Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Your anecdote regarding mods treatment of different individuals is cute and all but let's be honest it isn't reality....subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

You might get further guv if you (as someone who has no access to or knowledge of what actually happens backdoors) stopped trying to insist to the moderators that they're wrong about how things work behind the scenes.

Y'know, given we've already seen that you don't know how moderation here functions even on a basic administrative level....

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
If by "complete denial" you mean "explicitly stating it exists" then yes.

I'm on about at the point when the bias/favouritism presents itself. Not a vague "we're only human but your particular accusation is false and wrong", as we're getting in this topic. Also, what happens if a mod is perceived as acting in an unfair way to another user, is there a correction process? What is it? In other words, exactly what I said here;

it's that there's a complete denial of it happening when it clearly has and subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

Has any mod actually admitted that the mod in question in this instance acted out of what would be considered "good moderation"? Genuine apologies if so, because I haven't seen it. Nor do I have a vested interest, because I've not been involved in the topic in question nor seen the mod in question do anything out of the ordinary/unfair. But there seem to be a fair few people who aren't happy about the mods' actions in this particular case.

So you are specifically aware that no mods have ever been punished or corrected for their behavior? Because that is what you are saying. If the mods were as bad as you suggest, one of them would have banned you by now.

Try being a mod on a forum sometime, you'll find it eye opening.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ketara wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Your anecdote regarding mods treatment of different individuals is cute and all but let's be honest it isn't reality....subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

You might get further guv if you (as someone who has no access to or knowledge of what actually happens backdoors) stopped trying to insist to the moderators that they're wrong about how things work behind the scenes.

Y'know, given we've already seen that you don't know how moderation here functions even on a basic administrative level....

Beat me to it.

 Ketara wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Your anecdote regarding mods treatment of different individuals is cute and all but let's be honest it isn't reality....subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

You might get further guv ...... on a basic administrative level....

Can you stop calling me "guv"? It's pretty annoying and doesn't sit well with your patronising tone.

I know how the moderation functions, my knowledge of YOUR EXACT MODERATION ROLE might be limited, that's probably because it's the first time I've ever had any discourse with you. That doesn't make me entirely ignorant of the ENTIRE MODERATION PROCESS THOUGH DOES IT BROOOOOOO?

No? Great, glad we cleared that up.

You'll also note that I'm not stating a fact. I'm saying there doesn't SEEM to be a correction process (bolded above since you missed it first time). If there is I'd be glad to hear it and perhaps suggest improvements (since it obviously doesn't seem to be working broooooo).

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
So you are specifically aware that no mods have ever been punished or corrected for their behavior? Because that is what you are saying. If the mods were as bad as you suggest, one of them would have banned you by now.

You also struggle with the meaning of the word "seems"?

Here you go pal;

seem
siːm/Submit
verb
3rd person present: seems
1.
give the impression of being something or having a particular quality.
"Dawn seemed annoyed"
synonyms: appear, appear to be, have the appearance/air of being, give the impression of being, look, look like, look as though one is, look to be, have the look of, show signs of; More

Also for what reason should I have been banned? You know my entire post history and can recall every time I've broken the rules? All the warnings I've received? All the suspensions? I guess that's why you aren't a mod huh?

Frazzled lost mod privileges.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Can you stop calling me "guv"? It's pretty annoying and doesn't sit well with your patronising tone.

You might get further also if you stopped being touchier than a hair trigger mine pistol. So far you've displayed the martyr complex, repeatedly insisted you've been insulted (when nobody has bothered to do so), and now you're getting offended over someone calling you 'guv' (a common colloquialism). I mean, sense of perspective here? You're talking in the Nuts Bolts forum of a site on toy soldiers. This isn't 'serious business' as it were.

That doesn't make me entirely ignorant of the ENTIRE MODERATION PROCESS THOUGH DOES IT BROOOOOOO?

Errr....yes, apparently? I mean, you say here:-

I'm saying there doesn't SEEM to be a correction process (bolded above since you missed it first time). If there is I'd be glad to hear it and perhaps suggest improvements (since it obviously doesn't seem to be working broooooo).

