endlesswaltz123 wrote: I think if it is talking future psychic awakening then it should be allowable.
Whilst I do agree with you in principle, the last two threads on the subject have shown that people are utterly incapable of sticking to the topic and what is supposed to be News and Rumours devolves into all kinds of off topic nonsense. So no, we will be sticking to one thread per release until the PA series is done.
I also agree with what you think on this matter, however rather than just say "well it's going to turn into a S***show, so we shouldn't" yourself and the rest of the moderators need to do your/their jobs better to be quite frank, suspensions and bans for the most toxic, trolls of the forum, and that's including people that cannot stay on topic.
I have been a member of this forum for quite some time now, and being a member of other forums I do not actually like significant moderation and I hate what I am asking for above, yet there are so many people on here that cannot behave themselves (and I think the current world climate is not helping with less real life things for people to do) then an enforced break is necessary. People just cannot conduct themselves online very well any more, and I have been just as bad at times but seriously, if they don't shut up, set them free, stop ruining it for the rest of us.
Edit 1: That isn't a personal attack at yourself in terms of how you choose to moderate, it's not necessarily a personal attack on any moderator, maybe it's the rules you adhere to yourselves that don't give the flexibility to do what I am requesting above, in which case, maybe those rules need to change? All I'm saying is, use your power a little bit more, just closing and locking off threads actually doesn't do anything, it just shifts the ridiculousness elsewhere in the forum.
Edit 2: Fully aware of the irony in that I am being considerably off topic in moaning about the people that cannot stop being off topic in other threads...
Feel free to start a thread in Nuts and Bolts for this to avoid dragging this thread further off topic (we haven't even managed a page yet!).
Basically, here to do what was suggested. I thought rather than reword what I stated, it may as well be there as it was presented, with the edits included.
Just to reiterate, this is no specific issues I have with specific moderators, it's more you guys as a collective. I just think for persistent abuses of the above, which granted aren't the most offensive or worse things that happen on this forum, should be dealt with, with more vigour.
I just think these specific issues are some of the 'gateways' that happen in general on the forum. Some of the most extreme/vocal people on the forum just carry topics off in random directions on a consistent and regular basis, they ignore mod warnings and carry on and then a thread is locked.... Months or years down the line those guys are some of the most vile and toxic members of the forum, talking S*** to everyone when they could have been weeded out long ago. It's to the detriment of other people on the forum as well who can keep a conversation going and on topic.
Basically, certain members need to be punished more harshly and potentially banned as they just S*** all over everyone else trying to have a decent time.
Again, I'm not big on over moderation but some of the specific members are actually just trolls at this point and offer nothing to the vast majority of their members.
Vigour is the right word, I think . We probably do need to crack down on some repeat offenders (and for the record, 90% of the current moderator alerts issues are currently from the coronavirus thread, or the psychic awakening one ). Just takes a lot of work to do so!
Appreciate the positive / constructive feedback way you're bringing this up. Honestly I'm pretty socked at the moment with my kids being home due to the pandemic (and I've been riding herd on that thread) but seeing suggestions like this actually really does help us know what people would like to see on the site, and if we're missing anything.
RiTides wrote: Vigour is the right word, I think . We probably do need to crack down on some repeat offenders (and for the record, 90% of the current moderator alerts issues are currently from the coronavirus thread, or the psychic awakening one ). Just takes a lot of work to do so!
Appreciate the positive / constructive feedback way you're bringing this up. Honestly I'm pretty socked at the moment with my kids being home due to the pandemic (and I've been riding herd on that thread) but seeing suggestions like this actually really does help us know what people would like to see on the site, and if we're missing anything.
I totally get that you have other things on your plate, I don't think it even needs to be acted upon quickly per say but yeah, some of the people just need setting free now.
I do feel that stepping up the response, particularly now given that a lot of people are at home with nothing better to do, is a good idea. I think rule 1 violations in particular should be enforced a bit more strictly. Something like a 1-day ban is merely an inconvenience, but it sends a message. I feel that long term it would improve behavior overall.
Thanks for setting up the new thread and thanks for the constructive feedback.
As it relates to the PA threads, there were a ridiculous number of in thread, private and formal warnings (including suspensions) handed out over the course of the two threads but it seems to have little impact. One major issue with such long rambling threads is that people will often make off the cuff remarks ("I wish there was something for my faction"/"Why does this faction get another release") and before you can blink there are dozens of replies and it has devolved into pointless bickering.
As for harsher measures, I agree and disagree at the same time. With OT stuff the vast majority of people do not understand why it is an issue (and thus why they got a warning) and thus are unable to moderate their posting to avoid doing it. Whilst we could just banhammer them out of existence it really is not out preferred way of doing things and often these same posters are really great and constructive posters elsewhere. We do not have the ability to enforce topic only bans except in the OT forum so it is side wide or nothing (or checking a users posting constantly).
With the split of the PA threads it should be much easier to keep track of what is going on where (once people are used to it) and the emphasis can be back on the actual News and Rumours as opposed to rambling thoughts of poster X on topic Y. These threads will also have a much shorter lifespan than one mega thread and so will cease to be relevant much quicker and hopefully before they devolve into the cesspools of the previous ones.
As for the larger site wide points that have been raised, we will take it on board and I will open a thread in the moderator board to discuss amongst ourselves but welcome further thoughts from people.
Just a thing from my experiences moderating on other sites:
Banning/suspensions are often what many people want to happen/think should happen to resolve issues on a site. It's the most overt and often the only result of moderator actions that users can see. Ergo when things get reported and no one is banned/suspended people think that the mods have done nothing.
In reality there's often far more success for the site in terms of user retention and changing behaviour in open discussion with those who are the subject of reports. Ergo trying to show people the error of their ways; where behaviour is not tolerated and then provide them tools and the option to change their behaviour.
This can sometimes take a while and more than one incident to make a person start to change how they interact and behave - especially as much of the time its not what they've said its how or where they've said it that is the greater issue.
I think heavy draconian measures are only really of any use when a very significant portion of the membership have issues and there is just not enough time to talk to each one in-depth; especially when other users continue the disruptive behaviour and it persists like a "cult/group/club" on the site. Bad behaviour reinforcing bad behaviour. In that climate shorter warning periods and swifter suspensions can be the right tool as its more aiming to break cycles of behaviour and break the unity of a group on the site causing the disruption.
It's also worth mentioning that a lot of the complaints about threads going off topic come from people who participate in driving those threads off topic. On any number of occasions, I've literally had people posting off-topic replies in threads while I was in the process of cleaning out the off-topic posts those same people had reported. It's much easier for us to keep things on track if people don't actually respond to those tangents in the first place.
And yes, that includes posting to tell someone that they're off topic, or posting the 'last word' and then demanding that the other person should drop it and get back on topic.
insaniak wrote: It's also worth mentioning that a lot of the complaints about threads going off topic come from people who participate in driving those threads off topic.
I have never been so grievously personally attacked on the forum as this sentence.
Overread wrote: Just a thing from my experiences moderating on other sites:
Banning/suspensions are often what many people want to happen/think should happen to resolve issues on a site. It's the most overt and often the only result of moderator actions that users can see. Ergo when things get reported and no one is banned/suspended people think that the mods have done nothing.
In reality there's often far more success for the site in terms of user retention and changing behaviour in open discussion with those who are the subject of reports. Ergo trying to show people the error of their ways; where behaviour is not tolerated and then provide them tools and the option to change their behaviour.
This can sometimes take a while and more than one incident to make a person start to change how they interact and behave - especially as much of the time its not what they've said its how or where they've said it that is the greater issue.
I think heavy draconian measures are only really of any use when a very significant portion of the membership have issues and there is just not enough time to talk to each one in-depth; especially when other users continue the disruptive behaviour and it persists like a "cult/group/club" on the site. Bad behaviour reinforcing bad behaviour. In that climate shorter warning periods and swifter suspensions can be the right tool as its more aiming to break cycles of behaviour and break the unity of a group on the site causing the disruption.
I get where you are coming from here, and really I'm a teacher out here in the real world so I understand and appreciate your theory on trying to change behaviour. I think a few bad apples can ruin the bunch as well though and well, when one person is getting away with things, others soon follow as you reference with bad behaviour reinforcing it.
I really dislike draconian measures also, but yeah I think we are ultimately along the same lines in what you suggest and what I want, however I'd argue that the time is already upon the forum to be swifter with suspensions. It's already happening again, people are starting to divert off topic considerably and they clearly ignore warnings.
It does seem certain members have been suspended of late, those members are some of the key players in these issues. However, I believe the same members have been sanctioned before also, if they aren't going to change just save yourselves a headache.
In terms of gaining site wide feedback about the issue (whether most members see it as a problem or not) a quick poll on the matter might suffice? Even a google forms questionnaire might give you some insight. This use to happen on a yearly basis on a punk rock forum I use to visit years ago and it was highly effective I'd say, moderators changed how they approached things and people were eventually turfed out who would cause consistent issues for the vast majority.
Overread wrote: Just a thing from my experiences moderating on other sites:
Banning/suspensions are often what many people want to happen/think should happen to resolve issues on a site. It's the most overt and often the only result of moderator actions that users can see. Ergo when things get reported and no one is banned/suspended people think that the mods have done nothing.
In reality there's often far more success for the site in terms of user retention and changing behaviour in open discussion with those who are the subject of reports. Ergo trying to show people the error of their ways; where behaviour is not tolerated and then provide them tools and the option to change their behaviour.
This can sometimes take a while and more than one incident to make a person start to change how they interact and behave - especially as much of the time its not what they've said its how or where they've said it that is the greater issue.
I think heavy draconian measures are only really of any use when a very significant portion of the membership have issues and there is just not enough time to talk to each one in-depth; especially when other users continue the disruptive behaviour and it persists like a "cult/group/club" on the site. Bad behaviour reinforcing bad behaviour. In that climate shorter warning periods and swifter suspensions can be the right tool as its more aiming to break cycles of behaviour and break the unity of a group on the site causing the disruption.
I feel like, while true to an extent, it is unrealistic to expect mods to effectively act as counselors for a forum so large. It would be one thing if this was their job, but given the context I feel like handing out very short-duration bans sends a message without being draconian.
But that is just my take on things. I am not a mod.
As for the larger topic about enforcing the stay-on-topic rule, I personally feel that is less of a concern than enforcing rule #1. I am under the impression this topic is meant to be more broad than JUST relating to off-topic discussion but someone please correct me if I am wrong.
Usually the mods don't mind a thread getting a little off topic, but all too often a thread misses it's left turn at Albuquerque and ends up nowhere near where it should have been heading to (i.e., Pismo Beach)
NinthMusketeer wrote: I feel like, while true to an extent, it is unrealistic to expect mods to effectively act as counselors for a forum so large. It would be one thing if this was their job, but given the context I feel like handing out very short-duration bans sends a message without being draconian.
I'd wager that if you were to study it and get the reports chances are the number of problem people on Dakka isn't all that high. Problem people, in my experience, tend to partly be a problem not just because of their actions, but because they are typically very active and prolific users. They also tend to display patterns of behaviour - subjects that set them off; topics that they engage with regularly; quirks of behaviour that basically repeat. So often as not you can isolate and tackle them.
Of course I do agree that for volunteers it can take its toll on free time the mods have and disrupt enjoyment of a site for them. On the flipside if you tackle the "ring leaders" the overall impact can be quite large.
First off, I've had issues with mods and moderation here before. So maybe I'm not the best person to be offering any advice. But I think you should try to give equal attention to off topic posts and rule 1 violations. Mostly because one often leads to the other. Also in the past I felt like there's been uneven enforcing of the rules. Like some posters get a lot of leeway. But I'm worn out arguing that point.
Just to re-reference this, a specific mod warning has been made in the Psychic Awakening: Engine War thread today which is a prime example of what has been referenced above, and maybe the measures taken not being far enough.
As en example, a specific poster that has a name that relates to eggs has been a nuisance for weeks now, across multiple threads, these are the people that a warning I truly believe does not suffice as appropriate action in this specific circumstance (I'm assuming this poster has been warned via PM already, and recently).
I’m seeing a lot of political posts in the Coronavirus thread not being challenged. Is the ban on politics lifted in there? Or is it just the usual ‘depends on who’s saying it’ kind of deal? I’d like to know before I make a post that ends up getting deleted.
There have been a few religious posts as well, including one of mine. Mine got deleted. The others didn’t. Despite mine only calling out a priest who didn’t listen to the government and also offering a reason this isn’t the apocalypse. I do think they’re overtaxed by how much extra traffic is happening, but they’re also being over zealous and starting to crack a bit.
That said, I am a bit salty that mine got deleted while others were allowed to stay up. I figure somebody got offended by the three letter word. That’s ok. If people are crying over that, I’d like the mods to erase every comment during Covid about how safety and security is interfering with their stupid right to models. Because there have been posts by narcissists all over the place here who consider their rights to get/work on models to be more important than peoples’ safety. And one of those posts came from someone who is or at least used to be a mod.
Life ain’t fair, get over it. This site isn’t a public place. It’s a private club. It’s easy to join, but in the end, a select group of people decide if you can stay.
They have rules, but they aren’t laws. And yeah, some people can dance outside the edges of the rules and “get away with it”. This might be due to providing interesting content, being funny, or a lack of spitting on the shoes of the people that run the place.
It’s not a democracy. It’s a Senate (in the ye-olde Roman term). Appointed officials run the show as a group. You are free to complain, and the Senator is free to propose your eviction... though they’d need to get other senators on board too, and some of the Senators have some incredible patience for bs.
Welcome to the real world, where the rules are just guidelines until they’re inconvenient then they’re just suggestions, really. If you don’t like it, report it. If you don’t report it, and instead engage, that’s on the engager, not the mods.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight, I'd very like it if we could keep things polite, because the tone of that reply is not helping. This thread has been very useful so far and just this once I'd like a feedback thread to not be locked because it spiralled out of control like the many-many-many-many threads that preceded this one.
At the moment we may be seeing some gaps in mod coverage due to the COVID-19 crisis. I can only speak for myself here, but I am an expendable essential worker where my job requires me to be outdoors five to six long days of the week due to these crazy times.
I will add that we have been discussing things brought up in this topic and looking at how to best deal with some of the resident fevered egos, those who toe the line a lot and that other small percentage of the user base that likes to ruin things for the vast majority who just want to enjoy these forums. There's a lot more going on in the background than we can let on, which is a tad frustrating as before I joined the moderation ranks, I used to think all the time that they were doing nothing but raking in Dakka-dollars, but well.. plenty of stuff is happening, but as has always been the case with moderation, it is kept private.
There's no Dakka-dollars though, this is a job purely done out of love for the forums.
I'd like to second that - this thread has been very helpful, and spurred quite a lot of discussion in the mod forum and some action already. We appreciate the feedback!
