LBPCentral Archive

Home

Site Stuff

Site Feedback

And what would you have done?

Archive: 18 posts

So, we've all seen how the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread went. Not so great, eh? With a bit of time and some light moderation, it turned into a finger pointing, fist pounding shouting match with no apparent purpose than to see how angry people could get with one another.

"Light moderation"? What do you mean by that, you say. Well, I intentionally left the thread open long, long beyond the point at which it normally would have received moderator intervention. My moderation team is rather convinced I have gone insane by sitting on my hands while the world caught on fire but hey, I was told that the site staff is guilty of over moderating... so I thought I'd try out a bit less. Think of it as an experiment.

The 'A Disturbing Trend' began with a noble intention: To point out that some of the moderation policies around LBPC could use some improvement. Many valid points were made, and as a team (staff and community together) we got down to a simple problem statement and a reasonable ask. And I agreed. Hooray! Problem solved.

And then the thread just kept going. There was no one person who took the thread in the wrong direction or who derailed it. Debating happened, then more debating, then some anger, then a lot of quoting and debating, then some not so nice things. The purpose of the thread had long since been lost, and yet to honor the spirit of the thread I wanted to allow an opportunity for self moderation to occur. It didn't.

So, in the interest of keeping discussions open here at LBPC and not restricting opinions or freedom of speech or anything else, I ask you the community: What would you have done with the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread if you were a moderator? Of course, let's keep the discussion on topic and friendly, or I will be forced to pelt you with rotten apricots.

2013-09-29 07:24:00

Author:
Taffey

Posts: 3187

I think in the context of the thread, "lighter moderation" meant more "lighter unhelpful moderation". As I've said, locking a thread isn't always a bad idea, but it doesn't solve the bigger issue.

I suppose since the thread was aimed at the moderators to begin with: as soon as you guys understood the issue, acknowledged it and said you would (or would not) work on changing how you moderated, then that would've been the end of it. So the thread really didn't need to go on anymore than it did and locking it wasn't a bad choice.

Also, I think if someone disagrees with someone, there is nothing wrong with trying to get your point across as long as you do it impersonally. Meaning: only arguing the points they presented.

Arguing can be respectable if people learn that:

1. People have different experiences and values, so not everyone will see it your way.
2. Getting mad at someone doesn't make them get your point of view...
3. Most of time there is no right or wrong, so try to see how that person's points are valid.
4. It's probably not as serious as you think...

I do commend you guys for following up on this though. I honestly feel a lot of times you let people get away with A LOT. Hopefully now you guys can become the awesome crime-fighting team of super mods who keep people in line and make this site fun for everyone.

2013-09-29 12:47:00

Author:
comishguy67

Posts: 849

Under the same circumstances I would be doing what you're doing with this thread here. But that's not very helpful.

Personally I think the thread was done as soon as you had an answer to these questions.

1) The thing that I perceive as a problem is __________________________ .

2) My suggestion for fixing this problem is __________________________ .

A simple, "We'll see what we can do", to show the issue has been acknowledged and that should be that.
The thread can be left open in case there is more new & relevant information to be added.
However, if it's just people saying the same things over & over again in progressively longer, more snarky posts ultimately leading no where I think it's safe to assume it's time for a lock. Or as a compromise, in the spirit of being less restrictive, problem posts could be removed with a general warning and opportunity to re-word opinions keeping them civil. If that can't be done, the thread gets locked.

Mods are greatly outnumbered, they can't be expected to meticulously sift through every post of every thread individually picking out all the bad needles in the LBPC haystack. When threads start heading downhill as a whole it's reasonable to expect that the thread, as a whole, will be locked.

If what you have to say is so important you absolutely must explain to that person(s) how and why they're wrong, politely of course, there's nothing to stop you sending a PM to them. Otherwise it's probably not that important after all and it doesn't really matter if you don't get a last word in.

2013-09-29 13:19:00

Author:
SR20DETDOG

Posts: 2431

I come from from site like Gamefaq's where there are not really any moderators. If you let topics like that go on and on, they really go nowhere. You will have hundred plus pages of insults and debates that have nothing to do with the original topics, or as the guy above mentioned, just going in a huge circle.

I do have one suggestion, and you already mentioned this. I think a verbal warning from a moderator would be my only recommendation, instead of immediately closing the thread. It can be on the thread so everyone can see it, but that may help topics get back on track coming from a moderator.

I cant speak for everyone, but I spend most of my time in LBP2. But I do like to come here and see the more interesting topics. A lot of the discussions are about things I never really think about, and maybe should.