But there is a correction process. It's called talking to the site owner. It's their sandpit, if they have a problem with something, they mention it to the mods. And they do, when things they consider worthy of note come up. If there's an adjustment in procedure, or a way they want something handled, they say so. But you don't see that because it's back of house.

So, has there been an official mod decision over what was posted (regardless of intentions) then the thread being locked (by the poster no less) despite the thread being fairly calm minus the one real problem post in almost 30 pages?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Your anecdote regarding mods treatment of different individuals is cute and all but let's be honest it isn't reality....subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

You might get further guv ...... on a basic administrative level....

Can you stop calling me "guv"? It's pretty annoying and doesn't sit well with your patronising tone.

I know how the moderation functions, my knowledge of YOUR EXACT MODERATION ROLE might be limited, that's probably because it's the first time I've ever had any discourse with you. That doesn't make me entirely ignorant of the ENTIRE MODERATION PROCESS THOUGH DOES IT BROOOOOOO?

No? Great, glad we cleared that up.

You'll also note that I'm not stating a fact. I'm saying there doesn't SEEM to be a correction process (bolded above since you missed it first time). If there is I'd be glad to hear it and perhaps suggest improvements (since it obviously doesn't seem to be working broooooo).

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
So you are specifically aware that no mods have ever been punished or corrected for their behavior? Because that is what you are saying. If the mods were as bad as you suggest, one of them would have banned you by now.

You also struggle with the meaning of the word "seems"?

Here you go pal;

seem
siːm/Submit
verb
3rd person present: seems
1.
give the impression of being something or having a particular quality.
"Dawn seemed annoyed"
synonyms: appear, appear to be, have the appearance/air of being, give the impression of being, look, look like, look as though one is, look to be, have the look of, show signs of; More

Also for what reason should I have been banned? You know my entire post history and can recall every time I've broken the rules? All the warnings I've received? All the suspensions? I guess that's why you aren't a mod huh?

I can see how you're acting right now.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm left wondering how many people in this thread criticising moderaters have ever been moderators themselves. I understand constructive criticism (and agree with the original point of contention) but keep in mind that moderating is not a fun job.

More than once. On a couple of forums and in several Facebook groups.

No, it isn't fun. But it's not a job. It's not paying bills. If you can't do it, then you have to be the adult and step down or bring in help.

I'll be one of the ones to say it:

I know for a fact that at times, two individuals can do the exact same thing in the exact same thread- and depending on what the mod feels, one of the offenders can get a ban and the other will be posting afterward. And in at least one case, it wasn't the one who started the poop-throwing that got caged harder.

Because, come on- you can still SEE the forums when you're not logged in.

I won't suggest a conspiracy, but I know for a fact that certain posters do get a pass on flaming and 'being impolite'. As soon as others respond in kind, there are mods that come in to slap the peepee.

Dakkadakka is discussed elsewhere as a site with awful moderation. I'm just being honest. I won't even repeat some of the stories I've heard (I can't substantiate them, anyway)- but let's just say there's a couple of interesting tales.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Dakkadakka is discussed elsewhere as a site with awful moderation. I'm just being honest. I won't even repeat some of the stories I've heard (I can't substantiate them, anyway)- but let's just say there's a couple of interesting tales.

Having seen some of the tales told elsewhere, and having a view of the other side of the story, a lot of those tales are far less interesting than they might at first seem, other than as exercises in creative writing.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

I know for a fact that at times, two individuals can do the exact same thing in the exact same thread- and depending on what the mod feels, one of the offenders can get a ban and the other will be posting afterward. And in at least one case, it wasn't the one who started the poop-throwing that got caged harder.

This is exactly what I was getting at earlier. This depends less on 'what the mod feels' and more on the history of the specific posters involved. That's not bias, it's a deliberate effect of the moderation process - the reaction to rules infractions will increase over time if a poster chooses to not moderate their own behaviour.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
If by "complete denial" you mean "explicitly stating it exists" then yes.

I'm on about at the point when the bias/favouritism presents itself. Not a vague "we're only human but your particular accusation is false and wrong", as we're getting in this topic. Also, what happens if a mod is perceived as acting in an unfair way to another user, is there a correction process? What is it? In other words, exactly what I said here;

it's that there's a complete denial of it happening when it clearly has and subsequently there seems to be no correction process for this.

