|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Feb 25, 2004, 3:22 AM
Post #1 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
BVB posted a Topic about Roughster's questionable ethics towards taking the last shot at people, then locking the thread. Here is BVB's post:
In reply to: i noticed that after taking a few cheap shots at oldskool, he promptly locked the thread. what a sissy. is this what passes for moderation on this board? meanwhile, back at the ranch, i routinely get warnings from other moderators to tone it down. hypocrites. walk your talk, or get out of the moderation business. yes, roughster -- i'm talking to you. asshole. and as for whoever owns this board --maybe you should start policing your volunteers a bit. because from where i sit, they're all looking pretty good in their brownshirts.
There was also a post several days ago directed toward Roughster, which quickly disappeared too. I saved what the author had to say also:
In reply to: Gee, I hardly ever bother to visit this dump, except to add a whole bunch of routes not in the printed guides, but I composed something that I thought would add something to the anti-bolt thread, and this d***head with his nose up BobD's butt locked it for no apparent reason. In my response I was going to acknowledge my utmost respect for Mr. D'Antonio's accomplishments, but some dickhead precluded that, which I think will elevate this conflict to a level not required. Roughster, you are a f---ing moron. Zap this thread, eliminate my account. Please. Jackass. Continue your circle jerk at RC.com. What a bunch of idiots.
I believe Roughster's actions over such issues should be discussed for this has bothered many people. For all fairness perhaps a poll should be taken to determine if Roughster should be removed from his moderator status. Similar polls have been implemented by moderators to determine if users should be permanently banded. It would only be fair to subject the moderators to the same actions they take in such situations...
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Feb 25, 2004, 3:33 AM
Post #2 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I recently might have made my own peace with roughster, so I'm not going to just slam him here.
I've had several of my threads or ones I've contributed much fuel to locked or deleted. Some of them were totally stupid, like my correlation between coffee and loose bowels, but others were legit and IMO deserved to be seen. It's not right, nothing should be deleted. TOS seems to be a shield, this is not just for roughster but everyone. I'd like to have my own website where NO threads are ever locked, nothing is deleted and we can cuss all we want. It'd probably be classified as adult and I'd have to charge people to use it.
But at least we could have boobs on the site.
|
|
|
|
|
xanx
Feb 25, 2004, 3:39 AM
Post #3 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2002
Posts: 1002
|
cry about it :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry::cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry::cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry::cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Feb 25, 2004, 3:46 AM
Post #4 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
In reply to: It's not right, nothing should be deleted.
Indeed, nothing should be locked, either. All moderators actions should be considered, not just roughster's.
The only Mod I've had to deal with over any situation was epic_ed, which is one of the most just and nonpartisan persons on this website. He is extremely(if not completely), nondiscriminatory and fair, one of the best.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 25, 2004, 3:49 AM
Post #5 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
diesel,
That post you dredged up from bvb is pretty old. You can't believe how many similar threads of the type:
___________is doing a crappy job as a moderator.
have been posted here in the past. If you can't live with the fact that this board is highly moderated, you're in the wrong place. For myself, I have learned to take the good with the bad at RC.com.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Feb 25, 2004, 3:59 AM
Post #6 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
In reply to: That post you dredged up from bvb is pretty old.
It was posted just an hour or so ago...
In reply to: Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 7:00 pm Post subject: roughster does it again.
In reply to: If you can't live with the fact that this board is highly moderated, you're in the wrong place.
As far as bring back up issues that have been covered in the past, I apologize, I am relatively new to this website compared to you. :P
|
|
|
|
|
scubasnyder
Feb 25, 2004, 4:02 AM
Post #7 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 1639
|
who cares its just words, blah
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 25, 2004, 4:08 AM
Post #8 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
[quote="diesel___smoke"]In reply to: That post you dredged up from bvb is pretty old.
It was posted just an hour or so ago...
In reply to: Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 7:00 pm Post subject: roughster does it again.
