Another C&P thread

[motley]

Unlike its predecessors, this thread is not going to insult staff or give crappy reasons why C&P should stay.... however, I do feel that the C&P section added a source of control and helped in the exercising of discretion when enforcing the rules....

By listing off infractions and their penalties for the public eye you cause 2 after effects, the users get a better sense of what is and is not acceptable, the penalties associated with unacceptable acts, and a glimpse into the responsibility of the staff to exercise those rules they way they should be.

Do I agree with public hangings? of course not, but I believe in accountability, and accountability starts with any action taken by authority regardless of right or wrong.
I do not believe that the mod staff acts under any sort of conscious bias. That being said I can think of several times where a penalty was handed out in haste and thanks to the C&P board was lessened or eliminated after brought to public attention. I can also think of a few moderators who stepped down only after their actions were questioned.

Convening repercussions in secret and simultaneously silencing the targets only bolsters the critics who would call you "Gesapo". I also find it ironic that as much detest that moderators have for that word, the disbanding of the C&P section has made enforcement much like the historical secret police. You could silence me right now and delete this thread and the majority of the community would assume that I did something wrong. Im not accusing anyone of wanting to do something like that, but the ability to do so creates possibilities that we shouldn't have to deal with.

Even real police, enforcers of our way of life, have to justify every action, and it serves to preserve that way of life, holding the enforcer accountable when he/she doesn't do the right thing.

Basically I'm saying that the C&P section, while having some drawbacks, enhances the performance of both user and moderator. It may seem like not a serious issue, but considering the fact that you are a team made of volunteers, you have no more ownership over this site than anyone else, which means that you are charged with the responsibility of policing your equals. Therefore, as equals, the rest of the community should have the right to information regarding its own enforcement.

My 58 cents,

Mot

 

[Makelith]

By listing off infractions and their penalties for the public eye you cause 2 after effects, the users get a better sense of what is and is not acceptable, the penalties associated with unacceptable acts, and a glimpse into the responsibility of the staff to exercise those rules they way they should be.

As i've said before. If you want to know what is and isn't acceptable i've got a link to the rules in my sig. The penalties of the unacceptable can vary from an angry PM from myself or someone else on staff, an infraction, a read only, or even a ban. Repeated rule breaks obviously will escalate you up faster. I assumed this was common knowledge.

Do I agree with public hangings? of course not, but I believe in accountability, and accountability starts with any action taken by authority regardless of right or wrong.
I do not believe that the mod staff acts under any sort of conscious bias. That being said I can think of several times where a penalty was handed out in haste and thanks to the C&P board was lessened or eliminated after brought to public attention. I can also think of a few moderators who stepped down only after their actions were questioned.

Nothing was ever done by the C&P board, because people could never post there. It was always the S&F threads that people brought up that changed things. Eleib's 30 day ban for posting that thing for leggo prompted the thread in S&F which brought about the whole different rule for posting something for banned users and letting a banned user log in on your acct when it was previously covered under the same punishment.

Convening repercussions in secret and simultaneously silencing the targets only bolsters the critics who would call you "Gesapo". I also find it ironic that as much detest that moderators have for that word, the disbanding of the C&P section has made enforcement much like the historical secret police. You could silence me right now and delete this thread and the majority of the community would assume that I did something wrong. Im not accusing anyone of wanting to do something like that, but the ability to do so creates possibilities that we shouldn't have to deal with.

Even real police, enforcers of our way of life, have to justify every action, and it serves to preserve that way of life, holding the enforcer accountable when he/she doesn't do the right thing.

I'm not going to ban you for making the thread. I'm not going to ban anyone for asking. If i really was a gestapo i'd remove you, duddits, and the rest of the social groups/private forums that get the most one sided venting i've seen even with the flameboard.

Basically I'm saying that the C&P section, while having some drawbacks, enhances the performance of both user and moderator. It may seem like not a serious issue, but considering the fact that you are a team made of volunteers, you have no more ownership over this site than anyone else, which means that you are charged with the responsibility of policing your equals. Therefore, as equals, the rest of the community should have the right to information regarding its own enforcement.

This however is a pretty convincing argument, although slightly off. We are all equals are far as i'm concerned and will always remain to be so. Problem there is we aren't denying anyone any sort of information regarding enforcement. I've said in every thread (that's 4 times now) if you don't notice, you probably won't care. If you do notice then that person probably mattered enough to you that you already know what happened, but in the rare case you don't know what happened just make a thread and you'll get your information. If you'll notice the original Skaw thread before it turned to shit, the question was asked, and answered in the exact same manner that it was asked (much like this thread).

