[Quit deleting my posts]

[Nya-chan Production]

"There's mod dropbox" = Already explained why I don't personally like the dropbox = Your problem
"There's the alert system"= No idea what that is = Your problem
"There's pms to known active mods" = Already explained how my pms went unanswered = Happens
"Many of the mods hang out in IRC or one of the instant messengers" = Banned from the IRC = Your problem

Also keep in mind you don't really need to know everything that goes on. If the mods take care of something than that's it, there's no reason everyone should know exactly what was done. For example, if before this thread I had asked a mod about your banned I probably would have gotten brushed off and that's the way it should be. Mods shouldn't be airing issues about users in public, unless the user brought it up first as you did here. As for other stuff, we aren't in charge of running the org so there's no real reason we should know the minute details of it.

No idea what this paragraph has to do with my post. - maybe in the sense that you don't have to bother the mods about each and every thing? :<

[Otohiko]

Unfortunately I have to agree with Nya-chan's point there. I think it's not true that mods are unreachable by PM, though it does happen sometimes - and there are of course other channels, and if all else fails, even the admin email. My experience prior to becoming a mod was pretty good and I did get to mods reasonably quickly. And hey, this forum (Site Feedback) has worked for me a number of times before I was a mod. There have been serious discussions and criticism aired here before, and as long as you have a coherent argument you want to make, the administration will react. Rules and forum arrangements are not "sacred" and we can definitely talk about these if you want.

Now, before I say anything else, let me personally apologize on two points. First, I'm sorry for modding anonymously in your case - I should have sent a warning by PM rather than through the email system and I should have allowed you a chance to respond before rolling out the ban. Mind you, the wording of the warning message would not have been much different and my response would probably end up being the same as ultimately your behaviour constituted abuse, but I understand that it was a rude gesture on my part to do this anonymously. Of course the fact that you were also behaving rudely in that situation didn't help. Secondly, I'm sorry to everyone on the MEP forum who was surprised (and possibly offended) by a rash of removed posts without any warning or explanation. Again - it would have probably ended up the same, because there was definitely an issue and in my view it needed something done in order to maintain a reasonable level of respect and order. But it's one thing what you do, and another thing how you do it - and I realize that, in retrospect, I should have been a bit more personal and polite before modding. I promise that in the future I will not use anonymous warnings or take action on community issues (e.g. too much spam in the MEP forum) without warning/explanation. I still stand by both decisions as far as removing posts as essentially right, but I'm sorry if my actions in this were rude to anyone. Please don't blame the others for this or connect this to some sort of systemic singling-out of you by the administration. While I followed the consensus on forum rules, the actions regarding your case and MEP forum spam were mine. I feel like I've needlessly caused some people to be angry with the administration as a whole, which they shouldn't be in this case. If you still have a problem with these decisions, please feel free to direct the flak at me so to speak.

In terms of invisible mods, that is something that has been a choice for mods for quite some time now and aside from the fact that Phade set it up this way long ago, I can't tell you how it started. Personally, I think if some mods want to remain anonymous, it is their choice. I am not going to argue for or against it right now, but I support their decision. They are not a problem and have very, very useful roles on the .org that don't require them to be in any way "open". Visible or not, the mods are brought on board because the site administration trusts them to act on behalf of the site. There is no reason to open individual mods to criticism or questioning by the community unless they themselves are willing to do this. Mods should be free to speak on behalf of the administration, especially when basic rules are involved, and members should raise issues with the administration when rules and decisions regarding them are in question. This doesn't always work, but most of the time this makes the running of the forums simpler. I don't think we need to create any divides between individual mods (visible or not) and the administration as a whole when basic issues and simple are involved. That said, I think there are good reasons to go visible as it helps build trust and can be extremely helpful in defusing situations by personally talking through them (something which I should have been more open to in the specific situation which started all this) - but I still think this should be a choice. Mods are volunteers and if they don't wish to deal personally with rude members and spend a long time explaining their decisions, they shouldn't be forced to - they can do good things for the forum perfectly well without this and without members watching their every move. As long as there's someone for members to talk to (and I would argue there always has been), there is no problem. And I can tell you for certain that the administration is trying its best to be available to talk through these things and mediate community situations.

Mind you, none of this is to suggest that personally dealing with forum abuse makes modding decisions on it any less strict than those made anonymously. Ultimately mods will always stand by forum rules. It's just what we do.

