2011 mod poll

[Joaz Banbeck]

A day and a half has passed since the last nominee straggled in, so it seems to be time to do the poll.
We think that the right number of active mods is about four, so everyone gets four votes (except sockpuppets!)

I invite the candidates to post a position in this thread. Please, candidates only! ( As Daal has already offered his opinion in another thread, I'm copying it here.)
I recommend waiting until all candidates have posted, but it is up to you. The polls are open!

[Joaz Banbeck]

MY POSITION:

One of our local go players hosts classes for young players here in Southern California at local libraries. I've been to several of them to help teach. There are a bunch of boards with a dozen kids from maybe 5 to 10, most with their parents present. Some of the parents understand the game, some don't. Some of them speak English, others do not. Some of the parents leave the kids there, trusting us to look after the child until they return.
Adults play games too here, occasionally way above the level of the kids. Sometimes the kids understand what is going on at the board next to them, sometimes not.

That's what I visualize when I do modding: a multi-cultural and family-friendly environment. I would like to think that any parent could let his child log on to L19 without concern, or log on himself and be welcomed. I ask myself: would I be comfortable if I had a 6-year old child learning go, and the two adults at the next board began conversing like that?

So I am probably the most active mod when it comes to insults and name-calling.

On the other hand, I'm not greatly troubled by words like 'Orient'. I figure if it requires quoting three PoMo writers to explain why you are offended, the 6-year old wouldn't understand it anyway. So I am way less active than average on those issues.

I'm about 60-40 in favor of getting rid of the 'naughty words' filter. It sounded like a good idea at first, to have something online 7/24 that could inhibit rapidly escalating arguments, but in practice it has its faults. Not only does it not deal well with English donkeys, but I've seen several posts where stronger words were written in legitimate contexts and it took them out.

And I'm in favor of banning sockpuppets on sight.

That's where I stand on modding. If you like it, vote for me.

[kirkmc]

Well, I see that I'm invited to post my party platform here.

Vote for me and you'll have two chickens in every pot, and all your moves will be honte! Dead horses will not be flogged!

Seriously, I'm not interested in making any big pronouncements. I'm interested in keeping the board clear of spam, arguments and insults, ensuring that adults and kids can feel comfortable, and allowing the many meandering threads to meander, unless things turn messy.

I'm in Europe, so for spam-cleaning purposes that may be useful (depending on which time zones the other moderators are in), and I'm familiar with phpBB, running two other forums with the software. I work at home, and visit the board often during the day. I've successfully rooted out an attack of spammers on one forum, thanks to some tips from Jordus, and am well aware of what is needed to handle this on the back end.

[Chew Terr]

I don't really know if I should advertise like a political campaign here. Basically, I feel like the majority of a mod's job is stuff like spam/splitting threads when requested, et cetera. While the other portions are more visible, I assume that deleting spam is 90% of what mods do, and I'm willing to do the extra work.

As far as the issues that people are talking about, I suppose I may as well chime in my thoughts. As far as word filters go: my thoughts are this: I liked Don's outlook on GoDiscussions, that (paraphrased) 'parents should be comfortable with their children being on here unsupervised'. I try not to curse but I do, and I certainly don't normally care if other people do. However, if a friend of mine's swearing loudly near the kids' section of a bookstore, I'm going to elbow him. Basically, my thought is that the filter could either be viewer-end optional or removed on a trial basis. If the filter is removed, moderators would have to keep an eye out. I figure, anything that's kosher for daytime TV is fine, but if people go over the top, mods could either talk to that member individually (and edit the posts) or re-instate the filter. I'm all for freedom to speak casually, but I also want people like elementary/middle schoolers taught go by people like Iceman to feel welcome here.

For personal attacks, I try to err on the side of politeness, personally. However, I was in the debate club in high school, so I'm okay with things getting heated in a discussion. If something is questionable, I'd probably send a warning (I mean, if I sent something that could be misunderstood, I'd want to know so I could clear it up). However, if someone posts offensive stuff more than once, I'd probably start deleting content (and marking it as deleted for clarity). This is a pretty mature/understanding audience, and a lot of issues are discussed reasonably, with actual intervention rarely needed.

Wow, I wrote much more than I'd intended. Basically, I'm not asking for votes. I view this as a charity job that I'd be willing to help out with (since I'm on here anyways). There are lots of great candidates here, people who are helpful and reasonable. Honestly, any of these people will probably be fine, I just wanted to explain my preferences for moderation, whether it's me that's picked or not. Another thing worth considering by the current mods is, is it worth getting 6 mods instead of 4, to deal with the recent increase in spam?

[topazg]

I think most people on here that know me probably have a fair idea on my policies, but in short:

I believe that moderators should be vigilant, but not interfering. Where conversations touch typically controversial areas, I'll watch but not post, and only step in if things start becoming unpleasant (discrimination rears its head, attacks get personal etc). I am in favour of settling threads down instead of locking them, and contacting posters regarding content before manually editing it where possible.

