Community Feedback Poll [read clarifications in OP before voting!]

[GuitarBizarre]

Originally Posted by RVCA

No personal judgement in moderating, strict adherence to rules please

Post count and history mean nothing

Moderators must be able to justify all of their moderating decisions

and most importantly, community majority opinion means nothing. Mods are here to protect the minority and objectively enforce rules, no matter who is breaking them.

If history means nothing and strict adherence to the rules is everything, then doesn't that mean someone could insult someone, recieve a temp ban, return off that temp ban, insult the same person again, and continue the pattern indefinitely providing none of the insults were severe enough to warrant a permaban in and of themselves?

And, on the same token, doesn't that mean that if a respected member had a bad day, got drunk and said a few things they would later regret, that member could be permabanned regardless of the positive contribution they otherwise make to the community at all other times?

Moderators being able to justify their actions - No problems here. I don't think we currently even HAVE a problem with this.

Community Majority Opinion means nothing - Sorry, not with you on this one. The amount of time devoted to trying to please the community should be limited to avoid moderators getting distracted by the more...insistent...complainers, and often I think there are people who bitch about modding decisions for the sake of bitching about mod decisions, but the potential exists for genuine errors to be brought up by the community and resolved and that should be given weight.

[Necromancer]

Originally Posted by GuitarBizarre

If history means nothing and strict adherence to the rules is everything, then doesn't that mean someone could insult someone, recieve a temp ban, return off that temp ban, insult the same person again, and continue the pattern indefinitely providing none of the insults were severe enough to warrant a permaban in and of themselves?

And, on the same token, doesn't that mean that if a respected member had a bad day, got drunk and said a few things they would later regret, that member could be permabanned regardless of the positive contribution they otherwise make to the community at all other times?

Moderators being able to justify their actions - No problems here. I don't think we currently even HAVE a problem with this.

Community Majority Opinion means nothing - Sorry, not with you on this one. The amount of time devoted to trying to please the community should be limited to avoid moderators getting distracted by the more...insistent...complainers, and often I think there are people who bitch about modding decisions for the sake of bitching about mod decisions, but the potential exists for genuine errors to be brought up by the community and resolved and that should be given weight.

You're just "bucking" for a Mod position yourself GB. (I'm just teasing, no offense meant)

[GuitarBizarre]

Originally Posted by Necromancer

You're just "bucking" for a Mod position yourself GB. (I'm just teasing, no offense meant)

I keep getting told its just a matter of time, as long as I keep doing them those 'favours'

[Guybrush]

When I started moderating, my approach at first was black and white and I thought the same rules should apply for everyone. I wanted punishment for any rule breaking to be automatic, impersonal and without discrimination in regards to how long the offender had been here or how well liked he or she was. Basically, I thought if moderators were robots and people didn't get butthurt over infractions, then gaining infractions would be a natural forum consequence, one that you could plan for as getting an infraction really isn't that dangerous so it would still "allow" some rule breaking before members started getting banned.

Then I realized there's no way on MB people are not gonna take recieving infractions personal as it is now. They're used as warnings preceding a ban so people are scared and offended when they recieve them. My approach really wasn't working at all so I had to change the way I did things.

Instead of a moderator punishing people like a robot, I realized it would be better if moderators try to nurture the community instead. If you've been here a long time, that means you are part of the community and if you add positively to it, then I think that makes you a part that should be nurtured. As such, some members have earned some leniency on the moderators part while some, newcomers and those who affect our community in a generally negative way, do not deserve the same privilege. The goal is to make MusicBanter a pleasant and fun community to be a part of and to me, it's a bit like growing a bonzai tree. You have to remove some twigs here and there to make it beautiful (not that I often banned regular members).

The difference between my initial approach and the way I ended up moderating was the latter felt like it worked. For all mods to have the perspective that they're doing a service to a community they are doing their best to improve is an attitude that I think would benefit MB in all areas.


Something lately is causing a split between the mods and some of the members here. Some of the problem I'm sure is a lot of the moderators have a knee-jerk reaction which is very defensive when met with criticism or a wish that they change the way they do things. Why a defensive attitude? These people are the community you serve, so you should treat them with respect and listen. I also feel like moderators breaking the rules they are supposed to uphold can also widen the gap between mods and members as does using mod powers for gloating and terrorizing, like changing the content of a members posts. Because of their power and position as both rule enforces and role models, moderators have to tread more carefully than others, particularly when wielding that power. For example, if you give someone an infraction, in their message, you simply state why that happened and perhaps what could prevented it. You don't gloat or call the offender an idiot.

That's how I feel about it at least. I'm not sure I always lived up to those ideals when I modded, but I tried and I think all mods should.

[GuitarBizarre]

Originally Posted by tore

Lots of text.

Bonsai*

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by GuitarBizarre

Bonsai*

I did it my way.

[The Virgin]

Originally Posted by tore

it's a bit like growing a bonzai tree. You have to remove some twigs here and there to make it beautiful

and i bet i'm the soon-to-be blossoming flower on that bonzai tree.
hoping to overshadow the unecessary twigs.

anyways, i pretty much agree with everything you said and RVCA.

this site, apart from music, should maintain a 'nurturing' atmosphere, free from insults and attacks.

[Howard the Duck]

Originally Posted by The Virgin

and i bet i'm the soon-to-be blossoming flower on that bonzai tree.
hoping to overshadow the unecessary twigs.

anyways, i pretty much agree with everything you said and RVCA.

this site, apart from music, should maintain a 'nurturing' atmosphere, free from insults and attacks.

and blatant provocation to incur insults and attacks

[djchameleon]

Originally Posted by tore

Something lately is causing a split between the mods and some of the members here. Some of the problem I'm sure is a lot of the moderators have a knee-jerk reaction which is very defensive when met with criticism or a wish that they change the way they do things. Why a defensive attitude? These people are the community you serve, so you should treat them with respect and listen. I also feel like moderators breaking the rules they are supposed to uphold can also widen the gap between mods and members as does using mod powers for gloating and terrorizing, like changing the content of a members posts. Because of their power and position as both rule enforces and role models, moderators have to tread more carefully than others, particularly when wielding that power. For example, if you give someone an infraction, in their message, you simply state why that happened and perhaps what could prevented it. You don't gloat or call the offender an idiot.

That's how I feel about it at least. I'm not sure I always lived up to those ideals when I modded, but I tried and I think all mods should.

Thank you Tore for coming out and speaking about this same thing that we've talked about on IRC.

Of course, he said it way better than I did when I attempted to say the same thing weeks ago but this is my only issue with the mods. I didn't care about Dirty's ban. He broke the rules and was punished for it. That's fine.

On both sides the members and mods have decided to spread the gap between the two even further. The mods come out acting all high and mighty like they are the parents and we are just children that are throwing tantrums and misbehaving when we state our opinions, concerns and legitimate complaints.

On the members side, some of us haven't exactly expressed our complaints/opinions in a proper fashion which I know I'm guilty of.

Then there are the members that will come in and bash the few that want to speak up about things that are concerning them and say "oh the mods are doing a swell job and everything should just be business as usual. Also, you need to stfu for stating your opinion because you are just "whining". Come on now.

[Howard the Duck]

and to clear things up, I was only joking when I complained about pedo in the "Banned" thread

seems like everybody was doing it, so why shouldn't I?