[LittleAtari]

Also keep in mind you don't really need to know everything that goes on. If the mods take care of something than that's it, there's no reason everyone should know exactly what was done. For example, if before this thread I had asked a mod about your banned I probably would have gotten brushed off and that's the way it should be. Mods shouldn't be airing issues about users in public, unless the user brought it up first as you did here. As for other stuff, we aren't in charge of running the org so there's no real reason we should know the minute details of it.

No idea what this paragraph has to do with my post.

I think an issue here, and correct me if I'm wrong, is not that we should know why and when someone gets banned, but it's about seeing an action taken against people breaking the forum rules. -Reda- feels like he's being targeted because he really only gets to see action taken against him because he will notice if his own posts are deleted or if he's banned, but there's not much to clue him in on action being taken on other members. While I do believe that the mods do not need to disclose everything that they are doing, I think it would help to make certain actions visible. Allow me to explain:

For this I am going to cite a forum that I am currently inactive on, but I always liked the modding that took place on it: http://www.cad-forums.com/
On this forum there is ban list, showing all the temp bans: http://www.cad-forums.com/showthread.php?t=85202
In addition, any member that is banned has their subtitle say so. See username Hybridial on this page: http://www.cad-forums.com/showthread.php?t=66427
Also, a little more of the of the 'out of line' posts are not deleted, but there is a mod's not warning people when things get too hot or in certain cases that require a ban, a mod comes out and quotes the illegal post and says that the person has been banned for X amount of days.

How this benefits their community: It lets people know that there are mods and they are working.

First off, I'd like to say that I disagree with Arashinome in saying that every post needs to be read because I don't think it's feasible. It'd be hard enough just to ensure that all the mods are reading all the posts, than the actual process and time it would take to read all the posts. Sure it'd be nice if they could read all the posts, but let's face it. It's not going to happen. Still the forums do need to modded. Letting people know that action is being taken will keep the community in line in most cases.

The effect of the methods of the CAD forums is more people staying in line with the forum rules. It shows what the mods consider offensive and sets an example for the rest of the members. If something isn't completely ruining a thread, they keep it up with a mod note stating the ban or the warning. It shows people that action is being taken and no one feels singled out like how -Reda- feels now. My thinking here is that people know that the forums are being modded, but in a lot of cases do not see it being modded. I know that you guys are modding the forums, deleting posts, locking threads and whatnot, but how much of that do we see?Things like the banlist and the ban subtitles furthers the presence of the mods. I think just being able to see some of the modding will keep more people in line and will further the respect that people have for the mods.

I feel kind of weird making this post because it's recommending some different things in modding and it tells you guys how to do your job. A friend of mine here on the Org told me that everything I see wrong in the forums is there because everything else is being cleaned up. I only made this post as a recommendation because I do believe that making the actions of the mods more obvious can make your jobs a little easier because it emphasizes the rules that you guys have for the community.

[AaronAMV]

Also keep in mind you don't really need to know everything that goes on. If the mods take care of something than that's it, there's no reason everyone should know exactly what was done. For example, if before this thread I had asked a mod about your banned I probably would have gotten brushed off and that's the way it should be. Mods shouldn't be airing issues about users in public, unless the user brought it up first as you did here. As for other stuff, we aren't in charge of running the org so there's no real reason we should know the minute details of it.

No idea what this paragraph has to do with my post.

I think an issue here, and correct me if I'm wrong, is not that we should know why and when someone gets banned, but it's about seeing an action taken against people breaking the forum rules. -Reda- feels like he's being targeted because he really only gets to see action taken against him because he will notice if his own posts are deleted or if he's banned, but there's not much to clue him in on action being taken on other members. While I do believe that the mods do not need to disclose everything that they are doing, I think it would help to make certain actions visible. Allow me to explain:

For this I am going to cite a forum that I am currently inactive on, but I always liked the modding that took place on it: http://www.cad-forums.com/
On this forum there is ban list, showing all the temp bans: http://www.cad-forums.com/showthread.php?t=85202
In addition, any member that is banned has their subtitle say so. See username Hybridial on this page: http://www.cad-forums.com/showthread.php?t=66427
Also, a little more of the of the 'out of line' posts are not deleted, but there is a mod's not warning people when things get too hot or in certain cases that require a ban, a mod comes out and quotes the illegal post and says that the person has been banned for X amount of days.

How this benefits their community: It lets people know that there are mods and they are working.