Oops, sorry. That looked remarkably similar to an out take from a pissing contest Roughster had going with BVB a long time ago. I guess its still an ongoing thing.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
mm
Feb 25, 2004, 4:09 AM
Post #9 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Posts: 13
|
hey roughster,
this post is clearly in the wrong place: you should move it to the "go cry to your mom about it" category....
diesel_smoke: do u always bi*ch this much? nobody likes crybabies... :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Feb 25, 2004, 4:20 AM
Post #10 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
MM, I believe you've missed the substance of the issue, as it probably involved a little too much thought for you to comprehend. But feel free to call it as you see it...
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Feb 25, 2004, 4:31 AM
Post #11 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
Makes you wonder if THIS has anything to do with your motivation diesel? Hold a grudge much? Same could be said for BVB, who by the way supposedly has me Killfiled, which would mean he wouldn't be able to see my posts at all. I knew how long that one would last :lol:
I see two issues in this thread:
#1 Moderators post here too and have opinions. Thats how we became moderators here in the 1st place generally. We were active on the site and had a good feel for what was going on. Just because we are moderators does not mean that we are no longer allowed to post. Now look at your own post history Diesel. Can you see how you did not get along or agree with other posters over certain issues? If you need help, I can point them out for you :)
The fact of the matter is some people disagree, and that seems all fine and dandy unless one of those "someone" is a moderator. Then all of a sudden it is , "OMG so and so moderator is horrible!" Ask yourself what your motivation is for the Diesel? Have I moderated you in a manner that was unfair? As for the other threads, do you think I would be foolish enough to delete a thread about me personally and moderating style?
Other moderators and admins removed those posts for very specific reasons, the most prominant being they were against the [TOS] which I might add there are several elements to this thread which also violate it. Also, there is a Mod and Editor forum where this stuff gets discussed in such open and honest ways, that it is probably the "brutal" forum on this site. You guys don't see it of course, but the fact that every moderator is operating in a glass bowl should clue you in to the fact that we are under heavy scrutiny at all times. Do you know that every moderator action except for threads that are moved from one forum to another gets echo'd back to the Mod and Admin forum for everyone to look at and see what happened? This site is not run nilly-willy like I would guess many of you presume.
The second issue is the fact that there are any moderators is the real beef. The bottom line is people don't like to have their posts messed with in any way, shape, or form. I have known that from day one and any moderator who actually moderates per the [TOS] knows that as well. Trust me, it is much easier to not moderate and be a moderator, than to actually be a moderator and moderate accordingly to that which is layed out in the [TOS].
The business of runing the site to avoid being "blocked" from certain IPs by content filters and in order to fulfill the obligations for our PAY TO ADVERTISE clients require that we have a certain standard. Any standard, in our case the [TOS] , will require posts which fall below that to be "moderated". Think about that the next time you are at work and browsing the site. If this site was like bouldering.com, there is a good chance that many people could not access it from their place of business because of the content filters. Or how about that if we didn't have advertisers that we couldn't afford the bandwidth to support this heavily a trafficed site?
Blah, as Curt says, this is nothing new. I have been through it before, as well as I have seen other moderators go through it as well. It generally happens when a user has a beef for a moderator because of their opinions and ideals rather than actually there acts of moderating. It is no different here.
As for Moderating this post, I let and admin do it.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Feb 25, 2004, 4:32 AM
Post #12 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
Hopefully I'm not stepping on any toes here, but the admin staff has definitely been discussing policies regarding moderation and the possibility that some moderators might be a little over zealous in their dedication to the site. However, moderators and other staff members donate a considerable amount of time to rockclimbing.com because we enjoy the site and want to do what we can to make it enjoyable for as many people as possible, and we honestly believe that moderatros' actions are intended to be in the best interest of the site and the general userbase.
We'll also be discussing this within the moderator forum to get a broader perspective on the issue, but we definitely encourage and listen to user feedback - and will make policy changes as necessary to accomodate our growing numbers. If anyone ever feels that a thread has been unfairly locked or moderated, please PM an admin so that the issue can be addressed - but spamming General is never a good idea as it obligates us to take action against the very people who are already upset with the state of affairs.