But thats not to say, I dont see anything wrong with simply closing it either. It was really going nowhere after a while.

2013-09-29 15:43:00

Author:
Rpg Maker

Posts: 877

I would have made the who can post the longest reply competition into a site contest.

2013-09-29 15:54:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

"Light moderation"? What do you mean by that, you say. Well, I intentionally left the thread open long, long beyond the point at which it normally would have received moderator intervention. My moderation team is rather convinced I have gone insane by sitting on my hands while the world caught on fire but hey, I was told that the site staff is guilty of over moderating... so I thought I'd try out a bit less. Think of it as an experiment.
Equating moderation with janitorial duties (deleting/locking) speaks for itself.

If you read what Kala wrote in their opening post it wasn't a call for lighter moderation. From what I read the mods failed both to take an objective stance and to step in earlier. The opposing idea only developed further into the thread.

The purpose of the thread had long since been lost, and yet to honor the spirit of the thread I wanted to allow an opportunity for self moderation to occur. It didn't.
It certainly didn't. Look at the ratio of posts by mods to posts by users, they're practically 1 for 1. The mods were let off their leashes and took every opportunity to **** over users as hard as possible, all the while thanksing each other. It was pretty repulsive to witness.

Most people have zero comprehension that being a leader is a selfless and thankless position, they're unlikely to know the inner workings of the site either, so asking them how to conduct yourselves and how to implement the mandate of the site while a nice gesture is something you must reconcile amongst your own ranks. I wrote about this a while ago, it's something that will only become more apparent as the userbase shrinks.

2013-09-29 16:23:00

Author:
Ayneh

Posts: 2454

First, thanks for making this thread. I wanted to make a new, but was afraid it'd get locked.

So, we've all seen how the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread went. Not so great, eh? With a bit of time and some light moderation, it turned into a finger pointing, fist pounding shouting match with no apparent purpose than to see how angry people could get with one another.

"Light moderation"? What do you mean by that, you say. Well, I intentionally left the thread open long, long beyond the point at which it normally would have received moderator intervention. My moderation team is rather convinced I have gone insane by sitting on my hands while the world caught on fire but hey, I was told that the site staff is guilty of over moderating... so I thought I'd try out a bit less. Think of it as an experiment.

The 'A Disturbing Trend' began with a noble intention: To point out that some of the moderation policies around LBPC could use some improvement. Many valid points were made, and as a team (staff and community together) we got down to a simple problem statement and a reasonable ask. And I agreed. Hooray! Problem solved.

And then the thread just kept going. There was no one person who took the thread in the wrong direction or who derailed it. Debating happened, then more debating, then some anger, then a lot of quoting and debating, then some not so nice things. The purpose of the thread had long since been lost, and yet to honor the spirit of the thread I wanted to allow an opportunity for self moderation to occur. It didn't.

So, in the interest of keeping discussions open here at LBPC and not restricting opinions or freedom of speech or anything else, I ask you the community: What would you have done with the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread if you were a moderator? Of course, let's keep the discussion on topic and friendly, or I will be forced to pelt you with rotten apricots.

That's not quite my version of how things went.

So, we've all seen how the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread went. Not so great, eh? With a bit of time and some light moderation, it turned into a finger pointing, fist pounding shouting match with no apparent purpose than to see how angry people could get with one another.

Even in the last part, we were rather considerate. You can go and read the last page right now, and you'd be hard-pressed to find any instance of rudeness. In the deleted posts...not so much. But I'll get to that later.

"Light moderation"? What do you mean by that, you say. Well, I intentionally left the thread open long, long beyond the point at which it normally would have received moderator intervention. My moderation team is rather convinced I have gone insane by sitting on my hands while the world caught on fire but hey, I was told that the site staff is guilty of over moderating... so I thought I'd try out a bit less. Think of it as an experiment.

"The world caught on fire" is a bit romantic, isn't it. I still don't believe it was a "bad" thread. Nobody inside the thread save a mod or two complained about our behavior, and if they did, it was for the behavior in a different thread. But thank you for keeping the thread open for so long. Without you we wouldn't have gotten to page five, and had three, count 'em, three new people put in their opinion. Ironically, the last person's opinion, which was loved by the mods, wouldn't have even been put in had the mods had their way.

The 'A Disturbing Trend' began with a noble intention: To point out that some of the moderation policies around LBPC could use some improvement. Many valid points were made, and as a team (staff and community together) we got down to a simple problem statement and a reasonable ask. And I agreed. Hooray! Problem solved.

