Moderators posting, ethics and site Terms of Service

[The Chairman]

The first rule of being a mod is simple: HAVE FUN!!!

Mods are users first and volunteers second. If they aren't out posting, like an instructor who doesn't dive, they are pretty much worthless. However, like any user, a moderator is open to being moderated. I should know, as I am the most moderated person on ScubaBoard. In fact, if the software would allow it, I am certain that I would be banned from several threads and forums. Unfortunately, the budget to re-write the software to accommodate that or even allow you, the user, to ignore certain mods just isn't there! So, our imperfect staff works with imperfect tools to build the perfect Scuba Community. Somehow, it seems to work for us!

Abuse@ScubaBoard is moderated by me. For the last few days, I have not been able to read it due to traveling and participating in the Baltimore Dive Show. In fact I am typing this while hurtling 80mph down I95 in Ga. Thankfully, Mselenaous is driving!

 

[Scott L]

 

[The Chairman]

My "old" post below was arrogantly ignored, IMHO.

srsly?

You see this as moderator ABUSE?

Perhaps it's arrogant to think that every question you ask should be answered?

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

Stop trying to put words in my 'mouth'. I did not say your post was "inappropriate". It is, however, excruciatingly self-centered and rude.

And since you cannot seem to comprehend the topic, it is about moderators posting as users. They have a right to their opinion.

I thanked them for you. it looks like I quoted the wrong post, but you know what I mean. I was tossing out a couple of thanks on your behalf since you are out today.

 

[RU4SKUBA]

"the budget to re-write the software to accommodate that or even allow you, the user, to ignore certain mods just isn't there!"

Why do you have to re-write the software?

You could simply require moderators to log in to a different username when "off-duty" so they can be ignored like everyone else when making regular posts. Or do you have to put this to a "moderator-only" vote?

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

I moderate on another board--NO I AM NOT ASKING TO BE ONE HERE AND THE ANSWER IS NO IF ASKED and it is the same thing here as there. If I post a thought and challenge someone on something they get all huffy. We don't have the ability do the nifty color change so most of us post in all caps and put as the start of the post--POSTING AS A MODERATOR IN ALL CAPS TO DIFFERENTIATE FROM REGULAR POSTS. People whine about the mods shouting, but it is the only way we can clearly mark our posts as being a mod post as opposed to a regular post.

Someone posted something just tonight and made some really serious acusations against someone. I said, if true that is horrible. Do you have any first hand knowledge of this. Their reply, "people are trying to get interviews with the person in question to find out." So I post back that for now what you have just posted is gossip. Would it not better to get proof first and work behind the scenes to resolve things before going public. The response I got back is that I am too heavy handed and am destroying the group.

Seriously, we have all said things in the heat of the moment or said something stupid and mods help to pull us back. Several times I have been moderated and most of the time in hindsight, I was a little hot headed.

People are generally asked to be mods because of their thoughtful and reasoned posts. It would be a shame to not allow those same people to post.

I would suggest to the staff to consider having mods post under names such as moderator 1, moderator 2 and so forth. The staff will know who is which mod and the same rules should apply that a mod cannot moderate a thread in which they participate. I thin it would remove some of the personal animosity towards the mods.

 

[Jax]

srsly?

You see this as moderator ABUSE?

Perhaps it's arrogant to think that every question you ask should be answered?

I'd thank this post, but . . . . :kiss2:

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

srsly?

You see this as moderator ABUSE?

Perhaps it's arrogant to think that every question you ask should be answered?

Oh, I see, the most moderated member of SB evidently defends the "right" of "his" staff to state that "studies" support their opinion, even when there are no "studies" supporting their opinion, but members who know better asking for links to said "studies" are the ones who are arrogant.

I replied to a moderators post claiming that some members have expressed that some moderators come across as arrogant. I posted an example of a moderator coming across as arrogant, at least in my eyes.

