Moderation: Too much or too little?

[Cave Diver]

I'll post more later and since I started this thread I'll address some of the new concerns then. In the meantime I want to thank everyone for the constructive input thus far. I feel Its been a learning experience for staff and users alike.

 

[Cave Diver]

One of the issues that has come up is the inconsistency of moderation. As an example, a post earlier in this thread was moderated. The reason cited was "attempt to bypass the auto-censor." A less-than-complimentary term for stubborn folks was misspelled - perhaps to bypass the autocensor, or perhaps to "take the edge off" of the term.

The reason I associate this with inconsistency is that a simple seach of SB showed that word, spelled as it had been in this thread, shows up in 69 other threads. I didn't bother to re-do the search to see how many posts.

69 threads where no action is taken, one where it is. I know the line about hitting the report button - but it appears no one was offended in most of the cases.

Inconsistency.

You're correct, there is inconsistency in moderation.

We strive to be on the same page and when there is a major issue, there is generally a discussion about it before an action is taken. That helps make sure there is agreement on the action. When individual mods run across little things on their own, they are likely to just address it and move on. No two mods will handle the same scenario exactly the same, so a comment that one may tolerate, I may not. This is the times that you will probably see the most inconsistencies.

Believe me, I've found this to be a BIG issue at times and it's actually something I bring up from time to time in various staff discussions. Myself and another staff member are in the beginning stages of implementing a plan that I think may help address this and allow for more consistency across the board, but it's going to take time and mine is rather limited at the moment.

In the meanwhile, discussions like this that get feedback from the general user base are important so that we can identify areas that need improvement and look at what works and what doesn't.

 

[Cave Diver]

Reporting them up the line doesn't seem to help matters either!

If you have an issue, you can also report it directly to another staff member. It may not get the response that you're looking for, but at least you would know that it was reviewed.

 

[Rick Murchison]

(1) First of all, a thousand gomens for an error in moderation. "*******" used to be on the auto-censor list but it isn't any more, so my edit was in error. I have restored the post to its original content.
(2) However... as to the question of bypassing the auto-censor on purpose with a clever spelling - that is still verboten. The autocensor is there not only to assist us in being nice to one another, but to protect our younger members, and ourselves from the irate parents of our younger members. If a word you've used just disappears into a ******* line of stars, just leave it, or reconsider how to say what you want to get said in gentler terms. After all, if you really want to insult some coprophagus benthic slug, there's no need to resort to crude language...
(3) Certainly there are inconsistencies in moderation. Scubaboard is positively HUGE and for the vast majority of "modding" the mods depend on other board users to report TOS violations. If it doesn't get reported then it'll only get moderated if a mod stumbles across it AND feels like it should have been reported. In fact, most of the time the mod will stumble across a TOS violation in a thread where he/she's participating and will report rather than moderate the post.
(4) The mods are a pretty level-headed bunch, and for the most part very patient. Their interest is in the health and usefulness of the board. Like any art, moderation doesn't always paint a perfect picture. But we do try
Rick

One of the issues that has come up is the inconsistency of moderation. As an example, a post earlier in this thread was moderated. The reason cited was "attempt to bypass the auto-censor." A less-than-complimentary term for stubborn folks was misspelled - perhaps to bypass the autocensor, or perhaps to "take the edge off" of the term.

The reason I associate this with inconsistency is that a simple seach of SB showed that word, spelled as it had been in this thread, shows up in 69 other threads. I didn't bother to re-do the search to see how many posts.

69 threads where no action is taken, one where it is. I know the line about hitting the report button - but it appears no one was offended in most of the cases.

Inconsistency.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

And without all this attention in this thread, it would just have been another case of bullying a user and threatening them for non-compliance. I would rather see the system fixed than the thousand gomens.

 

[Hockeynut]

My hat is off to them.

Moderators are doing a thankless job you could never get me to do. Course, who the hell would want me to do it?

 

[lowviz]

I would.

 

[Diogenesdemar]

(1) . . . "A**hole" ["moderated" by yours truly] used to be on the auto-censor list but it isn't any more, so my edit was in error. I have restored the post to its original content. . .

So A**hole ["moderated by yours truly] is back on the permissible menu, but the popcorn smiley is verbotten?? I gotta tell you, I'm going to need some kind of scorecard (a daily "approved and non-approved" list perhaps?) to keep up around here. On the other hand, self-parody is an art form.


This is a great example of the problem with "moderation" -- it's always gonna be person specific and subject to change. Eventually, it kind of all seems to wind up far down the rabbit hole . . .

