Is this forum too moderated?

[kphoger]

In NE2's case ... a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense"

I was that other poster, and I took virtually zero offense at NE2's comment.  Do I get to request the 10-point penalty be rescinided?

[hbelkins]

You really want this place to look like MTR, or worse yet, the US Congress?

The competition could be to see who can keep their warning level the lowest. 

[Scott5114]

I am in favor of allowing people to see their own warning levels in their profiles, together with comparative statistical information (average warning level, standard deviation of warning level, etc.) calculated across the active user population (i.e., the subset of registered users with a post frequency above a given level, say 10 posts per month).  Allowing self-help should head off some incidents where moderator intervention would otherwise be necessary.

I confirm H.B. is correct--I cannot see my warning level in my profile either.

I am in favor of you writing us a forum module that does this

In NE2's case ... a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense"

I was that other poster, and I took virtually zero offense at NE2's comment.  Do I get to request the 10-point penalty be rescinided?

I am inclined to say no. Whether or not you personally took offense, it still constitutes bad conduct on his part and is a violation of the site rules. Allowing such conduct reflects badly on the forum (would you join a forum if you saw the established posters throwing ad hominem attacks back and forth instead of discussing things civilly?) and doesn't foster an environment that's conducive to polite discussion.

[InterstateNG]

What you seem to be overlooking here is that dtp was not posting in a mod capacity here. He is merely participating in the discussion, and while obviously frustrated, and maybe not exactly polite, I don't think this necessarily rises to the occasion of requiring moderator action. It also happened in September so it is much too late to do anything about it at this point. Were points to be issued for this post, it would only be 5 to 10, and would not bring dtp's warn level to the 30 points necessary to require moderator approval of posts (which would be a farce in any event, as I believe he would be able to approve his own posts).

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

[Alex]

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

DTP was a moderator when the forum first started and was selected for his role by the previous administrator. His time as moderator during that period was solid... When the forum restarted in summer 2009, DTP and all other previous moderators were demoted to regular members so that we could start anew. DTP was considered to be moderator again based upon his performance during the first run of the forum. He has since garnered minmal (from me at least) negative attention that indicates that he should be demoted.

Comments/criticisms about a moderator's handling of a post/thread/situation are not unwelcome either. If we are to improve things on the board, we need to see all sides.

[deathtopumpkins]

Considering this is a member of the moderating team here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3658.msg171760#msg171760

I think a public discussion of moderation here is totally warranted.

Will this post score a boundary with the points system, or do I have the terminology wrong?

What you seem to be overlooking here is that dtp was not posting in a mod capacity here. He is merely participating in the discussion, and while obviously frustrated, and maybe not exactly polite, I don't think this necessarily rises to the occasion of requiring moderator action. It also happened in September so it is much too late to do anything about it at this point. Were points to be issued for this post, it would only be 5 to 10, and would not bring dtp's warn level to the 30 points necessary to require moderator approval of posts (which would be a farce in any event, as I believe he would be able to approve his own posts).

Thank you. I think far too many people here don't seem to grasp the distinction between discussion and moderation. After all the drama that has gone on here I have sometimes considered resigning as a moderator just so that I can post without always feeling like someone is going to yell "MOD ABUSE!" if they don't like something I post. I thought this was why we used purple text, to distinguish moderation from regular posts, because we're people too, with opinions.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

I certainly did tell him to stop attacking me and consider re-reading my posts, since nothing seemed to be getting through to him, but even re-reading that post now I don't see anywhere that I threatened to use any moderator power on him.



Yeah, I've made questionable decisions.
Yeah, I've posted things I probably shouldn't.
Yeah, some of you probably hate me for it.
But I certainly do try and help out around here when I can, and I hope that people can put up with the occasional thing they don't like. If anyone really has a problem with anything I do, please, contact me. Just do please be polite about it, and do please be open to considering that maybe I was right, and please don't start a thread or make a post ranting about it. That's not productive.