Has any mod actually admitted that the mod in question in this instance acted out of what would be considered "good moderation"? Genuine apologies if so, because I haven't seen it. Nor do I have a vested interest, because I've not been involved in the topic in question nor seen the mod in question do anything out of the ordinary/unfair. But there seem to be a fair few people who aren't happy about the mods' actions in this particular case.

Why would they hell I'd just ban you and enjoy a nice bourbon*

*This may be why I am not a mod.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Frazzled lost mod privileges.

That's what they want you to know think. But then again, have you ever seen me and Lorek in the same room?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Try being a mod on a forum sometime, you'll find it eye opening.

Been there, done that. On a much larger site with much more toxic and disruptive boards.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm left wondering how many people in this thread criticising moderaters have ever been moderators themselves.

I have. As I pointed out in my post. In a forum dedicated to 40k of all things, so, yes, I've seen raging fem marines threads, RAW, and all the other fun that has rolled along. Including GW cease and desists.

But on the flip side, I'd also had out of control mods who abused their authority, some to astonishing degrees (looking at YOU Messiahcide, wherever you vanished to).

I'm not pointing fingers but from the outside this lock looked a lot like that last one


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

Been there, done that. On a much larger site with much more toxic and disruptive boards.

Something Awful, wasn't it?

I'd like to chime in though that for all it's faults, this is a really cool bunch of people to discuss OT things, including politics.

No where else I've found the unique blend of perspectives that makes much of the dialogue interesting to say the least.

We're all bound together in our love of table top wargaming, and it's nice to "shoot the gak" about other things too.

I don't get it.

People have been told this isn't a democracy. That the Mods aren't held to a standard of public office, but are held to the standards of the site owner, that seems thus far to be content with things as they are. At this point, pissing into the wind can't be helping anyone arguing for the "lynching" of moderators. And I exaggerate 'cause I'm an donkey-cave, ok? I know nobody wants to lynch anyone. But it does seem like some people want to figuratively hang some Mods on a cross. It seems like some people are expecting to get some sense of "justice" out of this thread. It ain't happening. There's no justice to be had, no vindication to be won, because the whole expectation for that is based on some kind of non-authoritarian system of governance.

Which doesn't exist here. No, I'm not telling people that if they don't like it they should leave. That's up to them. What I'm saying is that there is a fundamental expectation being expressed that does not jive with the reality of this situation. Posters can't hold the powers that be (here) to any kind of account. This isn't the democratic government that most Western nations are accustomed to. You can't protest, and change the government at the next election. You can rail against the iron wall... but you aren't getting through. You can appeal to the dictators. Again, I don't say dictator with a sense of anger or resentment. I describe only the power dynamic at work. But there's no force of will effect. You can't engage in a hunger strike. There's no international committee to appeal to.

Seriously. It's time to take the advice of a certain Disney Ice Princess. Life lesson time. Sometimes there's no win. Sometimes it's best of the situation. It's not someone's fault. And it doesn't matter if it is. If you have a problem, it's your problem. You have no leverage here. Adapt or move on. A sense of correctness has no force in this situation. You shout yourself hoarse and

Nothing.

It sucks. It's life. To loosely quote the old sage, Captain Jean-Luc Picard, "You can make all the right choices and still lose. That is not a failing, it is life!" Seriously, it looks like the lock came out of left field. It is also a thread that should have been locked and thrown in the dungeon before that point. It's a thread that just doesn't fit here. It's a misery machine that just outputs anger and resentment. Sometimes, you've got to let it go. Let it go. The thread never bothered me anyway.

 insaniak wrote:
This is exactly what I was getting at earlier. This depends less on 'what the mod feels' and more on the history of the specific posters involved. That's not bias, it's a deliberate effect of the moderation process - the reaction to rules infractions will increase over time if a poster chooses to not moderate their own behaviour.

Well let's put it this way, I can tell you.

Imagine being in a room where some putz is lighting entire notebooks on fire for two or three hours. Then someone strikes a match in a corner and the alarms suddenly decide to go off.

Food for thought.