Regarding the coronavirus thread, it unfortunately hits all the hot button things we're not Supposed to discuss (politics, religion, some 'isms) but it's hard to separate obviously. Please be patient with us there, and maybe consider just not reading that thread if it's too aggravating - as honestly other than needing to deal with mod issues I have done. You should definitely be getting your COVID-19 information elsewhere, and we're trying to keep it open, but it seems like a lot of folks are just using it to blow off steam =/. The more the rest of us don't, though, the better, and gives it a better chance of staying open for folks to at least try to discuss things. As always, if something's awry please hit the yellow triangle and a mod will Always look at it, even if no public action is taken.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m seeing a lot of political posts in the Coronavirus thread not being challenged. Is the ban on politics lifted in there? Or is it just the usual ‘depends on who’s saying it’ kind of deal? I’d like to know before I make a post that ends up getting deleted.
At this point there have been so many warnings, the thread would need to be locked. If the thread was locked, it would surely be instantly re-created by someone else since this is a worldwide pandemic. That leaves them to options of either enforcing a de-facto Covid-19 ban in the midst of the biggest story of our lives, basically, or ignoring all but the very worst offenders. I think going with the latter is the best, or at least least worst option, and one I appreciate. To be hoenst I think the mods have been doing a really good job policing the thread.
As someone who can't usually resist responding to flamebait, even the low quality variety (and thus making it worse, like the idiot I am) I have been trying hard to ignore it and just reporting it instead. Since I'm working from home and spending much more time on Dakka than usual, I can tell from the thread other people are usually doing this too, plenty of open challenges to inane arguments just... being ignored. Perhaps this will even make some of us better posters in the long run.
Nice one guys, I'm totally aware that moderating is firstly not easy, and is an absolutely thankless job most of the time.
As referenced above, if it takes a few days to get round to it, then so be it. It's nice to know feedback is listened to, and doubly so from people who quite frankly have more important things on their mind in the current climate.
That said, I am a bit salty that mine got deleted while others were allowed to stay up .
Don't take it personally. It generally just depends on how far the thread has advanced since the original post. If a post didn't really belong, and we see it before too many people respond to it, then it's easy enough to delete it to let the thread stay on track. If it's spawned a bunch of replies and quotes, it can be a lot easier, and potentially less confusing, to just post a' get back on track' reminder in thread if it hasn't already sorted itself out, rather than trying to delete multiple posts that are sometimes entwined through other discussion.
I imagine this suggestion will get knocked down, but i'll throw it up anyway.
Given that a lot of people are now homeridden and Dakka MODS are comparatively so few, could this be the time to promote a few temporary MODS?
I imagine that the Admin team have a list of people either earmarkerd for or at least who are watched for potential future MOD positions. Could not a few of them be given basic powers to help handle things in the OT while this crisis continues?
The ability to prune the branches, but not cut down the tree, so to speak.
It's also my understanding that swapshop/article MODS only have powers over their given domain. If this is the case, maybe expanding their remit (again temporarily) might help ease the strain?
As Brook says, there will always be gaps in MOD coverage, whether it be due to time zones or due to being considered essential or any other reason. I think now would actually be the best time to try out some probationary MODS. If they can handle themselves during a pandemic, then a normal weekday shouldn't be a challenge.
Bringing on a new mod has been one of the things we've discussed - it's a good idea, and we're probably overdue anyway. It's a bit of a process to make it happen, though, and if we bother yakface and legoburner to do it it would probably be permanent
Expanding swapmod powers is something we've considered in the past, although might not help with our current / immediate need coverage gaps quite as much. As a former swapmod myself it's definitely an idea I'm always open to
Thanks for the suggestions! The machine spirits are at work...
We should have a mod appreciation day! Only half-sarcastic.
But seriously, I appreciate you guys. I know I have not been the best behaved at times (though I feel I have at least improved over time) and would not envy having to moderate my own posts. And there are a hell of a lot of people as bad as me...
Ouze wrote: At this point there have been so many warnings, the thread would need to be locked. If the thread was locked, it would surely be instantly re-created by someone else since this is a worldwide pandemic. That leaves them to options of either enforcing a de-facto Covid-19 ban in the midst of the biggest story of our lives, basically, or ignoring all but the very worst offenders. I think going with the latter is the best, or at least least worst option, and one I appreciate. To be hoenst I think the mods have been doing a really good job policing the thread.
As someone who can't usually resist responding to flamebait, even the low quality variety (and thus making it worse, like the idiot I am) I have been trying hard to ignore it and just reporting it instead. Since I'm working from home and spending much more time on Dakka than usual, I can tell from the thread other people are usually doing this too, plenty of open challenges to inane arguments just... being ignored. Perhaps this will even make some of us better posters in the long run.
This is true yes. The virus is interwoven with politics, that’s a fact. So I’m fully on board with the ban being lifted, or at least ignored. But past experience has taught me that such a thing might not be evenly applied; that certain posters would be allowed a free reign on the matter whilst others will be cut off at every opportunity. It’s just something I wanted to bring attention to and get some clarification on.
If I sound overly bitter and cynical about this, just know that I’ve a dozen or so such experiences of this in the past. Like rule 1 for example...I’ve been called brain dead, a cultist and an idiot...from a mod. Not for acting out or anything, but just for being on the other side of the argument. And from other posters ‘aligned’ with the mods I’ve been given worse, all of which went completely unchallenged. There’s a reason I’m not a DCM anymore.
But it’s just as greatbigtree says. It’s not a public place, it’s a club.
Also some temp mods might be a good idea. Limited powers, if that’s possible. Like with the ability to remove posts, but not to lock threads or suspend posters. Just a thought.
I had a post deleted in the media section the other day, which mentioned politics, but was about something apolitical, no warning, just gone. I'm not complaining, the powers that be can do as they please, but it seemed unnecessary considering that the post was in no way confrontational, it wasnt even making a point one way or another. If anything it was more about history than politics, but hey ho. subjectivity I guess.
Why would there be a warning that the post was going to be deleted?
To be clear, unless you were also sent a warning, there is no censure in a post being deleted. The post is just removed to allow the thread to continue on track. It's not a big deal.
I suspect if an off topic/taboo subject post is part of a string of problem posts (especially if they're all after a warning has been given) they're much more likely to be snipped out than if they're isolated and nobody really responds to them
could explain why some stuff is being removed and others isn't (even ignoring we won't know how many yellow triangle clicks have been received which will also be a major factor)
It's just too authoritarian here, which is why I rarely post anymore.
Case in point, the Primaris Chaos thread literally up and vanished in the last 8 hours since I posted in it. No warning, no explanation.
It's just gone. Probably because one of the modes got angry about something or some idea that was put forward in there. Nuking threads is what will drive people away from this place, more so than a few people being belligerent on specific issues.
Togusa wrote: It's just too authoritarian here, which is why I rarely post anymore.
Case in point, the Primaris Chaos thread literally up and vanished in the last 8 hours since I posted in it. No warning, no explanation.
It's just gone. Probably because one of the modes got angry about something or some idea that was put forward in there. Nuking threads is what will drive people away from this place, more so than a few people being belligerent on specific issues.
Considering how quick it was devolving into tantrums about primaris existing at all I'm really not surprised. It was probably easier than just pruning a bunch of posts and making the thread seem super disjointed.
Togusa wrote: It's just too authoritarian here, which is why I rarely post anymore.
Case in point, the Primaris Chaos thread literally up and vanished in the last 8 hours since I posted in it. No warning, no explanation.
It's just gone. Probably because one of the modes got angry about something or some idea that was put forward in there. Nuking threads is what will drive people away from this place, more so than a few people being belligerent on specific issues.
Nothing to do with mods 'getting angry about something'. The thread had generated a ridiculous number of alerts, and so was temporarily moved into an alternate dimension so it could be looked at properly before it devolved any further.
When threads disappear, rather than just being locked, it's almost always due to one of two things. Either -
- the thread was spiraling into Crazy town, and needs serious pruning
Or
- a mod accidentally hit the 'Delete thread' button that's right beside the 'Lock thread' button.
I should note that in my experience pruning threads is sometimes a lot of work for no gain. I've often seen that once a thread goes south into crazy arguing land; once you prune out the argument those who were involved don't return so the thread dies on its own (basically you just spent ages fixing things for it to die off anyway); or the antagonists return and egos flare up again (especially if you didn't remove the one comment they took as an insult and now take that the mods hate them specifically because they left it in).
It's also hard to prune at times because insults get wrapped up in sane sensible comments in the same post. So you're either going through with a fine toothed comb trying to sift one from the other; or you're dumping whole posts that people feel slighted by because they made one tiny off the collar remark in an otherwise ok post.
Just as a suggestion, for threads like the above, firstly I'd hark back to my original point, are there any long term trolls in there that need to be dealt with? That in my opinion is your first call of action.
Secondly, how about temporary locking of threads, with a post to explain why? Give people a chance to get it back on topic, a clear distinct warning in the thread that it is to be locked for 24-48 hours, and when it re-opened, a clear and distinct warning again that it will be locked immediately if the topic goes off track and any warnings are made.
Whilst I'd argue that certain posters need to be dealt with, the complete lack of information when threads and/or posts go missing without a single explanation does not help things. I'd state it perpetuates certain grievances people have with mods, and that also leads on to people feeling victimised and that mods have favourite posters that they let things slide with... Whether that is true or not.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just as a suggestion, for threads like the above, firstly I'd hark back to my original point, are there any long term trolls in there that need to be dealt with? That in my opinion is your first call of action.
The whole reason for removing the thread temporarily is to give us a chance to look through it properly and figure out what needs dealing with.
Secondly, how about temporary locking of threads, with a post to explain why? Give people a chance to get it back on topic, a clear distinct warning in the thread that it is to be locked for 24-48 hours, and when it re-opened, a clear and distinct warning again that it will be locked immediately if the topic goes off track and any warnings are made.
That's already done, where appropriate. Removing the thread temporarily is done for messier threads where it's going to take a while to clean it out, and so would be confusing as hell for anyone reading it while that process is ongoing, and in some cases the thread just isn't worth the effort and will just be deleted.
Does the thread need to be cleaned up, if a clear and direct warning is made, and another when the thread has reopened?
I'm not suggesting you lock it to allow it to be cleaned, I was suggesting locking it to let the ridiculous flame war that has started to die off.... If it starts again then just nuke the thread, everyone has been given ample warning then.
That's definitely an option, and I've done it at times (publicly locking a thread for a day or so to let everyone cool off, then re-opening).
As Overread says, sometimes it's a lost cause and we start or ask someone to start a new one. In the case of this particular thread, there were already several mod interventions and one very clear mod warning that same evening, so it was kind of just going off the rails...
The "long term trolls" issue is something this feedback thread definitely brought to light, and that we're focusing on. While we've made some headway, that's a bit of a process - people still deserve a final warning / last chance to reform. But believe me, it has been noted!
One problem I know can be an issue is someone who is a "long term troll" is rarely a troll in the strict sense.
1) They might be someone who in the past was a major contributor who has fallen the side and become more jaded/snarky/off the cuff/etc... over time. So they might have quite a friend following on the site and in general have been around a long while.
2) They might only be "a troll" within certain key subjects and, outside of those situations, are perfectly normal and fine and perhaps even quite key contributors.
The result is sometimes its really hard to ban them because the might be friends; they might be key members in other aspects and they might have quite the following on the site. So mediation comes into play and that can be a very slow and painful process.
Sometimes you can simply remove the hot topics from the site in general - eg the ban on politics and religious debate which are quite common on a lot of sites as its a hot-button topic that can send many into patter 2 as noted above - horrible in political/religious discussion - perfectly fine outside.
Well, Moderation is far more of an art than a science.
The question of how to deal with "bad actors" is a pretty open one. I don't personally go in for blanket bans on topics, because what ends up happening is what happens here, it simply bleeds out into either thinly veiled attempts to circumvent the prohibition, or posts about the prohibition itself (which are both harder to deal with the "offending" posts, in a way).
To me, the better approach is not to moderate topics and issues, but to moderate conduct/behavior/comportment. In other words, a code of conduct that applies to all topics, then adjudicated.
Of course, in the end, all judgement will be judgement still. There will be people who agree/disagree with any and all judgement. But, if there is a fairly clear code of conduct, one can usually adjudicate based on that, rather than on a possibly more biased view of the topic at hand.
In the end, moderating on a large site is tough, because there is no way to please everyone all the time though.
Overread wrote: One problem I know can be an issue is someone who is a "long term troll" is rarely a troll in the strict sense.
1) They might be someone who in the past was a major contributor who has fallen the side and become more jaded/snarky/off the cuff/etc... over time. So they might have quite a friend following on the site and in general have been around a long while.
2) They might only be "a troll" within certain key subjects and, outside of those situations, are perfectly normal and fine and perhaps even quite key contributors.
The result is sometimes its really hard to ban them because the might be friends; they might be key members in other aspects and they might have quite the following on the site. So mediation comes into play and that can be a very slow and painful process.
Sometimes you can simply remove the hot topics from the site in general - eg the ban on politics and religious debate which are quite common on a lot of sites as its a hot-button topic that can send many into patter 2 as noted above - horrible in political/religious discussion - perfectly fine outside.
You could be describing me here, if I’m honest. Though I’m less about trolling, more about angry ranting.
I used to be a DCM, tried to be as friendly, appreciative and supportive as possible, but one too many bad experiences in the politics threads has soured all that. I know I shouldn’t let it get to me but it does.
But yeah, it’s a lot more complicated than simply getting rid of people.
I used to be a DCM, tried to be as friendly, appreciative and supportive as possible, but one too many bad experiences in the politics threads has soured all that. I know I shouldn’t let it get to me but it does.
But yeah, it’s a lot more complicated than simply getting rid of people.
And that's why politics is banned on so many general hobby and similar forums. Religion and Politics are two topics where people can get very passionate and very irate very fast. Even though nothing on a hobby forum is going to change the reality of either subject area, people argue with a lot of passion. Fights can so easily break out between otherwise totally calm people and it can grow to a point where some people end up engaging more in them than in the hobby side of the site. It spoils the experience for many involved and can turn them "sour" to the point where they give up on the community. Dropping in and out because its part of their regular habit to check the site; but more often inclined to be bitter, jaded and dislike people/the site more so than not.
It's a sad thing and honestly very hard to recover from. Typically the person needs to get a new burning passion in their hobby but also sometimes step away from the forum for a while and engage in life and reality for a bit then return refreshed and reinvigorated.
Yeah, "awesome except for souring due to the politics threads" can actually describe a lot of long-term posters . It's a big part of why we got rid of it... people were losing friends.
Honestly, I can't think of any place online where I can have a good political discussion at the moment (as opposed to face-to-face, where it's comparatively easy to have one). They might exist somewhere... but it feels a bit like looking for a unicorn, and it's definitely not here lol.
RiTides wrote: Yeah, "awesome except for souring due to the politics threads" can actually describe a lot of long-term posters . It's a big part of why we got rid of it... people were losing friends.
