Thread: How much Moderator Action Is Too Much

So, I was thinking about this last night, and are there any guide lines for moderator action here?

Now today, I was asked to not make a certien commetn which I agree with, but the way I was asked to not make that comment I felt was slightly rude. I don't really care, I have tough skin but I think mdoerators should approach situations which require their action with better temperment.

Secondly one of my posts was deleted last night, not because it violated anything specifically, but because the arguement was growing in the thread and the mdoerator wanted to reduce the escalating situation. The moderator also was taking part on one side of the arguement but also edited the person on the otherside of the discussions post. So is it allowed for a moderator to delete posts to stop an escalating arguement, even when that post is both civil, within the confines of the guidelines, and is very similar to other posts that were not deleted? Is it also allowed for a moderator to edit posts in a discussion he is part of?

IMO I think mods should approach situation with a tempered and civil approach they want to take action in. They should also not take action in a discussion they are a part of unless it shows gross negligence ot the guidelines, and lastly I do not feel posts should be deleted for what a mod precieves to be halting an escaltion. If a thread becomes to arguementative, I think the thread should eb closed. That's my . What do you think?

On second reading a moderators appraoch, which originally I thought to be minorly rude, I realize now it wasn't at all. So I retract that. I do think all situations like it should approached with civility, but my example of a mod proposing action in a rude manenr was off base, I was a little to close to the arguement :P

Of course, I am the Mod you are talking about in this.

First, I was a part of the thread, yes, but not part of that specific discussion.
Posters were involved in a silly argument over whether given age is too old for
a rookie. I had posted in there regarding durability and longevity of the same
player, but his age was not of concern to me. So there was no "conflict of
interest" on my part.

I deleted and edited several posts there, on both sides of the argument, to
calm the storm, so to speak. As I explained to you in a PM, your post was just
caught in the line of fire, and I had to get it out of the way to put the fire
out. I also later undeleted it, as you know.

Closing a thread is an extreme measure because it puts all discussions and
posts in that thread out of commission. It is preferable to edit and delete
individual posts as necessary. So no, closing a thread is not preferable to
deleting and/or editing posts.

Regarding your inquiry as to whether guidelines exist regarding the actions
of Mod, yes, they exist. It is a good idea for you and everybody to review
those guidelines. They are at http://broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1514.

Specifically, the rule in question is, "Moderators have the right to edit or
remove posts that are in violation of any rule or guideline or ones that they
consider offensive to the integrity of the community. Moderators may lock a
thread because it is has gone as far as it could go, in their opinion, or is
heading down a path that would violate the rules or guidelines (based on
experience). Rules may be added or changed at any time."

Frankly, I'm surprised to see this here, after you told me in a PM that it was
no big deal. But if you have questions, this is the place to do it. If you have
any further questions or comments, please let us know.


-ts

-----

Originally Posted by topscribe

Of course, I am the Mod you are talking about in this.

First, I was a part of the thread, yes, but not part of that specific discussion.
Posters were involved in a silly argument over whether given age is too old for
a rookie. I had posted in there regarding durability and longevity of the same
player, but his age was not of concern to me. So there was no "conflict of
interest" on my part.

I deleted and edited several posts there, on both sides of the argument, to
calm the storm, so to speak. As I explained to you in a PM, your post was just
caught in the line of fire, and I had to get it out of the way to put the fire
out. I also later undeleted it, as you know.

Closing a thread is an extreme measure because it puts all discussions and
posts in that thread out of commission. It is preferable to edit and delete
individual posts as necessary. So no, closing a thread is not preferable to
deleting and/or editing posts.

Regarding your inquiry as to whether guidelines exist regarding the actions
of Mod, yes, they exist. It is a good idea for you and everybody to review
those guidelines. They are at http://broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1514.

Specifically, the rule in question is, "Moderators have the right to edit or
remove posts that are in violation of any rule or guideline or ones that they
consider offensive to the integrity of the community. Moderators may lock a
thread because it is has gone as far as it could go, in their opinion, or is
heading down a path that would violate the rules or guidelines (based on
experience). Rules may be added or changed at any time."

Frankly, I'm surprised to see this here, after you told me in a PM that it was
no big deal. But if you have questions, this is the place to do it. If you have
any further questions or comments, please let us know.