First off, I'd like to say that I disagree with Arashinome in saying that every post needs to be read because I don't think it's feasible. It'd be hard enough just to ensure that all the mods are reading all the posts, than the actual process and time it would take to read all the posts. Sure it'd be nice if they could read all the posts, but let's face it. It's not going to happen. Still the forums do need to modded. Letting people know that action is being taken will keep the community in line in most cases.

The effect of the methods of the CAD forums is more people staying in line with the forum rules. It shows what the mods consider offensive and sets an example for the rest of the members. If something isn't completely ruining a thread, they keep it up with a mod note stating the ban or the warning. It shows people that action is being taken and no one feels singled out like how -Reda- feels now. My thinking here is that people know that the forums are being modded, but in a lot of cases do not see it being modded. I know that you guys are modding the forums, deleting posts, locking threads and whatnot, but how much of that do we see?Things like the banlist and the ban subtitles furthers the presence of the mods. I think just being able to see some of the modding will keep more people in line and will further the respect that people have for the mods.

I feel kind of weird making this post because it's recommending some different things in modding and it tells you guys how to do your job. A friend of mine here on the Org told me that everything I see wrong in the forums is there because everything else is being cleaned up. I only made this post as a recommendation because I do believe that making the actions of the mods more obvious can make your jobs a little easier because it emphasizes the rules that you guys have for the community.

this.

[LittleAtari]

I also wanted to address the issue of being able to better identify mods. Right now we've got a list in site announcements and a tiny link at the bottom of the boards that says 'The Team.' This may be a little difficult for some members to find. A member could go their entire time here at the org without seeing these lists and in extreme cases, not know who the mods are. Someone who doesn't hang out much in the forums probably doesn't know when they're talking to Mirk, Oto, or GQ, doesn't realize they're addressing the mods. There is nothing to identify them as mods except those lists, one of which isnt up to date either. Just as site admins are identified by title around their usernames, it would help if visible mods had something similar on them, too. This way forum members can better identify them. In addition, it furthers the presence of mods on this forum.

[downwithpants]

That's the problem with this whole fucking community in general, it's so cliquey that we can't even get new members to feel welcome here because the majority of us are all a bunch of elitest fucks who wouldn't take 2 seconds to help somebody learn.

i'll respond to this seriously because based on your joined date, i see you've only been here a few years. The org has moved leaps and bounds past where it was when we had the original off-topic section (up till 2003). one of the biggest problems with that community was the social exclusivity of the regular crowd. it spurred dick-waving flame wars. it was too difficult for the administration (of which i was not a part at that time) to control.

realize that whenever you have a social grouping of more than two people, you will get cliques. it happens everywhere: forums, school, work, sports. we cannot stop cliques from forming, however we do not want the same problems we had with the original off-topic community. so instead we ask that community members behave politely and encourage helping new forum visitors. when i read newbie posts in general amv and site help, i'm glad to see that our many of our current community members handle these threads much better than what has been the case in the past.

[godix]

I have argued in the past for better communication between the mods and users, but I meant communication between the mods and whatever user is currently having/causing an issue (which has gotten better over the last few years). I don't think mod actions should be broadcast to the org in general though. If you're at work and get disciplined for something do they put your name on a big board to let all your coworkers mates know? No. They keep it private. If you choose to tell people, as reda did in this topic, that's your choice. But if you want to keep it quiet that should be your choice as well. There's only two reason for mods to advertise who they've banned. First is people are just plain nosy, which isn't exactly a valid reason. Mind your own fucking business. The other reason is for the deterrent value of public ridicule, but is that really something you want to see the org do? The org has enough cliques already without actively setting out to make an outcast group that it's socially acceptable to mock. This isn't high school, we don't need all the cool kids in class going 'Haha, teacher busted you!' Let the mods deal with issues privately. The occasional discussion about modding, like this one, is enough to let the community know they are indeed active.

As for marking the mods as mods, that's rather pointless. We don't need to know who the mods are to behave. We just need to know there are mods and what the rules are. Marking mods sends the signal to treat them differently. Don't make drunken russian jokes with otohiko, he's a mod. Don't speak to mirk like a human, he's a mod. Don't dare tell kalium the stick up his ass is starting to rot, he's a mod. Don't ever treat Jasper like just another human being, she's head admin! We have to suck up to power ya know. Bullshit, let them be remain as normal and people can interact with them as normal. When they have to do stuff that is 'offical' mod business I'm sure they can make that clear. I've interacted with a fair number of the mods/admins. I have never once been confused about if Doki, TJ, Jasper, Kalium, Oto, mirk, etc. are speaking to me as part of their org duties or just talking to me as a regular person. I'll also note a large part of the motive to be an invismod is to be treated as a normal instead of a special elite class. Marking mods as special would just prove that mod403 has the right idea...