Honestly, I can't think of any place online where I can have a good political discussion at the moment (as opposed to face-to-face, where it's comparatively easy to have one). They might exist somewhere... but it feels a bit like looking for a unicorn, and it's definitely not here lol.
Alot of it comes down to the fact of anonymity on the board. It's a lot more difficult for us socially to say jaded things when there's a vis a vis .
The only way that it could happen is, when you'd have basically a 24 /7 moderator team in there to curb any thing remotly going into insult territory. so basically impossible.
RiTides wrote: Honestly, I can't think of any place online where I can have a good political discussion at the moment (as opposed to face-to-face, where it's comparatively easy to have one). They might exist somewhere... but it feels a bit like looking for a unicorn, and it's definitely not here lol.
A writing/reading forum I'm on - basically the calmest most sane and sensible place on the net it seems - even had to impose political topic bans. I think there's a "bit" of an internet generation thing involved. However I also think that as times have gone on we've entered some rocky periods where there's also a vast increase in political mistrust between people and politicians. Ergo people are fed up and annoyed and it vents online very very readily.
It's always a minefield of risk and in the end its not "needed" on most sites that are focused on other things. I agree its terribly disheartening to see a site tearing itself apart because of political or ideological misunderstandings and disagreements. Especially when you know that face to face most would have been fine with the disagreement; and when they were friends or at least got on before. When it starts to knock out some big long term contributing people it can really depopulate a site quite scarily fast (Esp today when Facebook has swallowed up a huge number of users to the point where forums are no way near gettingas many new members as they once did - which also makes social issues more of a problem because at a purely functional level; you're not getting replacement users in the same volume to replace any losses.
RiTides wrote: Yeah, "awesome except for souring due to the politics threads" can actually describe a lot of long-term posters . It's a big part of why we got rid of it... people were losing friends.
Honestly, I can't think of any place online where I can have a good political discussion at the moment (as opposed to face-to-face, where it's comparatively easy to have one). They might exist somewhere... but it feels a bit like looking for a unicorn, and it's definitely not here lol.
Well, I belong to (and help moderate) one small community, a forum for a book series, that we have managed to generally have amiable conversations along those lines. It does take work to "enforce" a principle of charitable reading, but that is infinitely easier where the "active user" population is likely several orders of magnitude smaller there than here.
Again though, to me, it is more about comportment than about topics themselves. While people are more likely to be strident in regards to religion or politics, it can apply to anything really. That is where the principle of charity really comes in. But, with an already hard job, enforcing that is much harder than just a blanket ban on given topics. However, I do still think that a blanket ban is at best ineffective, since it tends to simply mask the issue, not deal with it. That is, the forbidden topics are simply thinly alluded to or something similar, making enforcement even more of a nightmare, since now the judgement needs to be if the thin view was quite thin enough.
That likely causes consternation on other's part, who see through the veil, yet see no censure. Then, rather than play a veil-for-a-veil game, make overt statements and are then censured. I can see how people then would be frustrated by enforcement there, in a sense. It is sort of like someone evading a language filter but simply rearranging the letters of a word. No one is really "unclear" on what they were actually trying to say, but yet, by the literal letter of the rule, they did not use the given word. Again, to me, the "ideal" is less to quash topics, but rather to quash behavior in discussing things. That is, to facilitate the action of discourse, rather than limit or prevent it.
Although perhaps I simply have my philosophical hat on too tight though.
A smaller community helps, and as NotOnline said, places where people aren't anonymous also helps (although not completely - see Facebook!).
It can definitely be done, but to be completely honest we're a bit shortstaffed on active mods at the moment (that is another thing this thread has prompted discussion on, although as mentioned earlier the administrative process of bringing on a new mod takes a bit of time). When discussion of it was allowed here, it constituted the majority of the workload, and that workload was increasing as the political climate became more acrimonious recently.
So, for us right now, it's just untenable, and we're still seeing the effects of negative feelings from when it got a bit out of control (and thus finally disallowed), as FWC alluded to (and as probably all of us have seen in some long-time posters). My hope is that over time, folks appreciate the site just as a wargaming destination, and don't "need" to talk politics here. Just like how in a local gaming store, a heated political debate would probably not be welcome. These are important things to talk about... but there are other, far more suitable, places to talk about them
Anyway, I enjoy the "nuts and bolts" discussion aspect of these things, and definitely appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts! Now to go back to polishing my banhammer
Fun story, making explicit reference to 'tit-bondage' is fine, uploading photos of tit-bondage to the Gallery is fine and displaying pics of tit-bondage in a plog is fine, but typing "anus" gets you a warning.
Actually it was a line about eating something rancid out of your own, but yes, anything like that will result in a warning anytime. I'll also note I sent you a PM explaining it, didn't apply a suspension (although technically after a certain number of warnings they're supposed to be automatic) and received no reply from you...
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Does the thread need to be cleaned up, if a clear and direct warning is made, and another when the thread has reopened?
I'm not suggesting you lock it to allow it to be cleaned, I was suggesting locking it to let the ridiculous flame war that has started to die off.... If it starts again then just nuke the thread, everyone has been given ample warning then.
The problem is that people quite often don't read an entire thread before replying, particularly when they come across something that is a bit more confrontational. So when a thread goes off the rails, and we just post a warning rather than removing the posts, what winds up happening is that people respond without seeing the warning, other people who have been following the thread and so only look at the most recent post respond to that, and the whole thing starts up again.
At which point, we're back to locking the thread and suspending people again.
And, to be clear here - suspending people is not a preferred option. So we try to go for the route that is least likely to have the argument start up all over again.
Overread wrote: And that's why politics is banned on so many general hobby and similar forums. Religion and Politics are two topics where people can get very passionate and very irate very fast. Even though nothing on a hobby forum is going to change the reality of either subject area, people argue with a lot of passion. Fights can so easily break out between otherwise totally calm people and it can grow to a point where some people end up engaging more in them than in the hobby side of the site. It spoils the experience for many involved and can turn them "sour" to the point where they give up on the community. Dropping in and out because its part of their regular habit to check the site; but more often inclined to be bitter, jaded and dislike people/the site more so than not.
It's a sad thing and honestly very hard to recover from. Typically the person needs to get a new burning passion in their hobby but also sometimes step away from the forum for a while and engage in life and reality for a bit then return refreshed and reinvigorated.
Very true, and I’ve tried that very thing. But it’s hard to forget about it and move on when the poster or posters who have done it are right there in the threads you’re in, doing exactly same thing as before, unchallenged, and the ignore button isn’t cutting it because other posters keep quoting their posts. So you’ve got no choice but to either grind your teeth or jump at the bait.
Incidentally, it’s happening right now in the Coronavirus thread. There’s a poster in there now, one I’d definitely call a problem poster, doing their usual bit. Ironically, I actually somewhat agree with their latest point, to a point, but they are just so nasty about it it’s grating. Plus all that past history too. If you read through their posts they just ooze condescending arrogance. They are the absolute smartest person in the world and you aren’t just wrong for having another opinion...you’re an idiot...and scum, for having it. Utterly poisons the atmosphere of every thread they set foot in.
RiTides wrote: Actually it was a line about eating something rancid out of your own, but yes, anything like that will result in a warning anytime. I'll also note I sent you a PM explaining it, didn't apply a suspension (although technically after a certain number of warnings they're supposed to be automatic) and received no reply from you...
Yeah, it makes perfect sense. A line from a Bloodhound Gang song violates the PG-13 rules, tit-bondage doesn't. If I had kids, I'd feel safe knowing that they won't be exposed to such concepts as the anus on a forum about war, violence and death.
It was supposed to evoke feelings of disgust, because that is my feeling on the subject. Also, the last time I contacted a mod about one of my warnings, they just gave me another one. So forgive me if I have no confidence in the arbitrary and capricious nature that you all enforce what you claim are the rules.
Since a lot of mods are looking at this thread right now, I'd like to throw a quick "my bad" to whatever mod caught that thread I reported that "belonged in geek media" that was... already in geek media. I had too many tabs open and got confused, sorry!
As seeing people getting in hot water for posting rap lyrics on Twitter should show, just because something is in a song doesn't make it okay to say in another setting
As for explicit miniatures, we've always allowed a greater degree of freedom for things that are wargaming related, particularly actual miniatures, although sometimes we ask for spoiler tags or NSFW warnings in threads so people aren't caught by surprise. We've had discussion of that before, and it's a useful thing to talk about, but doesn't make posting what you did okay.
(Also note that "anus" isn't disallowed, or it would be caught by the swear filter, it was your whole sentence that was, frankly, disgusting that was inappropriate)
Edit:
No problem Ouze, there are plenty of erroneous alerts so it probably didn't even move the needle for whoever saw it
Ouze wrote: Since a lot of mods are looking at this thread right now, I'd like to throw a quick "my bad" to whatever mod caught that thread I reported that "belonged in geek media" that was... already in geek media. I had too many tabs open and got confused, sorry!
No harm done.
It's not like you went into a topic you yourself created and started reporting every post you personally disagreed with.
Forty-two alerts by one person.. forty-two alerts I had to go through.
Joking aside, this for most of the people out there that take the time to put in reports: Thank you!!! We can't be everywhere at once, so having people do the right thing by reporting instead of retorting and a bonus pretzel to those who also take the time to put in a helpful description makes things a whole lot easier for us.
Future War Cultist wrote: You’ve probably never read my reports then. They’re short sharp barks. Possibly even got nasty at one point.
At least you say something. I've had reports where a user clearly isn't happy, but they don't say why. People forget that interpretation can vary a lot (indeed a good few internet fights are purely because two people are trying to talk then end up fighting because they keep interpreting what the other person is saying wrongly) and it can be hard to work out why something is reported when there isn't anything apparent being said.
That said never had 42 reports from anyone in a thread before - though yeah "I don't like this/I don't like this person I'm going to report everything" is something I've seen before.
RiTides wrote: As seeing people getting in hot water for posting rap lyrics on Twitter should show, just because something is in a song doesn't make it okay to say in another setting
As for explicit miniatures, we've always allowed a greater degree of freedom for things that are wargaming related, particularly actual miniatures, although sometimes we ask for spoiler tags or NSFW warnings in threads so people aren't caught by surprise. We've had discussion of that before, and it's a useful thing to talk about, but doesn't make posting what you did okay.
(Also note that "anus" isn't disallowed, or it would be caught by the swear filter, it was your whole sentence that was, frankly, disgusting that was inappropriate)
Edit:
No problem Ouze, there are plenty of erroneous alerts so it probably didn't even move the needle for whoever saw it
So why, exactly?
Because you have posted exactly what I did, in composite. Am I to understand that separating the concept of rancid tuna-salad from the concept of an anus somehow saves it? If the whole is beyond the pale, how comes the parts of it aren't?
It wasn't off-topic; it wasn't rudely aimed at another poster; it didn't mention, reference or invoke either politics or religion; I didn't dodge the swear-filter and moderating it was arbitrary and capricious.
My other favorite is the cranky report that says 'Why is this sort of thing allowed?'
Or the variation: 'I got a warning for this! Why is this person allowed to do it?'
To which the answer would usually be: 'It's not OK, but you've only just reported, and I don't have a time machine to remove it before I see it...'
Adding a description of helpful, but so is remembering that the mod alert is often the first we will have seen of a problem post. Even in a thread where a mod has been active, stuff can be missed the first time through when you're reading in a hurry.
Because you have posted exactly what I did, in composite. Am I to understand that separating the concept of rancid tuna-salad from the concept of an anus somehow saves it? If the whole is beyond the pale, how comes the parts of it aren't?
It wasn't off-topic; it wasn't rudely aimed at another poster; it didn't mention, reference or invoke either politics or religion; I didn't dodge the swear-filter and moderating it was arbitrary and capricious.
The existence of the words isn't the problem. The specific usage of them was.
Would you use that phrase in front of your grandmother?
And while I'm sure you'll reply to that to assure me that you would, or that your grandmother would say worse in the middle of a church sermon, for most of us it's simply not something that fits in any way into polite discussion. And I very strongly suspect that you know that, and are just stirring the pot here.
BrookM wrote: Forty-two alerts by one person.. forty-two alerts I had to go through.
Just out of interest, if a person was ever to find themselves in the situation where the reporting of that many posts was needed, would it be more efficient/effective/whatever/etc to manually report those posts, or to directly message a mod (preferably one who shows as being online)?
Are the individual reports handy for record keeping or does it just end up being a quagmire of confusion?
If it's forty two alerts on a single thread, about multiple posters, it would ultimately be better to just report the post that starts things off, and add a note to the effect that the thread from then on is a trainwreck.
It it's a single user, and they have 42 posts that you legitimately think need attention, then PMing a mod about it would be more practical. We can look at their post history and work from there.
We don't keep a record of alerts - once they're actioned, they're deleted, and any relevant notes are made in the poster's individual file.
RiTides wrote: Actually it was a line about eating something rancid out of your own, but yes, anything like that will result in a warning anytime. I'll also note I sent you a PM explaining it, didn't apply a suspension (although technically after a certain number of warnings they're supposed to be automatic) and received no reply from you...
Can affirm that you get a ban on your fifth warning... even if those warnings are up to nine years apart and were issued for different reasons.
Not anymore. The system used to automatically apply a short suspension after 5 warnings, but that's been turned off so that we can apply some discretion in cases like that.
Jidmah - Yeah we've got some discretion with it now, although it's supposed to kick in at 5 (for reference, most users never get a single one). In your case, getting in my time machine looks like you had 1 way back in 2011, 3 in 2018, and 1 in 2020. So not quite the 9 year break (although nice streak from 2012-2017!!).
It also looks like you got caught up in us trying to crack down on the psychic awakening stuff, where we've had the most wargaming-related alerts and issues, by far, and was also the inspiration for this thread being created by the OP to ask for More intervention. It's just a very passionate topic of disagreement for a lot of our users it seems!
RiTides wrote: Jidmah - Yeah we've got some discretion with it now, although it's supposed to kick in at 5 (for reference, most users never get a single one). In your case, getting in my time machine looks like you had 1 way back in 2011, 3 in 2018, and 1 in 2020. So not quite the 9 year break (although nice streak from 2012-2017!!).
Yeah, turns out sleep deprivation from caring for a toddler doesn't mix well with posting in heated discussions. The first four warnings were well deserved.
It also looks like you got caught up in us trying to crack down on the psychic awakening stuff, where we've had the most wargaming-related alerts and issues, by far, and was also the inspiration for this thread being created by the OP to ask for More intervention. It's just a very passionate topic of disagreement for a lot of our users it seems!
The warning was for spam, not for violating rule#1 like the others. I did discuss this in great length with ingtaer and had it reviewed by BrookM, who both were perfect professionals about it. In the end I just accepted that our view on what spam is differs. As a result, I've decided just to not post on an PA threads anymore, except when I'm jumping between tabs and don't realize I am in such a thread when replying. Saves all of our time for more valuable things
What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
Besides that, I'd like to tell you once again that you are all doing a great job. I used to moderate a large forum, and know how much of a PITA cleaning after people like me is.