 

[lv2dive]

I agree! ScubaBoard is bigger than any of us. Think about your moderation... Few knew but you that you were even moderated. Also, your moderation did not result in any action against your account. Your reaction to being moderated is pretty typical... Anger (surprise) morphs into analysis which usually resolves into a better understanding. Heck, I'm proabably the most moderated person on ScubaBoard. Personally, I am glad when cooler heads wipe out those words that make this place less friendly. FWIW, Igo through the same process and it helps me to be a better poster. If our perceptions never evolve, we aren't using our capacity for critical thinking.

So... I went to work and had a busy day and just got back. I just don't understand this response to my post. I having been writing this post for like an hour and trying to make the following sound non-argumentative and I can't... I really don't mean it that way, I just don't understand where some of that stuff came from. So I am just posting and letting the chips fly (is that correct figure of speech, even?)

• I don't know that it matters whether anyone knew I was moderated or not? I don't care, clearly, since I mentioned it.
• If that post was even close to being worthy of some "action" against my account, then this isn't where I want to be anyway... I've never done anything before and if something like that was going to get me kicked me off, this is NOT the right place for me... if it wasn't close to being worthy of some "action", why bring it up?
• Where is my reaction to my moderation being derived from? (EG Anger-Analysis-Understanding) I went back and read my post from this morning, and the two emails I sent. I *know* I wasn't angry - confused, yes - but not angry - so why am I getting an attribution for an emotion I wasn't experiencing? I really didn't do a lot of analysis (the analysis had come earlier - when I had written the post that got moderated). Re "better understanding": basically, I just shrugged and said to myself, "ok green zone, tighter rules, think of it as playground where people can hide behind momma's skirts... note to self, stay away from green zones in future." And if that sounds snarky - that is just what was going through my head - BECAUSE - I HAD in fact done analysis BEFORE I posted to begin with. I could go into specifics but I don't want to get in trouble, but I felt like the references in my post had been made - in pretty much the same fashion - earlier in the thread, and I didn't see my post as being any further out of line than those references... [-]still don't[/-]*...but it's a green zone so what I accepted is that there are gray areas in the green zone that I didn't understand so I need to stay away.

Anyway, in the post that prompted this one, my point was that SB is bigger than any one person, and I sincerely believe that MOST of the people on this board respect that. And of course, entities change over time, and if this is the direction in which SB is going, so be it. It's just that it seems like it IS changing, faster than I would expect, which means of course that is related to moderation. And since this thread is ASKING for opinions related to moderation, I am allowed to voice mine While I understand wanting to create a safe place for new people to come and learn and ask questions... taking that too far too quickly will alienate some people who actually took the time to not troll their way through their first weeks and months on the board.

I am having a lot trouble articulating how I feel but the best analogy I can think of is how at some schools give every single kid a ribbon for every event at field day. As a society we are so worried about hurting kid's feelings or making them feel "less than" that we reward mediocrity. That's how I feel about this shift I am perceiving. That might be an extreme example but it just feels like there is such a concern for potentially hurting someone's feelings that everybody is getting ribbons even if they can't manage a single pullup. I mean, really, what's up with the popcorn smiley being gone? Probably not the best analogy but I am trying to be nonspecific.

And now i need to pack bc I'm diving this weekend <G>




NOTE: I know I said I was taking a break, and I am... but I started something here and it only makes sense to finish it. I found it annoying when someone walked away from a thread they started recently, I'm not going to walk from one I'm contributing to, either; specifically, i'm "allowing" myself to continue to comment on this thread bc it's a thread directly related to WHY I'm stepping back.

* someone explained to me in a different way why the post was moderated and there was one reason that I DID understand regardless of the fact that there were some previous posts that had some of the same content. Doesn't solve the "gray area" issue but did help me to not feel like I was just on one end of a "green zone" gray area inconsistency. I sincerely appreciate the long explanation I got from someone, you know who are - that meant a lot.

 

[lowviz]

Nice statement of your confusion Kate. And you are a regular. IMHO, SB needs a green stripe down the left side of Basic Scuba Discussions and New Divers and Those Considering Diving. This community holds those two forums "sacred". Like maybe signal that!!!


Forums "higher" than that are overseen rather well, IMHO.

Imagine the confusion of newbies who don't know any of the regulars and see everything and every forum as one homogeneous mass.

The mods could do a better job of keeping the two green zone "holy forums" homogeneous.


They took away popcorn???

come on, get real.