Finally, I've heard this complaint time and time again, but age should be irrelevant when it comes to posting on a forum. I may be 19, but I've been a moderator on this forum since, what, 2008? And I'm a moderator on another, even larger, site as well, so I have experience moderating a forum. And I like to think I know a fair bit about roads too, since I've loved roads ever since I knew what they were, am currently a second year civil engineering student, and have work experience at a state DOT. Also, don't people of my generation generally have more skill with the internet anyway?

Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

[Molandfreak]

Finally, I've heard this complaint time and time again, but age should be irrelevant when it comes to posting on a forum. I may be 19, but I've been a moderator on this forum since, what, 2008?

From another young poster, thank you!

Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

I admire your optimism, but alas, I see no end in sight... There's always going to be someone here who doesn't like what's going on. They will have their reasons, be them good or bad (but mostly bad)

[hbelkins]

Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

Actually, I think discussion of moderation practices is a good thing, in the interests of an open and collegial board. I'm still smarting over a ban I got last winter, that came totally out of the blue and for no good reason whatsoever. I know who did it, but they've never acknowledged it to me, and I went over their head to get reinstated.

I would have appreciated the chance to discuss that openly, and with other mods and members of the forum weighing in about it.

To the best of my recollection, this is the first time I've mentioned that incident here. When I posted about it on Facebook, some of the other moderators were surprised to learn of it and that one mod had acted unilaterally. That's what I think ought to be more open; the discussion of and rationale behind such decisions. I don't think one mod should have the power to ban a member, lock a thread or remove posts. I think that should be a group decision among the mods. A consensus, if not an absolute majority-rules vote.

As for the age discussion, perhaps the younger generation generally has more experience with the Internet, but they don't have more experience with life. I've always respected my elders, but as my generation becomes the elders in society, I don't see that as much.

I would think that those who have been active in the hobby or interest of roads since the early days of MTR and Roadgeek would be given a lot more discretion, deference and latitude. There are an awful lot of people here that have been acquainted since around 1996 or so.

[corco]

I don't see why age would be terribly relevant terms of moderation- I'd much rather have a level-headed, mature 17 year old (and there are plenty of those out there) moderating than a hot-headed, immature 40 year old (and there are plenty of those out there). Older folks tend to be more level headed and mature than younger folks, but there's so many outliers to that notion that it shouldn't be a primary factor in consideration.

Older folks who feel like they need to cite their age as a reason why they should be respected probably don't have any other reason to be respected. If somebody tells me "Respect me because I'm you're elder" I'm probably not going to take that very seriously. If somebody, as a result of their wisdom and life experience that can only (but does not always) come from age demonstrates that they deserve respect through their actions, I'll probably have deep respect for that- but it's the wisdom and life experience I'm respecting, not the age. For the record, I respect most, say, 80 year olds I meet because the vast majority demonstrate those qualities. A lot of 40 or 50 year olds haven't quite gotten there yet. 

Nutshell- I respect my elders because they have earned my respect, not because they're old. It's easier for me to respect an older person than a younger person, but there's plenty of young people I respect and plenty of old people I don't respect.

[tradephoric]

Well put corco.

[InterstateNG]

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

DTP was a moderator when the forum first started and was selected for his role by the previous administrator. His time as moderator during that period was solid... When the forum restarted in summer 2009, DTP and all other previous moderators were demoted to regular members so that we could start anew. DTP was considered to be moderator again based upon his performance during the first run of the forum. He has since garnered minmal (from me at least) negative attention that indicates that he should be demoted.

Comments/criticisms about a moderator's handling of a post/thread/situation are not unwelcome either. If we are to improve things on the board, we need to see all sides.

And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

words

Whatever.  If you get frustrated, back away from the fucking computer for a half hour.  That's what adults do.

