Is this forum too moderated?

[Beltway]

FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

Really?  They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

[KEK Inc.]

Then please add that [custom text formatting] to the posting guidelines. 

[Brandon]

FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

Really?  They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

As we all go bump, bump, bumping along outside the Tri-State Tollway.  BTW, ISTHA uses its own money on its roads, fully separate from IDOT.

[Beltway]

They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

As we all go bump, bump, bumping along outside the Tri-State Tollway.  BTW, ISTHA uses its own money on its roads, fully separate from IDOT.

I am well aware of those two agencies, and I also find the non-toll highways to be in decent shape overall.  Like I said, billions of dollars in reconstructions have been performed to the non-toll Chicago expressways that were originally built in the 1950s and 1960s.

[Michael]

FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Once I found out that IDiOT was Illinois, it's helped me a lot when there's discussion about multiple "I" states.

If it's not stated in the posting guidelines, please do not edit posts just because of a personal formatting pet peeves. 

What needs to happen to get "please use default formatting unless you have a really, really good reason not to" into the forum guidelines? Because that really should be a rule. I've yet to see an instance where custom formatting makes things more readable or more useful- it's just annoying even if I do have the correct fonts installed.

Seconded.

Thirded.  Seeing posts in Calibri (not Corbel, to answer Scott's question) drives me nuts.  I hate Calibri and Segoe UI as much as the strongest anti-Clearview people on here hate Clearview.  Even though I don't like Clearview, I still prefer it over Calibri and Segoe UI.  I find Calibri and Segoe UI to be blurry at smaller sizes, even though they were designed for Cleartype and LCDs.  Part of the blurriness might be do to the fact that I usually see the fonts used in Windows Vista and 7 where Cleartype is on by default, and I find Cleartype to be blurrier than regular text.  In the picture below, I think the text on the left is clearer, but the text on the right is darker.

Source: Microsoft's Windows XP Cleartype Tuner Webpage
</rant>

Back on topic, I don't think the forum is too moderated.  The only mod edit I can think of in one of my posts was by Steve when I forgot to close a quote tag.  As for bugo's opinion of post merging, I saw his posts before they were merged, and I thought it was somewhat annoying to have multiple posts in a row.  Why not just use the [h­r] tag (yay for the invisible character to make that show up!) or multiple quotes?  This post is an example of the multiple quote method.  If I'm using multiple quotes on more than one topic, I'll do something like this:

Topic 1, Quote 1

Response

Topic 1, Quote 2

Response

Topic 2, Quote 1

Response

I have seen some people here that are quick to jump on someone that they think is "doing it wrong" when they post something, but I won't point fingers.  Lastly, I haven't seen any "disappearing posts", but I don't pay that much attention.

[NE2]

How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

[Alps]

How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

[NE2]

You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

[Alps]

You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

That's unrelated, as far as I know.

[InterstateNG]

How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

This:

"Yawn."  "Plonk."  What is this, the best of MTR?

We're dealing with it.

would suggest otherwise.

[Scott5114]

The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

[Molandfreak]

We're still having this conversation? Seriously? I know I'm new here, but I've seen nothing but good moderation being done. These guys clearly go by the book, and they hold no grudges against anyone. And I'm not just saying this to get brownie points, I don't believe in that.

[bugo]

and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

[InterstateNG]

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?

[hbelkins]

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?

Well, I have to give you credit. You got me to look at the International board for the first time. Guess I should quit being so xenophobic. 

The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

This:

"Yawn."  "Plonk."  What is this, the best of MTR?

We're dealing with it.

would suggest otherwise.

That merely suggests that the mods ("we") are in discussion about it. I don't know exactly how they handle things, but it could be that Steve was outvoted.

You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

To whom are you referring?

[US71]

and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

Proof?

[agentsteel53]

and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

but you do.

contribute, or go away.

[Alps]

and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

but you do.

contribute, or go away.

As much as I like having this topic open, if we devolve into personal attacks, it will be locked. And don't say it's because "this forum is too moderated."

In terms of grudges, look, we're all human. We all make mistakes, hold grudges, etc. But the idea of a moderation team is that if one or two people dislike someone, the other mods keep them in line. I have called out other mods several times for perceived grudges, and they have done the same to me. I've defended a few members here when need be, and then again, I've tried to get a few banned. Not naming any names.

The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

In general, if we issue a warning, that user will know they have been warned. Sometimes we do make adjustments to the warning level without issuing a warning, but if a user becomes moderated or temp-banned, they will absolutely know about it. There are very few users ever on warning greater than 0% at any given time - I think the most I've seen is 4.

That merely suggests that the mods ("we") are in discussion about it. I don't know exactly how they handle things, but it could be that Steve was outvoted.

There wasn't a vote per se. The reason I responded the way I did was to try to stop the bickering in here by letting them know that yes, the mods are aware of what's going on. The ultimate resolution of the issue was done while I was at work.

[Brandon]

Out of sheer curiosity, what are the stars for on the left, under the user name?

[SSOWorld]

Yellow and Blue stars are set up for ranking by "experience" (posts).  Red stars: 1 = Regional Moderator (in charge of 1 or more boards), 3 stars - Global moderator, 4 stars - ask Steve, 5 stars - Admin.  Green Stars: 1 - DOT employee, 2 - contributes to AARoads.

[Scott5114]

In general, if we issue a warning, that user will know they have been warned. Sometimes we do make adjustments to the warning level without issuing a warning, but if a user becomes moderated or temp-banned, they will absolutely know about it. There are very few users ever on warning greater than 0% at any given time - I think the most I've seen is 4.

I want to add on to this discussion to share that moderator approval of posts starts at a 30% warn level, and moderators typically adjust the warn level 5 to 10 points at a time, meaning you will almost always have to commit somewhere between three and six infractions before reaching the threshold. The level also gradually degrades over time, so if you find yourself above the 30% level and don't do anything to cause your warn level to be revised upward (either by behaving or simply taking a break from the forum), you will eventually be free to post without mod intervention.

In NE2's case, he received a 20 point warning for posting "yawn", two 10 point warnings for posting "yawn" two more times, and then a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense". His warning level is currently 35% due to automatic degradation since then.

A warn level above 90% "mutes" the user–they are still able to log in (i.e. they are not outright banned), but not post anything.

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

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).

[hbelkins]

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions. 

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions. 

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

[Brandon]

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions. 

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

Or like a blog I used to post on.  The owner instituted a ratings system and all hell broke loose.  If people want to see what grudges and vendettas are like, it was like that blog when the guy was kicking people off right and left when he didn't like something they said (whether right or wrong).  He really went nuts when some of them went and posted on other blogs.  I just left, sick of it.  Don't even know if the account is active or banned - don't care either.  I'm very glad that the level of moderation here is lower, but enough to keep it from looking like the free-for-all that MTR became.  As for grudges and vendettas here, I don't really see much of it based on previous experience.

[J N Winkler]

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.