Yeah, those are exactly the rabbit holes we're dealing with in PA in particular!
And I can totally relate to the toddler / lack of sleep thing, like I said that was an awesome streak and usually, if there are big gaps or it's for something completely unrelated, we try to take that into account. But the PA stuff has been a bit of a runaway train for sure
Yo! I just wanna say that I had a look in at the 'rona thread earlier...
...man, those boys are really making you earn your crux terminatus'.
I for one think the mods on here do a really good job for the most part, and I wanna thank you for wading into fairly common keyboard-toddler brawls and sorting stuff out, so that we all have a fun place to talk about playing with our little men. I've had my fair share of slaps on the wrist (some very well-deserved, for being a troll-y little gak ball), but honestly, you guys really do a decent job, and quickly, too. Superdooper especially ingtaer, because he gave me some old knight legs for free from the other side of the world one time and that was very nice of him.
I think, given the increased traffic, boredom, and tension generated by the various lockdowns (oh boy, I've just been sent to work from home, prepare your butts) that maybe a new mod, or a temporary mod might be a good shout?
I think a temp mod, or rushing a new mod into the mix could end up being counter productive. It takes time to teach somebody procedures, as well as give them a grounding in how to handle different situations.
I'm pretty sure the number 1 complaint about moderation is that it's inconsistent, which of course mostly arises from the fundamental attribution error, not any actual inconsistency. I think that the Dakka team does make an effort to be consistent, and that takes time.
Polonius wrote: I think a temp mod, or rushing a new mod into the mix could end up being counter productive. It takes time to teach somebody procedures, as well as give them a grounding in how to handle different situations.
I'm pretty sure the number 1 complaint about moderation is that it's inconsistent, which of course mostly arises from the fundamental attribution error, not any actual inconsistency. I think that the Dakka team does make an effort to be consistent, and that takes time.
I find that people cry inconsistent far more than it actually is. Often because people only see their own personal experiences and public warnings/banning. So if they get told off for doing something, but don't see others being visibly told off they assume they are being singled out; when in reality more goes on behind the scenes than they see.
That said moderation does end up being somewhat variable based on the mods you get; which is why drafting new mods does take time. Another aspect is that even as a new mod (I've started modding on another site recently) it takes time to get used to the standards and process. So you do every much end up like a spare wheel just dealing with spambots at first until you learn how the rules are interpreted and put into force in a practical sense. Even if you're used to modding on one site, it takes time to get used to a new site and a new way of operating,
Polonius wrote: I think a temp mod, or rushing a new mod into the mix could end up being counter productive. It takes time to teach somebody procedures, as well as give them a grounding in how to handle different situations.
I'm pretty sure the number 1 complaint about moderation is that it's inconsistent, which of course mostly arises from the fundamental attribution error, not any actual inconsistency. I think that the Dakka team does make an effort to be consistent, and that takes time.
I find that people cry inconsistent far more than it actually is. Often because people only see their own personal experiences and public warnings/banning. So if they get told off for doing something, but don't see others being visibly told off they assume they are being singled out; when in reality more goes on behind the scenes than they see.
That said moderation does end up being somewhat variable based on the mods you get; which is why drafting new mods does take time. Another aspect is that even as a new mod (I've started modding on another site recently) it takes time to get used to the standards and process. So you do every much end up like a spare wheel just dealing with spambots at first until you learn how the rules are interpreted and put into force in a practical sense. Even if you're used to modding on one site, it takes time to get used to a new site and a new way of operating,
I agree 100% that most inconsistencies are because people bend what they see to match the idea that when they make a lousy post they are good people who made a mistake, while others are bad people who posted poorly becasue they are bad. that's the fundamental attribution error.
You also have people, including in this thread, who basically want, in writing, exactly how disruptive/rude/gross they can be. They obviously are so far from the actual idea that you should be posting positive, on topic material that they are only ever going to be upset about rules.
I let that poster get to me today again. Just the mere sight of them sets me off, and the ignore button doesn’t cut it. If I’m honest, the way things are going, I probably won’t make it.
Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
Sounds like you are advocating for yourself as the first.
Future War Cultist wrote: I let that poster get to me today again. Just the mere sight of them sets me off, and the ignore button doesn’t cut it. If I’m honest, the way things are going, I probably won’t make it.
Have you considered just taking a break from the forum? Getting out there for a few (one a day with social isolation) walks; engaging with the hobby with some building and painting and perhaps cleaning out the attic?
If another user is getting this much anger from you online it sounds a bit like you just need to cool off and take a break and come back in a bit. Seeing someone online on a gaming forum shouldn't be making your react like this to the point where you're sure you're going to do something that gets you banned from the site.
I'm always getting flagged for rule one "being nice". Which is funny as its also used to suppress opinions that differ from the majority.
Instead of removing an offending word they'll just delete the entire post to make sure you're suppressed.
Then it's a couple of days ban.
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage. But they're good mates with a mod. So it's all good.
Or certain well known posters who constantly get into rules debates just to start arguments with asinine interpretations.
Getting everyone worked up and angry with their god forsaken stupidity.
But the next day their at it again with another topic because they got bored.
Well, if you use phrases like "god forsaken stupidity" directly to another poster, than yes, it will probably generate a bunch of mod alerts and result in a warning (or, if you've already had a significant number of warnings for similar things, a suspension).
If you see others crossing the line, hitting mod alert instead of "fighting fire with fire" really helps, and keeps you from getting in trouble yourself, to boot
ValentineGames wrote: I'm always getting flagged for rule one "being nice". Which is funny as its also used to suppress opinions that differ from the majority.
Instead of removing an offending word they'll just delete the entire post to make sure you're suppressed.
Then it's a couple of days ban.
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage. But they're good mates with a mod. So it's all good.
Or certain well known posters who constantly get into rules debates just to start arguments with asinine interpretations.
Getting everyone worked up and angry with their god forsaken stupidity.
But the next day their at it again with another topic because they got bored.
I gotta be honest, I'm reading some of your posts... and I think you are consistently impolite. And that's just the posts that weren't deleted! Your posts are negative in tone and reflect a really poor view of Dakka, GW gamers, and people in general.
I think that a reflective person, when repeatedly told they were violating the rules, would consider the fact that maybe they should adjust their behavior, rather than blame some vague sense of favoritism. (Of course, posts that toe the line, but also open up productive conversation will be allowed, while posts that are dead ends or lead to flames will be deleted.)
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
You don't need to ban those subjects, as they already are off topic. and since they tend to derail positive conversations. When people are discussing what, say, Blood Angels get in a new book, a screed about how GW needs to give love to non-marines is off topic. It's not an inappropriate thing to discuss, although after decades it's hard to find a fresh angle on that one.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
And it's infuriating that it is being allowed.
I think that a general coronavirus thread is going to be a time bomb, because it's an inherently political topic. We can discuss how it affects wargaming in a more detached setting, but people are losing jobs and/or getting sick in large part due to government action/inaction. It's both keenly personal and also deeply partisan.
RiTides wrote: Well, if you use phrases like "god forsaken stupidity" directly to another poster, than yes, it will probably generate a bunch of mod alerts and result in a warning (or, if you've already had a significant number of warnings for similar things, a suspension).
If you see others crossing the line, hitting mod alert instead of "fighting fire with fire" really helps, and keeps you from getting in trouble yourself, to boot
Let's consider a different perspective.
My experience on Dakka has been dreadful the last few years. Primaris marines don't appeal to me, expressing that opinion often results in brigading attacks. The insults are often very personal and, when they don't get a rise, turn into obvious attempts to get a thread locked or a user banned.
For my part, I try to remain above it all and rarely engage when I see it happening. But I will stick to my guns and vocally reject the most egregious encounters. It sometimes means my posts are removed, and that's okay. The mods overall are fair, while I might disagree with some decisions you are appreciated for putting up with it all.
If the goal of Dakka is to become a marketing channel for Games Workshop, the brigading, banning, thread locking, etc. will get you there. My sense is the forum aspires to be more than that, but the picture sometimes gets a little blurry. Feels like threads are regularly gamed by a determined set of users intolerant of other people's opinions, who seem to have an interest in topics related to new releases. They seem to have an atypically intense need to rapidly respond to any negative sentiment.
As a result, I don't post here as much, mostly discussions on technical issues that don't catch the attention of the mob. I still talk to a lot of the same friends I've known on Dakka, we just do it on Facebook, Disqus and other sites.
That's my $0.02. Not telling you how to run your board, just sharing my outlook.
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage.
People say that sort of thing, but I can think of many a 'regular' who very much isn't around anymore for that sort of behaviour.
My experience on Dakka has been dreadful the last few years. Primaris marines don't appeal to me, expressing that opinion often results in brigading attacks. The insults are often very personal and, when they don't get a rise, turn into obvious attempts to get a thread locked or a user banned.
I'm really confused by this. Disliking primaris isn't exactly a rare opinion. I think the tide turned over the past few years, especially post shadowspear, but I think people not liking primaris is an opinion fairly frequently expressed.
Which is why I kind of wonder about your experience. I've certainly seen moods get ugly at people sharing their negative opinion, but that was usually in threads about that thing, making the negative voices really odd. the AOS threads got really nasty over that, as people kept popping in to explain why the hate the game to a bunch of people excited about the new releases. that isn't critique, that's just annoying.
Kanluwen wrote: Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
And it's infuriating that it is being allowed.
Yeah... I've curtailed my posting habits for quite some time because of this. (also partly because I took time off of 40k in general and gave most of my plastic crack to my son).
Now, granted I'm the poster boy for being in the middle of thread derailments (I'd wager my history is in top 3 of being most moderated), and for that I do sincerely apologize for my contributions in this regard, which likely contributed to the mod's decision to ban politics. I do miss it though!
Only thing I would do, Kanluwen, is to simply state that you disagree with that poster's premise, and state that you would continue the political discussions elsewhere. That way, you've informed the other poster of your disagreement that gives some context to your response and let the thread know that you're moving on from that point on dakka's forum, with the door open to continue the banned topic via other sites or simply direct PM.
Additionally, I want to thank all the mods for all the hard work they put in on this site. Even though my postings has dropped off quite a bit, I still lurk almost daily.
Which is why I kind of wonder about your experience. I've certainly seen moods get ugly at people sharing their negative opinion, but that was usually in threads about that thing, making the negative voices really odd. the AOS threads got really nasty over that, as people kept popping in to explain why the hate the game to a bunch of people excited about the new releases. that isn't critique, that's just annoying.
Agreed. Sometimes the criticism from one person isn't the problem; its the repetitive nature from a person and also from the community at large. Eventually those who like something, like Primaris, get tired of every thread about them devolving into the "I hate group" dominating the discussion; whilst they'd rather prefer to talk about the more positive angle. Sometimes you can solve it by starting another thread, such as how the AoS group has recently started making summoning and balance threads to try and take pressure off other subject with regard to those "hot topic" discussion points that can take a thread about one thing and turn it into another (often a repetition of the same/similar people discussing the same points).
I gotta be honest, I'm reading some of your posts... and I think you are consistently impolite.
Damn right I am. I say what I think.
Dude, I have never had a single interaction with you of any kind, ever, and I have you on ignore despite having no personal opinion of you. I am telling you this as someone with no skin in this particular game and trying to be constructive: you are often rude and your posts are generally unpleasant to read. You should either address that if you want, or at least accept that you're probably going to have a lot of people reporting your posts because you genuinely come across as very abrasive.
My experience on Dakka has been dreadful the last few years. Primaris marines don't appeal to me, expressing that opinion often results in brigading attacks. The insults are often very personal and, when they don't get a rise, turn into obvious attempts to get a thread locked or a user banned.
I'm really confused by this. Disliking primaris isn't exactly a rare opinion. I think the tide turned over the past few years, especially post shadowspear, but I think people not liking primaris is an opinion fairly frequently expressed.
Which is why I kind of wonder about your experience. I've certainly seen moods get ugly at people sharing their negative opinion, but that was usually in threads about that thing, making the negative voices really odd. the AOS threads got really nasty over that, as people kept popping in to explain why the hate the game to a bunch of people excited about the new releases. that isn't critique, that's just annoying.
Dunno.
Recent examples are the Chaos Primaris thread and the WWYD with Old Tacticals threads. Feel free to look through my history and share your thoughts.
I probably don't post often enough to be a constant source of anything.
Kanluwen wrote: Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
And it's infuriating that it is being allowed.
While I can appreciate the frustration there, the other side of that coin is that the topic inherently touches on political issues, but is kind of a little too big for us to just ban discussion of coronavirus entirely... So the fact that it has been skirting political issues without people escalating those arguments has been greatly appreciated.
I gotta be honest, I'm reading some of your posts... and I think you are consistently impolite.
Damn right I am. I say what I think.
Being polite and saying what you think are not actually mutually exclusive.
But if you acknowledge that your behaviour is impolite, I'm a little puzzled as to why you would be complaining about being pegged for being impolite on a board that has a requirement to be polite as its primary rule. It's like deliberately walking into a wall and then complaining that the wall is there.
I just wanted to chime in that I absolutely love this site and have huge appreciation for yakface, legoburner, and the mods for making Dakka what it is. It's a thankless task and I appreciate their efforts.
Kanluwen wrote: Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
And it's infuriating that it is being allowed.
While I can appreciate the frustration there, the other side of that coin is that the topic inherently touches on political issues, but is kind of a little too big for us to just ban discussion of coronavirus entirely... So the fact that it has been skirting political issues without people escalating those arguments has been greatly appreciated.
And on the flipside, that stuff seriously needs to either be getting removed or the posters in question need to be getting removed. That stuff is not okay, and a large amount of it is currently being driven by astroturfing groups that are more interested in $$$$$ than people.
But if you acknowledge that your behaviour is impolite, I'm a little puzzled as to why you would be complaining about being pegged for being impolite on a board that has a requirement to be polite as its primary rule. It's like deliberately walking into a wall and then complaining that the wall is there.
I know it wasn’t your intention, but thanks for giving me the best laugh I’ve had all day sir.
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
So you would prefer having these topics discussed for the hundredth time, rather than the new release? The suggestion was for New&Rumors only, these are perfectly fine topics to discuss in 40k general or your faction's chat-thread.
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
So you would prefer having these topics discussed for the hundredth time, rather than the new release? The suggestion was for New&Rumors only, these are perfectly fine topics to discuss in 40k general or your faction's chat-thread.
If you're not interested in a topic, why not just read it? I have no interest in playing chess, but I don't spend my time asking for the Parks department to ban it from being played publicly.
The OP is about PA:Saga of the Beast. I'm extremely interested in that. The last four pages of that thread are about the four topics outlined in my post. They have no business being in that thread.
Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were talking about new topics, not topics being derailed - I should have read more carefully before responding.
Compared to "back in my day" with IRC and BBS, DakkaDakka is positively warm and fuzzy. I'll never understand people who get upset at "mean words on the internets", like just close the browser if you don't like it, or block them.
But if you acknowledge that your behaviour is impolite, I'm a little puzzled as to why you would be complaining about being pegged for being impolite on a board that has a requirement to be polite as its primary rule. It's like deliberately walking into a wall and then complaining that the wall is there.
That's not what I'm complaining about... In fact that's not even closely related to what I said
Let's try to reel this back in to the topic, guys - if you've got specific suggestions for moderation on the site (like in the OP) feel free to post, but let's not use this as a place to bash each other, please.
RiTides wrote: Let's try to reel this back in to the topic, guys - if you've got specific suggestions for moderation on the site (like in the OP) feel free to post, but let's not use this as a place to bash each other, please.
Jidmah wrote: What I think could help in addition to the measures you already have taken would be explicitly banning the topics that keep taking threads on new releases off topic for the N&R forum:
- marines get too many releases
- why poster's faction deserves a release more than whoever the new release is for
- why the faction didn't deserve a release
- complaining about the new thing being better than whatever poster's faction has (no one in specific, there are multiple people doing this).
I've let myself be baited into those kind of discussion multiple times, but there really is no point in them.
It would be better to ban people who ask for bans on these subjects.
The mass flagging, cliques and big-mother on the board is very off-putting.
So you would prefer having these topics discussed for the hundredth time, rather than the new release? The suggestion was for New&Rumors only, these are perfectly fine topics to discuss in 40k general or your faction's chat-thread.
Let's make sure I understand what you are saying:
- Discussing topics repeatedly, or
- Banning people
If I got that right...
My opinion is somewhere between those two extremes lies a happy medium, and mods should take a hard look at the people encouraging them to take extreme measures against other users.
Just to be clear, permanent suspensions (we don't actually use the word "ban" really ) take a long time to occur and involve a Lot of warnings along the way. There is no "nuke from orbit... it's the only way to be sure" approach here!
- Discussing topics repeatedly, or - Banning people
If I got that right...
My opinion is somewhere between those two extremes lies a happy medium, and mods should take a hard look at the people encouraging them to take extreme measures against other users.
I suggest banning those topics (not users!) from N&R (as well as similar topics for other games, like those "AoS sucks!" postings), so posts taking yet another threads in their direction would result in the same actions as any other forum violation would.
I think the biggest thing is that punishment is often a very bad way to prevent things from reoccurring. If the behavior isn't always being punished, it will continue.
People post bad horrible stuff here all the time, but it doesn't get flagged.
So when it does, they get their punishment, but then if they continue it didn't work because not every post is being punished.
Idk, I'm just trying to think of it in ABA terms lol.
Maybe just.......don't respond to bad posts?
Future War Cultist wrote: I let that poster get to me today again. Just the mere sight of them sets me off, and the ignore button doesn’t cut it. If I’m honest, the way things are going, I probably won’t make it.
Have you considered just taking a break from the forum? Getting out there for a few (one a day with social isolation) walks; engaging with the hobby with some building and painting and perhaps cleaning out the attic?
If another user is getting this much anger from you online it sounds a bit like you just need to cool off and take a break and come back in a bit. Seeing someone online on a gaming forum shouldn't be making your react like this to the point where you're sure you're going to do something that gets you banned from the site.
I wish I could, but unfortunately I'm still out working that this time, in a job I thought I was long done with. It's proving both mentally and physically demanding, and I've only got the weekends to myself. This place is one of the only things keeping me anchored to the hobby, and it helps to take my mind of the job even during the day, so I don't want to leave it.
And yes, seeing someone on a gaming forum shouldn't be making me so mad, but with the crap they've said and continue to say going unchallenged it just gets my hackles up. And like I said before, the ignore function doesn't cut it unfortunately.
Kanluwen wrote: Something that I keep seeing in that coronavirus thread is specific individuals are repeating disinformation that cannot be refuted without engaging in specific political discourse.
And it's infuriating that it is being allowed.
While I can appreciate the frustration there, the other side of that coin is that the topic inherently touches on political issues, but is kind of a little too big for us to just ban discussion of coronavirus entirely... So the fact that it has been skirting political issues without people escalating those arguments has been greatly appreciated.
And on the flipside, that stuff seriously needs to either be getting removed or the posters in question need to be getting removed. That stuff is not okay, and a large amount of it is currently being driven by astroturfing groups that are more interested in $$$$$ than people.
Why? If discussion on a thread is civil, which the cv thread has been, why should anything be removed? That makes no sense. Let the conversation flow freely. The fact that it's spanned over 100 pages, covering everything from science, to rights, liberty, and daily updates in between, amongst people who often disagree on things, is a huge success story.
Because one person is spreading misinformation that cannot be readily debunked outside of crossing the line for politics.
The concept of shared responsibility doesn't exist. In certain political spheres it's entirely the fault of the people in the theater for listening and not the person shouting "fire".
Because one person is spreading misinformation that cannot be readily debunked outside of crossing the line for politics.
So report it, and if we agree it's an issue it will be removed.
Apparently you haven't agreed it's an issue, because the few posts that I flagged are still there as far as I can see.
I'm not trying to be mean or stir the pot here, but in an age of misinformation--this is one place where you can curtail it. For the most part, I'm just avoiding that thread because it's exactly like the politics threads of yore. There's a few individuals that continually spout things that they know will get reactions but they stay just enough within the lines that nothing ever seems to get done with regards to their behaviors.
ScarletRose wrote: In certain political spheres it's entirely the fault of the people in the theater for listening and not the person shouting "fire".
Another way of looking at this point is, there’s really not much that can be said for folks who look to the off topic section of a toy soldier discussion forum for authoritative information about important matters.
Anyone who seriously becomes “infuriated” by reading something in a thread on this site needs to simply “walk away” from that thread. I know myself, it’s easier said than done. Pushing the modalert button may make doing it a bit easier and is appreciated (but in no way guarantees we’ll see things the same way).
Point taken. I see now that it’s no good getting angry about them or complaining about them either. I won’t bother with the report button anymore, I’ll just stick with the ignore function.
Because one person is spreading misinformation that cannot be readily debunked outside of crossing the line for politics.
Why not? if their post is not political, your rebuke can also be so.
but if its that big a problem, just ignore it, or leave?
It might just be me, but I've never even thought about reporting a post. maybe its just my mentality, but I like to think that if I cant handle something that someone has written online without reporting them to the moderators, then I might have bigger issues.
Well I can understand why people get infuriated when they see disinformation spread even on a wargaming forum. It just makes them remember how pandemic this situation is becoming - and it is really an issue in our real lives, not just for politics. I do also understand Manchu's point of view, even if I don't share it.
That said, I believe the topic on Coronavirus exist because we can't help but feeling anxious to this exceptionnal situation. Either we worry about our health, the impact of the changes it had on our life or even political beliefs, in the end it's all linked. Some use it to let the steam off, others genuinely want to talk about it with users on the forum and see how they feel as well.
There is a lot of frustration around, it can't be denied. We can't even buy our plastic model / paint drug as usual as before to ease it. That's not an excuse to be rude with other people, that's for sure, but I do appreciate the moderators still doing their best not to make it worst by being too harsh in answer. I don't believe it would make the situation better to go on a ban spree...just fuel the frustration even more.
Sometimes I think its important that people realise that moderators are not peer reviewers for a forum.
They are not experts in multiple fields able to swoop in and unanimously peer review and moderate specific content to remove lies/mistruthes and clarify statements. In fact if mods started doing that not only would it really increase their workload, but it would likely REALLY annoy more people.
It's easy to spot someone else saying something wrong and wish it were corrected; however we all make mistakes ourselves.
In addition when mods are not experts in fields of study it also means that they could make mistaken calls as well. The Corona virus situation highlights this greatly; early statments even be experts in the field, have later proven incorrect or simplified etc...
In the end mods aren't there to police the content in that way unless someone is obviously in the extreme (which would likely nudge closer to trolling than anything else). Otherwise if you see someone saying something wrong then you can simply post to correct them in a police fashion - showing evidence etc... to prove your point. Other people reading can then decide who they believe and what they believe on their own. And sure some people will continue to never get the point and will make mistakes over and over and some will argue their point forever because the logical argument isnt' part of it its more their ego arguing.
I think the mods here have been very understanding in the corona thread, and have not taken action in cases I would have,
I've been the victim of some abusive, dictatorial moderation. Anyone who's been on rpg.net will understand. Also some other forums that allowed extremist views in ONE direction.
I saw some posts i the corona thread I was sure would get modded but mostly they didn't.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Exactly, that's why people calling for posts to be deleted simply because they disagree with the content is not a road we should go down.
That's a big umbrella to hide behind.
Posts that are harmful, contemptuous, or off topic according to the rules shouldn't be protected just because 'sometimes people disagree.'
I find the easiest thing to do is pretend human beings are reading your posts. When you do that, you tend to consider the impact of your chosen words on other “people” that might read them.
If, When typing a post, you reflect on other “people” reading your post, that someone might justly determine your post is “jerky” or “asinine”, or “deliberately offensive” , then you can consider the pros and cons of proceeding. If you choose to proceed, just be aware that your comments might have consequences, and that the further you go past the point of good taste, the more likely the consequences are to be negative and/or severe.
If you aren’t sure, determine a risk vs reward scenario in your head, and experiment. You’ll likely find a “risky but usually ok” point fairly quickly, at which you can make fairly accurate assessments of the probable future outcomes of given actions.
Also, recognize that this is not a public place, but a very open but still private club. Provide interesting content, join conversations in a constructive manner. Don’t be an donkey-cave. You know, normal stuff.
Just to be clear, we generally try to save removing posts as a last resort, so we wouldn't be doing that in a widespread manner. Ideally, now that some of the political things have passed, we can keep the coronavirus thread less focused on that side of things (which we generally don't allow here, so we don't have to make these kinds of judgement calls and, more importantly, all the drama that goes with it )
RiTides wrote: Just to be clear, we generally try to save removing posts as a last resort, so we wouldn't be doing that in a widespread manner. Ideally, now that some of the political things have passed, we can keep the coronavirus thread less focused on that side of things (which we generally don't allow here, so we don't have to make these kinds of judgement calls and, more importantly, all the drama that goes with it )
You must be pretty naive, between bolsonaro, trump the Germans and austrians and south tyroleans opening borders torwards each other , a tracing APP with privacy concerns i doubt the storms over and out and that is just the harmless Part of exemple with imediate political tint.
The whole point of the moderation process is that there's a double-check of the criteria for insulting, harmful or contemptuous. A user reports a post and a mod has to agree with them that the post is bad enough to warrant deletion. Seems like a pretty robust and sensible system.
To answer your question directly and in the most literal sense, it's the moderator who gets to decide. Kind of goes with the role.
The whole point of the moderation process is that there's a double-check of the criteria for insulting, harmful or contemptuous. A user reports a post and a mod has to agree with them that the post is bad enough to warrant deletion. Seems like a pretty robust and sensible system.
To answer your question directly and in the most literal sense, it's the moderator who gets to decide. Kind of goes with the role.
It's not a sensible system because it concentrates power into a single individual with biases, and those biases are known.
The whole point of the moderation process is that there's a double-check of the criteria for insulting, harmful or contemptuous. A user reports a post and a mod has to agree with them that the post is bad enough to warrant deletion. Seems like a pretty robust and sensible system.
To answer your question directly and in the most literal sense, it's the moderator who gets to decide. Kind of goes with the role.
It's not a sensible system because it concentrates power into a single individual with biases, and those biases are known.
hello insominia my old friend it's not good to head from you again...
I haven't seen much bias on this board. Given human nature there's likely to be some but I haven't seen it. Admittedly my ability to see fine or small level bias may be impaired having seen the huge bias on other sites, like rpg.net which makes bias part of the rules.
But this place, while given human nature i'm sure these is some bias, keeps it low key enough that I'm really not seeing it.
BaconCatBug wrote: It's not a sensible system because it concentrates power into a single individual with biases, and those biases are known.
No, it doesn't. All moderator actions are logged and visible to the rest of the mod team, and to the site's admins. Those actions have to remain within the bounds set by the admins, and we have rather frequent discussions amongst the team where edge cases arise.
If a single individual starts acting outside those bounds, corrections can be made. If a moderator was consistently working outside what is expected due to personal bias, they wouldn't be retained as a moderator.
So when a user complains of a mod 'singling them out' it generally comes down to nothing more sinister than that user and the mod on question tending to frequent the same parts of the site, or simply being online at similar times.
(Multiple edits due to typing (badly) on phone...)
The whole point of the moderation process is that there's a double-check of the criteria for insulting, harmful or contemptuous. A user reports a post and a mod has to agree with them that the post is bad enough to warrant deletion. Seems like a pretty robust and sensible system.
To answer your question directly and in the most literal sense, it's the moderator who gets to decide. Kind of goes with the role.
It's not a sensible system because it concentrates power into a single individual with biases, and those biases are known.
So you have a sensible solution I assume? I've not detected any extreme bias on this site form the moderators and every single interaction I've had with them in their moderator capacity has been more professional than I'd expect from a bunch of volunteers. We're talking about a forum for discussing toy soldiers here and it seems from the replies there are already processes in place to account for Mod bias, which seems more than reasonable for such a place.
If you have just come into this thread to bash mods, you have totally missed the point of this thread.
Don't complain, make suggestions for what you want in regards to moderation, just complaining is actual useless, you need to consider how you want specific issues you have and how you want them to be dealt with.
My example:
Personally I want suspension for certain problem members that consistently derail specific threads in the N&R section, mainly because at this point I do not believe what they do is firstly beneficial to the discussion and secondly I absolutely believe it is trolling. That is my issue and my suggested way it should be handled to the mods.
My problem is aired, and my suggestion for how I want it to be dealt with personally is also suggested, with the opportunity for the mods to reply and explain their actions. Some debate happened also, and fundamentally I adhere to their rules, whether I like the result or not.
A poor example of the above
There's too many off topic posts in the N&R section, do your jobs better.
This approach is just complaining, and is absolutely not constructive. If you complain without contributing other than to complain, you are taking this thread and it's purpose off topic, and in MY OPINION you are part of the problem on this forum that I would like to personally see eradicated, it's childish and is how people conduct themselves on twitter which is the absolute most toxic place on the internet.
If you haven't got anything constructive to say, and are incapable of saying it in a polite manner, this is not the thread for you, maybe start your own thread?
The whole point of the moderation process is that there's a double-check of the criteria for insulting, harmful or contemptuous. A user reports a post and a mod has to agree with them that the post is bad enough to warrant deletion. Seems like a pretty robust and sensible system.
To answer your question directly and in the most literal sense, it's the moderator who gets to decide. Kind of goes with the role.