Man, it is almost like I made a couple threads in N&B recently complaining about the same mod and the same reasons for locking a thread.

The same arguments are being thrown out by both sides.

"The thread was getting heated!"

No, it was a calm and collected discussion until the mod got miffed.

"It had potential to go bad!"

So does every High School chemistry teacher but they aren't all getting investigated by the FBI.

"If you dont like it leave!"

Rinse. Repeat. Carbon Copy. But nothing is wrong! Working as intended.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0MK7qz13bU

Skip to the 1:00 mark. Pissing into an icy wind just gets you yellow snow back. The system works just as intended. Utterly baffling at this point.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Man, it is almost like I made a couple threads in N&B recently complaining about the same mod and the same reasons for locking a thread.

The same arguments are being thrown out by both sides.

"The thread was getting heated!"

No, it was a calm and collected discussion until the mod got miffed.

"It had potential to go bad!"

So does every High School chemistry teacher but they aren't all getting investigated by the FBI.

"If you dont like it leave!"

Rinse. Repeat. Carbon Copy. But nothing is wrong! Working as intended.

So, a normal person would get the hint already...

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Man, it is almost like I made a couple threads in N&B recently complaining about the same mod and the same reasons for locking a thread.

The same arguments are being thrown out by both sides.

"The thread was getting heated!"

No, it was a calm and collected discussion until the mod got miffed.

"It had potential to go bad!"

So does every High School chemistry teacher but they aren't all getting investigated by the FBI.

"If you dont like it leave!"

Rinse. Repeat. Carbon Copy. But nothing is wrong! Working as intended.

FWIW while I am defending the mods overall here I do feel Killkrazy was out of line in this instance.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Man, it is almost like I made a couple threads in N&B recently complaining about the same mod and the same reasons for locking a thread.

The same arguments are being thrown out by both sides.

"The thread was getting heated!"

No, it was a calm and collected discussion until the mod got miffed.

"It had potential to go bad!"

So does every High School chemistry teacher but they aren't all getting investigated by the FBI.

"If you dont like it leave!"

Rinse. Repeat. Carbon Copy. But nothing is wrong! Working as intended.

So, a normal person would get the hint already...

Yeah, settle down peasants! Get back in line.

Well this has been impressively dragged into a weird direction.

As for the thread under discussion, it was very odd, not at all what I expected from said mod, passionate sure, but this feels really out of character and a weird lock given the context.

Believe me, guys, we've seen the feedback here and get the point. None of us are perfect, but we Do read these N&B threads, and discuss the concerns brought up as a team, etc.

I posted previously here that we liked the idea of a non-participating mod shepherding a US politics thread if we Do re-open one. Manchu actually was already doing this - unfortunately, I kind of came in and gave the thread both barrels (I really, really hate "ists/isms" applied to large people groups!) and maybe this started things spiraling a bit towards where it ended up.

So, we'll see when/if he's ready to start (and guide) a new one. I suggest chocolate and flowers, as that's got to be the most thankless job on the site

Finally, as noted before, other mods may need to respond to time-sensitive alerts in the thread, so there's no "immunity" from posting in that thread - if anything, it's the opposite, there's a short leash as it's not what this site is primarily for. But we are planning to make it "Manchu's problem " for the most part, for better or worse

I feel you stepped in when it was needed and the thread got back in line after that. Even towards the end people wer generally good about being specific to saying certain things about certain viewpoints/people who have it, a subtle but important distinction.

People seemed to be behaving better. Of course the off topic has shed quite a few people that posted in previous politics threads and caused it to get heated. Mods do pretty well considering the emotions playing up from time to time and the previous lock was expected. It was just the last time that the context and the speed it got locked at was surprising.

I for one, look forward to the US Politics thread re-opening for a simple reason. Unlike most political discussion areas on the internet it is NOT an echo chamber since so many posters have so many different views. If I go to a dedicated politics board, you generally only hear the same side in a purity contest with each other.

Regards KillKrazy and the Mod lock. I have no problem with it..... but I hope it is only temporary OR if someone started another politics related thread it would not get locked until it had run its course.

Every so often, any thread just needs to be locked. If it is worthy it will rise again in a few days or weeks time. I mean, think about the Robotech RPG Tactics threads that went some 300+ pages.... twice!

