Yesterday Gunner posted a topic asking where a topic went.
That topic has now gone as well.
Quite simply, why? And why all the secrecy? IF these things are breaching the AUP, surely we need to be told how, else how can we learn?
My thoughts on the moderation are well known.
As with most things in life feedback helps close the loop. For instance…‘Thread closed because of blah…’ or ‘We pulled that thread because of persec issues’. Good moderation isn’t really hard.
But at the end of the day, its up to the mod team how they run the place.
[quote=“Baldrick” post=14236]Yesterday Gunner posted a topic asking where a topic went.
That topic has now gone as well.
Quite simply, why? And why all the secrecy? IF these things are breaching the AUP, surely we need to be told how, else how can we learn?[/quote]
The post that Gunner made I moved to a hidden area, and people that posted to it PMed to explain. I didn’t see the need to tell the whole world I’d removed it, because, well it didn’t effect them.
The post that Gunner was talking about was also removed based on several abuse reports, including one from the person that was the subject of the post! I didn’t touch that though, so I can’t say who was told or when.
Edit: you could of course learn what breaches the AUP by say, reading it? :-p but all joking aside, some of the things we remove posts for are so obviously breaches it is ridiculous!
pEp, as per our exchange of PM’s, my view is that the mod team is fast becoming a Freemasons-style society. Transparency is what’s needed or you’ll continue to see topics like this one created.
Also as I stated, I would have no hesitation in vocally supporting a mod team who ARE open, transparent and who don’t employ double-standards but despite what the AUP says, I will openly question any secretive modding that I come across on this site.
I’d like to put it on record that I have no complaints about the moderation team; in fact, I have nothing for praise for them and for the very difficult job they do.
[size=1]Now please release my family like you promised, mods.[/size]
I’m outraged that we’re expected to follow a set of rules enforced totally by people given more authority than us! Why, with the inability to appeal and having to do as we’re told, anyone would think we were part of some uniformed, military organisation!
I certainly acknowledge that they DO have a difficult job but there are some mods who make it even more difficult by their actions, hence some of us on here who will raise questions.
All I’m saying to them is (and the list is not exhaustive!):
- Have the balls to stand up and be counted. Remove the ridiculous ‘Operation-this-and-that’ usernames.
- Don’t remove threads or posts without any form of explanation.
- Don’t unlock threads, add your comments and then prevent us mere mortals from posting by locking it again.
- Don’t bait users then hide behind your authority as a mod.
- Be transparent in all dealings with the membership and communicate effectively.
WRT No.1, someone on here suggested that we get rid of usernames and use our real ones. That to me, is a good start.
We’re not part of a uniformed military organization, dear boy, only a uniformed youth organization*.
[size=1]
*When it suits the powers-that-be, of course.[/size]
We’re not part of a uniformed military organization, dear boy, only a uniformed youth organization*.[/quote]
In this specific context we are actually just a group of people who are members of an online community. What we do in our “spare” time isn’t a factor.
[quote=“Gunner” post=14256]I certainly acknowledge that they DO have a difficult job but there are some mods who make it even more difficult by their actions, hence some of us on here who will raise questions.
All I’m saying to them is (and the list is not exhaustive!):
- Have the balls to stand up and be counted. Remove the ridiculous ‘Operation-this-and-that’ usernames.
- Don’t remove threads or posts without any form of explanation.
- Don’t unlock threads, add your comments and then prevent us mere mortals from posting by locking it again.
- Don’t bait users then hide behind your authority as a mod.
- Be transparent in all dealings with the membership and communicate effectively.
[/quote]
What I was driving at.
While I don’t doubt that in these instances justice was done. My issue is that it didn’t look like it was being done. 1 thread closes, then the thread about it closing is closed, both removed with no explanation. It LOOKS gestapo-ish.
as for the names thing, I really don’t see the point in complaining about anonymity. We’re all anonymous. It will make no difference to me whether this is nodded by someone called PEP or Jonathan Smythe, i don’t know the person in real life, if you want to step away individually from anonymity, you are free to do so. (Although I don’t think that Moss should have two accounts, one for nodding, one for posting, that’s a little two faced.)
We’re not part of a uniformed military organization, dear boy, only a uniformed youth organization*.[/quote]
In this specific context we are actually just a group of people who are members of an online community. What we do in our “spare” time isn’t a factor.[/quote]
True…
One could of course point out that PEP is hardly anonymous to anyone who works out his deviously complicated username!
i see the point of it, given the less than cuddly way the ACO reacts to criticism (pitchfork, point hat, big burning cross etc…), i rather like the idea that mods can get involved in the nitty-gritty of discussions without betraying the world, and the ACO snoopers, that they are involved in the running of this place.
thats fine, the problem is that - as has been said above - theres no ‘this is why we’ve removed these posts/deleted this thread’ communication.
theres also not much in the way of a sense of humour, or indeed realism - the thread in question was about an idiot who put a stupid photo of himself on the net. he complained and the mods binned it. they’ve done him no favours, because now he and his friends think they can police the web to remove stuff they don’t like.
big, big mistake - as they will discover sooner or later.
A lot of our usernames will already be known at an individual’s Wing and\or at HQAC level - I know mine is. We’ve also had several ‘meets’ in recent years and some of the membership know who certain others are so it adds a personal dimension to the site because you get a feel for the ‘real’ person as opposed to their online persona.
A few years ago, someone at HQAC got all bent out of shape about this site but since then, we’ve had a number of changes of leadership and IMHO, HQAC have bigger fish to fry than continuing to persecute the membership on here.
[quote=“angus” post=14265]the thread in question was about an idiot who put a stupid photo of himself on the net. he complained and the mods binned it. they’ve done him no favours, because now he and his friends think they can police the web to remove stuff they don’t like.
big, big mistake - as they will discover sooner or later.[/quote]
Absolutely.
He put himself on offer and then went crying to someone when others poked gentle humour at him. FGS, we weren’t even being derogatory but I suppose this pretty much sums up elements of the youth of today.
Clearly, it does, otherwise Baldrick wouldn’t have felt the need to ask.
IMHO, it’s boils down to the same 5/6 people who always complain when either they, or another member, are modded. They need to grow up and find another forum to post on if they don’t like it. Heck, start their own. The mod style on here doesn’t stop people from joining nor does it restrict new members from contributing. It’s like the daily mail in here sometimes.
Bingo, with bells on! It enables them to be snidey with what is effectively an alt. If they can’t be even handed and mod under their normal usernames I’d question their suitability to mod at all!
Gotta beg to differ there fella, we may see lots of new people joining (I genuinely don’t know what the membership figures look like) but it’s the same old names posting, we certainly don’t see a whole host of new names contributing.