Mod team discussion

[Lady Vulpix]

Disclaimer: perhaps I should have waited until morning to post this in order to be clearer and less prone to messing things up, but then I might not sleep well while thinking about this, so here it goes.

There are different reasons which have inspired the creation of this thread, but the reasons themselves are not important. What matters is its purpose.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the way TPM's authorities are handling things, and to suggest ways in which things could be improved. By TPM's authorities I mean each and every one of us: mods, supermods and admins.

Keep in mind that TPM's and Misc's rules apply here as well as on all other threads, so whatever you have to say, say it respectfully. Please prove that you have the maturity to discuss these things without resorting to insults or personal attacks. And to everyone who receives criticism, please reply with respect as well, and see if there is anything you can do to make things better. I will try my best to do my part.

You can also use this thread to commend people who have been doing good things for TPM - mods or otherwise.

[Mikachu Yukitatsu]

One point I might rise is that most mods are quite busy with their lives, most of them have a day job, studies and stuff. But this doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't have enough time for TPM. And although our forum has a thin negative ring these days, things could be worse. We do have Mt. Moon where we can post the spam. Also, we have members and mods who have noticed the problems, that's where this thread comes from.

As for giving credit, other than the honored mod team, there are members like Knight of Time and Asilynne who do lots of work in their respective fields for the good of TPM.

[Magmar]

Normally, I'd try to post something constructive, but in this case, I have to say the mods aren't really as needed as they once were. It seems like most of the active people remaining ARE mods, admins, etc. to some degree, and there's only a handful of us who aren't. Not all mods always abide by the rules, which doesn't really phase me at all but it does happen. When you have too many people in the hierarchy, a "pecking order" can emerge, but fortunately that has not happened here. What has happened however is a statistical anomaly in which if conflict is going to emerge, statistically that conflict is more likely to involve those in authority if those in authority make up a majority of the group.

[Andrew]

Remember - You say a bad word against me, and I'll make sure you'll never say anything again.

[shazza]

The modicum amount of active members negates any legitimacy that the moderators have bar housekeeping duties such as moving misplaced topics – which seldom occurs, anyway. The roles are exterior titles that are not indicative of authority or respect. While they have the traditional moderation powers, there is an unspoken knowledge that the most interesting members are allowed to bend the rules by adding a bit of colour – which is where any temporary stages of excitement and intrigue – which are less and less frequent – come from. However, since the colour has all now been shifted to Mt. Moon, the rest of the forums are a dull alternative that are now in the background to a forum that was designed to escape the absurdity of archaic rules and administration. This is why members feel more comfortable in Mt. Moon, and regularly post topics that could have been suited for Misc, however there is a comforting factor about Mt. Moon that doesn’t exist anywhere else. This is because it is more in alignment with the true ranking of members and the ambivalence of forum administration (though we can argue that the reality of the forums has shifted because of the implementation of Mt. Moon, and to an extent this is true [chicken and the egg], but Mt. Moon was born because of an asinine imbalance between an assumed importance of administration and a long-standing consensus otherwise)

To contemplate the significance of the moderators is in of itself a gross overestimation of the significance of moderators. Nobody cares; nobody has cared for a long time. Not even the moderators. Why should they? Chris is dead. Kevin is a myth. Susie rises from her grave every six months for five minutes. Zak is a SuperMod but gets ridiculed time and time again, and makes snide remarks towards Sam (Crystal Mew). Scott (RedStarWarrior) makes my user name green and just posts about his wife. John (kainashi) just does . Roy Karrde, a moderator, would have been warned, if not banned himself during The Strict Years. Members and moderators alike gang up on one member (see Heracross or Dark Sage as two recent examples)

Moderators now bend the rules because they don’t care. Members only get infringements when there is an ego involved. And, as Barry correctly observed, the majority of members are moderators – moderators of idle forums that only discriminate between the colour and boldness in their usernames.