Well, here's what you said:

A very fair suggestion and one I am willing to entertain. There is quite a bit of discussion on the subject happening in the super-duper-secret underground staff bunker; this will be added to the mix.

I thought that even if you agreed with me, it still might not be implemented if the mods didn't want it, out of consideration for the mods. If I had known that it was going to happen, I'd have thanked you and been on my merry way.

But I didn't know.

And then the thread just kept going. There was no one person who took the thread in the wrong direction or who derailed it. Debating happened, then more debating, then some anger, then a lot of quoting and debating, then some not so nice things. The purpose of the thread had long since been lost, and yet to honor the spirit of the thread I wanted to allow an opportunity for self moderation to occur. It didn't.

Well, then, I thought-if the mods can debate it there, why don't we debate it here?

I know, of course, that you weren't debating, you were discussing. But naturally some of your beliefs contradicted, and I could see what would happen from there. And, though I can see how people would think so, I don't think we got progressively worse and worse. We just debated. Yes, the exchange between fumetsuozo might have been seen as disrespectful, but even so, it wouldn't have lasted. I'd already made up my mind after posting my last post (a deleted one), to never reply to him again over the course of the thread. I knew by then there was no convincing him, or myself, of anything. And, again, the deleted posts, but, again, I'll get to that later.

So, in the interest of keeping discussions open here at LBPC and not restricting opinions or freedom of speech or anything else, I ask you the community: What would you have done with the 'A Disturbing Trend' thread if you were a moderator? Of course, let's keep the discussion on topic and friendly, or I will be forced to pelt you with rotten apricots.

I'd have let it die by itself. I think as long as there is no name-calling or blatant insults, debates are fine. If people got sick of it, then they'd leave, and then the thread will go down the page and disappear. I think people can see that there's no convincing each other themselves. Even if they don't, I'd still let them debate. Nobody is forced to look at the thread. Let people be as redundant and unmoving as they please. It's their choice, and it's not hurting anyone but them.

So in conclusion, thanks. Again, had I known that what I proposed would go into effect, I wouldn't have debated any longer, and the thread would have died naturally on page two or three. But I now see that you will, and since I got what I want, and the problem will be fixed, I guess I can say this is a happy ending.

Not completely, though. The matter still remains over the deleted posts, and the refusal of a certain man to take responsibility for what he did. Whether I discuss this out here or in PM's is up to you, Taff-eh.

2013-09-29 16:37:00

Author:
Kalawishis

Posts: 928

I think the topic was handled by the mods fairly fine. Letting the topic go on long as possible until the topic turns into pointless arguments & personal attacks or when the topic just goes into looping nonsense circles of nearly meaningless debates. Better a topic is closed in order to keep a peaceful & clean forum & before members get close to hating each-other I'd say. *mew

2013-09-29 17:24:00

Author:
Lord-Dreamerz

Posts: 4261

I suppose since the thread was aimed at the moderators to begin with: as soon as you guys understood the issue, acknowledged it and said you would (or would not) work on changing how you moderated, then that would've been the end of it. So the thread really didn't need to go on anymore than it did and locking it wasn't a bad choice.

But as you said there was "one person who took the thread in the wrong direction or who derailed it"...Thanks for the response and the to-the-point post, I appreciate it comish.

That is exactly the type of feedback I was looking for. And just a quick point of clarification - I actually said "no one person derailed the thread" - just a simple case of misreading/misquote I think.

Under the same circumstances I would be doing what you're doing with this thread here. But that's not very helpful.

Personally I think the thread was done as soon as you had an answer to these questions.Thanks for weighing in SR20, and for the additional suggestions. That definitely helps! 8)

I come from from site like Gamefaq's where there are not really any moderators. If you let topics like that go on and on, they really go nowhere. You will have hundred plus pages of insults and debates that have nothing to do with the original topics, or as the guy above mentioned, just going in a huge circle.

I do have one suggestion, and you already mentioned this. I think a verbal warning from a moderator would be my only recommendation, instead of immediately closing the thread. It can be on the thread so everyone can see it, but that may help topics get back on track coming from a moderator.Yeah, I've spent a number of years on GameFAQs and threads there can certainly get a bit... interesting. I agree with your suggestion and I think we're going to start moving forward with that approach. I'm overdue to revamp the site rules (slightly) and that's on my list. Thanks!

