Edit by *Username*?

[quartercast]

...but that image sure helped me clear that up. That was the thread about something else that derailed into misogynistic trash. There were several warnings from us that this was not an acceptable level of discussion, but since the posters didn't clean up, the topic was split so that the posts that went off the deep end and their comments were moved to another thread, and the topic locked. Your post went with the others not because of the word "nazi", but because it was part of that thread (it would be rather incomprehensible left on its own amongst the rest).


We still have that thread. You can have your post back somewhere, if you like, although it doesn't make much sense by itself - that post is by no means something that would be considered bad. It is a bit dishonest to call that as a case of "secret" moderation though, given that there were a rather large number of rather stern warnings and admonitions given by most of the moderation staff, in-thread, before we gave up and took it away. I can restore your post in the context of a selection of mod warnings, if you want

You're welcome, I did your job for you by finding a post which you failed to. There was no board error. You guys stuffed up.


Yes, that is secret moderation. No mods identified themselves when deleting/moving/commenting in those posts. I personally never received any notification from any moderators.


And yes, that thread is a dogs breakfast - my post is a reply to klapse's, which is still there. My post has nothing to do with the contensious issue in that thread. Would you like to elaborate on why my post would be out of place?


Ideally, I would like to hear 'OK we stuffed up a bit there, we'll do better next time'. Instead you choose to ridicule me about a 'precious post' and insinuate that I am dishonest.


I'm done here. If I have the time to spare I will write a complaint about your behaviour. I know you're all volunteers, but I don't put up with bullying from anyone.

 

[Nintendo]

Also, to everyone...

I want to say that in regards to anyone saying stuff like "we (mods) have all (mods) agreed..."
Well, I didn't agree to anything.

 

[moxie]

You're welcome, I did your job for you by finding a post which you failed to. There was no board error. You guys stuffed up.


Yes, that is secret moderation. No mods identified themselves when deleting/moving/commenting in those posts. I personally never received any notification from any moderators.


And yes, that thread is a dogs breakfast - my post is a reply to klapse's, which is still there. My post has nothing to do with the contensious issue in that thread. Would you like to elaborate on why my post would be out of place?


Ideally, I would like to hear 'OK we stuffed up a bit there, we'll do better next time'. Instead you choose to ridicule me about a 'precious post' and insinuate that I am dishonest.


I'm done here. If I have the time to spare I will write a complaint about your behaviour. I know you're all volunteers, but I don't put up with bullying from anyone.

I do not understand what you mean by bullying? Honestly, I do not. Is this a language thing? Is it something with the word "precious" i do not understand? Please be aware that this is not my first language.

You told us about a post which was secretly deleted because it contained the word "nazi". That isn't very much to go on. I searched through all hidden posts back to the start of this boards and did not find it. You complained about the massive secret moderation going on. I asked the other mods - Noone knew what this was about. Noone had modded anybody for anything "nazi"-related. 

Then, you put it in context, which meant I had more to go on, and so could find it, and could give an explanation of why it was moved. I cannot particularly explain the exact choice of posts which remains, but  it would be an attempt to keep some semblance of coherence in the original thread. It might be some nuance I'm not aware of, but I still don't get how repeated warnings of "This is not ok - Clean up or we will have to do something about it", followed by continued crap, followed by a split-and-lock, can be considered "secret moderation"? The difference between "Someone secretly deleted my post because of the word Nazi, and no explanation was given" and "I had a post in a thread that went straight down the gutter, and after several mod warnings half the thread was removed and the rest was locked, although I don't see why my post was removed" is rather great in my mind. To say the first, whilst being aware of the latter, is something that I would describe as "intellectual dishonesty". I do not know what it should properly be called instead?

But in hindsight, I guess we cocked up. For most of the 8 mods involved in the discussion about this thread, this was one of the first mod-needy meltdowns. Had it been now (after a lot more discussion), we would probably have hidden the whole sorry thing and left a note in the original place, instead of trying to salvage anything out of it. Now, we  have talked through the proper procedures a bit more thoroughly. 

And no, not everyone has "agreed". There has been a discussion. There is a wide span of attitudes, and we try to find a compromise that will be in the middle. 

 

[Binky]

Whatever happened, and whoever took action, I'd say that the very existence of this thread shows that we, the mod team, got something wrong.

I can only ask for your (the users') patience while we learn how this community works, and please, do speak up if you see something that should (or shouldn't have been) moderated.

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

I hope our incompetence lessens over time.

 

[moxie]

Indeed. 

 

[EvilDragon]

Hmm, Sony, I'm not sure what you mean with over-moderating.

I am visiting the boards daily, multiple times, but I haven't seen anything where I thought here was some over-moderating going on.

Right now, it seems like a nice community to me, without much drama going on, but lot of productive stuff.

If you let us know where you think the mods are over-moderating, then please share that with us, as I don't know what you're talking about.