The powerful ones are the colourful characters that add creativity and nonsense that would have otherwise got them banned between the years of late 2001 and 2007-2008 (The Strict Years). The enforcement of rules are now more lenient since then, because many of the moderators are now aware that such enforcement will only be a cancer to TPM in the long run, so they themselves have the insight not to take their roles seriously, unless it is for entertainment purposes (see Heald). And this is a good thing, and again facilitates colour into the forums.

Mt. Moon is now the most successful forum of TPM because it is not a farce trying to maintain an order that has not been needed for many years. I would ask to strip all moderator, supermoderator and administrator rights (including yourself), and let the enjoyment flourish, however I can concede that occasional administration duties need to be carried out. De-mod everybody and have three super-mods that carry out whatever miniscule duties that need to necessary be carried out!

Edit: Keep Austrian Vicemaster Alex as moderator of General Discussion. He's been repping that for 12 years.

[RedStarWarrior]

@shazza, sure, we aren't as necessary as we once were, but as far as bias or rule bending, I'm more oft to go off on a fellow staff member than a normal user because they should know better. I have been guilty of rule breaking myself, not going to lie, but I don't think I've ever infracted someone that didn't get several warnings or wasn't a spam bot. Even if I detest them, I will give them a warning first. Also, part of the problem with how we are viewed is a result of not seeing what we do. People (including mods that are getting out of line) get warnings and infractions all the time. We also have extensive discussions in the mod forums about user issues and ways to improve the forums.

That being said, I think the staff are doing a decent job overall, even though we are surely too large in number. The only issues I've had is respecting moderating boundaries as supermods are there to help mods, not rule over them or contradict their decisions. However, that's happened only once or twice and any conflict is resolved shortly (though I can't say I always acted mature in said situations). We are relaxed in applying the rules as we don't want to be strict and scare away what few users we have. If we had an abundance of idiots like some other forums, I could understand more adherence to the rules. Favoritism may be an issue, but I don't personally act out on any.

I'd like to recognize shazza for constantly trying to stimulate forum activity (and even though I speak well of you, Shannon, I'd still infract you).

[Lady Vulpix]

Shazza, you have painted an apocalyptic picture of TPM. Personally, I'm glad to differ, because if we had sunken that low, there would be no hope left for the forums.

As RSW has pointed out, mods do get infracted/warned for breaking the rules. And regular members are allowed to report offending posts even if they were made by mods (which would probably be a helpful feature if people were to use it responsibly, these days we're only getting reports from Dark Sage about people who are behaving just like him).

I don't play favorites either. I believe the rules are there for a reason and they should be followed regardless of how many or how few we are. If we find that a rule is obsolete, we can discuss it and drop it altogether, but to me it makes no sense to say "this rule should hold if the board has more than N active members, but not if it has fewer than N". Say, for example, personal attacks. Is it OK to attack someone just because there are few members around? I say no.

However, there is also a misconception about the rules, of which I became aware shortly before Mt. Moon was created. The rules are not meant to make us stiff and uncomfortable. Quite the opposite, they're meant to make posting more enjoyable for everyone. Most of the threads in Mt. Moon aren't breaking any rules and could just as well be posted elsewhere, on whatever forum is more relevant to their respective subjects. The only way I can think of in which Mt. Moon can help you "let loose" is the ability to derail a thread at any time with no concern for its initial topic, but that can also be done with "party threads" on other forums, where there is no set topic and you can talk about anything. Additionally, you can be sarcastic and even laugh at someone else as long as it is clear that it is all in fun and no one takes offense. That is not considered flaming, and it is not against the rules. So, if we let something like that go without an infraction, it's not because the poster is "above the rules", but because we don't see that post as breaking any rules. On the other hand, if a post is made with the intent of hurting someone, we will act upon it regardless of who the poster is.