 RiTides wrote:
(I really, really hate "ists/isms" applied to large people groups!)

You must stay busy on here, then.

 Ketara wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
If moderators are under no obligation to be impartial, then it means that they can abuse their position.

Only if you subscribe to the belief that everyone is doing it for the mind-altering position that is the wielding of power on a toy soldiers forum. Otherwise, any such potential for abuse is generally curtailed by the actual motivation of the Moderator team; namely, to help the community flourish in a positive way. Abusing the position would generally be anathema to that goal.

I repeat, everyone makes a mistake every once in a blue moon, because moderators are human. As Insaniak said above though, the goal is not be impartial or follow an iron clad set of rules, but to create a site which inculcates the values and community spirit that the site owners desire. That is the guiding rule that we all try to work by. We're here doing what we do because we want all of you to have a mature, polite, and friendly place to discuss toy soldiers!

My role is more circumscribed than most, but I see the grindings of the gears. I have seen one user accuse the mod team of an intrinsic left wing bias whilst being suspended, even as another rants about their right wing facist tendencies as he gets an OT ban on the same day. I have seen the endless trouble with people who actively want to contribute to the community and do so in a number of ways; but struggle to contain their tempers and sense of perspective on subjects important to them. I've seen supposed adults, who when receiving a mild warning for insulting someone, be incapable of perceiving their own faults, go on a mission to try and prove how the mods must be a) persecuting them, b)breaking the rules themselves, c) inconsistently applying the rules or d)morons.

I see it all. I have nothing to do with it, but I see it. And in half a decade of that, whilst I haven't necessarily agreed with everything done, I have extremely rarely seen anything I thought was disproportionate or abusive. There's usually a reason for anything done, even if the users aren't able to perceive it. The system works, more or less.

That’s all true, to a point, and that point is when politics gets involved. Politics is way more charged than toy soldiers. You can’t tell me that there are no mods in here who after a bad day won’t use their position to stick it to someone on the other side. I’ve seen it repeatedly. They’ll ignore like minded people abusing the other side or even join in with it. Hell, sometimes they start it, and the staff in general get more pissy with the ones pointing this out than they do with the ones actually doing it. They’re happy to tolerate and ignore abuse when it’s directed against people they don’t like, but can’t respond fast enough to deal with it when the tables are turned.

Case in point, I’ve been called pathetic, an idiot and a cultist, and another poster has been accused of being a member of the EDL, and all these posts went unchallenged. Normally I wouldn’t give a feth, but in another example a poster who’s not of the same opinion as the mods had his head bitten off for making a simple joke. One ‘right on!’ poster was only dealt with the other day because they went completely ape gak, and even then I don’t think they would have been challenged had their posts not been reported.

And now I know why. Because as said right here in this very thread, mods are under no obligation to be impartial. So they do have a licence to dick with people who’s politics they don’t like. Let them be mocked and insulted whilst hammering them over every little thing. At least now it’s being openly admitted, and I won’t feel so bad when February rolls around and I don’t renew my DCM.

This is why Politics thread are just a bad idea. They just bring out the worst in everyone involved. This site would be doing itself a massive favour if it got rid of them.

Make the politics threads DCM only and make it unmoderated no-holds-barred-all-name-calling-all-the-time.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
And now I know why. Because as said right here in this very thread, mods are under no obligation to be impartial. So they do have a licence to dick with people who’s politics they don’t like. Let them be mocked and insulted whilst hammering them over every little thing. At least now it’s being openly admitted, and I won’t feel so bad when February rolls around and I don’t renew my DCM.

That's the boat that I'm in. At this point you have a few mods that are good, most that are indifferent at best, and a few that are aggressively bad. At one point a poster repeatedly referred to this community as "pathetic incels" and that was apparently OK. It's OK to refer to feminist posters as being as bad as ISIS, and a cancer, as long as you don't also generalize about Trump voters. Unbelievable.

i have no idea wtf happened in the last year with the moderation on this site but at the end of the day all you can do is vote with your wallet; after 10 years of being a DCM mine is up in August and I will not renew.

There is a reason why the DCMs haven’t started one in the DCM forum.