[Nya-chan Production]

Don't speak to mirk like a human, he's a mod.

mirk is a mod?

oh wai-

[LittleAtari]

godix, I'm only providing what I've known to work. The CAD forums are a much larger community than the Org forums and from what I've seen, this method has seemed to work for them. It hasn't caused there to be cliques. It's the internet. Do people really care enough if someone is banned to treat them differently? Most times not, unless they find the person to be annoying, but a ban isnt needed to tell them that. Sure it'd be nice if we could all just behave knowing that there's mods and just knowing that modding is going on, but it's seemed to create problems. I, for longest time, thought that there was a slack in modding simply because I do see things wrong and don't see much of the modding. It bothered me and to an extent still bothers me. I'm just saying that this super concealed method of modding is causing members to feel that they're being targeted. The thing is, I don't think the mods intended things to be 'concealed,' but thought that they were protecting people in the community. The result is that we've gotten trolls who feel the need to further their trolling because they think they're being unfairly targeted.

As for cliques, every community and forum has them. There's nothing that you can do to prevent them. If a clique were to emerge that involved people who followed the rules and people who didn't, wouldn't that be a good thing? It'd be promoting goodness and shunning inappropriate behavior. I can see how it's possible to get a 'better than thou' clique from it, but if the mods don't allow backseat modding, I don't see the problem.

Like Reda said, people shouldn't need to report something as offensive in order for a mod to take action. By doing this, you give up a degree of control. You're saying, so long as the community doesn't have a problem with things, it's fine. While I do believe the people are important when building a community, the leadership is also important. The leadership should have degree of control and presence in order to show that there are certain things that the site does care about.

We shouldn't have to go through the trouble of the occasional discussion about the modding just to please one member who gets pissed off enough to say something. The fact that it keeps being mentioned should be enough for things to be changed to avoid wasting so much time on this.

As for treating mods different because of their labels, that's not the point of labeling them. The point is for more people to be aware of who's a mod and that there are mods. We can still keep invisimods with this method, as it still works so long as some visible mods are present.

[godix]

Atari,

I think the fundamental issue is we have different viewpoints on what the mods/admin should be. You clearly view them as leaders. If your leaders are not plainly visible you are 'bothered' by it. They define the direction and tone the community takes. Without leaders rebelliousness spreads across the land and undesirable elements rise up. I'm being somewhat flip here, but essentially all I've really done is just rephrase what you just said.

OTOH I view them as garbage collectors. They remove trash, which fosters the health of the community. It's a tough job and I respect (most) people who do it. However if I don't actively notice a garbage collector for awhile it doesn't bother me, as long as they're still actually removing the garbage. I don't take take my marching orders from a garbageman and the community isn't directed by garbage men. They quietly remove my and other peoples trash and the community goes on in whatever direction it wants to. Garbage collectors aren't the communities leaders, if anything they're somewhat subservient.

I guess it boils down to this, is the community here to loyally serve the mods/admins or are the mods/admins here to serve the community?

Also note, different standards and different practices work for different communities. There are communities heavily modded, there are communities with barely any moderation. There's even schemes of communities that are user moderated.

We shouldn't have to go through the trouble of the occasional discussion about the modding just to please one member who gets pissed off enough to say something. The fact that it keeps being mentioned should be enough for things to be changed to avoid wasting so much time on this.

Do you apply this to other parts of your life? Does the fact people keep protesting abortions mean we should change our laws to avoid wasting so much time on it? Does the fact people keep calling blacks 'niggers', arabs 'towelheads', mexicans 'spics', etc. mean we should change general societies acceptance of those groups to avoid wasting time dealing with racists? Should we teach creationism is school to avoid wasting time with religious protesters? Should you be barefoot, preggers, and cooking dinner to avoid wasting time with sexists? These are rather extreme compared to the org of course, but the idea is the same. Should the org change itself to avoid wasting time with some dickhead who didn't realize mass spamming insults might not be a good thing?

Also, last time I remember this conversation coming up was around two years ago when it was centered around me (and I wasn't the one who brought it up I might point out). We occasionally have this discussion but it's not like it's a massive and daily waste of time or something.