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

I'm not really bothered if I would get demodded, since I don't really have to do much mod-work anyway, but being a mod is handy for me in ASB so I can set up or delete topics, edit first posts of old thread and just generally update to fit our current 'metagame'. Aside from that, I'm just a regular member like the rest.

[Jeff]

Being a mod around here pretty much amounts to nothing more than having some housekeeping abilities like being able to move/delete threads and get rid of spambots and such. And you know what? I'm fine with that. I understand that I'm not here to boss people around, I'm just a member coming here to converse and have fun, just like anyone else. I just also happen to help keep the forums tidy.

[CaptainJigglypuff]

How does one become a mod?

[Lady Vulpix]

How does one become a mod?

First of all, a mod spot needs to be open. You can be an active member making positive contributions for years and still not become a mod because there is no need for a new one (you will still become well-known and respected, though).

Then, once a forum needs a new mod, one is chosen among the members who have been making good contributions to that forum. The choice process varies in each case: sometimes a resigning mod will appoint a successor, sometimes several mods will have a discussion and decide, sometimes a contest will be held and sometimes a discussion will be posted on the forum itself so that the active members on that forum can decide.

In other words, there is no fixed procedure. Here on TPM, moderating is just about keeping things in order and not about being above other members. So when a job needs to be done, someone who is expected to do it is appointed for that purpose.

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

Kill your father and fight your siblings for the right to the throne!

[Emerald_Gen.3]

Kill your father and fight your siblings for the right to the throne!

seems legit

[Zak]

Zak is a SuperMod but gets ridiculed time and time again, and makes snide remarks towards Sam (Crystal Mew).

Pretty sure neither of those things really ever occur outside of Mt. Moon...

[DarkestLight]

Mt. Moon is now the most successful forum of TPM because it is not a farce trying to maintain an order that has not been needed for many years. I would ask to strip all moderator, supermoderator and administrator rights (including yourself), and let the enjoyment flourish, however I can concede that occasional administration duties need to be carried out. De-mod everybody and have three super-mods that carry out whatever miniscule duties that need to necessary be carried out!

ASB challenges that remark >.> And while the idea for streamlining the process seems quite acceptible, you now limit the whole of moderation to a number far fewer than what is actually needed. I would say the discourse amongst mods for each group does help, and yes, the rules are laxed and bent here, but bent in a way that still makes viable consistency withing the forum. If they need to be tightened, they can be. There is no pigeonholing for the most part, and why should there be?

Sure, some folks may be disagreeable, but communities aren't made and maintained on complete acceptance. There are always free-thinkers, something we all should be when it comes to our own well-being and independent thinking on any subject.

If we explode in activity again-even for a summer, I feel that your statement shazza; will not be any more affluent than a stuffed goose on a mantle :/. But what do I know? I'm just a dude with a penchant for typing at 2 am

[ChobiChibi]

The sudden creation of this thread worried me at first. I thought "Great. This shows how much confidence Gabi must have in the mod team to bring it up with the entire forum before talking to them first". But I don't feel so much like that since the thread has developed...

Anyway, what bugs me the most is how there are still people modding that haven't logged in, or posted anywhere in months. It's been said before that they still hold these positions out of gratitude for their work in previous years, and I understand that, but if you want the forum to pick up in activity (especially if we want to go ahead with the website revival in whatever form it takes), then surely you need a more active mod team that's willing to actually contribute to the forums.

This doesn't mean I think there should be more mods. It would be better to share the load with the existing mods instead. This is not me wanting some massive power trip, it's the fact that this also resolves the mod to member ratio issue.

"But Becki, you only post in an RPG once a month or so. How does that make you more active than others?" A lot of the stuff that goes on in RPG happens over IM. Plotting things, making new RPGs and the like don't happen directly on the forum. This is something I'd actually like to change a bit, since we have a lounge... But RPG is a team game, you can't move along on your own.

Anyway, I promised myself I wouldn't get into RPG politics (mostly cos I think they're a load of bollocks).