-ts

-----

It's not a big deal, but frankly I think its something worth discussion. If you also remember in my PM, I said it's not a big deal, but that I think posts should not be deleted in these cases. I think its a pretty extreme thing for a mod to take words out of a persons mouth as editing their posts do. I think editing and deleting is just as extreme as closing a discussion since you are changing a persons post to what a mod believes should be posted.

I made this thread because its the town hall. If I am correct, tned made this forum with the explicit idea that this wasn't a place to be decided by only the mods or tned, but the community at large. I told you it wasn't a big deal, but I think that when its necesary to take such action needs to be defined more. To mix both sound decision making with concrete guidelines for these situations. Mods are human to, and I think if its to open ended, decisions will be made that people won't agree with. By setting guidelines as to what can be edited, and to what situations I think it creates a better forum. What constitutes offensive to the integrity of the community? I know in your pm to me, you didn;t feel my post was, but it was deleted none the less.....

I think its an important thing to discuss.

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

It's not a big deal, but frankly I think its something worth discussion. If you also remember in my PM, I said it's not a big deal, but that I think posts should not be deleted in these cases. I think its a pretty extreme thing for a mod to take words out of a persons mouth as editing their posts do. I think editing and deleting is just as extreme as closing a discussion since you are changing a persons post to what a mod believes should be posted.

I made this thread because its the town hall. If I am correct, tned made this forum with the explicit idea that this wasn't a place to be decided by only the mods or tned, but the community at large. I told you it wasn't a big deal, but I think that when its necesary to take such action needs to be defined more. To mix both sound decision making with concrete guidelines for these situations. Mods are human to, and I think if its to open ended, decisions will be made that people won't agree with. By setting guidelines as to what can be edited, and to what situations I think it creates a better forum. What constitutes offensive to the integrity of the community? I know in your pm to me, you didn;t feel my post was, but it was deleted none the less.....

I think its an important thing to discuss.

I thought I said that, as far as discussing it here.

Can you point out where I discouraged that?

This saying something one way and being taken another gets a little old . . .

-----

Originally Posted by topscribe

I thought I said that, as far as discussing it here.

Can you point out where I discouraged that?

This saying something one way and being taken another gets a little old . . .

-----

Your taking it that way is on you IMO. It was not intended that way, and if you re-read my first pm, what I said in that pm pretty much sums up exactly what I posted here...

Well, let me put it this way: We Mods do the best we can to make the right
decisions. Most of the time, they will be good decisions. Once in a while, they
may be bad decisions. But we do the best we can at this unpaid position.

If I feel it is necessary to edit or delete a post or a series of posts, I will do
that. If I feel it necessary to close a thread, I will do that. That is the best I
can do. Sometimes I may delete a post and later undelete it, as I did yours.
The other day, I closed a thread and later opened it. But then, I may delete a
post and leave it deleted, or close a thread and leave it closed. Depends on
the situation.

I will be fair as I can in all situations. But all I can do is the best I can do.
There is nothing else. As I mentioned, if you have a question or a challenge,
this is the place to do it. I will always take it into consideration.

If you still are not satisfied, you can appeal it to the Advisory Board, an
option I am unaware of in any other message board. You have a lot of
options here.

-----

First, I think this works two ways, as a fellow poster.

If offended or questioning, why do you not pm the moderator or the administrator and try getting your questions answered in that manner first, as not to escalate a situation that may be 'easily' resolved with a pm or two or five. If then you feel your concerns are not being taken seriously, then make a thread for ALL TO SEE?

As a fellow poster, I think it's very rude for members to post threads regarding moderators, at the onset of a problem, without first trying other avenues.

How much moderator action is too much?

My question leans more towards, how much member action is too much.

I do say that completely enjoying your other posting though, so please do not take it to heart, just as you asked in your thread for opinions.....

Originally Posted by -HW-

First, I think this works two ways, as a fellow poster.

If offended or questioning, why do you not pm the moderator or the administrator and try getting your questions answered in that manner first, as not to escalate a situation that may be 'easily' resolved with a pm or two or five. If then you feel your concerns are not being taken seriously, then make a thread for ALL TO SEE?

As a fellow poster, I think it's very rude for members to post threads regarding moderators, at the onset of a problem, without first trying other avenues.

How much moderator action is too much?

My question leans more towards, how much member action is too much.

I do say that completely enjoying your other posting though, so please do not take it to heart, just as you asked in your thread for opinions.....