 

[motley]

this is why I like dealing with you, straight answers, honesty, all that jazz....

Im in the middle of something so I can't decipher and produce a response at the moment, but please do know that I really appreciate the time spent on my post as always.

 

[Miros]

Just tossing out a prime example of this, a friend of Audino's sent me a PM asking how long is RO was. S/he was very respectful and asked that and a couple other questions and all was well. I need some dinner.

 

[motley]

As i've said before. If you want to know what is and isn't acceptable i've got a link to the rules in my sig. The penalties of the unacceptable can vary from an angry PM from myself or someone else on staff, an infraction, a read only, or even a ban. Repeated rule breaks obviously will escalate you up faster. I assumed this was common knowledge.

Fair enough, but even with rules that may seem black and white there is always a gray area. Its the discretion used when entering that gray area that I speak of. Hopefully, over time, that gray area becomes more and more defined. Im very glad you use discretion when handing down penalties, but its the gray area, the instances where the user isn't sure if a rule has been broken that help us eliminate that gray area.

Nothing was ever done by the C&P board, because people could never post there. It was always the S&F threads that people brought up that changed things. Eleib's 30 day ban for posting that thing for leggo prompted the thread in S&F which brought about the whole different rule for posting something for banned users and letting a banned user log in on your acct when it was previously covered under the same punishment.

I agree, but my point in this part of the discussion was implying that the C&P board helps make bad moderation less likely, and when adhered to adds a form of accountability for it.
Personally, make, I trust you to do the right thing, our conversations have led me to believe that its truly what you want, however, my confidence in past, present and future moderators is not as strong. And I feel strongly that some sort of system needs to be in place to prevent people from taking advantage of the authority that they hold.

I'm not going to ban you for making the thread. I'm not going to ban anyone for asking. If i really was a gestapo i'd remove you, duddits, and the rest of the social groups/private forums that get the most one sided venting i've seen even with the flameboard.

Im not saying that you would, im saying that you could, its the ability to ban without a paper trail that bothers me. I don't feel threatened at all, to date I have had 0 infractions on this board, and I dont expect that to change, I know the rules and I follow them to the best of my ability. But without anyone to answer to, someone who is much more passionate than you or I, could abuse such a system and ban people without proper justification.

This however is a pretty convincing argument, although slightly off. We are all equals are far as i'm concerned and will always remain to be so. Problem there is we aren't denying anyone any sort of information regarding enforcement. I've said in every thread (that's 4 times now) if you don't notice, you probably won't care. If you do notice then that person probably mattered enough to you that you already know what happened, but in the rare case you don't know what happened just make a thread and you'll get your information. If you'll notice the original Skaw thread before it turned to shit, the question was asked, and answered in the exact same manner that it was asked (much like this thread).

I agree with you again, but please understand, its not exactly the C&P board im defending, its the other effects it had on the community which I feel shielded some of the forums integrity. And now without it, there is room for exploitation, and I do feel that there is a legitimate need to prevent that....

You don't have to bring back the C&P boards to make me happy, but if you're going to have a social group for people that have been banned, then maybe you can allow them the ability to plead their case in that group, and make it readable by all for the sake of accountability.

 

[Miros]

I agree, but my point in this part of the discussion was implying that the C&P board helps make bad moderation less likely, and when adhered to adds a form of accountability for it.
Personally, make, I trust you to do the right thing, our conversations have led me to believe that its truly what you want, however, my confidence in past, present and future moderators is not as strong. And I feel strongly that some sort of system needs to be in place to prevent people from taking advantage of the authority that they hold.

Damnit, I knew I'd be in there somewhere. D:

Im not saying that you would, im saying that you could, its the ability to ban without a paper trail that bothers me. I don't feel threatened at all, to date I have had 0 infractions on this board, and I dont expect that to change, I know the rules and I follow them to the best of my ability. But without anyone to answer to, someone who is much more passionate than you or I, could abuse such a system and ban people without proper justification.