I still think most (but not all) forums need 2 mods. Just because of the times where there are conflicts that are better resolved with two heads rather than one. CT and I compliment each other's strengths and weaknesses well, I wouldn't do it without her (as an example, not because we're secretly lovers >>).

As for rule bending, I've bent some of the RPG rules because otherwise I'd just cause the place to stagnate (moreso than it is already). Why would I stop someone reviving an old RPG? That'd be great if I wanted to discourage them from ever posting again.

I think I'm done...

[Mr.E]

I've never felt the need for moderators to be active in the community which they moderate. Moderators are for... moderating. That doesn't require any posting of topics or starting discussions or anything, just keeping peace and order. Does security need to help Best Buy salesmen with their sales pitch? No, they just detain shoplifters and stuff.

Minus the film noir tone and glorification of Mt. Moon, I agree with shazza. Many of the remaining members are mods, nobody cares or has cared in a long time. At least I haven't. I personally stick around as a force of habit, an homage to my Internet Pokémon roots (as I'm still somewhat active in the competitive community), sense of duty because I technically moderate a forum and I should probably look at it periodically. Likewise, I'm presumably kept around just because there's no reason to dispose of me. I was there when it died, I'm still here, I'm not hurting anything. I'm sure the rest of you have your own motivations and some of us actually do work around here.

Sometimes I think you Misc guys are a little too harsh on the removal of topics (like the Dark Sage witch hunt lately), especially considering it's not like the thread list is moving very fast these days and nothing's really off-topic (as far as threads that go in the forum, not posts within focused threads) because it's a miscellaneous forum. I don't like to close/delete much of anything unless it's blatant flaming or other egregious violations. Not that I can, but if I could. If you simply don't like something, ignore it. If some idiots want to pointlessly argue back and forth with each other, let 'em. It's not hurting you. Maybe that's just me.

[Lady Vulpix]

I've just made a search for mods who haven't logged in within the past 6 months and didn't find any.

If a mod becomes inactive for too long, please point it out and we can look for a replacement.

As for the rule bending... perhaps the rules should become clearer? There seems to be a lot of discussion about whether something is or isn't against the rules.

Oh, and I'm with Mr. E on the Misc subject.

[shazza]

Obviously my post was somewhat of an ironic nature, friends.

[Lady Vulpix]

Obviously you weren't clear enough about it.

[shazza]

That ruins it.

[ChobiChibi]

I've just made a search for mods who haven't logged in within the past 6 months and didn't find any.

If a mod becomes inactive for too long, please point it out and we can look for a replacement.

There's someone at 6 months (last logged in November), and another at 4 (January) (also, depending how you count it... Whether you count the month that they last logged in or not). Admittedly, some of the people who I don't see seem to log in either while I'm asleep or at work/uni, I've realised.

I think the balance between breaking rules and enforcing them needs to be addressed. You don't want to enforce rules to the point where people are scared to post anything at all, but at the same time you don't want to let people get away with murder. I guess there's a fine line, and it's all down to personal judgement. This is why it's better to have 2 mods per forum section, in most cases.

[Blademaster]

Plotting things, making new RPGs and the like don't happen directly on the forum.

How fitting - neither does anything else!

[Lady Vulpix]

I think the balance between breaking rules and enforcing them needs to be addressed. You don't want to enforce rules to the point where people are scared to post anything at all, but at the same time you don't want to let people get away with murder. I guess there's a fine line, and it's all down to personal judgement. This is why it's better to have 2 mods per forum section, in most cases.

I don't think it's a matter of finding a balance between breaking rules and enforcing them. Enforcing rules shouldn't scare people away from posting because that defeats the purpose of the rules. If someone is constantly afraid of breaking the rules, it means the rules aren't clear enough. And if it comes to a point where you feel like you should break just one rule, just once, then that means something is wrong with that rule and it should either be reformulated or eliminated.

