Moderators moderating discussions they're involved in? (and other mod issues)

[dmaul1114]

Starting this per this request:

Originally Posted by Verencat

THIS THREAD HAS GONE WAY WAY TOO FAR. PLEASE KEEP IT DOWN.

ANYONE WHO HAS PROBLEMS WITH THE MODERATION OF THIS SITE CAN START A THREAD IN THE FEEDBACK FORUM AND REFER TO ALEXANDER TURCIC.

From the problems in this thread--linked to the last page for the most relevant discussion.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...=87244&page=10

My only gripe with the moderation there really is that a moderator who's involved in a debate/argument should not be able to threaten action--it's a conflict of interest.

Most well-moderated forums I've posted on have policies preventing that. If a moderator thinks action is needed in a thread their active in (particularly in a discussion they're actively involved in), they have to refer to another moderator to review and issue any warnings if needed.

It prevents the conflicts of interest, and keeps members from Kenny feeling like they're being abused as such etc. And it's easy to implement.


I'll also add, as I mentioned in that thread, that the moderation on this site needs two other improvements.

1. More consistency. I see some blatant personal attacks get very light warnings, and other times minor bickering get very stern warnings.

2. More teeth in enforcing the rule violations. I've seen people warned multiple times for attacks etc. who never got suspended or banned. The Apple subforum issues a month or so back would be a prime example.

It's improved, but I've given up reporting attacking posts as that incident made it clear that the mods have no teeth, as the people posting out right personal attacks get warned repeatedly with no real action taken. Problem some more stern PM threats of bannings given that particular case has cleared up for a while--but there would have been multiple bannings on other well moderated sites I frequently very early on in that debacle.

Hell, I get a suspension (deserved) for attacking another member, and even attacked the mod afterwards and ASKED to be banned and I'm still here!

On that note, that request still stands. I've had it with this site and I'd like my account banned/closed so I can resist the temptation to keep getting sucked into arguments on here.

Thanks!

[kennyc]

I reported the abuse by Zelda in this thread and was immediately jumped on by Nate.

If moderators are going to abuse their position they do not deserve to be moderators.

Please review the thread and take appropriate action.

[TGS]

I don't know who will read this thread but just to put the opposing view in the interests of balance. My feeling is that the conduct on the thread has mostly been within the bounds of what is acceptable and that this complaint is vexatious. Zelda has both participated in the discussion of the thread and attempted to "moderate" when necessary. Mostly such changing of hats has not been necessary but when it has, it has been undertaken with a light touch which has been entirely appropriate.

I believe that a review of the thread will reveal that it was hijacked for purposes never intended by the OP and that, had this not happened, none of the bad feeling which seems to have been generated would have occurred.

[omk3]

Absolutely agree with TGS.

Zelda never threatened anyone, just pointed to the guidelines, and rightly so. It was a touch of common sense in a seriously derailed thread.

Anyone who doesn't want to visit the site any more is free to do so, I should think.

[Freeshadow]

as TGS and omk3 have said.

[Angst]

Thanks for the link. I never miss a good spat if I can help it.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Angst

Thanks for the link. I never miss a good spat if I can help it.

Thought so.

[TGS]

And now the behaviour of those who didn't want to take part in the discussion of the original topic of the thread have, by hijacking the thread and ramping up their vitriol, succeeded in having the thread closed.

You know, there's not very much I care less about than whether people choose to call their liseuse a liseuse or something else. But I do care somewhat more about how some people's bad behaviour can curtail other people's freedom to legitimately discuss something well within the bounds of propriety and well within the scope of this forum. That I think is appalling.

I don't blame the mods for taking the decision to close the thread, (well I do a bit - perhaps they could have seen how certain anti-liseuse members were manipulating the situation and responded differently), the real culprits are the ones who hijacked the thread and turned it into something quite different from what was originally intended.

[omk3]

Agreed, very well said TGS.

And I will point you to this post https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...4&postcount=38 just to show how some of them are trying to continue the bickering even outside the (closed) thread.

I understand not discussing political or religious matters in a forum about ebook reading (though there are enough threads about those around), but to be afraid to discuss words is unbelievable.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by omk3

Agreed, very well said TGS.

And I will point you to this post https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...4&postcount=38 just to show how some of them are trying to continue the bickering even outside the (closed) thread.

I understand not discussing political or religious matters in a forum about ebook reading (though there are enough threads about those around), but to be afraid to discuss words is unbelievable.

And omk3 this sort of post is just as bad as anything that has been said or done in any of the threads discussing this silly topic or the post that you linked to. Why do you think your behavior by doing this way is in any way different than what was posted? (and would more appropriately be called trolling than anything that happened in the referenced thread) It's not you know. You are as guilty (or perhaps moreso) than those you point the finger at in an attempt to continue stirring the pot.

What was is that a wise man once said. Let he who is without sin speak first.

I agree that we should be free to discuss any topic, including religion and politics in the lounge in a respectable manner without threats and personal attacks.

[omk3]

Please show me when and where I personally attacked anyone or insulted anyone.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by omk3

Please show me when and where I personally attacked anyone or insulted anyone.

I never said you did. What I did say is that by pointing to the thread and egging it on you yourself are trolling and stirring the pot and keeping the vitriol churning just as much as you claim others are.

[omk3]

So pointing out a post that I think is deliberately insulting to me is trolling? I really don't get your definition. This is the feedback thread, and I was giving feedback.

[Freeshadow]

kenny I really really wish, I'd recieve 1 € for every time you state (again) that something is silly, since it'd make me able to replace my whole Fantasy/SF pbook collection with epubs within 3 months.

arguments instead of 1 single word d be nice

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by omk3

So pointing out a post that I think is deliberately insulting to me is trolling? I really don't get your definition. This is the feedback thread, and I was giving feedback.

No you weren't. You were deliberately perpetuating the argument. If you have something to say about it, how it offends you then do so in that thread and not here where we are discussing (particular) moderators and their behavior in the thread referenced in the O.P.

This is not a thread to continue the discussion of that silly word and what you or I think about it.