I checked the moderator logs, but most of them only show topic moving or splitting, it's rare that someone edits a post.

Based on the amount of visitors, posts and members, that's pretty good.

But if you can give us any examples what you didn't like, then we'll look into it.

A new mod team always needs some time to get into it.

 

[ShleeDragon]

There has been overmoderation.. I've had sarcasm edited.

 

[klapse]

Seems like very small problems are being overblown. These boards are in general friendly, positive and well managed.

 

[Kumaki]

Also, to everyone...


I want to say that in regards to anyone saying stuff like "we (mods) have all (mods) agreed..."


Well, I didn't agree to anything.

Well, the majority of Mods are in agreement about the things I mentioned, SONY.

If you aren't on board with those ideas, well, then, perhaps you should, because it makes Moderating much easier, because it has the following effects:

1. A person does not get over-modded, because of the sensitivities of one Mod.

2. The Mod trail is transparent, we all know who Modded something.

3. The Forum public knows that, when something was Modded, it was not the decision of just a single Mod...but a consensus among several Mods, and therefore, probably deserved to be Modded.

If the method in which Modding is done is clear to all who participate, and this is understood to be a consensus decision, then it makes the job of Modding a lot easier...and there is less likely to be a bunch of questionable Modding, such as quartercast and others are complaining about.

Would welcome your insights, SONY, if you think something should be done differently.

 

[Kumaki]

Whatever happened, and whoever took action, I'd say that the very existence of this thread shows that we, the mod team, got something wrong.

I can only ask for your (the users') patience while we learn how this community works, and please, do speak up if you see something that should (or shouldn't have been) moderated.

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

I hope our incompetence lessens over time.

I'll second that.

As I said, even I, who have current and past experience Modding boards...the fact is, that one must be sensitive to the culture of te Board too, when Modding.  and this is something that will take a bit of time for everyone to learn.  Please do be patient with all the new Mods.

 

[overgauss]

Sony I totally understand your point of view and get where you are coming from.  As a mod I hold you with the upmost respect and highest regard.  As far as I'm concerned you set the bar.  You make no claims to skill nor experience, yet it shows.  You are even-handed, selfless, and just.  Though you are tired of speaking, your voice still needs to be heard.

You gain trust where others flaunt it, and hold everyone to the same standard that you hold yourself to.  It is easy to see why you are admired.  My only advice is to make everyday better than your last.  I have learned from you and hope to continue to do so.

Cheers!

 

[Wally]

Can't we all get along?

 

[quartercast]

Was I naive, maybe. Deliberately dishonest, definitely not. What a cruel thing to be accused of by a mod. All in a day's bullying

It's hard to get along when you tried to bring up a geniune concern and a moderator ends up bullying you, denying it could ever happen and when you find evidence for it they accuse you of making things up.

 

[moxie]

I have nowhere "denied it could ever happen". Don't be silly. And I have nowhere accused you of "making things up". Show me where I've accused you of making things up, and I will profusely apologize. If not, I expect you to do the same. 

I have tried to help you, detailed what I did, and explained the general procedure. Your original report was rather lacking. When you told me more, I was able to find out what had happened. What is the problem?

This is also coming from the same person who is upset that he is censored for calling an actual person a "grammar nazi" (even though he actually wasn't), yet call bullying on me calling a piece of text "precious". I find that ironic.

 

[_wb_]

In my opinion, quartercast is right to worry about mods applying censorship/"overmoderation"/secret modding, and Moxie is right when he says that this is not what is happening, or at least not intentionally.

There may have been a few cases in the recent past of slightly too severe decisions (no big harm done though, nobody got banned or anything like that), but I guess there is always a "grey zone" between the stuff that clearly needs no moderation and the stuff that clearly does, and (as Moxie stated elsewhere) it took a while for the new mod team  to define exactly where to draw the line - and maybe the line is not completely crisp yet even now (if that is even possible), but at least it has gotten thinner.

If you feel like making posts near that line, e.g. like DaMummy's obsession with bestiality or Shlee's rather vulgar "sarcasm" involving iCP2 and dildos, that's fine with me but don't be surprised that sometimes such a post can get hidden and/or result in a warning point. If you want to avoid that, just stay on the safe side of the line and you should be fine. Just express your point in a calm and civilized manner (i.e. without using vulgar language, typographic screaming, racist slurs, personal insults etc.).

Real censorship would be to remove posts because someone disagrees with the contents, or wants to prevent certain information from being revealed. That kind of censorship is totally unjustifiable and if I would catch any other mod to do such a thing, I would immediately demand them to have their mod rights revoked. But I'm pretty sure that no such thing has happened on this board (at least since I'm a mod; I have no clue what Craig may or may not have done back when he had mod rights), and I'm pretty confident that no one in the current mod team would do that.

 

[quartercast]

I have nowhere "denied it could ever happen". Don't be silly. And I have nowhere accused you of "making things up". Show me where I've accused you of making things up, and I will profusely apologize. If not, I expect you to do the same.

