Quote:
Originally Posted by evilrooster
I do know it's not possible to build a lively, interesting and intelligent community by letting people argue endlessly with the moderators. I'm a moderator myself, and I know how a set of disgruntled people feeding off of one another's ire can really poison an entire thread.
|
I've been a moderator, too, and the thing is that it takes two sides to have an argument. There's not much someone inclined to be argumentative can say to, "I'm sorry, you're absolutely right, those emails were a bit unclear, and I apologize. We're working on getting those e-books ready for you as soon as we can, but there are technical issues that need to be worked out." They can complain that the books are not available
right now, but even they will realize (sooner or later) that their complaining won't help matters.
If they do try to continue the argument, then you politely but firmly explain that you already answered their question and you don't respond to them anymore. You don't rise to the bait. Or, as the old Internet aphorism goes, "Don't feed the trolls."
Even if they didn't want to apologize or get all customer-servicy, there were sure to be other, better, more moderatorly responses they could have made besides getting all huffy and scornful. Moderators are supposed to
moderate, like oil on troubled water, not
intensify like water on a chemical fire.
Understand, I have nothing against Torie and pnh as people. I'm sure they're great, and I've known many great people myself (not to mention occasionally being one) who had a gift for saying absolutely the wrong thing at the wrong time. I just think they could have made some better choices in how they responded to those angry rants.