Regarding the TOS, it is not intended to be a shield for moderators - it is intended to provide guidelines for basic conduct. If you have any recommended changes to the TOS, please let us know. We are always open to constructive criticism so that we can improve as we grow - but flaming people who are trying to help is generally unproductive.
In short, constructive feedback, good. Flamage, bad.
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Feb 25, 2004, 4:37 AM
Post #13 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
You know, I think you might enjoy posting here a lot more if you weren't a moderator, Roughster. Seems that a lot of mods who resigned have seen that life on the other side is a lot less hassle and more fun.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 4:40 AM
Post #14 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: I've had several of my threads or ones I've contributed much fuel to locked or deleted. Some of them were totally stupid, like my correlation between coffee and loose bowels, but others were legit and IMO deserved to be seen. It's not right, nothing should be deleted. TOS seems to be a shield, this is not just for roughster but everyone. I'd like to have my own website where NO threads are ever locked, nothing is deleted and we can cuss all we want. It'd probably be classified as adult and I'd have to charge people to use it.
yeah that pretty much sums up the situation... we don't bother trying to win on merits. ;-) Actually the truth is more along the lines of 'you cannot please everyone, and we don't even try to anymore'. Nobody can stop you from setting up your own site, and if it rules and everyone leaves rc.com for it, that's our own damn fault. if not, maybe we're onto something, what with this Shameful Kowtowing to People With Actual Money. (...that pays our Actual Hosting Bill and Actual Server Purchase...)
As far as moderation goes -- I set it up to be audited, and I'll look and see if it is. Threads don't get deleted; they get marked as 'suppressed' (yes, the irony is fully intentional, I wrote the code). So if someone's been making questionable decisions, they can explain why they opted to whack certain posts/threads; and if it seems abusive, maybe they are not the right person for that particular job. (we have plenty of shit-shoveling work to go around)
The TOS isn't supposed to be a shield from scrutiny, and if it is there's something wrong. It is there so that users know what to expect from the moderators, up to a point. (there's really no accounting for taste, but there's also no excuse for spite and favoritism in a 'community')
On the other hand the quote from thread #2 up above is about the most obvious flame I've ever seen. Part of the purpose of moderation is to keep empty, vacuous crap like that off the front page (and in Community where it is logically shelved).
Besides, it was a shitty flame job. I would run away and hide if I'd written such a weak flame when there is an embarrassingly vast supply of ammo.
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Feb 25, 2004, 4:41 AM
Post #15 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
In reply to: You know, I think you might enjoy posting here a lot more if you weren't a moderator, Roughster. Seems that a lot of mods who resigned have seen that life on the other side is a lot less hassle and more fun.
I am out to prove that you can be a moderator and actually have a strong opinion. Every website has a moderator "hitman". This is the mod that everyone loves to hate but is usually because they represent the target of "all acts of moderating".
Believe it or not I am a moderator for two other websites (SCARY I know ;) ) as well have run my own website. I am not new to this game, and the other two sites I moderate for, there was already someone filling the role that I fill here so I was spared :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 4:57 AM
Post #16 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: It's not right, nothing should be deleted. Indeed, nothing should be locked, either. All moderators actions should be considered, not just roughster's.
yeah, god forbid that we occasionally intervene to break up a mob scene. remind me to have the hosting bill forwarded to your mailing address...
I know you're not stupid, so maybe you are simply overlooking what happens when things move too far towards total chaos. We chose to err on the side of order and we soldified that intent in the wording of the TOS. Does it suck sometimes, yes it does. People say fuck and shit in the real world and often with good reason. People argue, sometimes viciously. But the total lack of accountability -- the knowledge that I'm not going to reach across the table and knock your teeth out if you insult me on the Web -- gives the situation a lot more incentive to break for anarchy. Once that happens, the epic flamewars, while initially amusing, tend to destroy the value of a site as a resource.