What does dishonest and intellectually dishonest mean to you? Perhaps we have different ideas of what they mean.

I have tried to help you, detailed what I did, and explained the general procedure. Your original report was rather lacking. When you told me more, I was able to find out what had happened. What is the problem?

No problem! Yes, I understand you could only find my post after I found and submitted an archived version myself.

This is also coming from the same person who is upset that he is censored for calling an actual person a "grammar nazi" (even though he actually wasn't), yet call bullying on me calling a piece of text "precious". I find that ironic.

That is interesting, where did I call an actual person a "grammar nazi"? I was jokingly referring to a phrase used earlier in another thread, by somebody else.


I do feel your language and behaviour is bullying. You're not able to be objective and impartial, instead you take things personally and use condescending language.

 

[moxie]

What does dishonest and intellectually dishonest mean to you? Perhaps we have different ideas of what they mean.

"Intellectual dishonesty" is when someone in a discussion argues whilst willfully ignoring knowledge that would impact his arguments. Possibly this is my philosophy degree speaking it is a rather common critical counterargument. I.e. "Well, mister tobacco company representative: Since it is established that you are well aware of the state of science when it comes to smoking and lung cancer, you can't really argue that smoking is risk free - That would be intellectually dishonest of you".


In this case: Claiming that posts were deleted without a reason given, whilst being aware that several mods had already posted in the thread, warning that unless people cleaned up, stuff would have to be modded.


If anything, it is the exact opposite of "making things up". More like "Conveniently forgetting things".

 No problem! Yes, I understand you could only find my post after I found and submitted an archived version myself.

Well, it would have been enough to tell me what thread it was in to start off with. Or tell me that it disappeared together with a lot of other posts. That would, however, have lessened the impact of your "censored for no reason" line - Se answer above.


Also: On the mod end of things, it is quite a difference if something is deleted or if it is moved. There is an accessible log of all things hidden or deleted, which means that there is an obvious place to look for "deleted" things. "Moved" things are not so easy to follow.

That is interesting, where did I call an actual person a "grammar nazi"? I was jokingly referring to a phrase used earlier in another thread, by somebody else.

The quote from the post in question is "Are you doing the spelling and grammar nazi thing again?". Later, you claimed that you were censored for using the expression "grammar nazi" and that this was wrong (part of the great big secret moderating thingie). Yet on the other hand, you want to report me for bullying on the grounds that I called your post precious.


The funny in the argument lies not in whether you actually meant to call someone a nazi or was just joking, it lies in the combination of stating that the mods should not act on the perceived action of calling a person a nazi, yet at the same time the mods should act on (as a consequence of you reporting) me calling a post precious.

I do feel your language and behaviour is bullying. You're not able to be objective and impartial, instead you take things personally and use condescending language.

I still don't get how in the world you can construe what I'm doing here as "bullying". It is really, truly, incomprehensible to me. Yes, I take it personally when you claim that the mods are secretly deleting posts that they don't like, because I am a person who are part of the mod team, and that is a rather serious accusation if it is true. When you repeat that accusation with nothing more to show for it than that you've lost one post, I get irritated. So I search, ask, and cannot find it, and tell you so. You give me more information, I find it and explain what happened, and you reply that I'm not apologizing enough? And to top it of, you claim quite provably wrong things about me (that I've "denied it could ever happen", that I've accused you of "making things up"), AND then call me for bullying? For being condescending? For not being objective?

Really? 

I'd really like you to find where I've said those things. Really. And tell me, so that I can apologize properly.

Or, when you don't find that, you'd have to admit that you are quite simply lying, above. Go ahead.

 

[2bit]

You know that you guys are arguing over a post that quartercast , had it not disappeared ( hidden , forum glitch frankly I do not give a **** ) would have forgotten about making the next day . That in my opinion is a total and utter waste of bandwidth and Evildragon's server space .

 

[moxie]

Well, yes, in part. The other part is exactly how...um...freely one may position oneself visavi stuff like truth. I react badly to people claiming I've said or written something I didn't really do. I notice that QC has not yet shown me where I've supposedly said the things he claimed (and berated me for). 

 

[Christoph.Krn]

And no, not everyone [from the team of moderators, remark] has "agreed". There has been a discussion. There is a wide span of attitudes, and we try to find a compromise that will be in the middle.

Well, has anyone from the moderation team ever considered asking all the users for input, too?
I think for the team to solve (some of) the problems it appears to be having with moderation recently, the moderators should think again about just /why/ someone would want to fake-moderate own posts. Basically, I think that the moderation team should open a public thread where it actively asks users for feedback.

On a sidenote, I'm a fan of standardized in-post moderation notes. If they are there, and if they are done right, then everyone knows and understands why, where, and also when something was edited and by whom, right at the places where it matters. This is especially true for threads that were split out from other threads, where a note in the first post with a link to the original thread provides helpful context.