Moderation level

[Bonobo]

Come on, TChan, you’re taking it too personally again it’s not about fingerpointing, I believe, it is about how we (that’s all of L19) find a good way to solve this dilemma, it’s not about finding a culprit.

—————————————————————————

Does the mod team actually look for new mods every once in a while? It seems healthy to me get an infusion of new blood regularly, not only to give long-serving mods some well-earnt relief, but also to keep pace with forum growth, etc.

But I believe this “job” often attracts people with a strong wish to exert power over others, with authoritarian tendencies … therefore, when I was co-mod in a German Mac forum in one of my former lives, I recommended to directly invite the few people we’d like to be mods to join the team rather than publicly ask for volunteers, to prefer those who’d be somewhat reluctant to do such a job over those who flooded us with wishes to become mods.

When I look at our member list, sorted by number of posts in descending order, I can see at least ten people among the top 50 posters whom I’d love to see as co-moderators here, because of the wits they show in their contributions, because of their manners, because of their obvious social competence, because they are helpful, clever, and friendly … and I can imagine how they’d be “somewhat” reluctant … because they are critical of themselves, and this is exactly why I’d like them to be mods.

Cordially, Tom

[HermanHiddema]

But I believe this “job” often attracts people with a strong wish to exert power over others, with authoritarian tendencies … therefore, when I was co-mod in a German Mac forum in one of my former lives, I recommended to directly invite the few people we’d like to be mods to join the team rather than publicly ask for volunteers, to prefer those who’d be somewhat reluctant to do such a job over those who flooded us with wishes to become mods.

When I look at our member list, sorted by number of posts in descending order, I can see at least ten people among the top 50 posters whom I’d love to see as co-moderators here, because of the wits they show in their contributions, because of their manners, because of their obvious social competence, because they are helpful, clever, and friendly … and I can imagine how they’d be “somewhat” reluctant … because they are critical of themselves, and this is exactly why I’d like them to be mods.

Cordially, Tom

Agree. Sensei's Library does this. Librarians (mods) are invited by the admins based on a proven track record of high quality contributions and level-headedness in discussions.

I am also, generally, in favour of having many mods who each do very little. More hands make for lighter work. 90% of the work is just removing spam anyway, and more mods also increases the chance of at least one of them being online at any time and therefore able to respond quickly.

[Bonobo]

By the way, how is it that this thread, which is updated every few days (one could also say it is being pushed up), and often with a changed title, is NOT spam, while that teacher’s post is considered spam?

I have meanwhile purchased GoEye, it is a nice app, but the constant pushing is quite annoying, IMNSHO.

Just to show how things are being handled quite differently, and how they may be perceived quite differently.


Greetz, Tom

[HermanHiddema]

By the way, how is it that this thread, which is updated every few days (one could also say it is being pushed up), and often with a changed title, is NOT spam, while that teacher’s post is considered spam?

I have meanwhile purchased GoEye, it is a nice app, but the constant pushing is quite annoying, IMNSHO.

Just to show how things are being handled quite differently, and how they may be perceived quite differently.


Greetz, Tom

Actually, I think that thread is a good example of how promotion of a commercial product or service should be handled.

GoEye2012's product is clearly relevant to the go community, so I think it is fine to announce it and talk about it. He has posted a single thread about it, in a relevant subforum (subforum description: For discussing go computing, software announcements, etc.) and keeps using that single thread (just changing the subject sometimes). As I said in another place: Threads are easy to ignore, far easier than posting comments all over other threads, which break the flow of conversation. Furthermore, using a single thread also avoids cluttering up the subforum index page.

So in my opinion, GoEye2012 sets an excellent example here. If we allow posts about products/services, then his way of doing it is probably the least intrusive way of doing it. The only criticism I have is that he perhaps updates too often (though he is definitely not the only poster there). A recent update like "A few crash bugs have been found causing crash when moving a game to an empty game group(collection). These will be fixed asap. Thanks." is pointless, IMO.