[Scott5114]

Another thing that I feel needs to be stated is that age is just an indicator of how long you've been around and doesn't indicate how those years were spent. I have a friend who has lived in something like six countries and worked in four or five different industries. She's 25. Unless I had a reason to do otherwise, I respect her more than I would someone who is 60, worked one job the whole time, and never been outside Oklahoma, because although the latter guy has more time on this planet than her, my friend has much more experience in terms of having actually experienced a wider range of what life has to offer. Yet if one goes by a bland "respect your elders!" platitude we should give more respect to the old sheltered dude.

I bring this up because while I am only 22, I have many years of experience of Internet moderation–I joined my first online community at age 13, got my first moderation position (half-operator of an IRC channel) at 14, became a forum mod at 15, then Wikipedia admin at 18. So despite my low age compared to some posters, I like to think that I have amassed a valuable amount of experience in moderation, more so than you would think if you just looked at my age as a number.

[J N Winkler]

To the best of my recollection, this is the first time I've mentioned that incident here. When I posted about it on Facebook, some of the other moderators were surprised to learn of it and that one mod had acted unilaterally. That's what I think ought to be more open; the discussion of and rationale behind such decisions. I don't think one mod should have the power to ban a member, lock a thread or remove posts. I think that should be a group decision among the mods. A consensus, if not an absolute majority-rules vote.

In SABRE, when I acted as a moderator, we generally observed the following rules:

*  A member could be suspended only with the agreement of another elected officer.  (Moderators are all elected officers.)

*  A member could be permanently banned only after a vote of the active membership.

*  Posts were never deleted outright.  Instead, they were moved to an out-of-sight holding area.  This form of "soft deletion" was very rarely done.  Posts were generally not edited either except very occasionally to repair quoting problems (we never did forced post merges to nearly the same degree as AARoads, partly because--unlike AARoads--we allow users to view a list of most recent threads which is unsorted by board and is much more comprehensive than the "last few posts" panel at the bottom of the screen).  "Soft deletion" and post editing were at the sole discretion of an individual moderator, but with provision for oversight by the moderating team and by SABRE Committee as a whole.

Web forums present a learning curve for the membership and for the management.  Mistakes made at the beginning are less likely to be made later on.  For instance, a few years ago it was not uncommon for post edits to consist of paragraph deletions accompanied by snarks in purple text.  (This happened to me once, and I complained.)  Now that rarely happens because it has been realized that overt post edits other than for a clearly neutral purpose, such as quote repair, cause more trouble than they are worth.  They don't leave an audit trail that allows third parties to verify discretion was appropriately exercised, and they leave victims who believe justice is on their side and make demands for satisfaction which the forum is ill prepared to accommodate.  In the long run, it is just easier for both management and ordinary users to act as if they are housebroken, and to keep management responsibilities separate from feelings about individual users.

As for the age discussion, perhaps the younger generation generally has more experience with the Internet, but they don't have more experience with life. I've always respected my elders, but as my generation becomes the elders in society, I don't see that as much.

I think most of those complaining about the youth of particular moderators are not protesting about lack of years per se, but rather about what they perceive as the absence of other positive qualities, such as life experience, maturity, evenness of temperament, people skills, etc.  There are some moderators on this board, such as Scott5411, who are unusual in bringing a considerable amount of natural ability to the job.  There are others who still have a little way to go in acquiring the arts of masterly inaction and of leaving a user feeling that an intervention has been facultative even if it has not gone in that user's favor.

I would think that those who have been active in the hobby or interest of roads since the early days of MTR and Roadgeek would be given a lot more discretion, deference and latitude. There are an awful lot of people here that have been acquainted since around 1996 or so.

I would not be in favor of such a policy, nor--frankly--do I see how seniority or grandfather protection for longtime MTR regulars serves the interests of the AARoads forum.  Surely such members, having seen (and, in some cases, participated in) MTR's decline at first hand, should be more keen to model good conduct to newcomers to the hobby?

