Over-Moderation?

[Foltest]

Alice told me to post something here instead of talking about it in the Discord chat.

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16718-roses-surrender/page-39

 

We had the longest thread in Alliance Affairs locked because of three or four people replying with off-topic/spam stuff while the actual discussion was still on-going.

 

 

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16847-rose-surrender-reply/

 

We then had an attempt to reopen the actual discussion and it was subsequently locked again before it could get going. Sending the message that no new threads would be allowed to continue the discussion.

 

 

 

So effectively the mods, due to a handful of people's replies, decided to quash an actual discussion regarding in-game affairs. Over-moderation like this inhibits the community's ability to generate political content, which is minimally 50% of the actual game. I would prefer to see "spam" handled in a more appropriate way that doesn't punish the community next time.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Raymond Reddington

[Codonian]

I agree with Holton that the first thread being locked was unwarranted and to lock the 2nd thread that tried to continue off the conversation of the first thread was ridiculous 

[Aurora Yukihime]

[While I am aware that this is not a suggestion thread, the only alternative is a direct message to Sheepy, of which I am sending at this moment, but feel that this magnitude of discussion needs to be seen by the players if so warranted.]

 

I would first like to admit that I am not a regular of these forums, and am more or less a currently quiet nation emerging from solely communicating within my alliance of UPN. I come merely with past experience in forum moderation and empathy for the players I have heard today.

 

I have heard, from a spontaneous argument regarding the recent locking of the Rose Surrender thread, an argument between a moderator and players over the decision to lock the thread instead of continuing the conversation and warning and removing the posts of the “three spam messages†at the bottom of the thread, of which the mod cites as the reason for closure.

 

Further analysis of the thread shows that, up to the point where one player mentioned "as, sa, as...", there was a healthy discussion including reference to UPN leaders within the last page. Furthermore, a further reply posted in Orbis Central was locked for "spam" when clearly the offense is thread-jacking from the same "as, sa.." offenders.

 

Upon questioning the mod, they announced that “Locking is more effective considering most people who get warns do not seem to be affected by itâ€. This raised several red flags for me.

 

As I mentioned before, I do have game moderation experience from several Ragnarok Online servers. When confronted with an offending player, it is clear that the best means of dealing with the player is an effective way of punishing that player alone. My first resort would not be to block access to the map, or server, or, especially, locking an active forum thread.

 

It is clear the problem is the weight of moderator warnings, and I propose the following change.

• Remove the 7-point warning system and replace it with this condensed system, or a similar variant
  • 1st Offense – Written warning
  • 2nd Offense – 1-24 hour forum account suspension (subjective application based on severity)
  • 3rd Offense – 1-5 day forum account suspension (subjective application based on severity)
  • 4th Offense – Forum account ban
• The warning expiration times, appeal length, and approval process will remain intact.

With this change, the moderation will be more incentivized to punish single offending players instead of stopping an active discussion (of which this forum needs in some areas) due to a few minds’ wandering.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Aurora Yukihime

[Dr Rush]

I would like to comment on the SA posts since they are being brought up. There was a sub conversation happening in regards to the record length of the thread. During the course of this conversation it was brought up that Mensa had a thread 350 pages long. When asked how a thread could get that long we provided a short explanation & demonstration. Said demonstration was completely on topic & therefore not spam.

[LordRahl2]

I would like to comment on the SA posts since they are being brought up. There was a sub conversation happening in regards to the record length of the thread. During the course of this conversation it was brought up that Mensa had a thread 350 pages long. When asked how a thread could get that long we provided a short explanation & demonstration. Said demonstration was completely on topic & therefore not spam.

 

As a central part to that sub-conversation Rush speaks the truth.  The intent was a demonstration not to destroy the highly interesting meta game conversation that was ongoing.

[Saru]

The moderators need to pretend like they are actually doing something...

[Alataq]

>inb4

 

great job mods

[Woot]

Do mods on this forum really lock threads because they're too interesting? Or can I shut down any discussion on this forums I don't like by posting a little bit of spam and derailment? 

[Donald Trump]

Just allow anything. No need to let political correctness effect discussions. Social Justice mods are a pain. News at 11. 

[Sailor Jerry]

If they keep locking threads so no one can post, what would be the !@#$ ing point of coming on these forums then.....which would in turn cause folks to do what?  You guessed it........leave the !@#$ ing game because why?  Inabaility to use the main forums.  Use the "Warn System", that's what it's !@#$ ing there for......duh!!!!!