I would have made the who can post the longest reply competition into a site contest.That sounds like an idea for a perfectly valid forum game thread to me. :3

Most people have zero comprehension that being a leader is a selfless and thankless position, they're unlikely to know the inner workings of the site either, so asking them how to conduct yourselves and how to implement the mandate of the site while a nice gesture is something you must reconcile amongst your own ranks.Having a discussion of how the community thinks the staff should conduct themselves is a little more than just a gesture - I also want to make sure the community is aware that I am very much willing to engage in discussions of constructive criticism. Overall you are correct though, thanks.

First, thanks for making this thread. I wanted to make a new, but was afraid it'd get locked.No worries.

More discussion was needed, so I figured it would be most appropriate if I start the new thread. As previously stated, I am absolutely all about addressing how I can do a better job managing LBPC.

That's not quite my version of how things went.That's fine, but that is not the intent of the thread nor is it on-topic. You will notice that I have applied strikeout to your post on everything I am not interested in. I am not doing this to be rude, I am just not interested in the off-subject details of this particular debate, and I'm not about to allow this thread to turn into another debate thread. By all means, start a debate thread in Gen Discussion and have at it! I wholeheartedly encourage it in fact, and I'll even participate in it, but I do not want it to happen here. Fair enough?

I'd have let it die by itself. I think as long as there is no name-calling or blatant insults, debates are fine. If people got sick of it, then they'd leave, and then the thread will go down the page and disappear. I think people can see that there's no convincing each other themselves. Even if they don't, I'd still let them debate. Nobody is forced to look at the thread. Let people be as redundant and unmoving as they please. It's their choice, and it's not hurting anyone but them.

So in conclusion, thanks. Again, had I known that what I proposed would go into effect, I wouldn't have debated any longer, and the thread would have died naturally on page two or three. But I now see that you will, and since I got what I want, and the problem will be fixed, I guess I can say this is a happy ending.Thanks for your thoughts on this. You do have a valid point of "letting the thread die" - a lot of times I do like that approach. I'm not convinced that other thread actually would have died out (I think it was getting worse) but regardless, your opinion is highly valued and certainly is a help.

I think the topic was handled by the mods fairly fine. Letting the topic go on long as possible until the topic turns into pointless arguments & personal attacks or when the topic just goes into looping nonsense circles of nearly meaningless debates. Better a topic is closed in order to keep a peaceful & clean forum & before members get close to hating each-other I'd say. *mewMuch obliged!

2013-09-29 17:55:00

Author:
Taffey

Posts: 3187

Thanks for the response and the to-the-point post, I appreciate it comish.

._. Lord, I swear I can't read. *Goes back to 3rd grade*

2013-09-29 18:55:00

Author:
comishguy67

Posts: 849

Locking it after it derails and PMing all those who felt they had more to add to the discussion, or asking for their overall argument to cancel out flame war.

2013-09-29 22:18:00

Author:
flamingemu

Posts: 1872

I'd like to put my two cents in about this whole situation. The thread probably went on a bit too long and should have been shut down soon after the questions were answered. He made his point, you asked the questions, and after that I think the thread should have been locked. After that point the thread seemed to go nowhere other than pointing out personal grievances that had no business being part of that thread.

Also, some of the attitudes toward current mods are totally unjustified. The harshness of some previous mods made this place no fun at all. The current group is much friendlier, helpful and laid back - which is something this site was sorely missing for some time. I do need to disclose that I'm not completely objective, since jww and I are quite close. However, I'm no longer intimidated to show up here now and then like I was in the past.

2013-09-30 01:54:00

Author:
TheCountessZ

Posts: 537

Just throwing an idea out here.

On another forum I was on they had a 'Serious Discussion' area, a place where the only posts to be made are ones that directly address the topic at hand and/or the (polite) points of other users'.

Through out these recent threads it seems to boil down to Kalawishis wanting to continue actual discussion of the topic, others' finding topic silly, naturally poking some at it and the two polar opposites didn't mix well.*

In this particular case Kalawishis could have re-opened the topic in serious discussion to continue the debate. It would probably be best leave the original thread in tact for the people who still want to make fun of it though. This way both sides get what they want.

I should also point out this is 'Serious Discussion' not 'Serious Discussion of Serious Threads'. Nothing's stopping you seriously discussing how to make the trousers from Wallace & Gromit or how a swallow could carry a coconut 8D

Like I said, just throwing an idea out there. It seemed to work on the other forum so maybe it's worth a try here?
If we don't like it or it doesn't get used it can always be removed.

*I never actually did look at the original hearting your own level thread, the title was enough to know it was going to stir something up

PS, I was just thinking if would be good to have 'contact mod' next to the report post icon. I sometimes forget it even exists down there.

