This has nothing whatever to do with Euthanasiast’s thread or behavior, and is entirely inappropriate.
Fenris and Bricker and clairobscur have raised what most would consider legitimate points. You are doing yourself and the boards a disservice by dismissing it with “they all hate me”.
Regards,
Shodan
and also don’t be surprised, when you pull these rules out in a thread that the mod/admin is involved with on a personal level and end up suspending a member, that people don’t believe or accept your after the fact justifications.
I don’t hate you. I don’t hate any of the staff, actually. Threats are way over the top, IMO, and no, you shouldn’t have to put up with that. But, here’s the thing: I don’t really like you all that much. It’s not really personal, except to the extent that your moderating is an extension of your personality and that’s where the real issue lies. Your moderating is capricious, inconsistent and seemingly based on personal motives (i.e., you getting pissed off for swhatever reason). This thread is the result of one such poor decision. As another, let’s take the time you suspended me for “junior modding.” Prior, there was no explicit rule about junior modding and not even any general agreement on what it was. You cite the fact that I was previously warned for it. This is incorrect; not that you’d let facts get in the way of a good suspension or banning. However, I feel I should point out to that the reason I was warned by Dex previously was NOT for “junior modding,” per se. Rather it was form making statements which, when coupled with my apparently inscrutable title, SDSAB, seemed to confuse people into thinking I was speaking as member of the staff. All well and good, and at some level I understood his concern. However, all the links to so-called infractions you sent me were posted well AFTER I allowed the title to lapse–which was on purpose, largely for that very reason. And they were all, with one except, pretty lame and others I showed them to generallyagreed. So, yes, being suspended for an entirely bullshit, made-up reason cheesed me off, I think, with good reason.
This point fails to address the argument I made: that there are scores, if not hundreds, of equally misleading titles which equally paint a group for the actions of an individual, over the years, and this is the first time it’s generated this kind of response.
Yes, that may well be true – but surely you don’t consider me as in this category? You and I haven’t had a huge amount of interaction over the years, but there’s never been any malice between us, in either direction. Nor do I hold any ill will against you now; I think you do a fine job at a thankless task and I greatly admire your willingness to do it. But my general admiration for you and your work here doesn’t insulate you from a critique when it seems to me you’ve made a serious error… and, as I suggested above, this kind of reaction, from me, is extremely rare. I’ve been here since 1999 – how many times have I ever criticized a mod decision in general, or one of yours in particular?
You’re absolutely right, and I don’t quibble with any reaction you had to the abusive language. My feedback here is solely directed at your characterization of the thread title as improper trolling.
I wish you’d take a second and rethink this call, because I believe it to be wrong.
While this was pretty funny, Lynn just said she wasn’t responsible for the banning. Ed was. She also wasn’t particularly rude; she said, “stop trolling”, and Euth told her to fuck off.
I still don’t agree with the suspension, though.
OK, now there is a reason for Lynn to ignore everything else in the thread.
Thanks a ton, Q.E.D.
Regards,
Shodan
No, she didn’t say that. She said Ed thought he should be suspended. This does not imply that he directed her to suspend him. He may have (But, why would he? He has the absolute authority and certainly the capability to ban or suspend someone all on his own; why have a third party do it for him, if that’s what he wanted?), but she didn’t make the point clearly enough to gauge.
Substitute 2001 for 1999 and I’d say exactly the same thing.
I don’t see how anyone was “magically” expected to know anything. There was a clear mod comment and then Euth told everyone to fuck off. That’s what resulted in suspension. Are you saying that we were magically expected to know that telling a mod to fuck off after a warning was a new rule?
As I have posted before, Ed said
Note: submit to their interpretation. That means they can do anything. We’re stuffed.
Lynn, it is good to see that you are being reasonable and willing to discuss the matter. You are one of the very few staff members of whom I have an opinion as a poster (a good one), and I don’t have any recollection of you as a staff member (for better or worse, but I think good staff is invisible, so I take it as a good sign).
On the title being inflammatory, there is no way you can defend that. If it were (and it isn’t), then there are dozens of other thread equally wrong or worse.
We have a product (the threads) that we want to sell (get views/responses). The title is our only advertising. Most of us craft them to get attention. This means getting most of the question in GQ, being funny in IMHO and being outrageous in the Pit. Details have never stood in the way of shocking headlines.