[Boidhre]

By the way, how is it that this thread, which is updated every few days (one could also say it is being pushed up), and often with a changed title, is NOT spam, while that teacher’s post is considered spam?

I have meanwhile purchased GoEye, it is a nice app, but the constant pushing is quite annoying, IMNSHO.

Just to show how things are being handled quite differently, and how they may be perceived quite differently.


Greetz, Tom

I like that thread, if I want to know something about how GoEye is getting on I can just visit there. If I don't, I can just ignore the thread safe in the knowledge that all I'm missing is GoEye material. I agree with Herman, this is ideal.

[Bantari]

But I believe this “job” often attracts people with a strong wish to exert power over others, with authoritarian tendencies … therefore, when I was co-mod in a German Mac forum in one of my former lives, I recommended to directly invite the few people we’d like to be mods to join the team rather than publicly ask for volunteers, to prefer those who’d be somewhat reluctant to do such a job over those who flooded us with wishes to become mods.

When I look at our member list, sorted by number of posts in descending order, I can see at least ten people among the top 50 posters whom I’d love to see as co-moderators here, because of the wits they show in their contributions, because of their manners, because of their obvious social competence, because they are helpful, clever, and friendly … and I can imagine how they’d be “somewhat” reluctant … because they are critical of themselves, and this is exactly why I’d like them to be mods.

Cordially, Tom

Agree. Sensei's Library does this. Librarians (mods) are invited by the admins based on a proven track record of high quality contributions and level-headedness in discussions.

I am also, generally, in favour of having many mods who each do very little. More hands make for lighter work. 90% of the work is just removing spam anyway, and more mods also increases the chance of at least one of them being online at any time and therefore able to respond quickly.

Agree.
Although I have to point out that there is also a downside of having many mods/admins, especially when we also consider that TOS, as it must, contains grey areas and requires admin discretion. The more mods/admins we have, the more different way to interpret those grey areas, and thus the more variety in dealing with a particular type of situation depending on which admin happened to deal with it. This usually creates general unhappiness.

This is, partly, the issue with KGS admins, no? Different admins interpreting stuff differently?

So either we have tight communication between admins to lower the discrepancies, or strong supervision, or better written TOS, or more understanding users, or all of the above. And maybe there is some "best" number of admins - a number which minimizes the discrepancies and yet spread the workload enough.

[HermanHiddema]

Agree.
Although I have to point out that there is also a downside of having many mods/admins, especially when we also consider that TOS, as it must, contains grey areas and requires admin discretion. The more mods/admins we have, the more different way to interpret those grey areas, and thus the more variety in dealing with a particular type of situation depending on which admin happened to deal with it. This usually creates general unhappiness.

This is, partly, the issue with KGS admins, no? Different admins interpreting stuff differently?

So either we have tight communication between admins to lower the discrepancies, or strong supervision, or better written TOS, or more understanding users, or all of the above. And maybe there is some "best" number of admins - a number which minimizes the discrepancies and yet spread the workload enough.

One difference with KGS is that we have a report button here. When in doubt (i.e beyond obvious spam and such), you can always wait and see whether any user reports the post. That way, part of the moderation duty actually shifts to all users. If a post bothers nobody, no need to moderate, right?

[Bonobo]

[..] downside of having many mods/admins [..] The more mods/admins we have, the more different way to interpret those grey areas, and thus the more variety in dealing with a particular type of situation [..]

So either we have tight communication between admins to lower the discrepancies, or strong supervision, or better written TOS, or more understanding users, or all of the above. And maybe there is some "best" number of admins - a number which minimizes the discrepancies and yet spread the workload enough.

Agree, “all of the above”.

Also, I wouldn’t call it a “downside”, I view tight communication among moderators as mandatory, like I wouldn’t call it a downside that I need to breathe in order to stay alive
Every forum has (or should have) a private area for mods where they can rail on about the plebs as much as they like


Greetings, Tom

[Bantari]

Agree.
Although I have to point out that there is also a downside of having many mods/admins, especially when we also consider that TOS, as it must, contains grey areas and requires admin discretion. The more mods/admins we have, the more different way to interpret those grey areas, and thus the more variety in dealing with a particular type of situation depending on which admin happened to deal with it. This usually creates general unhappiness.