There is one final point about the youth of moderators and how it relates to familiarity with the Internet.  I think the relevant feature here is not young people's stereotyped greater familiarity with the nuts and bolts of posting, but rather their much greater experience with forums which have much more heavy-handed moderation policies, much larger turnover of posters, and are commercially run in many cases (DigitalSpy comes to mind).  It is my impression--and it is only that--that some of the younger moderators have come to the AARoads forum with the idea of importing those boards' moderation policies, perhaps not having the life experience or people savvy to realize that this is not what the community as a whole wants.

[hbelkins]

My comments about youth are and were not intended to be applied to the moderation of this forum, but to roadgeekery/roads enthusiasm/roads scholarism and life in general.

I was a know-it-all kid once upon a time, fresh out of college and thinking I knew more than my new co-workers who had no college journalism degrees but plenty of real-life experience. Didn't take me long to understand that the people with years of real-life experience knew how things worked and how to handle certain situations a lot better than my wet-behind-the-ears book learnin' allowed me to understand.

[Alex]

And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

My post was to address your continued contention that DTP is too young to be a moderator. My point is that he has been with us essentially since day one.

[J N Winkler]

I was a know-it-all kid once upon a time, fresh out of college and thinking I knew more than my new co-workers who had no college journalism degrees but plenty of real-life experience. Didn't take me long to understand that the people with years of real-life experience knew how things worked and how to handle certain situations a lot better than my wet-behind-the-ears book learnin' allowed me to understand.

If you can get admitted, a Harvard undergraduate degree will set you back about $35,000 per year.  Real life, on the other hand, is the most expensive tuition there is.

[kphoger]

Another thing that I feel needs to be stated is that age is just an indicator of how long you've been around and doesn't indicate how those years were spent. I have a friend who has lived in something like six countries and worked in four or five different industries. She's 25. Unless I had a reason to do otherwise, I respect her more than I would someone who is 60, worked one job the whole time, and never been outside Oklahoma, because although the latter guy has more time on this planet than her, my friend has much more experience in terms of having actually experienced a wider range of what life has to offer. Yet if one goes by a bland "respect your elders!" platitude we should give more respect to the old sheltered dude.

I bring this up because while I am only 22, I have many years of experience of Internet moderation–I joined my first online community at age 13, got my first moderation position (half-operator of an IRC channel) at 14, became a forum mod at 15, then Wikipedia admin at 18. So despite my low age compared to some posters, I like to think that I have amassed a valuable amount of experience in moderation, more so than you would think if you just looked at my age as a number.

I think the idea of 'respect' is a rather nebulous term, so I'll use your friend as an example.  On one level, my first reaction is to have more 'respect' for the 60-year-old man, simply because I value commitment, and his career record seems to demonstrate that value.  Others on here have expressed other reasons for naturally tending to respect their elders.  There may also be things about him that someone might find more 'respectable'–take your pick as to what value or quality you find respectable.

Someone who greatly values a free spirit, stretching yourself, and living young would likely tend to have more 'respect' for the 25-year-old lady.  There may also be things about her that someone might find more 'respectable'–again, take your pick as to what value or quality you find respectable.  And, again, this is all what someone's first reaction might be.  Our opinions of people will always evolve the more we get to know someone.  And also keep in mind that this is all hypothetical:  I obviously don't actually know either person, and I don't intend for these words to accurately describe either one.

But, here's my point:  None of that necessarily means one or the other would make a better moderator for a forum, just as none of it necessarily means one or the other would make a better parent, teacher, softball umpire, or cook.  The 60-year-old has the greater life experience of time, but the 25-year-old has the greater life experience of diverse culture.  The 25-year-old has maybe not learned yet when to keep quiet (J N Winkler's masterly inaction?), but the 60-year-old has maybe learned it to a fault and no longer knows how to take a stand.  The 25-year-old has maybe never been caught up in feuds and left trampled in the process, but the 60-year-old has maybe become bitter and cynical.