I used to read F*ckedCompany a lot, there were some awesome trolls on those boards. But the sad thing is, even the good trolls got drowned out by the race-baiting Bush-supporters and Joe Wang spams. That pretty much decided it for me; the low road is not a good business model. (note also the lack of advertising on FC and phil's other sites these days.)
Threads don't get deleted; I implemented this a few months ago. They get 'hidden' and another mod can reverse such decisions, 'unhiding' them. Just like locked threads can be unlocked. If you edit or zero out a post of yours, it goes away, but that isn't how it works for topics.
The reason for that hack is precisely this type of situation. If a decision is difficult and error prone, why not make it reversible? Poof, unlocked/unsuppressed, no harm done. Plus there's an audit trail.
If I wasn't so lazy maybe I'd send a patch to the phpbb team ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 5:00 AM
Post #17 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: If you can't live with the fact that this board is highly moderated, you're in the wrong place. This is probably true, maybe I should go to a libertarian(not to be confused with liberal) minded website...
oh christ, I knew there was something awry here... remind me again why Libertarians haven't stormed the White House?
ah yes, it's because of the unbelievable naivete of their policy goals.
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Feb 25, 2004, 5:02 AM
Post #18 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
In reply to: Makes you wonder if THIS has anything to do with your motivation diesel? Hold a grudge much?
In reply to: Now look at your own post history Diesel. Can you see how you did not get along or agree with other posters over certain issues? If you need help, I can point them out for you :)
In reply to: The fact of the matter is some people disagree, and that seems all fine and dandy unless one of those "someone" is a moderator.
In reply to: Have I moderated you in a manner that was unfair?
No, you haven't. No one has moderated me thus far.
In reply to: Also, there is a Mod and Editor forum where this stuff gets discussed in such open and honest ways, that it is probably the "brutal" forum on this site. You guys don't see it of course, but the fact that every moderator is operating in a glass bowl should clue you in to the fact that we are under heavy scrutiny at all times.
In reply to: The second issue is the fact that there are any moderators is the real beef. The bottom line is people don't like to have their posts messed with in any way, shape, or form.
Very true, something that should be held to the highest order.
In reply to: The business of runing the site to avoid being "blocked" from certain IPs by content filters and in order to fulfill the obligations for our PAY TO ADVERTISE clients require that we have a certain standard. Any standard, in our case the [TOS] , will require posts which fall below that to be "moderated". Think about that the next time you are at work and browsing the site. If this site was like bouldering.com, there is a good chance that many people could not access it from their place of business because of the content filters.
Edit: To correct term 'deleted' to 'suppressed'
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Feb 25, 2004, 5:11 AM
Post #19 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: In reply to: You know, I think you might enjoy posting here a lot more if you weren't a moderator, Roughster. Seems that a lot of mods who resigned have seen that life on the other side is a lot less hassle and more fun. I am out to prove that you can be a moderator and actually have a strong opinion. Every website has a moderator "hitman". This is the mod that everyone loves to hate but is usually because they represent the target of "all acts of moderating". Believe it or not I am a moderator for two other websites (SCARY I know ;) ) as well have run my own website. I am not new to this game, and the other two sites I moderate for, there was already someone filling the role that I fill here so I was spared :lol:
Ah. Some other mods here have expressed disillusionment with the job and got to the point where they weren't having any fun anymore. I wasn't sure whether or not you were getting fed up with the job.
|
|
|
|
|
jackscoldsweat
Feb 25, 2004, 5:12 AM
Post #20 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 18, 2003
Posts: 380
|
"Monderation is masterbation" ~Wieland
Moderation on site forums like this are the exact reason forums like supertopo.com and news groups like rec.climbing are so successful. Rec.climbing has stood the test of time and will live on long after. Post/Read what you like on them. Just be prepared to take the flame should it follow.
This site needs a LORD SLIME!!
Moderation leads to self destruction. I believe in extremes. Maybe thats why I climb??
JacksColdSweat
|
|
|
|
|
hishopper
Feb 25, 2004, 5:16 AM
Post #21 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 387
|
Hey, I got an idea... how 'bout we moderate the moderators! Yeah... yeah! That's a great idea!