[greatkitteh]

The moderators need to pretend like they are actually doing something...

So ban the trolls and Kastor ffs . . . It isn't "spam" if it has political value.

[Delyruin]

Tbh great threads always have little side convos from time to time while keeping on one central topic. It's completely natural and people shouldn't get all emotional about it unless it's absolutely egregious. 

 

Arbitrarily locking a thread because of the natural flow of the convo is ridiculous and turns people off of any forum in a big way.

 

One of the things I admire most about our moderators over at the Mensa forums in my 9000+ posts there is their hands off approach, only involving themselves if something becomes blatantly out of hand. Even then there is a mod chat board where we all talk about what an appropriate response may be. The lack of this is one of the main reasons I stay away from here.

 

It works, threads generally stay on topic, and everyone comes out a Certified Genius.

 

Shout-out to Manpile <3

Edited October 8, 2016 by Delyruin

[Avruch]

The heavy handed approach is really just one moderator, I don't think we need to tar all the mods with the same brush. If anything the problem with the whole team is the absence of a consistent approach to "derailed" threads. 

[LordRahl2]

The heavy handed approach is really just one moderator, I don't think we need to tar all the mods with the same brush. If anything the problem with the whole team is the absence of a consistent approach to "derailed" threads. 

 

I thought it took 2 to lock?

[ArcKnox]

I mean, you could always just delete the offending posts and let the thread continue rather than locking everything.

 

But what do I know

[Four]

Ok. 

 

Well - I guess I'll do this. 

 

1. Not give a &#33;@#&#036;. 
2. Let reports roll in and not doing anything about them. 
3. Allow the forums go from quality posts in Alliance Affairs to the shit posting that has been occurring.

 

Thanks for the insight. 

[Alex]

Obviously there is some frustration here, but understand a delicate balance must be struck between maintaining quality forum discussions and not stifling conversation.

 

I and the moderators would like to promote as much worthwhile discussion on the forums as possible. However, quite often the topic of a thread changes significantly from the OP, sometimes to the point where there is really no relation whatsoever. In these cases, where discussion about the original topic is over, we lock threads -- with the intention that you move the otherwise unrelated convo to a new thread, related to it's original topic post.

 

Often times locking a thread isn't so much about stopping the conversation as it is directing it elsewhere, where it is relevant.

[Sketchy]

 

1. Allow the forums go from quality posts in Alliance Affairs to the shit posting that has been occurring.

 

You are already doing that one.

Edited October 9, 2016 by Sketchy

[LordRahl2]

You are already doing that one.

 

Implying there was ever quality posting there.

[Codonian]

Ok. 

 

Well - I guess I'll do this. 

 

1. Not give a !@#$. 
2. Let reports roll in and not doing anything about them. 
3. Allow the forums go from quality posts in Alliance Affairs to the shit posting that has been occurring.

 

Thanks for the insight. 

As a Moderator, Shouldn't you give a shit about reports? 

[Aksel]

As a Moderator, Shouldn't you give a shit about reports?

I think thats the point the staff was making - like all the complaints, but moderation/admin is only doing their job?

[LordRahl2]

I think thats the point the staff was making - like all the complaints, but moderation/admin is only doing their job?

 

Not every report is valid.  Nor do number of reports signify a valid complaint

[Aksel]

Not every report is valid.  Nor do number of reports signify a valid complaint

Meh. I've been reported and have active points on my account...I didn't complain.

 

People could just deal with their violations and man up?

 

On one hand theres a thread being like "we need more moderation" and then next time "over moderation burn the mods!"

[greatkitteh]

 

[*]Allow the forums go from quality posts in Alliance Affairs to the shit posting that has been occurring.

Thanks for the insight.

 

I wouldnt mind that

[Sketchy]

Meh. I've been reported and have active points on my account...I didn't complain.

 

People could just deal with their violations and man up?

 

On one hand theres a thread being like "we need more moderation" and then next time "over moderation burn the mods!"

 

The problem isn't too much or not enough moderation.

 

It's just bad moderation in general. Arbitrary moderating.

 

The rules and guidelines for the different sections are dumb too. Mods enforce the weirdly strict requirements for a thread to not fit into Forum Games & Spam, yet you don't enforce it when Alliance Affairs threads are made that are clearly not announcements, then somehow they are "preserving the quality of alliance affairs".