I believe that assuming good faith and good intent is an important default position, until sufficient evidence to the contrary suggests otherwise. I think in a forum community consisting of primarily adults, it is important for moderators to not patronise or condescend posters, and this is all part of maintaining a civil atmosphere.

I believe it's important to have moderators that are elected by the community, that represent the community, and that set a example conduct for existing and new members. I think the process by which moderators are selected should be transparent, and all moderators should be held accountable for their actions.

[daal]

Here's my position:

As long as people are not being rude or offensive to one another they should be allowed to say pretty much anything they want. We have a few rules on the forum that disallow topics such as religion, politics and sex, that in public conversations sometimes tend to move in an offensive direction. This makes moderation easier, and as such, I think the rule is fine. Nonetheless, in most cases, it's not one that needs to be enforced. Most of the time, we treat one another with respect, and that's what I generally expect. I also believe that it is unnecessary to censor bad language. Most of the time, nobody uses it anyway, but if someone feels the need for example to be explicit in describing how much a move stinks, then so be it.

[Dusk Eagle]

Moderators for the most part should not intervene to stop a debate between two members. However, if a debate gets too personal and insults start to be thrown, moderators should step into the thread and issue a warning to avoid personal attacks. If the discussion cools down, great. If it doesn't, moderators should resort to more extreme measures, such as locking the thread and, if necessary, privately issue warnings to individual users.

In terms of editing messages, I think it is okay for moderators to do so if one of the following occurs:

• Profanity directed toward another user, or excessive profanity.
• Inappropriate advertising/spam
• Posting of obscene images
• Links to illegal/copyright-violating material

In all cases, moderators should note if they have edited a user's message. If a whole post has to be deleted, I would prefer if there were some way for the forum software to denote that a message has been deleted, but I'm not sure if that is feasible. The exception to that last statement would be if a post is being deleted which is the only post in the thread, in which case just deleting the entire thread is fine.

One final thing I expect from moderators is that they will strive to be civil and friendly with all members of the forum. I feel that this is an important quality if I am going to trust that the moderator is making fair decisions when a problem occurs.

This is what I would like from other moderators, and if I am elected what I would strive to follow.

[Kirby]

Political campaigning? Hehehe... I think that I will vote based on what I already know about you guys... Although, I guess it's useful to see where you guys stand on issues.

[Solomon]

I'll be direct:

1. I don't edit or delete other people's posts unless the post contains warez or pornography because I find it to be rude and invasive.
2. I may not have posted much recently, but I am still active (lurking mostly) and have kept up with my moderating duties with a spambot ban count of 18 in 2011.
3. Regarding personal attacks and heated debates, I follow the 3 strikes rule; more info here.

I'd like to emphasize point 1. I'm well aware that a kid could log on L19, read a heated debate and be affected by the animosity of some posts, but I consider it an abuse in censorship powers to modify what someone else says without notifying the poster beforehand for this sake. If the violation is more explicit, then warnings - never impulsive editing/deleting.

[EdLee]

I learned the hard way a while back on GoDiscussions the danger of losing one's calm on any online forum.

Since then, I've adopted a few guidelines for myself. They may sound very cliche:

• If I have nothing nice to say, it's probably better not to say anything.
• If it's something grandparents should not see, better think twice before posting.
• Use caution and common sense -- but understand that could mean different things in different cultures.
• Harmony is a very precious element.

I think most people on L19 are actually quite nice and reasonable. But from time to time,
trouble happens and that's where mods come in.

Final note:

• Before I criticize someone, walk a mile in his shoes.
  Then when I do criticize that person, I'll be a mile away and have his shoes.

[hyperpape]

1. Can we change our votes?
2. I'm mulling over my fourth choice. Does the poll have a set time it'll be up?

[Joaz Banbeck]

1. Can we change our votes?

Yes

2. I'm mulling over my fourth choice. Does the poll have a set time it'll be up?

It ends on Tuesday. The exact time is near the top of the poll.

[daal]

Having garnered less than 5% of the popular vote (which by the way would be enough to get a party seats in the parliament of some European countries), I have decided to step out of the race. I would like to thank all of my (6) supporters, and ask them to accept this defeat with grace and to hold no grudge against my worthy competitors. I offer my full support to the coming administration and I urge you to do so as well.

[cyclops]

I have decided to step out of the race.

O
Pity, I was just going to vote for you. Now I need to find someone else.

BTW, I would be nice if the time-zone were known for the candidates.
It seems the Australia - China - Japan - Korea zones are not well represented.

[kirkmc]

I will join daal in dropping out. It's clear who the voters want. Thanks for considering me.