Your input is always appreciated, HW. You are very much valued in that
sense, as well as in many others.

In fairness to BBL, he did PM me, and we had a discussion over what I did
with his post. He apparently was not satisfied with my answers . . . which is
okay because I at times was not too happy with a given Mod myself when
I was a "non-Mod" poster. So what he did here was the right thing: He took
it to Town Hall. If he still is not satisfied, then, as I mentioned, he can take
it to the Advisory Board. Now, I am presently on the Advisory Board, but I
would recuse myself off it in this case so BBL could be assured he is being
considered fairly.

But again, if BBL wants answers beyond what I gave him, he posted in the
right place.

-----

Originally Posted by topscribe

Well, let me put it this way: We Mods do the best we can to make the right
decisions. Most of the time, they will be good decisions. Once in a while, they
may be bad decisions. But we do the best we can at this unpaid position.

If I feel it is necessary to edit or delete a post or a series of posts, I will do
that. If I feel it necessary to close a thread, I will do that. That is the best I
can do. Sometimes I may delete a post and later undelete it, as I did yours.
The other day, I closed a thread and later opened it. But then, I may delete a
post and leave it deleted, or close a thread and leave it closed. Depends on
the situation.

I will be fair as I can in all situations. But all I can do is the best I can do.
There is nothing else. As I mentioned, if you have a question or a challenge,
this is the place to do it. I will always take it into consideration.

If you still are not satisfied, you can appeal it to the Advisory Board, an
option I am unaware of in any other message board. You have a lot of
options here.

-----

Top, I hope you understand I didn't mean this as an attack on you at all. That's why originally I kept the situations where we had disagreed anonymous, so no one individual would come under fire. I think you do a tremendous job, but I also think that the rules which define when moderators take action in similar cases should be more clearly laid out.

One of my posts, the one in reply to your here, came off a little arguementative, and I want to apologize for that, but I think it's a valid discussion, to which I agree you accept.

I just feel its something that should be discussed. There will be edits and deletes, I understand that. I may not agree with them, and if its your post being edited or deleted obviously you won't be happy about it, but I do think it can only help to lay out rules governing this sort of thing more clearly. Not only for those of us posting, but for the mods so their actions don't have to be justified, but are clearly backed by the guidelines. I know right now they are, but its very vague language IMO which doesn't come close to letting an individual really understand what constitutes and doesn't constitute such action.

So on that note, I do want to say I appreciate your work top, and all the mods. There is a reason in one of my pm's last night top that I said you should be nominated for mod of the day!

Originally Posted by -HW-

First, I think this works two ways, as a fellow poster.

If offended or questioning, why do you not pm the moderator or the administrator and try getting your questions answered in that manner first, as not to escalate a situation that may be 'easily' resolved with a pm or two or five. If then you feel your concerns are not being taken seriously, then make a thread for ALL TO SEE?

As a fellow poster, I think it's very rude for members to post threads regarding moderators, at the onset of a problem, without first trying other avenues.

How much moderator action is too much?

My question leans more towards, how much member action is too much.

I do say that completely enjoying your other posting though, so please do not take it to heart, just as you asked in your thread for opinions.....

I lked your post HW, but once again I think the idea of this thread is being taken off course. This isn't about finger pointing, and my issues with top were resolved yesterday. This is about protocol, and about talking about it in the community to get an understanding of what that protocol should be. If no one agrees with me, I'm fine with it, but this will help, no matter what to better define what constitutes moderator action, and if what I precieve to be to much action is infact that.

There's a reason I kept top out of this originally, and I do believe it is an issue that should be discussed in the oepn and not behind closed doors. This is something that effects us all, and a few shouldn't decide what is a majority issue IMO.

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

Top, I hope you understand I didn't mean this as an attack on you at all. That's why originally I kept the situations where we had disagreed anonymous, so no one individual would come under fire. I think you do a tremendous job, but I also think that the rules which define when moderators take action in similar cases should be more clearly laid out.

One of my posts, the one in reply to your here, came off a little arguementative, and I want to apologize for that, but I think it's a valid discussion, to which I agree you accept.

I just feel its something that should be discussed. There will be edits and deletes, I understand that. I may not agree with them, and if its your post being edited or deleted obviously you won't be happy about it, but I do think it can only help to lay out rules governing this sort of thing more clearly. Not only for those of us posting, but for the mods so their actions don't have to be justified, but are clearly backed by the guidelines. I know right now they are, but its very vague language IMO which doesn't come close to letting an individual really understand what constitutes and doesn't constitute such action.

