiness.  The nasty comment was ignored and the comments in response to it were followed by the moderators comments. 

I thought we were responsible for what we post??  Why are they getting away with this stuff?

I have to agree with corgi, although I have never seen the forum as it was "back in the day". I do not get driven off by the posts, it is the red ink. I do not understand why the forum has to be moderated as it is. It seems very politically correct if you ask me. I can see where a post might be red inked if it contains a direct personal insult but I have not seen anything that I would consider a personal insult worthy of red ink. I also feel the red ink is not applied across the board and is somewhat bias. 

 Maybe something like the old CM forum would work, although not related to CM himself. Just have a debate board where anything goes but cursing and personal insults. If you post your topic there people are allowed to DEBATE it, which of course means that there will be no red ink (unless you curse or post a DIRECT personal insult) and a clear guidline that lets everyone know that if you cannot stand the heat of a topic you should not post in that forum.

denise m

However is it impossible to predict what's coming done the pipe and to be prejudged for something you haven't said or done (yet) is unfair.

Denise...it's hard to see things that way when you can predict almost to the letter, who the next post in line will be from, what it will say, and the tone it will be said in. In some cases one can do that 2-5 posts out...it's actually that predictable.

ETA...warning humor ahead!

I emailed this guy about Modd'ing the forum and he will be here in January 2008!

dgriego

Just have a debate board where anything goes but cursing and personal insults. If you post your topic there people are allowed to DEBATE it, which of course means that there will be no red ink (unless you curse or post a DIRECT personal insult) and a clear guidline that lets everyone know that if you cannot stand the heat of a topic you should not post in that forum.

I'm unclear how current Mod/Admin staff intends that section, presently. In the last few months, when there have been tensions, I have written posts to discuss perceived differences (cm vs R+, for example), to have open and adult debate, but as a result have been edited or even publicly cajoled for "baiting." Unfortunately, some of us are seen as flaming when we invite open discussion; even though those discussions can be pretty eye opening, and at the very least push us all to be more clear and precise in our writing.

I truly appreciate how hard it can be to Moderate, to feel sure of one's judgments, to recover and learn from mistakes. It's a very humbling experience, if one allows it to be.

Ixas...I was under the impression that only an Admin, could actually restructure and reformat the forum? Surely you needed Admin approval and assistance and maybe even input from others on that Mod/Admin team,...when you made these changes?

The topic of having a section specifically intended to debate has been discussed, and has been decided that it would cause more problems than it would solve.   

rwbeagles

Denise...it's hard to see things that way when you can predict almost to the letter, who the next post in line will be from, what it will say, and the tone it will be said in. In some cases one can do that 2-5 posts out...it's actually that predictable.

I agree that a few people are quite predictable and that is why "the bait" is such an effective weapon of choice for certain members. However, I do believe it creates a sense of unfairness when mods assume how you will respond and truthfully can appear arbitrary at best and bias at worst. I think it is impossible for any moderator to stop people from posting what ever they want, all they can do is respond appropriately once it has been posted. Trying to control what hasn't happened is as the topic suggests - 'a vicious cycle'. As any good clicker trainer knows, timing is everything - clicking too soon will not get you the results you want and only causes confusion. To a dog it's like "What do I do?" to a person it's "What did I do?"   

Anyways, I understand what you are trying to do. 

Ixas_girl

When I was moderating,

I did appreciate the moderating in the very hard subject of "PTS - for or against".  I think all the forums laws were broken in that thread, but you know what, it did not last.  There was no red ink and I believe there was only one interruption by you to shift focus.  I believe in that thread, members views changed and became more senstive and were now more understanding to people directly involved with the shelter dog. 

I am afraid to say that if that thread was started today, there would be loads of red ink and the end results of having a better understanding would not have been achieved.

rwbeagles

Ixas...I was under the impression that only an Admin, could actually restructure and reformat the forum? Surely you needed Admin approval and assistance and maybe even input from others on that Mod/Admin team,...when you made these changes?

Amstaffy, now I completely understand what baiting looks like, and its predictability. 

willowchow

I see in that alpha thread two separate situations where someone was pretty nasty.  And, the only posts that were commented on were the ones in response to the nastiness.  The nasty comment was ignored and the comments in response to it were followed by the moderators comments. 

I thought we were responsible for what we post??  Why are they getting away with this stuff?

Actually, going back through it--the editing was pretty balanced IMHO.  The only times where the moderators actually posted something were to make general warnings about the direction of the thread (many of which seemed to be ignored by certain posters).

I seriously do not see why it is so difficult to have a debate without it getting nasty, personal, etc.  Somehow 4iC was able to get through 30+ pages of topic, while having to vigorously defend her beliefs, actions, and relationship with her dogs---without getting edited by a mod once.  Obviously it is possible--maybe she should give classes or something......     

denise m

rwbeagles

Denise...it's hard to see things that way when you can predict almost to the letter, who the next post in line will be from, what it will say, and the tone it will be said in. In some cases one can do that 2-5 posts out...it's actually that predictable.

 

I agree that a few people are quite predictable and that is why "the bait" is such an effective weapon of choice for certain members. However, I do believe it creates a sense of unfairness when mods assume how you will respond and truthfully can appear arbitrary at best and bias at worst.

I might agree with you *if* there was not such a clear pattern in those posters who get dinged for it.  Pretty much every post that I have seen edited for that reason was pretty obvious, as most "baiting" involves personal digs, very thinly veiled nastiness, etc.  Honestly, as a poster I would rather see someone who is obviously baiting (and IMHO, posters know *exactly* what they are doing when they write those posts) edited out then see a thread go downhill and have to try to read through the red ink created by the exchange of personal attacks that have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

denise m

Anyways, I understand what you are trying to do. 

LOL now if you can explain it me...lol. Some days...

but ya know the "PC Santa" or "Mr T" stories and such help me to balance. So thanks all for indulging me hehe.