On some people hating all staff, that might be true. Some others feel the need to put their heads up the ass of all staff. Some like it overall but dislike some members. Some others just hate general attitudes among staff (and the members who often exhibit them).
You are right in not bothering to address those who hate all staff. There is nothing you can do to please them. Similarly, there is no point in hearing those who kiss your butt 24/7.
But then, when the people whose opinions depend on your performance complain about something, it is a good idea to listen. Most complains come from a desire to see this place go forward and worry that bad actions or bad staff members can bring it down. We don’t complain to piss you off, or to one-up you. We complain because we think something can be improved if we talk about it.
If the whole process of putting up with complains is too much of a burden, then by all means step down. You are right that moderation is a shitty, unpaid task. Only people who derive some sense of accomplishment from it should take it. Otherwise it sucks big.
And finally, when in doubt, detach yourselves from potential conflicts of interest. If you thought the title of the thread was trolling, then pass it to someone else (I assume you have something better than just reporting it).
Euthanasiast got screwed over big for nothing. He didn’t intend to troll, and he didn’t break any rules (that existed prior to his actions). Trying to bend it around “Don’t be a jerk” doesn’t cut it. Specially if it wasn’t your first response.
Telling mods to fuck off and calling them cunts is what the Pit is for (even if one disapproves of the level of discourse of either). Suspending someone for doing so pretty much does away with half the purpose of the Pit.
If the new rule is that you need to open a new thread to do it, then fine, that’s the way it is from now on. Make it public and start enforcing it. You cannot make that retroactive.
Well, Ed was the one who announced it - see ATMB thread - so I assume it was his decision and/or action.
Oh, come on. That’s implicit in any moderated board on which the owner reserves the right to kick people off. Heck, it’s implicit on any Web site. Or any business of any kind. What are you expecting, due process rights? You’re playing on someone else’s playground. Yeah, you have to submit to their decisions.
In the pit, yes.
I just can’t get behind this. I see a distinction that is admittedly hard to elucidate between opening a thread to complain about mod actions, which happens regularly, and posting ‘fuck you’ as an immediate response to a mod action. There’s a degree of distance in the former which changes it from outright rejecting mod authority to just complaining about the action.
It usually doesn’t come up because mod actions happen more frequently outside the Pit, so a new thread pretty much has to be made. If it does happen in the Pit, the action is usually followed up with closing the thread in question, so again a new thread has to be made.
This situation in particular is somewhat rare, so we don’t see how it plays out all that often. It’s also natural to post the complaint in the thread in question, because it’s already in the Pit, but then that immediacy and seeming rejection of authority comes into play.
No shit. The board’s been run this way for the last nine years or so. What’s with the sudden fear? It’s not like we’ve woken up to find our board administration suddenly overrun by a dictator and cronies. The dictator’s always been here.
So now he was suspended for not being nice? You cannot be serious.
I agree with this 100%.
Still, it is a bit of a gray area in the rules. I just started an ATMB thread about this.
Now Lute will be suspended for not being serious. I hope you are happy.
No. We have miscommunicated.
We were magically expected to know that a thread title all of a sudden must be 100% factually accurate in all particulars despite that that rule never having existed before (the December one was an out-and-out lie–something like “Bill Clinton Murders Hillary Clinton” and inside there was thread about puppies, IIRC AND it was (IIRC) a multiple repeat offense thing) and there were no prior hints that the mods were going to “try…to tighten up on” this mystery rule.
Shouldn’t they, y’know, tell everyone that this super-secret new policy was in effect before they start throwing around warnings?
He was warned for a rule that wasn’t in effect before he was warned. And that isn’t in effect now (the Bush Memo thread title for example, violates this new rule and there’s a GD one or two that probably do as well) and that won’t be in effect in the future. (And no, I don’t want to see the Bush Memo OP warned. It’s a stupid rule)
His behavior after that is much less defensible (if defensible at all), but it all flows from getting a warning for violating the made-up, super-secret rule.
*And let’s not trot out the “Don’t be a jerk” canard. A provocative (but still relevant) thread title has NEVER been “jerkish” behavior before and I’ll predict in a year, this rule won’t be remembered or enforced again.