I agree, and also agree that I specifically used unnecessarily snarky language in one of those threads, for which I apologized.
Dex, the advice you just gave–could you make a commitment to trying to follow it yourself in the future? There were a lot of times you moderated in those threads where you were unnecessarily snarky yourself, and I think it made the discussion a lot harder.
So just to be clear, and as regards this particular topic, someone could start a thread in ATMB saying “I believe that Poster X may be receiving better/worse treatment by the mods than everyone else. Here’s some examples I think show that”, and that would be fine where other approaches might not?
Which is just a restatement of Shodan’s question, really, but I’d be interested in seeing a direct answer, if that’s possible.
You can’t if he’s a former mod.
Regards,
Shodan
This statement right here is the same thing as saying you think there are people here who are out to get you. And, like I said in my email to Dex that I assume he CCed to everyone else, the things you think prove that this is the case are often just you taking things too personally or not understanding the reasons people post in ATMB.
People complain in ATMB not to be jerks, but because they disagree with how the board is being moderated, and sometimes greatly. This assumption that people who otherwise function perfectly well on this board are trolling you is just weird.
They have genuine complaints, and you guys often post in ways that piss them off. See my next post.
And it seems like LHoD has made my point for me. I’d even argue that his first moderating action (about the police favoritism post) was not calm and rational. It assumed from the outset that people were trying to use ATMB to pit Czarcasm.
Not that they were just upset about a perceived injustice about how he was moderated, and got overheated, which is what really happened. No, you assumed nefarious intent from the outset.
This is exactly what I’ve said is a bad idea. While it’s possible someone is trolling you in ATMB, it really doesn’t happen all that often. People who aren’t trolls elsewhere on the board aren’t going to suddenly become trolls in ATMB.
If you want things to go calmly and rationally, start with the assumption that people are expressing their genuine concerns. Sure, it may still escalate, but at least you won’t be part of the problem.
Yes, I will certainly try. I believe that I only get snarky when I get provoked, usually (a) after the third or fourth time explaining something, when I get the impression that the other side isn’t listening at all; or (b) when I see rude/insulting behavior going on; or (c) both. However, yes, I will do my best not to respond to snark with snark; however, if the snark crosses the line, I will respond to insult with Warning. Fair enough?
That’s just not so. You CAN as long as you’re polite and reasonable about it. In the recent brouhaha, there was so much of a “pile up on” a form mod, that I stopped it in that particular thread. I certainly did not mean no where, no how. That thread had already gone far into the rant/spittle/outrage area, and I wanted to limit the amount of insult already heaped upon a particular poster.
Again, I think that the point of all our policies (and rules) is to promote reasonable and rational discussions here on every topic imaginable, including criticism of moderator actions. The point at which you don’t want to be reasonable or rational – you want to vent, to froth at the mouth, to hurl invective and opprobrium – that’s the Pit (where we neither expect nor encourage rational discussion.) 
I disagree with this. Sometimes the underlying facts are themselves “insults”.
If your entire point is “so-and-so was reprimanded for being an all-purpose jerk over an extended period of time, while the-other-guy was not reprimanded for being a far bigger jerk over an even longer period”, it would seem that there’s no forum in which this can be communicated, whatever language you use.
HR is about not riling people up unnecessarily. But there are a lot of things that an HR person might have to say that would not be acceptable here. The HR person would do their best to minimize the person’s feelings, but they would communicate what had to be communicated regardless of whether it was ultimately insulting (e.g. “you’re not pulling your weight around here”).
To my knowledge, the rules of these forums are that you can’t insult people outside the Pit, even if done in a “calm and rational” manner. If this is incorrect, it would be worth clarifying.
A) is a real problem, though. There’s some interesting research about how, in a disagreement, people are far likelier to ascribe the disagreement to a character flaw in their opposition (unwillingness to listen, intellectual dishonesty, being a terrible person) than to try to figure out the genuine cause of the disagreement (a failure to communicate or understand effectively, different starting principles, different underlying assumptions). If you’ve explained your view three or four times and others are failing to agree with your view, it’s absolutely possible they’re just not listening; however, it’s also possible that you’ve not explained yourself well, or that you know something they don’t, or that they know something you don’t–or even that you’ve not listened very well to what they’ve said.