Rules can be discussed and changed, they're not made by a higher power outside TPM, they're made by us, the people who post here everyday. So no, I don't think we should try to decide when to break a rule, instead we should figure out why the need to break a rule arose in the first place, and fix that rule so that what we feel inclined to do doesn't go against it.

If, on the other hand, we discuss the rule and find that there's nothing wrong with it and that you shouldn't have broken it in the first place, then it means that what you have done has offended others without a good reason and you should refrain from doing it again.

[ChobiChibi]

How fitting - neither does anything else!

But RPG is a team game, you can't move along on your own.

That's all I have to say to you. And that RPG may not be extremely busy these days, but it's still more active than most.

I didn't say that we need to decide when to break rules. I think I really need to rephrase the first half of that paragraph... What I was trying (and failing) to get at is that sometimes when rules are broken, things aren't done fast enough. Or, when things are done, someone else comes along and decides that's not what should have been done, because it didn't break x rule in their opinion, and therefore either reverses the punishment, or is irritated by it.

What is the point in enforcing said rule if someone else is going to overturn it?

I mean, if I had just told Blade to fuck off instead of being fairly civil, one mod decides that's unacceptable and deletes that part of my post, but the other decided it was fine and reinstated that part of the post, would you not be annoyed?

I genuinely used to be scared to post in misc. Terrified I'd get ripped to shreds for having a dorky opinion, or saying the wrong thing.

I'm gonna stop rambling now, cos I no longer see the point I'm trying to make. Blah, I blame the fact it's Friday.

[RedStarWarrior]

I'd just like to point out that I have nothing to do with the Dark Sage witch hunt. It takes two or more people to argue, so all of the blame can't be placed on him.

I personally do not agree with how some of the threads have been handled as of late, but I am not in a position to overrule my fellow moderators. That is Gabi's job and hers alone (no, supermods, it isn't your job either).

@Chobi, post what you want. If someone is harassing you, regardless of their position, message me and I will handle it. I have no issue with deleting posts made by anyone.

[Lady Vulpix]

I'd just like to point out that I have nothing to do with the Dark Sage witch hunt. It takes two or more people to argue, so all of the blame can't be placed on him.

I personally do not agree with how some of the threads have been handled as of late, but I am not in a position to overrule my fellow moderators. That is Gabi's job and hers alone (no, supermods, it isn't your job either).

I hate to resume this discussion but it was I who reopened Dark Sage's thread because the mod who closed it had claimed to be doing it "because it has become a shithole and not because it has broken any rules". No one ought to close a thread if no rules have been broken (except in particular cases where the discussion has become obsolete, or a game has a new version).

Now, I'm in a difficult position, as I don't want to be a dictator. I believe most things can be discussed so that we can come to an agreement rather than start fighting each other. Hence this thread. I will only override a mod's actions by myself if I have no doubts that there's been a power abuse. So I hope I don't have to do that in a long time. Never again, if possible.

[Heald]

I hate to resume this discussion but it was I who reopened Dark Sage's thread because the mod who closed it had claimed to be doing it "because it has become a shithole and not because it has broken any rules". No one ought to close a thread if no rules have been broken (except in particular cases where the discussion has become obsolete, or a game has a new version).

Actually this is untrue. Posts are deleted if they break rules (and so are threads if the post that starts the thread is also breaking rules). Threads are closed if discussion has descended into off-topic nonsense or if the main posters in the thread are unable to contribute in a civil manner and the thread is thought to be beyond salvage. Most recent example of this was the 2012 Election thread when Gavin Luper closed it because Roy Karrde and Dark Sage continued to argue long past the actual election itself. They weren't breaking any rules but a decision had been made that the thread had run its course and no more on-topic civil discussion could be expected.

[Lady Vulpix]

In that case the election had passed and no one was discussing the original topic anymore, so the discussion had become obsolete.