Ethics is one of the words in the title of this thread; I was thinking ethically when I was posting in this thread. Abuse is not in the title of this thread, not in the OP of this thread, not in the first few posts to this thread and is not in the post I quoted for my reply that has so fueled the conversation.

I was simply pointing out what I saw as moderator arrogance.

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

Perhaps he didn't reply back and dropped the argument as you made a better case for you point? Perhaps he didn't feel he needed to have the last word? Or perhaps he just thought, I don't like talking to this guy and walked away. None of us are required to keep posting in a thread once we start. We can leave anytime and don't have to ask for a hall pass to leave. We can just leave for any reason or no reason.

I was engaged in several threads a while back. Got a phone call that a family member died and didn't bother or really feel the need to tell anyone in any of the threads why I ducked out for a while. I didn't feel the need to account for my lack of posts and still don't feel the need. It was no one's business why I took a break. Maybe he had something happen that day and when he came back on the board he just didn't feel he wanted to use him limited time to argue with you.

 

[Jax]

I know that I am most likely still on the ignore list of at least one moderator, because of the title of the PM in my inbox, early in Jan of this year. I did not read the PM 'cause I really don't care.

There have been times in the past where I thought I was already on "that" ignore list, because relevant questions by me were ignored.

I do not use the "ignore" function, although I do ignore most of a number of members and moderators opinions.

I have made ignorant posts and I think I respond fairly well when that ignorance is "proved." Wouldn't it be considered arrogant for a moderator to ignore valid questions about their own ignorant posts?

My "old" post below was arrogantly ignored, IMHO.

I feel that is just one of quite a few negative, ignorant posts with regards to Hawaii diving, and I will continue to correct/challenge them when they happen, even if the author does not see/learn from the corrections/challenges.

Well, this was not the first time I have "had" to challenge/correct SB mods posting Hawaii ignorance as users, nor the last. Sometimes I challenge/correct with kid gloves and sometimes not. The ongoing pattern of ignorant negativism from some does occasionally cause my corrective posts to be confrontational, but this post/reply/question was premeditated to be as nicely worded as I could bring myself to be at the time.

I considered including that the studies of reef fish off Maui actually point to the exact opposite of what the mod was posting; near shore reefs have declining coral coverage and near shore reefs have declining fish numbers, while coral coverage at Molokini is stable and there is no recent study of Molokini fish numbers, probably because the fish population at Molokini is pretty good.

I chose not to include that and I do not feel I would have included that if it were just some SB member.

I did not try to put anything in your mouth. :shocked2:

I posted an example of a moderator posting as a user, where the moderator made a statement "as fact" that is not a fact. I immediately (next post) asked for the supporting data for the moderators statement of fact. This was not an issue of someone's opinion; this was about anyone claiming their opinion was backed up by "studies" when in fact there is no study that backs up that opinion. The only studies actually point to the opposite of the stated opinion.

If the mod posting as a user had replied that there are no links to any studies backing up the opinions but even so the mod's opinions will remain unchanged, I'm relatively sure I would have had further questions or comments.

I did however find the lack of reply, being completely ignored, to be excruciatingly self-centered and rude.

Oh, I see, the most moderated member of SB evidently defends the "right" of "his" staff to state that "studies" support their opinion, even when there are no "studies" supporting their opinion, but members who know better asking for links to said "studies" are the ones who are arrogant.

I replied to a moderators post claiming that some members have expressed that some moderators come across as arrogant. I posted an example of a moderator coming across as arrogant, at least in my eyes.

Ethics is one of the words in the title of this thread; I was thinking ethically when I was posting in this thread. Abuse is not in the title of this thread, not in the OP of this thread, not in the first few posts to this thread and is not in the post I quoted for my reply that has so fueled the conversation.

I was simply pointing out what I saw as moderator arrogance.

Holy schizzle, you really do think it's all about YOU! Obsess, much?

How about you have a mod cut all this to your own thread, and stop hijacking this one?