Concerns about moderating policies

[Bubblesong]

Soooo, what if, among all the excellant Moderators, there was this one Moderator that kept getting in little squabbles in several different threads, in which it kind of looks like this one particular Moderator is running around with his inflatable hammer whacking innocent bystanders on the head, and derailing what might have been informative discussions? How do all the joyous Scubaboard fans pile on this one Moderator and either give him his well earned verbal "noogies", or even better, get him banned from any post with the letter "o" in it, just to learn him a lesson?

 

[RainPilot]

FWIW, I run a couple of internet forums and admin some other social media discussion groups and moderation is a b**ch. Regardless of what your policies are, someone will always try to push the boat out to see how far it goes, someone will whinge about free speech, others will report every second post as offending their sensibilities.

Keeping a balance of fair and free discussion without becoming a loose collection of flame wars is a thankless, almost impossible task.

I have had one post of mine removed by a mod and the way it was handled was, to me, perfect. I lost my temper with an individual and resorted to snark without any useful info and my post quietly disappeared. I believe the mod involved looked at my track record and figured it wasn't worth making a big deal about and just removed the offending post.

In most other forums, I would have been lightly whacked with the ban-hammer and left feeling much worse than the offense deserved. That being said, if I did the same thing in a subsequent post I'm sure that my prior indiscretion would be taken into account and the results might be different as a trend is emerging.

Referring to @boulderjohn post about the individuals with lots of good to say but marginal ways of saying it, I think this forum does pretty well in maintaining a reasonable signal/noise ratio without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I guess if that hammer ever does come down on me my attitude regarding the mods might change but so far so good.

 

[Storker]

*puts down popcorn bucket*

This has been an illuminating thread. @RainPilot 's post shows quite clearly how there are different ways of reacting to both perceived infractions, and to being moderated. On the latter point, some members accept being moderated, because they realize that if you walk the line, you sometimes step over it, and if they don't agree with the moderator action, they either suck it up because they know that there are at least three sides to any discussion (mine, yours, and the right), or they ask in a reasonable way - often by PM - for a clarification. They might even express their polite disagreement. Some times the moderator decision is reversed or modified as a consequence of the appeal, usually it isn't. And just FTR, AFAIK all the staff members participating in this thread have been moderated at one time or another. Some more than others. When it happens, we don't whine. We STFU and take it as a learning experience.

On the topic of perceived infractions, most members quietly report their concern, the report is considered by the mods, and the report is either politely dismissed, or some action is taken. Usually most of the members don't even notice what's happening, because moderation is supposed to be low-key. Then there are those who feel the need to call out the infraction in public. Whether this is because they feel that the barb hits too close for comfort (a case of "if the shoe fits..."), because they feel for some recreational outrage or if they have other reasons for raising a stink, I don't know.

But one of my earlier points in this discussion still stands: If you - any one of you - see something you consider inappropriate, just hit the report link. No matter who wrote what you're reacting to. The report link is there in the bottom left corner of every post, just below the post content. Voice your concerns, and the report will be seen by the mods. They might see it as an obvious case, in which case the reaction is swift, they might deem it equally obviously unwarranted, in which case the report is summarily - but politely - dismissed, or it might be a borderline case. If it's borderline, there might be quite a bit of discussion about how to handle the case. If a moderator is involved in the thread where the report comes from, that moderator is not allowed to take part in the decision making. Conflict of interest and all that.

*picks up popcorn bucket, opens a beer*

 

[The Chairman]

Soooo, what if, among all the excellant Moderators, there was this one Moderator that kept getting in little squabbles in several different threads,

Send a link of the problematic posts with a detailed description to abuse@ScubaBoard.com. Only I get those.

 

[The Chairman]

Some more than others.

Yeah, like me!

 

[Storker]

Yeah, like me!

Until now we've been sooo good at telling people whom we're talking about while leaving out actual names.

And then you come in, messing everything up. Oh well.

 

[DiverAmy]

Once, I posted a "don't feed the troll" meme in a thread which seemed obviously, clearly, and unequivocally a troll thread to me. My post was removed. I received a short lightly threatening PM. I felt special, wronged, misunderstood. Though I don't recall the details, I stand by my interpretation of the poster and his motivation. I forgot who he is or exactly which scuba controversy was being rehashed for the nnnnnteenth time.

I moved on. It does seem like scubaboard gets trolled a lot. Maybe all boards do. I don't have experience, really. I do read here often, especially when I'm in the process of training (which I'm in right now). I wish there was more substantive material on point to my interests, but fishing around for it has led me to some people, places, and things I would not have otherwise encountered that enriched my online and offline experience. I certainly don't want to moderate or be moderated (much).

 

[Storker]

How do all the joyous Scubaboard fans pile on this one Moderator and either give him his well earned verbal "noogies", or even better, get him banned from any post with the letter "o" in it, just to learn him a lesson?

That kinda depends on what you want. Do you want this:

Or this?

 

[Bennno]

These students try the teacher's patience. They cause a buildup of anger that may keep the teacher awake at night wondering what to do about this troublemaker. The teacher will eventually become hypervigilent with that student, ready to pounce at the first sign of trouble.

Yeah, bad and incompetent teachers will do that. I can't believe that you, as a teacher, think that's OK.
If you can't be fair because you're being too emotional (and vindictive I guess) you shouldn't be a teacher and you shouldn't be a mod either!
Teacher who behave like that need to be fired.

So, Storker for instance comments on cave diving accidents, working as a instructor, spear fishing etc. even though he knows nothing about it as it seems... if I point that out, I get reported, WITHOUT having called him a moron! When I asked, what I am being reported for. I get no answer or I get insulted.

John likes to write loooooong 'lectury' posts with a lot of questionable stuff in them... when I comment, it get deleted and I get lectured some more by pm.

Why are people that act like that picked as mods? People that take themselves this seriously should not be mods. It's not all mods, but 4 of them come to mind that are just awful.

Now, I'm sure I have, yet again, broken some rule. On this board, you can't utter an critical opinion when it goes against what the 'little clique' thinks and I doesn't hurt some mods ego. Of course it's also OK to slander companies like revo based upon hearsay, when Pete or some mod has some kind of problem with them. On the other hand, the DSS get to talk s%&t as much as he wants... I guess he's buying advertisement on SB.

This whole spiel about 'mods can't mod in threads they are involved in' is utter BS. People like John and Storker are biased against me whether they are involved in a certain thread or not, that system makes no sense.

If some post are deleted that's fine, it's done in other forums to and they will give you a reason for it that makes sense... on here, it's being done to proctect people egos.

It's a real shame since are a lot's of people on here that seem very competent and post lots of great advice and have very interesting stuff to say, unfortunately this is not a free platform and that's on of the reasons people are going to facebook.

 

[boulderjohn]

They may not have been deleted for language. Quite often, vitriolic comments are a part of a thread being pulled off topic. We tell the offender why their post has been deleted and quite often they'll tell everyone else a different story. As a rule, we're not going to get into those kind of bicker battles. People who want to believe the worst about us will not have their beliefs altered by the truth.

People who have been moderated in some way, either by having a post removed or by being temporarily banned, often talk about it later to tell everyone why they were unfairly treated when they were moderated. If any of those complaints ever described the reason for that moderation accurately, I sure don't remember it. If you ever read such a post, you can be sure that although you do't know why that person was moderated, you can be pretty sure whatever they said about it was NOT the reason. Often they THINK it is the reason, but in those cases they either misunderstood the explanation or were not given a good explanation for it.