2013-10-01 02:05:00

Author:
SR20DETDOG

Posts: 2431

Following though of SDog's suggestion of a place for the serious talk, perhaps we could have a place for the silly talk? Where all the spam is condensed into a tiny sized can. A Can of Spam, if you will.

...

Ok, I'll shut up.

As for the topic at hand... um... you did good! Yep! The RAWK approves!

2013-10-01 02:19:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Is this a thread about a thread about a thread about a thread...where does it end?

I've been out of the lbpc loop for a while and I'm struggling to see what the issue is under all this mess.

I've had a quick look through the thread in question and I have to agree with Kalawishis on some points. If a sensible thread shows signs of being derailed then only the problem posts should be moderated. Just locking or deleting the thread won't solve anything and usually leads to the OP posting another thread asking "What happened to my thread? Continue discussion here", which in turn leads to a mod saying "Your thread was locked for a reason lol deal with it

" or words to that effect, leading to another locked thread. If the irrelevant posts or spam or whatever were just deleted or edited then the discussion could continue, no? Unfortunately, no. Because in my experience that just leads to more posts asking "where did my post go?", which also often leads to a mod dropping a "no spam, locked!" post.

So surely the best option is to deal with the individual posts that are causing the problems, making sure to actually explain what happened to the post, and why, and to warn others to stay on topic, before allowing the discussion to continue. This seems like common sense to me but in my experience, it rarely happens. Myself and several other members have spent plenty of time voicing our concerns about the moderation on this site but nothing seems to change. Moderation remains inconsistent and confusing. Seemingly random sometimes. It's like comishguy said here:

And looking at the MM picks thread, you guys barely enforce your own rules. There was spam, sarcastic comments and hate up the booty and it took you 10 pages to close it down. Seems to me you guys just pick and choose whatever threads annoy you and deal with them how you want.

And the response from the mods to comishguy just seems ridiculous to me. They eventually seemed to decide that they'd "won the argument" and locked the thread, which happens all too often.

So in answer to the question, I would have removed derailing posts, given warnings, but allowed the discussion to continue in a sensible way. By which I don't mean start arguing with the posters and lock the thread when I get bored.

2013-10-01 12:31:00

Author:
ARD

Posts: 4291

Just throwing an idea out here.

On another forum I was on they had a 'Serious Discussion' area, a place where the only posts to be made are ones that directly address the topic at hand and/or the (polite) points of other users'.Perhaps a subforum under General Discussion? Technically that's what that particular forum is for anyway, but a specified place just for serious and polite debating? I'm not opposed to that if it's something people want.

I would have removed derailing posts, given warnings, but allowed the discussion to continue in a sensible way. By which I don't mean start arguing with the posters and lock the thread when I get bored.ARDEH

I'd hardly say it was a case of "lock the thread when I get bored", unless by "bored" you mean "observing other people arguing fiercely and on multiple subjects completely unrelated to the purpose of the thread"... but I digress.

Thanks for the feedback!

2013-10-01 21:53:00

Author:
Taffey

Posts: 3187

Perhaps a subforum under General Discussion? Technically that's what that particular forum is for anyway, but a specified place just for serious and polite debating? I'm not opposed to that if it's something people want.

I honestly dont see the point in a sub forum. Is it meant to be hidden from the guest? Either way, a forum is a forum and changing the location wouldn't alter the real issue here. The topic was posted in the correct place and believe it or not wasn't a failure, since well look at this topic.

If the community is going to be open to debates--and I think Ayneh has a good point on this one, the rules should be consistent. Generally the mods did a good job, but I did see several messages by the mods that were deleted, and we users do not have that privilege, which kinda gave them an "I am God" factor. But Taffey has already mentioned this.

I thought it was a good topic and lots of great points were made, even if it got lost in the inevitable mumbojumbo that befalls every "debatable" thread on these forums.

Ultimately, if we want to be more open to topics like this, we shouldnt detour from them or fear debates(cough discussions*) in general but rather pursue them in a more ethical way. I dont think I was the only one that learned from the thread.

2013-10-02 03:33:00

Author:
Rpg Maker

Posts: 877

Forcing the original thread creator to a serious subforum while the jokers can stay in the original thread sounds like the wrong way around, IMHO.

2013-10-02 11:50:00

Author:
Rogar

Posts: 2284

LBPCentral Archive Statistics

Posts: 1077139 Threads: 69970 Members: 9661 Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.