So on that note, I do want to say I appreciate your work top, and all the mods. There is a reason in one of my pm's last night top that I said you should be nominated for mod of the day!

Well see, the language has to be pretty "vague." Precise descriptions only
end up resembling the Talmud, and the regulations still will not cover all
the situations that will arise. It has to be largely up to the person doing the
modding in a given situation. But that is why you have the avenues of
appeal here. If I goof, you have a place to go with it. This message board
is the only one I know of where you really have that.

-----

Originally Posted by topscribe

Well see, the language has to be pretty "vague." Precised descriptions only
end up resembling the Talmud, and the regulations still will not cover all
the situations that will arise. It has to be largely up to the person doing the
modding in a given situation. But that is why you have the avenues of
appeal here. If I goof, you have a place to go with it. This message board
is the only one I know of where you really have that.

-----

Well that's what I'm getting at. I would prefer it to be less vague. I don't think every situation needs to be mapped out, but I do think it should be more clear then it currently is. Here's some examples of how I would prefer things to be. Obviously this is a forum with a lot of people, so things won't b how I prefer them, but it's my opinion so I'll spout it .

I especially feel strong about editing posts. I don't think they should be edited unless they are obviously violating the rules, and should only remove personal attacks and insults. Even if the post escalates the discussion, it should be allowed to remain so long as it is not violating these two major things IMO.

I feel deletion should only be for similar reasons, but should be done when a group of posts (i.e. one or more people discuss things in a rude manner, and it escalates) warrent deletion, or an entire post by an individual cannot be edited because the hwole post is in violation of the guidelines.

Closed threads should be reserved for when the thread has become so inflammatory that it actually draws people in to break the rules.

Things of this nature. I say this because diferent mods se things differently. Leaving it up to the individual makes it a very different system depending on the mod who is online at the time. I don't see what could make this forum worse by more clearly defining what fits and why it fits into each of these catagories: edit, deletion, and closing.

It's how I feel....

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

I lked your post HW, but once again I think the idea of this thread is being taken off course. This isn't about finger pointing, and my issues with top were resolved yesterday. This is about protocol, and about talking about it in the community to get an understanding of what that protocol should be. If no one agrees with me, I'm fine with it, but this will help, no matter what to better define what constitutes moderator action, and if what I precieve to be to much action is infact that.

There's a reason I kept top out of this originally, and I do believe it is an issue that should be discussed in the oepn and not behind closed doors. This is something that effects us all, and a few shouldn't decide what is a majority issue IMO.

I appreciate your attitude. However, bringing issues into a thread, even though completely your right, does not show 'the whole picture' to viewers. Therefore, to me....it still comes across as finger-pointing, even if not intended as such.

I don't know how you'll ever find the right answer(s) to what you are looking for, as the multitude of variations given any one situation that occurs, all the varying factors in any one situation.

These are the types of threads that depleted BM in my opinion, and did not help to clear up anything. Best of luck to you finding insight though.

Originally Posted by -HW-

I appreciate your attitude. However, bringing issues into a thread, even though completely your right, does not show 'the whole picture' to viewers. Therefore, to me....it still comes across as finger-pointing, even if not intended as such.

I don't know how you'll ever find the right answer(s) to what you are looking for, as the multitude of variations given any one situation that occurs, all the varying factors in any one situation.

These are the types of threads that depleted BM in my opinion, and did not help to clear up anything. Best of luck to you finding insight though.

Good post. I don't expect there to be any right answers, just a ton of them for one thing or another. I do believe that the rules could be more clearly defined to address most if not all situations more clearly while still being vague enough not to turn the system into what BM is now with the demerit thing they have for any and all violations depending on its catagory as defined by the CoC.

All opinions are welcomed though, as it is an opne discussion , I just feel it could be done a little better. When BM was in its hay day IMO, it was still fairly clearly defined as to what action could or not be taken, but the mods own opinion did play a role, which helped IMO. Now at BM it's like a computer is the mod. No give or take at all.....

But my opinion is pretty well stated. I'll leave it at that, I have to ru nanyways, but I do believe that the system could be more concrete, but not to stiff. Just enough to define when action should be taken, but stil lleaving enough good sense in the mods hands for them to make choices based upon the situation.