So let's just take age out of the equation, and break the word down into what it really means to us:  experience.  Experience should matter, age should not.  Now, what sort of experience should be valued most highly is another topic of discussion (working for a DOT, moderating other forums, dealing with conflicts in other areas of life, etc.), and maybe that's the more pertinent question.


ps  I'm 31 years old, have never moderated a forum, and frequently put my foot in my mouth.

[agentsteel53]

If you can get admitted, a Harvard undergraduate degree will set you back about $35,000 per year.  Real life, on the other hand, is the most expensive tuition there is.

astonishing how many fools seem to scrape the tuition together.

[formulanone]

I don't see why age would be terribly relevant terms of moderation- I'd much rather have a level-headed, mature 17 year old (and there are plenty of those out there) moderating than a hot-headed, immature 40 year old (and there are plenty of those out there). Older folks tend to be more level headed and mature than younger folks, but there's so many outliers to that notion that it shouldn't be a primary factor in consideration.

At a board I moderate, we've had some 16-year-old mods, ranging to those which are 50+. As the board has been around over ten years, the moderation age has increased in kind; roughly half of us are in our 30's. The admins were/are all over the age of 30 (save the site owner). Simply put, a good mod is a good mod, and admittedly, having a little young blood never hurts when those of us become less and less hip to the latest whatchamacallit do-dad thingamabob on the intertubes. If even a "youngster" can act with maturity when dealing with troublemakers, then other younger members have less problem falling in line (as needed), rather than feeling as if they're pushed around by older members.

On the other hand, there's always going to be a few troublemakers that leverage age into their stereotypical rant against the moderators; either they're/we're "adults with no life" or "some punk kid with nothing better to do". You'd figure general public's use and awareness of the internet over the past twenty years might shatter some of those tired-out quips, but I suppose that's expecting too much.

[InterstateNG]

And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

My post was to address your continued contention that DTP is too young to be a moderator. My point is that he has been with us essentially since day one.

So you're just going to ignore the broader point I raised.  Okie dokie.

[US71]

So you're just going to ignore the broader point I raised.  Okie dokie.

Which is?

[hbelkins]

Got this as a private message tonight:

Your signature is in violation of our site's policy against harrassing other users. While I know you and NE2 have your spats, please remove the line from your signature and don't use it against other users again. Thank you.

OK, two questions:

1.) Who's "I?" Makes this sound like one person's decision.

2.) That was my signature for weeks. Took "you" that long to notice it? 

[Roadsguy]

Funny that I never noticed your signature until now, when it's gone.

[hbelkins]

As is usual with such things, this simmered overnight and came to a full boil.

It's funny that a moderator (and I'm not picking on the one in question) can openly mock him in his signature, and get by with it -- probably because it is funny -- but someone else speaks the truth and gets slapped on the wrist.

It's also funny how certain people seem to constantly violate guideline #18, but nobody seems to care.

This also calls to mind another point I made upthread. There are several of us who've been around since the early days of M.T.R. and Roadgeek, I couldn't name all of us if I tried, but a few others are Doug K., Jeff K., Adam P., US 71, Jeremy, Froggie, and yes, even SPUI. (Apologies if I left anybody out). I would think that holding senior roadgeek/enthusiast/scholar status would allow for a whole lot more latitude vs. some newbie who just got here and who nobody knows. And I'd think that if some who aren't here, like C.C. Slater and Mark Roberts came aboard, they'd also get similar senior status deference.

For all the M.T. R. flamewars and Facebook drama over the years, this place has caused more heartburn than both of them combined. It seems like you have to be extra-careful not to offend someone's sensibilities.

(Wonder if this little rant will get my warning level raised from its current 10 percent? I'm now on the "moderator watch list." Is that anything like being on the suspected terrorist list?  )

[US71]

I'm surprised a Moderator called you on this. We have regularly discussed people's sig lines and the consensus has been to take a hands-off policy on such things.  Either the policy changed when I wasn't looking or someone has gone rogue.  Was there an ID attached to the message?