Question 3: Moderation fairness and Consistency

[fudgestain]

So rossored thinks the mods are fair, 13 people disagree, and 43,961 people aren't interested.

If a mod believes that he/she is fair and consistent and so forth, the opinions of an extraordinarily miniscule number of people aren't likely to effect much change. Therefore, while I applaud jon's motives and effort, I can't help but wonder what is the point of all this?

If I may bring up the issue of clarity one last time, it is not possible to fairly and consistently apply an ill-defined rule, and discussions of whether to apply it "tighter" or more "loosely" are a wasted effort.

If the rules are clear and everyone understands them, then half this poll should be unnecessary. As to whether or not violators should be required to wear a pink W or scarlet B, I'll leave that up to the governors.

The existing guidelines are clear and are the standard. If you don't like them, tough.

 

[dbphoenix]

The existing guidelines are clear and are the standard. If you don't like them, tough.

If they're so clear, then why are fairness and consistency an issue?

Speaking of which, the "vigilance" of the moderators with regard to these threads has been noticeable, as has the fact that the threads are considerably thinner. Perhaps if the mods were to repost what has been pulled and explain exactly their reasoning behind pulling them, most of the questions posed by these polls would be answered.

 

[barjon]

db

other than one or two posts pulled by the posters themselves it's only been the Question 2 thread where there has been deletions and that was because it was degenerating into a spat between a few participants. A total of 13 removed - 11 relating to the spat and 2 totally inoffensive but extraneous.

jon

 

[dbphoenix]

Does that include the post just removed from the Question 4 thread? In any case, removing 20% of the posts seems unusual, though perhaps not.

Be that as it may, the point and the suggestion stand. First, if the standards are so clear, then most of these perceived problems should not arise, i.e., either a post violates the rule or it doesn't. Second, if the standards are not so clear, then having the moderators explain why a particular post was removed provides more specific guidance. If members then continue whatever behavior it is that the moderators find unacceptable, the moderators can be reasonably certain that the behavior is intentional.

 

[MasoMinos]

So rossored thinks the mods are fair, 13 people disagree, and 43,961 people aren't interested.

Another way of looking at this is, like any democratic vote anywhere else, to take the percentages as indicative of the group as a whole - even those who don't vote.

As of the time and date of this post, 15.15% of the membership feel the moderation of this site is fair and consistent.

 

[Stockjunkie]

db

other than one or two posts pulled by the posters themselves it's only been the Question 2 thread where there has been deletions and that was because it was degenerating into a spat between a few participants. A total of 13 removed - 11 relating to the spat and 2 totally inoffensive but extraneous.

jon

I assume that you put up the poll for a real reason , in that you are truly interested in what members have to say . Otherwise why do it ?

As such how is questioning a poster's sincerity " degenerate " or " extraneous " ?

Is it that some are deemed above and beyond the rules ? if so why not say so loud and clear so we all know what sort of standards or lack of it we are dealing with . it would save us the bother of even replying to the special few who cannot be touched.

It seems to me now it is now a question more of hyprocrisy and openess .

It quite clear that some will get special preveliges over others . Not terribley surprising or perhaps even wrong .

What seems so insideous is IF the board maintains the pretense of some sort of objectivity whilst all the time protecting those deemed untouchable because of the flattery they eminate to the right people.

It's one thing or the other , can't have it both ways . One either moderates as fairly as one can or you throw the whole thing out and say so in public .

 

[DaveJB]

Barjon posted this poll, I choose to accept it at face value that it is a genuine attempt to understand why there's such a disparity between user and mod perception. I also think DBP has made some valid points, as have others, that will be ignored (not purposefully) simply because this is starting to polarise into an 'us v them' argument.

Unless T2W is totally different to every other human enterprise since creation the truth will lie somewhere in the middle. The point I liked from DBP is (to me) simply logical - until the rules are defined as accurately as possible, so they are subject to as little interpretation as possible, then it's impossible to moderate in a manner that all will consider fair and in accordance with said rules. You can't publish a rule list of 50,000 rules with 10 examples for each, but it might be a good start for T2W management/mods to set some sort of group up to look over the rules and see how they might be redrawn, with the aim of making it easier to not only 'mod fairly' but also for the vast majority to agree that is indeed the case.

T2W MIGHT even consider some sort of appeal process - when looking to ban a user it is done on a very temporary basis, have a list of users willing to adjudicate, send them the details of why the ban was imposed and the 'bannee' is allowed to attach a statement in defence. That's probably what the mods are doing already, I'd have this as an extra layer - mods impose the ban, if it's appealed then it goes to the user group for a second opinion. If not appealed the ban stands. At least then the users wouldn't be imagining the mods had some sort of agenda in play here... I genuinely think there's nothing more than human fallibility involved here, but I didn't vote for 'a little unfair' etc without having the odd twinge about behaviour of the unbanned.... you can wind people up on a bbs very easily, I consider it unfair to punish the chap who snaps yet let off the patronising rissole who drove them to it!

(As I read the rules rissole is allowed, a meaty treat for all the family, so I'm told!)
Dave

 

[barjon]

...........................I assume that you put up the poll for a real reason , in that you are truly interested in what members have to say . Otherwise why do it ? .......................................

.

To repeat yet again, yes I did and I am. Conspiracy theories seem to abound and I suppose people will think what they will whatever I say.

For what it's worth, though, let me emphasise that I have no hidden agenda and what I am doing here is off my own bat - albeit with the agreement of the team - and a serious attempt to listen, learn and hopefully improve the operation of T2W for the benefit of its members.

First and foremost I am one of those members and I was (and remain) happy to take on a moderating role to help it along. It's the best site going and I want it to remain that way and get even better. Anyone who thinks I'm prepared to waste my time - and it's cost me in trading terms lately I can tell you (I can hear the tears falling ) - on some kind of spurious exercise....................well words fail me.

Since we now seem to have a sub-plot about moderation of the whole topic I'm re-instating all the deleted threads in the hope that people will judge for themselves and then concentrate on the questions I have put to you.

Good trading

jon