It's not a sensible system because it concentrates power into a single individual with biases, and those biases are known.
So you have a sensible solution I assume? I've not detected any extreme bias on this site form the moderators and every single interaction I've had with them in their moderator capacity has been more professional than I'd expect from a bunch of volunteers. We're talking about a forum for discussing toy soldiers here and it seems from the replies there are already processes in place to account for Mod bias, which seems more than reasonable for such a place.
Public Mod Logs and actual explanations (i.e. cite exactly which rule and why).
I don't think mod logs of the mod discussions are valuable to the population - its not like a formal hearing with strict codes of practice and such; its a conversation between volunteers. In my experience they can drift, get silly, ramble on or even go nowhere all on their own.
I would say that I've always felt that public resolutions are a valuable thing for moderation. I recall the old Relic News forum used to publicly post (in a locked section) when a user got suspended (and its duration) or banned and the reason for it. They never went into fine detail, just a simple. "User banned for X for doing Y "
I don't recall if it ever showed warnings, just actions taken (suspension/ban). They also only showed if a person got banned for sneaking back in with a new account once - thereafter never showing it again for that user (to avoid someone using it to attention seek).
I think it helped display what was not tolerated and also showed that the moderators do take action in serious cases. It's about the only forum I've known to do that, though I've tried to sometimes encourage similar on other sites I've moderated- though often many mods don't like it.
Personally I think that suspensions/bans are already public (its noted on the users profile); however its also invisible because unless you're watching a user you can easily miss that they've been suspended/removed.
The issues I see with making that sort of information public are that, for one, some users take their warnings and suspensions as some wierd badge of honor. We've had users in the past who kept a count of their warnings or suspensions in their sig, as if it was something to be proud of. So having 'official' recognition in public could well beat serve to egg on inappropriate behavior.
The flip side of that is that, for others, having it publicly displayed when they are suspended is going to be embarrassing... And contrary to what certain YouTube parenting videos would have you believe, humiliation is a poor motivator, and is likely to lead to worse behavior in the long run.
Ultimately, the aim of our moderation process is to discourage, rather than punish. And that, IMO, works better when it's kept private rather than drawing unnecessary attention to it.
Making discussions public is something I have direct experience of not working well. There often needs to be a "safe place" where issues can be discussed away from the user, without them involved, and that can sometimes lead to discussions about actions that end up not being taken, sometimes even quickly shot down, that can then generate their own drama.
I would hope that any warning or suspension comes with an associated reason that the user can then refer to if they want to take the matter further but I don't think making those discussions public is helpful.
insaniak I agree that displaying punishments can backfire. That said I think there's two key elements to consider
1) Punishments are already publicly displayed on a users profile. It's already within the public domain on the forum when a person is suspended/banned. However the system, if I recall, only shows a ban not a suspension or a ban. Furthermore whilst its public its not displayed for the whole forum to see unless you go looking for it.
2) Public display that moderators are acting and that suspensions/bans do happen can be a resource for displaying that moderators are "working". That moderation is happening and that there are actions taken place in the most serious of cases.
I think when you have a user start to display or use publicity of their own punishments as a badge of honour that's disruptive ,but I think it also shows to the mods that the user in question either needs different handling or that they are clearly not going to improve their behaviour - ergo putting them quickly onto the "one strike you're out" situation.
For me the whole public display of actions taken is more about presenting information that's already there on the site in an upfront manner. It's also useful if someone you like gets banned because you then know to reach out to them elsewhere rather than spend weeks thinking they are just not around then finding out they were banned ages ago.
I fully agree that moderators need to have private discussions regarding things and that they don't need to be public and that having them public would defeat the point of them (to the point where chances are mods would end up chatting in private messages and then only displaying the choice of those discussions anyway). A safespace also means that if any private information about a user surfaces the mods can talk about it without it leaking out to the general forum population.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Exactly, that's why people calling for posts to be deleted simply because they disagree with the content is not a road we should go down.
That's a big umbrella to hide behind.
Posts that are harmful, contemptuous, or off topic according to the rules shouldn't be protected just because 'sometimes people disagree.'
I agree. I never said those that break the rules should be protected. But often that can be used by some people as a way to just get things removed that aren't really an issue, just because they don't like them.
1) Punishments are already publicly displayed on a users profile. It's already within the public domain on the forum when a person is suspended/banned. However the system, if I recall, only shows a ban not a suspension or a ban. Furthermore whilst its public its not displayed for the whole forum to see unless you go looking for it.
This isn't actually visible, so far as I'm aware. And we don't actually have any distinction in the system between a 'suspension' and a 'ban'... The system just has a single 'user is suspended until [date]' type toggle, and for a permanent suspension we set that to a 100 years or so in the future.
So if we're still around next century, we may see a return of some familiar faces. Hopefully they'll have mellowed slightly by then...
2) Public display that moderators are acting and that suspensions/bans do happen can be a resource for displaying that moderators are "working". That moderation is happening and that there are actions taken place in the most serious of cases.
Yup, from that angle I can certainly see it as a positive thing. I think the issues I mentioned before, and the potential for people to try to 'game' the system, make it seriously problematic, though.
Appreciate the feedback, though, and it will likely spawn some discussion amongst the mods!
I have noticed over the years that posters who get into trouble a lot tend to see the whole concept of moderation as some kind of legal system where they can demand appeals and even try to “bring charges” against other users (and of course, especially against mods).
This is a category mistake,
What’s actually going on is something entirely different. What we want is discussion of toy soldiers, related topics, and to some extent unrelated topics. The only point of the rules is to facilitate that goal. Suspending people’s accounts is presumptively contrary to that goal, as is deleting users’ posts. As far as possible, it’s best to avoid such harsh actions.
Having a kind of “public punishment” function seems to have more in common with the mistaken “legal paradigm” and less in common with the accurate paradigm of wanting as many people as possible to contribute to as many conversations as possible.
Just wanted to pop in and say that I actually really appreciate the moderation here, Dakka is one of the less insane places on the internet as surprising as that often is to people, there's little of the lawlessness and raw atrociousness of conduct of some groups that sees the worst elements of the playerbase run wild, and none of the extreme overmoderation some communities have seen that strangled off posting. This community is overall pretty rad, and the people running it have a good handle on what they do. We all bump up against the edges at times, but Dakka handles it well.
On the subject of displaying punishments, as a regular user, I don't like the idea much, it just seems like a way to stigmatize people for no good reason on a forum that's fundamentally about plastic monsters and toy soldiers. On other boards where I've seen that, or where they have things like subforums that detail bans and reasons, it often just serves as something for other users to chuck around and derail threads with.
The only time that I would consider appropriate for 'displaying punishments' is when it is individuals with a particular style of baiting/"arguing".
It should not be up to the rest of the forum to let newer posters know that certain individuals are only interested in arguing, not actually discussing things.
There’s a fairly well known site that likes to air its moderation actions out in the open, and it’s a terrible way to do things. Though that may be because the staff there are genuinely horrible people. They’re the sort of people who ban you for liking/hating what they hate/like. As petty as that.
Basically what usually happened was, the person who’d been suspended was made to come into the suspension thread and publicly prostrate themselves before the staff and repent for their mistakes, usually accompanied by a grovelling apology. You weren’t allowed back in until you did so, and trying to defend yourself would earn you an instant permanent ban. And yes, the rules were ‘whatever was convenient for the mod at the time’.
Actually now that I compare the two, Dakka doesn't seem so bad. There’s only one mod here I openly dislike, as opposed to the whole staff.
But I suppose what I’m saying is, keep your moderation in private.
"Future War Cultist suspended for 2 weeks for swearing at members and moderators"
What you describe above which sounds like they want public apologies, but also seem to have very variable to no standards of moderation. Once you are or have the perception of, banning for frivolous things then the whole moderation system - no matter how you run it - is going to become a mess; which will result in a messy argumentative and hostile forum often one where people are unsure what to do or say since everything is open to being taken as rule breaching by moderators with no standards.
That's alright but it wouldn't hurt to let this thread fall down the page if there's no active moderating issue to discuss (and we are working behind the scenes on many of the things previously talked about in this thread).
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage.
People say that sort of thing, but I can think of many a 'regular' who very much isn't around anymore for that sort of behaviour.
I can think of several. Simply check my ignore list (if you can see such a thing) for multiple examples.
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage.
People say that sort of thing, but I can think of many a 'regular' who very much isn't around anymore for that sort of behaviour.
I can think of several. Simply check my ignore list (if you can see such a thing) for multiple examples.
In my experience mods tend to react more to what they see and what gets reported. Remember interpretation is a thing. Its possible to have a heated discussion between two people without either feeling insulted; similar I've seen people take offence at the most benign of comments. If you don't report it and explain in the report then the mods might not see insults that you see even if they see the post (country to popular belief mods don't read everything).
But you'll always catch the regulars constantly belittling and bullying people, never get a post removed, never get a post edited while treating lesser posters as garbage.
People say that sort of thing, but I can think of many a 'regular' who very much isn't around anymore for that sort of behaviour.
I can think of several. Simply check my ignore list (if you can see such a thing) for multiple examples.
In my experience mods tend to react more to what they see and what gets reported. Remember interpretation is a thing. Its possible to have a heated discussion between two people without either feeling insulted; similar I've seen people take offence at the most benign of comments. If you don't report it and explain in the report then the mods might not see insults that you see even if they see the post (country to popular belief mods don't read everything).
Oh please, you know exactly who I'm referring to. Shall we start with a certain someone who is a fan of a band containing Kerry King? No point in engaging these condescending individuals, nor reporting them as nothing is done. Let them run free and thing they're big guy on campus as they flex their epeens on how much they can dominate 40k and anyone with an opposing opinion to them is beneath them.
I have no idea who you mean - nor who Kerry King is.
This is why there's report systems - if you don't report it then it won't get seen. You might see it clear as day. I don't, the mods might not - and if you just report without commenting they might not see your point of view.
You're already using the ignore system so if that isn't working and if you're not reporting things then there's no potential for change.
Also just because an insult within a post isn't necessarily removed doesn't mean nothing happened
Grimtuff, many long time users might get your implication, but let's not go any further down that road as we don't want to talk about folks who can no longer post, and thus can't defend themselves (this is always our policy, everywhere on the site, even the DCM section - if someone doesn't have access to it, we ask that they not be discussed there).
Oh please, you know exactly who I'm referring to. Shall we start with a certain someone who is a fan of a band containing Kerry King? No point in engaging these condescending individuals, nor reporting them as nothing is done. Let them run free and thing they're big guy on campus as they flex their epeens on how much they can dominate 40k and anyone with an opposing opinion to them is beneath them.
Without going into specifics, I would point out that the user you're referring to has received more warnings and suspensions than you have. And that's a few.
This is what we mean when we keep saying that the fact you don't personally see the result doesn't actually mean that nothing is happening. Reporting posts that you think are an issue does get results. We're just not always going to agree with you on whether or not a specific post is actually a problem.
Overread wrote: There's a difference between a public notice
"Future War Cultist suspended for 2 weeks for swearing at members and moderators"
What you describe above which sounds like they want public apologies, but also seem to have very variable to no standards of moderation. Once you are or have the perception of, banning for frivolous things then the whole moderation system - no matter how you run it - is going to become a mess; which will result in a messy argumentative and hostile forum often one where people are unsure what to do or say since everything is open to being taken as rule breaching by moderators with no standards.
You’re right. And now I’m annoyed that I’ve let my experiences of that gak hole affect my experience here.
The very fact this thread is 6 pages long shows the mods are not bad. On badly moderated forums like rpg.net the moddisars would have locked the thread immediately and banhammered the OP.
Likewise on SJgames.com any criticism of the mods is instantly silenced and the poster usually threatened or banned.
So the fact this thread is still open and the op isn't banned tells me the mods here are generally ok.
You’re right. I’m sure I’d be banned by now if they weren’t.
That other site that will remain nameless, my ban started with me questioning all the jumping for joy at the passing of Margaret Thatcher going on, not to mention one posters declaration that the Prime Minister deserved to lose his child.
I said I found all this to be in extremely bad taste, but I was warned for disrupting the thread. One thing lead to another and I told them to shove it, earning a permanent ban for it. The place was a comically stereotypical echo chamber; disagreeing with the consensus set by the mod of the thread was against the rules, period.
So in hindsight maybe Dakka isn’t so bad. But know that this is why I’m tetchy about double standards in moderation; I had a few good friends on that site that I lost contact with thanks to the incident and I’m still sore about it.
Manchu wrote: I have noticed over the years that posters who get into trouble a lot tend to see the whole concept of moderation as some kind of legal system where they can demand appeals and even try to “bring charges” against other users (and of course, especially against mods).
This is a category mistake,
What’s actually going on is something entirely different. What we want is discussion of toy soldiers, related topics, and to some extent unrelated topics. The only point of the rules is to facilitate that goal. Suspending people’s accounts is presumptively contrary to that goal, as is deleting users’ posts. As far as possible, it’s best to avoid such harsh actions.
Having a kind of “public punishment” function seems to have more in common with the mistaken “legal paradigm” and less in common with the accurate paradigm of wanting as many people as possible to contribute to as many conversations as possible.
There's a poster or two here that seem to get away with things but your whats actually going on could just about explain it as well. I have to ask myself as much as I agree with that whole paragraph, would it be worth changing that philosophy to get rid of those one or two individuals and that's an easy no. So please no significant changes.
Ahhh. You think that poopy-posting is your ally. But you merely adopted the spam. I was born in it. Moulded by it. I hadn’t seen the rules until I was already a man, and by then they were too confusing for me to make sense of. Idiocy betrays you, because it belongs to me!
Jerram wrote: I have to ask myself as much as I agree with that whole paragraph, would it be worth changing that philosophy to get rid of those one or two individuals and that's an easy no.
Yes, this is the same conclusion that I have come to in thinking through it over the years.
That other site that will remain nameless, my ban started with me questioning all the jumping for joy at the passing of Margaret Thatcher going on, not to mention one posters declaration that the Prime Minister deserved to lose his child.
I said I found all this to be in extremely bad taste, but I was warned for disrupting the thread. One thing lead to another and I told them to shove it, earning a permanent ban for it. The place was a comically stereotypical echo chamber; disagreeing with the consensus set by the mod of the thread was against the rules, period.
So in hindsight maybe Dakka isn’t so bad. But know that this is why I’m tetchy about double standards in moderation; I had a few good friends on that site that I lost contact with thanks to the incident and I’m still sore about it.
So was it maclennan that banned you and did he make a snarky taunt at you when he did?
I’ve found myself still reporting posts (but with better descriptions now) but what I’m not going to do is get annoyed when nothing is seemingly done about them. Because I can understand the process a bit better now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matt Swain wrote: So was it maclennan that banned you and did he make a snarky taunt at you when he did?