This is, partly, the issue with KGS admins, no? Different admins interpreting stuff differently?

So either we have tight communication between admins to lower the discrepancies, or strong supervision, or better written TOS, or more understanding users, or all of the above. And maybe there is some "best" number of admins - a number which minimizes the discrepancies and yet spread the workload enough.

One difference with KGS is that we have a report button here. When in doubt (i.e beyond obvious spam and such), you can always wait and see whether any user reports the post. That way, part of the moderation duty actually shifts to all users. If a post bothers nobody, no need to moderate, right?

Right.

[Bantari]

[..] downside of having many mods/admins [..] The more mods/admins we have, the more different way to interpret those grey areas, and thus the more variety in dealing with a particular type of situation [..]

So either we have tight communication between admins to lower the discrepancies, or strong supervision, or better written TOS, or more understanding users, or all of the above. And maybe there is some "best" number of admins - a number which minimizes the discrepancies and yet spread the workload enough.

Agree, “all of the above”.

Also, I wouldn’t call it a “downside”, I view tight communication among moderators as mandatory, like I wouldn’t call it a downside that I need to breathe in order to stay alive
Every forum has (or should have) a private area for mods where they can rail on about the plebs as much as they like

In the ideal world, sure.
But I guess in the ideal world we would need no admins at all.

[Bonobo]

[..]

In the ideal world, sure.
But I guess in the ideal world we would need no admins at all.

Not quite sure where this constructive <cough> contribution is meaning to lead towards … but how shall we get there if we not begin taking small steps?

[Bantari]

[..]

In the ideal world, sure.
But I guess in the ideal world we would need no admins at all.

Not quite sure where this constructive <cough> contribution is meaning to lead towards … but how shall we get there if we not begin taking small steps?

Well, the point is that, it not being the ideal world, and people being the way they are (yes, even the mods/admin are people) - we should build some functionality to prevent the admins from getting out of hand if there are too many of them. For example - we cannot just assume the admins will have tight communication lines, this should be somehow imposed on the system. And so on...

Its nice to say "all of the above", but how do you enforce it? Or do you think admins will behave without?

Small steps are great, but these small steps should be taken with an eye on any future issues - especially if we go the path of many many admins. Which means, the sooner we identify potential problems, and the sooner we implement countermeasures, the better.

Sorry for not explaining it better, I honestly thought that was self-evident and mentioning that the world is not ideal would be enough of a clue. My bad.

[moyoaji]

My college club's former secretary once said this about club politics: "We are a club that meets to play board games..."

That simple statement has stuck with me for three years now as a reminder of the fact that a society's politics are only supposed to facilitate the goals of the society. It also put a sobering perspective on our small organization that was getting too wrapped up in its own internal affairs. To this day, we are still a club that meets to play board games.

In the case of our forum, the reminder would be "We are a forum that meets to talk about a board game." Any additions to the TOS, changes in policy, addition of new moderators, etc. should be done with this as the goal.

All I expect from L19 is a pleasant place to talk about go online. Nothing more and nothing less. So far, it has been this for me.

[hyperpape]

I'm pretty sure that there are fewer active mods than there were in the past. So while we should make sure anyone who becomes a mod is well suited, I think the worry about too many mods is merely hypothetical.

[Uberdude]

Actually one idea I had (though it requires a change to the forum software so probably new mods is easier) was if many (>10?) people reported a post it would get deleted immediately. That way the community could clear up spam without the need for admin action. There is the problem it could be abused to bully annoying people who don't break the rules, so perhaps there could be a role less powerful than an admin but more than a regular user of "spam killer" and maybe once 2 (?) of those marked it as spam delete it. I heard Kaya had some sort of community-based censor feature like this, did it work ok (or were there never enough users/spam/troublemakers to tell)? Or maybe instead of delete just hide, rather like the spam comments feature on youtube, and delete once an admin/spam killer says ok.