I'm not sure if I or any other mod posted it but there is a board visible only to admins & mods that will automatically post the user, the points, the post, the administrative note and a ban reason if necessary when an infraction is issued. It's a sort of internal control mechanism so in case anyone is abusing it they can see it flat out the minute the infraction is issued. So it's not entirely paperless just out of the view from the general userbase. I can only assume and hope that if a punishment is made that seems like it's too much then one of the other staff members would raise there hand and say something.

The original part of your message mentioned a gray area and I just gotta say that there will always be gray areas of a rule that we put in. One we were just discussing was the whole RL attack on the flameboard. I believe it was originally put in because someone took a post in the Reality Sinks In board and used it in a flame. It's got to be really uncomfortable if you post a semi-intimate thing about your life and then someone goes and makes a mockery of it. I know that would drive me away from making any other posts and asking for people's advice which takes away from the other users and the the RSI board. But on the other hand, a user calls another user ugly in a thread and they are on RO? That's just messed up in my opinion.

 

[motley]

well in light of miros' post id say that that is a decent control point, now im trying to figure out if i think its sufficient....

In the case of duddits

here is the time line as I understand it

Duddits makes post > deleted

Duddits makes another post > deleted

Duddits makes a third post asking for an explanation > deleted

Duddits gets a PM explaining his deleted posts from Make, and at the same time he gets a 2-week RO from sneakypants for "Excessive/Inappropriate material + Ignoring Staff Decisions."

Maybe he shouldn't have voiced his question of the decision in the same thread where his posts were deleted, but does the majority of the moderation staff believe the punishment matches the crime??? because I just don't see it... His first post was calling the thread a "nerd fight".... really? is there an thread on the flameboard that ISN't a nerd fight? I fully understand deleting the post, but I dont think asking for an explanation warrants an RO, especially for the reasons quoted above....

If i am wrong then so be it, but for a first time offender i think 2 week RO is extreme.

Other than that, I think you guys have satisfied the majority of my concerns, knowing that there is some sort of control in place helps the issue greatly. Although I do still think its exploitable its not nearly as bad as I believed it to be before discussing it with you guys.

 

[Mirewen]

this is why I like dealing with you, straight answers, honesty, all that jazz....

You wont get jackass responses from Make, have to give him that.

In the case of duddits

here is the time line as I understand it

Duddits makes post > deleted

Duddits makes another post > deleted

Duddits makes a third post asking for an explanation > deleted

Duddits gets a PM explaining his deleted posts from Make, and at the same time he gets a 2-week RO from sneakypants for "Excessive/Inappropriate material + Ignoring Staff Decisions."

Maybe he shouldn't have voiced his question of the decision in the same thread where his posts were deleted, but does the majority of the moderation staff believe the punishment matches the crime??? because I just don't see it... His first post was calling the thread a "nerd fight".... really? is there an thread on the flameboard that ISN't a nerd fight? I fully understand deleting the post, but I dont think asking for an explanation warrants an RO, especially for the reasons quoted above....

I think this is why C&P is sometimes a good idea. Yes, we can refer to the rules and, by deduction, can figure out why they were banned/read-only'd/etc. But sometimes (because Dud's posts got deleted) people coming in late in the game don't know why. You log in 2 days after the fact and don't understand why someone has "Read Only" or "Temp Ban". Do you want people to ask questions in PM's like "Hey why is [insert name here] Temp Banned?" Seems to be less of a pain in your ass to just post a small snippet of why.

 

[Makelith]

Like i said before. I'd say roughly 90% of people wouldn't even notice. If someone did notice chances are they already know what happened. In the off chance of someone not knowing what happened and are actually concerned i'd happily answer PMs or if someone asked in a thread.

It would give me something else to do on QCDN other then read the latest group of reported posts and read about Miros' lube of choice.

As far as Duddits goes, he is under review.

 

[Mirewen]

Kay, thanks for the response. If you don't mind reading a couple PM's once in a while about it then it's all good.

 

[Hexx]

I think what Motley said is what was the main concern for some us, whether or not there was some sort of "paper trail" so to speak that would keep a future mod from abusing their power to RO and/or ban people for things said mod didnt like etc etc. Good to know, I'm satisfied with that.

 

[Falsey]

I think what Motley said is what was the main concern for some us, whether or not there was some sort of "paper trail" so to speak that would keep a future mod from abusing their power to RO and/or ban people for things said mod didnt like etc etc. Good to know, I'm satisfied with that.

pretty sure if a mod was abusing their power they wouldnt be a mod for long. there isnt really a big need for c/p if make doesnt mind PMs from peeps.