I don’t know who that is. But yes, the mod who did it was very snarky and condescending. Actually there were two; the first one who was deleting my posts and giving me the warning? Very confrontational and belligerent. The second one who wanted me to repent in the sin bin? Snarky, arrogant and condescending.
Resentment costs you your strength. Bitterness will defeat you.
Not sure if I can work much more Bane-ings into this thread. This is already a stretch. In all seriousness though, FWC, we’ve lived through worse Forums. Bring back that positive guy, I miss him.
greatbigtree wrote: Resentment costs you your strength. Bitterness will defeat you.
Not sure if I can work much more Bane-ings into this thread. This is already a stretch. In all seriousness though, FWC, we’ve lived through worse Forums. Bring back that positive guy, I miss him.
Theophony wrote: I would hope that we could do a better job of holding sellers/designers to one thread which they need to update. The forums for “other” games is full of the same people who constantly pump out painting or gameplay videos and make multiple threads for their business.
So, as an aside, that's a different problem - vendors are not supposed to be doing that, and if they are, you should report the threads so a moderator can ask them to consolidate their updates. The expectation as I understand it they generally need to stick to one thread, especially if\when they are starting new threads frequently.
Though I enjoy a bunch of the painting and gaming ones, some like GMG put up a new thread with each video they do. I enjoy them and Ash, but when I went looking in the alternate game section there are dozens of videos for all sorts of systems.
Has anyone else seen this as a problem? I tend to be the most active mod in the other games sections and whilst I do recognise what is being said I have no issue with it as the handful of people who do this tend to post on very different subjects (game reviews, different historical eras etc.) and those forums move so slowly that I haven't found it overwhelming.
Unless it is for people actually selling stuff in which case they do need to stick to one thread (and that one in N&R).
Theophony wrote: I would hope that we could do a better job of holding sellers/designers to one thread which they need to update. The forums for “other” games is full of the same people who constantly pump out painting or gameplay videos and make multiple threads for their business.
So, as an aside, that's a different problem - vendors are not supposed to be doing that, and if they are, you should report the threads so a moderator can ask them to consolidate their updates. The expectation as I understand it they generally need to stick to one thread, especially if\when they are starting new threads frequently.
Though I enjoy a bunch of the painting and gaming ones, some like GMG put up a new thread with each video they do. I enjoy them and Ash, but when I went looking in the alternate game section there are dozens of videos for all sorts of systems.
Has anyone else seen this as a problem? I tend to be the most active mod in the other games sections and whilst I do recognise what is being said I have no issue with it as the handful of people who do this tend to post on very different subjects (game reviews, different historical eras etc.) and those forums move so slowly that I haven't found it overwhelming.
Unless it is for people actually selling stuff in which case they do need to stick to one thread (and that one in N&R).
Looking just now at the Misc. other games the first page is dominated by one webpage having 18 posts for their videos and reviews. While they are on different games and topics, they are all clickbait for their sites. Another poster had 5 topics about different aspects of one game. A third also has 5 threads. I think these choke out manufacturers who could be getting visibility. These are just on the first page.
I think I misunderstood the problem earlier. By vendors, I meant like, the guys who make a game - ie Puppetswar shouldn't be starting a new thread for every product release. What you're describing is a single user posting a lot of batreps to essentially flog their YouTube channel where they flog merch, which is a little different.
I think you should consider that your concern is they are pushing off manufacturers who could get visibility - is that actually happening? The very first page of misc games goes all the way back to December 2019. Given that person's posting habits, a new thread about X vendors new games would be in the top third of the first page for at least 2 months easy. There are a lot of batreps for sure, and I see how that might be irritating if you frequent that forum a lot - but I don't think anyone is actually getting pushed off.
Okay, I can see that.
From the way I look at it the person who has 18 threads are all for different games and are spread out over nearly 6 months, they also post the video here and it is not just "click through to my site/blog" which I really despise.
On the other two again I note that those threads are spread out over months.
We have had 2 users who were making multiple threads (and in one instance very tangentially related to the sub) both of which have now consolidated into single threads but this was due to the rapiditiy with which they posted.
You state that these posters choke out other manufactures but I reiterate that the oldest thread on that forum's first page is nearly 6 months old, if there was such interest in other stuff being posted it would have been and would have knocked other threads off the front page.
Whilst I can see your point and for places like N&R that move with such rapidity consolidated threads are necessary, I just dont see how making these people consolidate threads would prove beneficial in a forum that moves so slowly.
Ok, the subs in question are slow moving, but equally the posts in question rarely attract any discussion and sometimes hardly any post views even relative to other threads in the same sub, which is the best metric I have as a non administrative user to conclude that they're not adding a lot of value to it.
I'm not suggesting that the people who make content should be stopped, but I think perhaps expanding the articles section or similar to include all user generated content could be something worth trying?
I’ve been bored and looking for new games to try out, wanting something smaller, not a huge manufacturer like GW, FFG, or Pivateer Press. I go to look in the Misc other threads and find thread after thread of posts by one or two people and feel they are probably getting some sort of kickback from the manufacturer. Whether or not they are getting anything from those manufacturers, it’s still what one other group is playing so not a good variety of what’s being seen or played in the greater scheme.
Also if I were a game creator I would feel cockblocked by such tactics in a forum. It’s the grocery store analogy of I can’t get placement for my brand because XYZ brand churns out 20 different things and takes higher placement than me. I have seen companies in retail environments that pull great product out of stores because they can’t get decent visibility. I think that could be happening here too. Why would these companies bother with having a thread on here if they can’t compete be seen.
I know I’m not being too eloquent right now, Massive allergy headache, but I believe it needs to be re-evaluated. I’ve had bunches of blogs here. Hundreds of pages. Dozens of topics and games. Why is it that I can go back and readjust my thread title to show my latest interest when these guys can’t be bothered? They want placement and visibility. To pick on GMG for a moment, with the preface of I generally enjoy their videos and I’ve gotten a few games by watching them. Couldn’t they do one thread with a title like GMG video battle reports: now featuring xxxxxxxxx. And just update the title when they do a new video? Edit the first post with an index of what page different games are on. That would make the sub forum more open. Have a link to their YouTube channel which is actually where I watch their videos anyway. My current 70 page thread has had the main title edited 16 times my old 198 page thread I edited 66 times for change of directions with projects and games. The fact that they don’t do this is more of a showing of how they are pump and dumping to get traffic.
If we slim down the thread then some basic maintenance can be helpful. Move completed kickstarters to the subforums instead of them lingering in the News and Rumors forum. Once again it’ll make finding things easier. He owners of the threads can locate them by looking under their threads started links. Having functional sub forums will help small time games get traction just by getting visibility.
I need caffeine to get rid of this headache, I’ll check back when I can make more sense.
greatbigtree wrote: Resentment costs you your strength. Bitterness will defeat you.
Not sure if I can work much more Bane-ings into this thread. This is already a stretch. In all seriousness though, FWC, we’ve lived through worse Forums. Bring back that positive guy, I miss him.
I’ve been bored and looking for new games to try out, wanting something smaller, not a huge manufacturer like GW, FFG, or Pivateer Press. I go to look in the Misc other threads and find thread after thread of posts by one or two people and feel they are probably getting some sort of kickback from the manufacturer. Whether or not they are getting anything from those manufacturers, it’s still what one other group is playing so not a good variety of what’s being seen or played in the greater scheme.
Also if I were a game creator I would feel cockblocked by such tactics in a forum. It’s the grocery store analogy of I can’t get placement for my brand because XYZ brand churns out 20 different things and takes higher placement than me. I have seen companies in retail environments that pull great product out of stores because they can’t get decent visibility. I think that could be happening here too. Why would these companies bother with having a thread on here if they can’t compete be seen.
I know I’m not being too eloquent right now, Massive allergy headache, but I believe it needs to be re-evaluated. I’ve had bunches of blogs here. Hundreds of pages. Dozens of topics and games. Why is it that I can go back and readjust my thread title to show my latest interest when these guys can’t be bothered? They want placement and visibility. To pick on GMG for a moment, with the preface of I generally enjoy their videos and I’ve gotten a few games by watching them. Couldn’t they do one thread with a title like GMG video battle reports: now featuring xxxxxxxxx. And just update the title when they do a new video? Edit the first post with an index of what page different games are on. That would make the sub forum more open. Have a link to their YouTube channel which is actually where I watch their videos anyway. My current 70 page thread has had the main title edited 16 times my old 198 page thread I edited 66 times for change of directions with projects and games. The fact that they don’t do this is more of a showing of how they are pump and dumping to get traffic.
If we slim down the thread then some basic maintenance can be helpful. Move completed kickstarters to the subforums instead of them lingering in the News and Rumors forum. Once again it’ll make finding things easier. He owners of the threads can locate them by looking under their threads started links. Having functional sub forums will help small time games get traction just by getting visibility.
I need caffeine to get rid of this headache, I’ll check back when I can make more sense.
Going to quote you so I am sorry if you go back and edit the original post, which by the way is perfectly fine and makes good sense.
I am not sure how to respond to the issue of people getting stuff from manufacturers for their posting reviews and the like (other than to wonder how I sign up!), I really do not see it as an issue. I have come across a fair few such posts over the years, mostly in N&R and they have never altered my opinion on a product one way or another and I would imagine that holds true for most people. If we like the look of a product we will buy it, if we do not then no amount of shilling or showmanship will convince us and often will have the opposite effect? I know I have seen many posts where people rage at others for pushing a bit too hard on various products.
On how this effects creators/manufacturers, I do know for a fact that we have at least six who post semi regularly in the four lowest misc. forums and they do not seem to be overly effected. Indeed one of them pushes other games quite regularly. If anyone is feeling that way I would certainly urge them to join in and post more about their stuff where it is appropriate (we do have a games development sub as well), the best way to make themselves more visible is to actually post! Again, I think that those forums are so slow moving that the only way they could be pushed out is if the traffic increases dramatically. Which I would think was fantastic as I would love to hear more about these less talked about games and it might encourage them to post more?
On the blogs, this I wholeheartedly agree with. If someone is blogging about something then they really should be keeping to a single thread, I do with my B5 ACTA thread (which I have not updated in ages...) and there are others that do the same whether through their own choice or because they were told too. Personally I do not feel that the likes of GMG need to do the same as they cover a wide range of topics that are pretty unrelated, those that I have looked at anyway, so it might stifle/hamper discussion if they were made to but I do agree that if they are on the same or very similar topics then it should be blogged. However, looking through some of the other boards I do see that some people are indeed posting a thread at a time for individual battle reports in a series and worse just posting a link to their blog in doing so. Now this is purely personal and is ingtær as a user of dakka and not ingtær the mod, but I really hate that. it is not something against our policies but I don't like to see it. I will however raise those interrelated points with the other mods and see how they feel on the matter.
On the moving of kickstarters, if after completion/delivery they are still generating discussion then I whole heartedly agree with you. I will try and be more aware when looking in N&R and shuffle things over when its time.
@Azreal13 and Theophony, this is certainly something that will be looked at in the future, when we've got the time for it and when we've received our reinforcements.
All I can say is, I've made attempts in the past, only for people to either ignore it or to demand that we, the mods, do all the merging and whatnot for them.
I've always held the view that a mod team needs to be bigger than it needs to by at least one or two moderators. It's very easy for a volunteer to get sidetracked or to just not want to hobby any more or engage with the community as much. Even regular uses drift in and out of a site.
When a mod does it, you can go from a well moderated site to one where the mods are a bit overstretched.
Another, bigger, issue is when there are specific tasks for a specific mod and that mod takes a holiday without telling anyone. Perhaps life just gets in the way; or they lose interest or just feel overworked (remember whilst most tasks aren't much they do eat into the community engagement time and sometimes people just get sick of turning up to do "their duties" and get nothing "back" from the site).
That's why I think any specific moderator task should be shared between two or three mods. That way if one vanishes, there's already a backup of other mods who know what to do; that they should do it and don't need to be organised or told or have to work things out. They can just get on and do it.
Users should definitely be allowed to post new threads about vids or blogposts they have made, most especially in subfora where there is almost no traffic otherwise. The web forum is principally about hosting discussions. But an important ancillary function is disseminating information.
None of us want to do that, it defeats the whole point of a discussion forum and is really not how we wish this forum to be run.
That said we do occasionally permanently suspend people and (excluding spam bots) it tends to be when a poster is extremely bigoted, posts abhorrent things (racism for eg.) or shows conclusively that they are unable or unwilling to follow our rules. It is very rarely our preferred method of handling things but it on occasion it does have to be done.
Although it does mean that you’re stuck continuously dealing with the problem ones....
It does... But that's the whole point. In some cases, those 'problem ones' eventually get sick of butting heads with the mods and modify their behavior. Others just mellow over time. And yes, some either get sick of constantly being suspended and wander off, or have to be shown the door. But so often, the driving force behind that behavior is a passion for the hobby that we would rather redirect into something positive. Kicking people out for feeling strongly about the hobby and just being crap at relating to others is somewhat self defeating when the purpose of the site is to share the hobby.
Also many sits that ban people too swiftly tend to just end up with what appears to be a lot of problem users. Because instead of changing their behaviour, the offended banned users just register under a new account with a new email and name and keep going.
So you end up with a growing population of problem users because they reach a point where bans basically are an inconvenience rather than a barrier.
If someone whose account has been permanently suspended comes back under a new user name, hopefully they will trick us and avoid being found out by never getting in trouble again. That’ll show us!
Although it does mean that you’re stuck continuously dealing with the problem ones....
It does... But that's the whole point. In some cases, those 'problem ones' eventually get sick of butting heads with the mods and modify their behavior. Others just mellow over time. And yes, some either get sick of constantly being suspended and wander off, or have to be shown the door. But so often, the driving force behind that behavior is a passion for the hobby that we would rather redirect into something positive. Kicking people out for feeling strongly about the hobby and just being crap at relating to others is somewhat self defeating when the purpose of the site is to share the hobby.
Of course the problem posters sometimes just drive off others in the meantime. So while they're doing their thing they cause problems continuously while slowly driving out the population of the part of the forums they inhabit. So while they may eventually calm down the damage will be done.
Although it does mean that you’re stuck continuously dealing with the problem ones....
It does... But that's the whole point. In some cases, those 'problem ones' eventually get sick of butting heads with the mods and modify their behavior. Others just mellow over time. And yes, some either get sick of constantly being suspended and wander off, or have to be shown the door. But so often, the driving force behind that behavior is a passion for the hobby that we would rather redirect into something positive. Kicking people out for feeling strongly about the hobby and just being crap at relating to others is somewhat self defeating when the purpose of the site is to share the hobby.
Of course the problem posters sometimes just drive off others in the meantime. So while they're doing their thing they cause problems continuously while slowly driving out the population of the part of the forums they inhabit. So while they may eventually calm down the damage will be done.