And then.. then we'll police the police while we're at it!
Flagrant abuse of authority is one thing, but 99% of the rants about moderators boils down to snobbish little sissies whining about being moderated. Don't like it? LEAVE! Or work your way into becoming one yourself, and then of course you wouldn't dare stoop to retribution and pharisaically do to them what you've spewed about them doing to you for months.
I know forums are where everyone who has a keyboard gets to chime their $.02 in - and that is a great thing - but please, please get a life.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 5:19 AM
Post #22 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Power corrupts, and any one in power should be heavily scrutinized and regulated so no one is 'stepped upon.'
*SNORE* yeah, and Halliburton shouldn't get no-bid $700M contracts... meanwhile, back in the real world...
This is a website with some relatively inconsequential forums that people use to communicate. Aaron is a volunteer moderator. He may or may not be perfect. You may or may not agree with his judgement. But his decisions are reversible (your posts don't get deleted from the database when he or I or any other mod whacks a thread) and you are free to question them, in fact when you do it makes it all the more likely that such decisions will be scrutinized. Not certain, mind you -- we're not flipping the juice on to the electric chair, here. There is a pretty significant degree of self-policing that goes on, and while Aaron takes a lot of flak, it's likely that this is more a result of the sheer volume of work he does on the forums than anything else. If you disagree, you will be well served by noting specifically the forums involved and the titles or general time of the incident(s), and forwarding compelling evidence of it directly to Phil Box (philbox) or Adam (rrradam). Maybe they agree with you, maybe they don't. But it will do a lot more good than the usual circus in the forums. Nobody pays serious attention to these anymore, for better or worse.
Not saying you're wrong, just that this is the wrong place to debate it. Also, most of us who work on the site admire Aaron's work ethic and are reluctant to question his decisions when they're all reversible anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Feb 25, 2004, 5:19 AM
Post #23 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
In reply to: Hopefully I'm not stepping on any toes here, but the admin staff has definitely been discussing policies regarding moderation and the possibility that some moderators might be a little over zealous in their dedication to the site.
Amber, I feel like you're condoning what diesel is saying by posting this first part. Maybe I'm running around with rose-colored glasses as I tend to do, but I don't see anyone here with a semblance of "power" misusing it. Some mods are more lax than others. I let a lot of stuff go that I probably shouldn't, but those that work stringently to uphold the ideals of the site as they see it shouldn't be debased with comments like this.
I'm very much a "let the people govern themselves" person when it comes to social intricasies such as website forums, social settings, etc. The crappy people (including we mods) will eventually be taught a lesson in classic scapegoating fashion. We have threads in community calling dummies to task and other mob-policing going on. My solution in life has always been that if you can't draw a clear distintion of beneficial or not, it is usually best to avoid altogether. I was called on it and rescinded, even though I still don't like some of the content posted there, I let it be.
But diesel, cussin'? Horse with blinders? Come on. Is swearing THAT important to you? I've been known to cuss like a sailor at times but I somehow manage to restrain myself posting to RC.com. There's no need for it. It drives me crazy when we run weed, loss of virginity, and drinking glorification threads, too. When I was a teenager, we didn't get exposed to that stuff and I think my pals and I turned out okay. No reason to let a kid get exposed to stuff when he/she can find out about these things on their own.
All this Internet stuff does translate to real life whether you want to believe that or not. I've not climbed with people because of it, found people had opinions of me before I met them, and such like. Chill people, chill.
That's my happy happy advice of the day.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 5:21 AM
Post #24 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
I don't restrain myself for shit. That's one of the reasons I've never had a problem with the filters (personally). F-bombs just don't have any power anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Feb 25, 2004, 5:22 AM
Post #25 of 136
(7784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Hey, I got an idea... how 'bout we moderate the moderators! Yeah... yeah! That's a great idea! And then.. then we'll police the police while we're at it!
actually it is a great theory, it's the implementation that gets you everytime ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