[Heald]

In that case the election had passed and no one was discussing the original topic anymore, so the discussion had become obsolete.

Once a discussion becomes obsolete, the thread will usually die anyway. It's only when members keep posting in a thread that has run its course and posting in a way that is not civil or pleasant that it needs to be closed. Which is why Gavin closed it (and not specifically because it was obsolete - if it was obsolete, we would have let it just fall off the front page).

In fact throughout my entire time here at TPM, both as a member and a mod, the vast majority of thread closures are triggered by the fact a thread has descended in petty squabbling (although this was a lot more common a few years ago).

[Magmar]

It's kind of amazing how, after 13 years (not naming names, and there might not even be here at TPM, but kind of as a general statement you all know I don't throw shade xo), some people haven't managed to develop mature ways to manage conflict. I notice this mostly when I observe how some people I went to high school with act on Facebook, primarily those who never moved out of home and still live in the same town/work in the same town... Townies still fight like they did in high school!

[Lady Vulpix]

I believe that taking over a thread and changing the subject completely IS against the rules. If the new discussion makes sense, it should be moved to a different thread. If it's either SPAM or a flame war, the people involved should be warned and their posts deleted. In none of those cases should the thread be closed if its purpose is still valid.

[Blademaster]

I mean, if I had just told Blade to fuck off instead of being fairly civil, one mod decides that's unacceptable and deletes that part of my post, but the other decided it was fine and reinstated that part of the post, would you not be annoyed?

For what it's worth I'd have contested such a deletion. You set me up for an easy joke and I took it. I have no qualms with being told to get lost for that.

(Spoiler:) I only mock because I love. <3

[RedStarWarrior]

I believe that we should edit inappropriate parts out of posts so long as they are completely distinct thoughts (different paragraph, not selective editing). If it is not possible to salvage a section of the post, it gets deleted.

By editing, I mean if Blade (for instance) relies intelligently to someone and then is a total fuckhead after his response within the same post, I would delete the fuckhead part.

[Andrew]

I am against editing posts and deleting posts. It's essentially censorship. I'd like to think TPM is mature enough to deal with problems rather than resorting to nanny-state deletion.

[RedStarWarrior]

TPM as a whole, yes; individual members, not quite.

[Lady Vulpix]

TPM's freedom of speech is bounded to the rules. Want to discuss the rules? Fine, but that's another discussion entirely. As long as a rule is in place, you're not supposed to break it. If you do, then don't complain if your post is "censored".

On other notes - this was brought up by a few posts on the CISPA thread - I would like to point out that we have a report system which, if used correctly, can help make everyone's lives at TPM easier. If you see an intentionally offensive post and the mods have not yet acted upon it, you can report it by clicking on the symbol at the bottom-left corner of said post. So, if someone posts something offensive and we haven't noticed yet, please report them. It works much better than just wondering why they're getting away with it.

And, just in case you were wondering, that works with mods' posts too. I believe you can even report admins' posts, although if you find any of my posts offensive, I'd rather you let me know first because it's certainly unintentional. I don't mean to offend anyone here. Same goes for anyone else who may accidentally offend someone. But if it's intentional, go ahead and report it.

[RedStarWarrior]

To add to what Gabi has said, if you report a post, don't bother replying to it as well. Treat it as if it doesn't exist or else we get self-propagating bullshit.

[Dark-San]

Most members are old and mature to know not to cross the line. Taking into account that this forum existed for like years and most members are literally veterans, we should not really be too strict. It is all right to loosen a little but just keep to the basic rules of not being an annoying online prick.

[Heald]

It is all right to loosen a little but just keep to the basic rules of not being an annoying online prick.

Unfortunately this seems to be beyond the grasp of the members whom the mods have to make interventions upon.

I think ever since I was modded I've had only 3 members who have ever caused me to invoke my modly duties because they are unable to handle the immense responsibility of posting without failing the quoted rule above, and only one of them is still active (unfortunately).