This is the point I was hinting that. Hell, in the past one problem poster outright told me to get lost off the site altogether. Although ironically that poster now seems to have vacated the site instead.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Of course the problem posters sometimes just drive off others in the meantime. So while they're doing their thing they cause problems continuously while slowly driving out the population of the part of the forums they inhabit. So while they may eventually calm down the damage will be done.
Which is precisely why reporting problem posts so that we can stay on top of it is so important. No matter how many moderators there are, we can't be everywhere and read every post.
There are limits, too - we actually went through and checked on some of our "problem accounts" as a result of this thread. Everyone still gets to go through the appropriate process... but for people who are intentionally posting in a way that's against the rules, we're keeping an eye out.
Excellent, my subversive activities are proceeding without suspicion.
Edit: Damn it!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
greatbigtree wrote: Well, I mean, it could go either way. Sort of a joke and now also a little bit of the old paranoia creeping in, so becoming a serious question.
Hey, alternative could be you're getting eyed up to be offered a place among the big boys and/or girls
ScarletRose wrote: Dakka has a friend feature (though it doesn't seem to do much) .
The main use for it, other than having people show up a different colour on the 'Who's online' list, is to easily find new threads by people you've friended:
I noticed in the corona thread there was a clear case of person A insulting person B, and then person B having his response deleted. How is this acceptable?
Thanks Manchu, puts my mind somewhat at ease... always got to be a little suspicious of the Man.
And, just to set myself up for some well-deserved ridicule regarding my immense ego, I don’t think me becoming a Mod would be good for anyone. Say what you will about the Mod team, these people have *PATIENCE* for the kind of things that would set me off in a non-diplomatic type of response. It’s unpaid volunteer work and they deal with a lot of, for lack of a better term, entitled whiny bitches and I would have trouble referring to them in a diplomatic way, and that tends to bleed over.
Just to make sure it's clear, friending someone doesn't give us any extra insight into their profile (we can see everything already ) and isn't used for keeping an eye on anyone.
Generally, it's because someone is your friend (or maybe because they friended you and you wanted to reciprocate, etc!). Nothing nefarious here
Yup. I’ve been there too. This place is supposed to be fun and enjoyable. If someone consistently rubs you the wrong way, or throws monkey feces at you, the ignore button is there, and a bit of restraint to not look.
I even found it helpful, for some posters, just to have a mental heads up before I “unignored” a post to read. That heads up helped me a lot, to not get “invested” in that post. Sometimes a, “I disagree, and here are my reasons...” post let me contribute to a thread without letting myself dive into a slugging match.
(I miss the Bird, sometimes. Skumgrods are hard to find.)
I like the friend feature. It is nice way to show solidarity with those posters you support. I get a buzz when I see a new friend request in my inbox, which at a time like this is great.
I’m glad you made this thread too. Shows that you all care. Yesterday I had a bad experience with one mod but in truth I started it. We have beef going back to that time around 2016-18 when politics was all the rage (pun intended) and it gave me a chip on my shoulder. But as I was the first one to mention politics specifically, this time the blame lies with me.
Rule 2: Stay on Topic
After reading and posting at Dakka for awhile you may feel as though you have developed friendships with some, perhaps many, of the other posters and readers. This is probably one of the most rewarding parts of participating in a discussion area. It is only natural to occasionally want to share information with your friends that is "Off Topic" (i.e. not related to the subject matter of the forum you are in).
While it may at first seem harmless to post a bit about off topic (OT) subjects, it can become a slippery slope. If others join in on OT posts then soon everybody has sent the discussion threads on so many tangents that it is difficult to follow the original topic. Further, posting off topic essentially violates Rule #1. People come to Dakka looking for information related to the hobby. It is not polite to post off topic items frequently.
If you wish to discuss a topic that doesn't pertain to wargaming, it should be started in the "Off-Topic" forum.
-----------------------------
Of course, whinging incessantly in the End of the Brick and Mortar thread about GW's new Catachan is totes on-topic and any posts alleging otherwise will be deleted.
Excommunicatus, the post I deleted was one user literally dropping an F-bomb on another user about COVID-19... it had absolutely nothing to do with the Catachan model. If a thread gets OT just hit the yellow triangle with a note like "Can a mod ask for this thread to get back on topic?"
From what I can tell, distribution of the Catachan model is a pretty relevant thing for a brick and mortar store discussion, though, right? I'll check that out now...
Edit: The discussion in that thread has wandered a bit, but mostly been fine for such a vague OP / topic. Honestly, if we cracked down on a thread like that for being OT, not many on Dakka would survive as there are a lot of elements relating to how FLGS are doing in the pandemic.
I was literally in the process of joining the catachan mini thread with some positive comments on the details but it’s locked just as I’m about to post. And low and behold, it’s because of him again. At exactly the same time he’s starting trouble in the corona thread, yet again.
I was going to suggest a solution but since I think that you wouldn’t like it, I’ll bite my tongue.
Hey guys, while we don't mind responding to moderation questions in here, if you have an issue with another specific user it's not appropriate for us to talk about it here.
Please feel free to PM a mod with any concerns, but let's keep this thread from focusing on other specific users. Thanks!
While I don't want to be finger pointing, right now there is a user posting in at least six different threads at once who is just antagonizing everyone while not actually joining the discussion. All those threads have completely been turned into this user vs. all of dakka, completely drowning any of the interesting discussion going on there before. Note that there are a handful of users regularly doing this.
They aren't actually breaking any forum rules, but it's extremely frustrating, and the only thing I can do about it is unsubscribe the threads and stop reading them, because otherwise my lack of self-control will make me part of the problem. The ignore function simply isn't enough when someone continuously succeeds making threads become about themselves.
Jidmah wrote: While I don't want to be finger pointing, right now there is a user posting in at least six different threads at once who is just antagonizing everyone while not actually joining the discussion.
All those threads have completely been turned into this user vs. all of dakka, completely drowning any of the interesting discussion going on there before.
Note that there are a handful of users regularly doing this.
They aren't actually breaking any forum rules, but it's extremely frustrating, and the only thing I can do about it is unsubscribe the threads and stop reading them, because otherwise my lack of self-control will make me part of the problem.
The ignore function simply isn't enough when someone continuously succeeds making threads become about themselves.
I think I know who you mean, posts full of condescension and a sort of 'one true way' tone?
I reported all the posts I thought were actionable, as mentioned in the thread prev. that seems to be all we can do.
Talking about people in a very lax manner and you could be talking about the same person or different persons or even each other.
Remember how you interpret a post and its content is not the same as how others might interpret it. You might see an insult whilst another sees a simple comment; you might see incorrect facts where another might know otherwise; you might see trolling whilst another just sees general banter etc...
Report - explain in the report - move on. Use the ignore system and if you really really REALLY can't stand the other person just don't respond to them.
I don't care about what that person writes - I care about an interesting thread having gone to gak because certain people decided to start a fight with everyone.
Future War Cultist wrote: Also hard to ignore that person when their gak is getting threads you’d like to participate in locked. That’s not ignorable.
True, but unless the lock mentions that the discussion is banned formally you can often re-start discussions from the positive point of the original topic. Of course you have to be sensible. If the original topic was "Female marines" then chances are starting it again won't go down well. However if it was "What's the best Necron Model" and the discussion went bananas then you can start it up again.
Interestingly whenever I've seen or locked threads on topics, even when specifically mentioning that people can start a new thread on the original topic - very very very few people ever do.
And here the mods have explained that they aren’t prepared to get rid of them.
That's not what was said, at all. But even if it was, it wouldn't mean that we're not interested in doing something about it, if someone's actually causing issues. We would need more than vague hints to look into it, though. Hence the suggestion to report the posts in question.
Automatically Appended Next Post: It's also worth pointing out, though, that 'being disliked by someone' is not against the rules. And that it generally takes more than one person to derail a thread...
I'll add my weight to this, they are a nuisance and is actually one of the specific posters that was central to this thread being created.
About the point above, there are many posters I actually don't like on this forum but would not report - some have even posted in this thread, but they aren't trolls, this one is an absolute troll.
Guys, again, feel free to PM a mod if you want to explain an issue with a specific user in detail, as we're not going to discuss individual users here.
Otherwise, as noted, please use the yellow triangle to point us to rule breaking posts. But if there's a larger "general" issue, a PM could be much more useful.
Can any mods explain why my venn diagram was removed from the cv thread for being 'non wargaming' but all the other images posted since have been left alone?
I wasnt the one to remove it but generally that happens when someone directly attaches the image to a post and thus it gets hosted by dakka (and we only allow wargaming images). The few images I just looked at are hosted offsite and linked using image tags.
Right, any non-wargaming images uploaded to Dakka get removed (reviewing images is actually a manual process, thank goodness we've got a few folks super dedicated to it!).
If it wasn't hosted here, I'd have to check further, but that seems the most likely. If your post had been edited directly it would show up in the automated moderator log, and there's nothing there for it, so this seems like the only explanation.
I just wanted to stop by to say thank you for this thread. I used to harbour a lot of resentment towards you staff but this thread demonstrates that you’re at least trying to make things work, and that deserves recognition. Keep it up and I might even be a DCM again.
Up to you, really. If it's something specific buried in a massive post, then including details so we know what we're looking for is useful. Likewise, if it relates to something that has been ongoing in the thread, it's worth pointing that out.
In general, though, just whatever you feel conveys the issue at hand.
So, I think this is the best place for this; I got myself a suspension in the “movies immune to dislike”. I’m not vengeful or anything to the mods; clearly people were bothered by what I said. However, I’m standing by what I had said. My views are unchanged, and I am unapologetic. Weeks ago, I commented that I feel this site is no longer a place i feel that I want to be, and being considered “rude” because I appreciate keeping an artist’s vision “pure” and not having somebody new come in and crap all over that vision...I’m not sorry. Maybe I like things old fashioned, maybe I’m resistant to change. I realize I chose Ghostbusters to be the noose I hung myself with, but I would have stood the same ground for Pocahontas being changed to a man or Black Panther being changed to a white guy. And i would have done it with the same vehemence out of respect for the sanctity of history/vision. So again, no apologies on my part.
Where is this going? I’m making a public request to have my account closed out. This isn’t because I got a suspension. It’s not because I offended people. I don’t feel like a real part of this site anymore, and don’t feel like I’m getting what I want out of it anymore. I know that I’ll keep checking in if my account stays active. And I’d rather avoid that. So I’m asking for my account to be locked. I have enough going on in my life that I don’t need to trouble myself with being somewhere I don’t feel a part of. I’m not going to have a meltdown. I’m not going to mouth off. I stood my ground, and I’m making a request. I’d like you guys to honor that.
Dakka doesn't delete accounts. Too technically awkward. It would screw up the forum to delete significant numbers of posts.
I suppose the regular mod team could lock the account for you if that's what you want, but...you do know this website isn't a hotel, right? You don't actually need to check out. You can just...stop coming here.
You could also have someone else change your password so you can’t login.
You can also do it yourself by changing your password, writing down a gibberish password on a paper, then destroying the paper. I did that with a different forum.
I hear you. Sorry this isn’t the place for you, I’ve been in your shoes and you’ll find somewhere new to enjoy.
It can be given a ban or very long suspension. Long enough that I can’t post further. I know deleting accounts isn’t an option. But a ban or long-term, undisclosed suspension is. An open door gets walked through. I want this door locked.
As stated, I’m not getting what I want here, but I still feel “the draw” because I’ve been here for so long. I’m actually planning to head over to TGA. About all I want these days is AoS because my wife and I do it together (well, after she’s fully better, that is). The Dakka community...isn’t wonderful for AoS. Overread, I already saw you’re there, I’ll see you over there. I assume I’ll see a few friendly account faces once I’m up and running.
timetowaste85 wrote: As stated, I’m not getting what I want here, but I still feel “the draw” because I’ve been here for so long. I’m actually planning to head over to TGA. About all I want these days is AoS because my wife and I do it together (well, after she’s fully better, that is). The Dakka community...isn’t wonderful for AoS. Overread, I already saw you’re there, I’ll see you over there. I assume I’ll see a few friendly account faces once I’m up and running.
I’m sorry to see you go time. On bad days I’ve almost found myself in the same boat, so I completely sympathise. I would ask if there’s anything we could do to change your mind but it seems pretty made up.
I’m on TGA too, usually in the Overlord thread, if you ever want to talk AoS.
Just waiting on RiTides to lock me out. I sent him a fairly long, involved email as to why I want to go. Has nothing to do with anyone here. Short thing is that I had enough gak thrown on my plate in real life that posting on a forum where I feel less and less a valuable part of is less and less important. And I need to focus on the important stuff, not trying to fight to remain a member where I am one only by ten-year technicality at this point. I don’t bring anything to the table anymore, and I’m not getting what I want either. So...it’s time to say goodbye. I’ll lurk in N&R since it’s an easy place to get info for releases. But that’s all. The AoS section is dead, I’ve worn out my interest in 40k, and the media section probably gets me in the most trouble.
I can tell you all I’m a Trump supporter, if that makes it easier to see me go!
Yeah that was a really weird 'look at me I've been here so long I feel like I'm important, but you guys should lock me out because I can't stay away.' If Peregrine could step away without even so much as a goodbye..
Hey guys, for what it's worth that's not how I viewed it / I don't think that's what was meant. We also had some great PMs and I gave timetowaste my email in case he wants to come back in 6 months or the like. He had a lot going on personally and I think it was a wise decision for now!
We also have a site policy of not discussing folks who can't respond (whether they voluntarily or involuntarily had their account locked, for instance) so let's move on and discuss something else wrong with the site please (or if all's good, we can let this thread lie for a bit ).
That's an interesting site policy. Does it apply to only mods or all users? I guess my confusion stems from the fact that honestly I have no idea if a user is locked out(voluntary/involuntary) and to find that I guess I would have to go to their account?
Back to issues with the site - if I were to report someone does it alert the mods that the post within the thread has an alert or does it only alert that the thread has an alert and now you guys have to scroll through all of the posts to find the specific post where someone was either OT or violating the rules in another way?? Knowing which is true would probably help with how much detail I put in the alert.
It's more just if you know someone doesn't have access. It usually comes up in a situation like this, where a mod prompts that the person doesn't have a way to defend themselves so we shouldn't discuss them (at least in a negative light). Definitely not something you need to worry about when posting, just noting it as we meet the criteria here.
The mod alert takes us to the specific post, and also shows who reported it and their comment. If multiple people report the same post, unfortunately we only get to see the first comment and the number of users reporting. But usually if it's a lightning rod like that it gets our attention quickly even with less detail
Yeah I genuinely do not understand why any of that had to be made public. Only thing that makes sense is that he was hoping for someone to convince him to stay.
. We probably do need to crack down on some repeat offenders (and for the record, 90% of the current moderator alerts issues are currently from the coronavirus thread, or the psychic awakening one 
). Just takes a lot of work to do so!
. It's a big part of why we got rid of it... people were losing friends.
and usually, if there are big gaps or it's for something completely unrelated, we try to take that into account. But the 