If you can be very aware of the cognitive bias toward ascribing bad faith to your opposition, I think that’d help.
With the proviso I suggested earlier, that in threads treading tricky grounds you give folks the benefit of the doubt regarding insults, fair enough.
Then for the third time, can you please explain in what way"there is a Poster X exception to the rule" differs from “the mods do not enforce the rule the same against Poster X” such that the first is insulting and the second polite and reasonable?
Regards,
Shodan
Let me expand on why I proposed this idea in the first place. In no way shape or form do I want to return to the bad old days were every mod decision that somebody disagreed with was pitted. However, what we have now is as system where poster/mod disagreements still bubble over into multiple threads. This kerfluffle has produced something like five different threads now. Two of them were even in the pit.
I’m proposing a release valve. A single sticky, just one permanent thread, so stuff like this doesn’t pollute the rest of the board. Questions about moderation would still go to ATMB. If the discussion gets to heated, which happens, the thread can be locked with instructions to take further comments to the sticky where people can vent their spleen 'till their hearts content.
I do truly believe this will make things in general more peaceful, which is why I am proposing it.
Faulty premise. It is perfectly acceptable to talk about poster behavior that spawned a moderator decision in ATMB. But you have to refrain from attacking the poster, and keep the topic on what the behavior was, not your judgments about the behavior and your opinions about the poster.
One thread for discussing any and every issue the crops up? One ongoing berating thread with no indication what new topics are arising or when a new moderator is getting bashed? Not a very workable solution.
Plenty of threads in ATMB have accused the moderators of being biased without being closed or warnings dropped for insulting the mods.
Post a thread in ATMB that says something like “I believe Mrs Bunny is being biased with respect to moderating her husband Mr Bunny. Here are incidents.”
Don’t start a thread in ATMB saying something like “Mrs Bunny is a lying, two-faced, jack-booted thug who uses her authority to unfairly protect her hubby Mr Bunny, that pussy.”
Most of the problems could have been avoided with a forced “Cool Down” period before a mod is allowed to issue a warning. Maybe make them count to 10 slowly and do a period of deep-breathing exercises. It seems to work with my toddler.
Preach!
You can, and I’m surprised if anybody is confused about this. I’m pretty sure Czarcasm has been Pitted before, and in case that’s not so, I went out of my way to say that Pitting him is fine. You can’t Pit mods over their actions as mods. Why would that apply to someone who retired from moderating almost three years ago? He’s not doing anything as a mod now.
If you insist on using overdramatic language, sure. “Complain recreationally” really isn’t the same as “out to get me.”
Usually, yes. Not always. I appreciate your deep and unshakeable faith in the pure motives of people on the Internet, but I think I’ve been doing this long enough to come to my own conclusions about what people do and why they do it without that conclusion being treated as if it were astonishing or crazy.
It’s still not going to happen.
Of course it’s not. It’s not even going to be discussed, apparently. Certainly not by you. You have made that abundantly clear. You haven’t even said why not. All you say is that “It’s not going to happen”.
Right here:
Sorry if it sounds like I’m stomping on your idea. I’m just trying to be very clear so everybody knows where we stand. I don’t want people to think we’re debating an idea and might change the rules when we’re not.
But see, you’re not discussing the idea. You refuse to discuss anything that might change the status quo. You haven’t actually said why it’s a bad idea. What you say instead is that “ATMB does the job we need it to”. Who’s “we”?
I’m sorry, but that’s just not good enough.
Correct. The status quo isn’t getting changed. I don’t like being harsh about that, but that’s exactly what I want to communicate here.
‘ATMB works fine and this wouldn’t improve it’ is a pretty solid reason, I feel.
I mean from the perspective of the mods and most posters. I realize not every single poster is satisfied, but that’s not a plausible goal. The forum does what it was intended to do, with occasional complications or even absurdity (as is to be expected).
Too bad.
The current system (ATMB) works better than the old one (Pit) did. Your idea would not improve the current system, but would partially regress it to the old one. What’s to discuss?
The fact that the current system spawned five different threads over one minor incident might be a start.
So? That still doesn’t make your idea a good one.