# Clarification of "junior modding" **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 3, 2014, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703 "2014-08-03T10:32:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2014, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/21 "2014-08-03T20:45:42Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think the key issue is whether somebody who is not a moderator or representative of the board is invoking official board sanctions. > > In my mind, anyone should be free to write something like _“If you keep posting silly things, I will no longer respond to you.”_ and even _“If you keep posting silly thing, everybody here will make fun of you.”_ which represent their own reactions as fellow posters. But if you write something like _“If you keep posting silly things, the board will ban you.”_ then you’re invoking the administration. As a matter of policy, _IMHO_ members should not be issuing orders, but advice is ok. Again IMHO. So, “I am not a moderator, but such silly posts tend to earn warnings and eventual bannings if they persist,” should be acceptable. A certain amount of intra-member policing is a good thing, though I concede there are disadvantages as well. For example, posting silly things isn’t actually a warnable offense _per se_: the hypothetical advice given in this paragraph is bad. In terms of the functioning of this board, I only see a problem with junior moderating to the extent that it involves an excessive number of cooks or it adds unacceptable levels of confusion. And of course asking for clarification of the OP should be encouraged to the extent that it fights ignorance. That’s what we’re here for. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2014, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/22 "2014-08-03T21:38:16Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > If you got outta bed at 5:30 to post a rule clarification it must be weighing on your mind quite heavily 😃 It was actually 6:30, I’m in eastern time zone because we’re travelling to visit newborn granddaughter, and I’m normally up by then anyhow. 😉 Others: Some useful thoughts, thanks. I accept **Cicero** ’s amended wording; I used “dictating” because it was in the prior. > [@Little Nemo](#): > > In my mind, anyone should be free to write something like “If you keep posting silly things, I will no longer respond to you.” and even “If you keep posting silly thing, everybody here will make fun of you.” which represent their own reactions as fellow posters. But if you write something like “If you keep posting silly things, the board will ban you.” then you’re invoking the administration. I agree. But it’s rarely so clear. The more usual situation is someone saying “That’s a personal insult” or “That’s threadshitting.” Those are “technical” terms (i.e., against the rules), and my point is that should be up to a moderator to decide whether something is an insult (vs merely snarky) or threadshitting (vs a brief tangent.) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/23 "2014-08-03T21:46:09Z")
I think an issue here is that some of us (and I include myself) would rather address a minor problem ourselves rather than call in a moderator to deal with trivia. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2014, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/24 "2014-08-03T21:47:24Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > “Circs” > > Seriously? Junior modding! ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/25 "2014-08-04T00:30:59Z")
The problem I have is that I’ve seen people say someone is threadshitting quite often, and seen mods go ahead and respond in such threads without any indication that the claim should not have been made. Heck, I will do it, since the rule appears to say that not all threadshitting is moderatable. And this rule seems to even say that not all junior modding is moderateable, as sometimes it just comes across as rude. These two overlapping fuzzy lines are why I think handing out Warnings for claims of threadshitting is a bad idea. If the person is insulting in their claim, moderate the insult. If it’s causing a hijack or otherwise harming the thread, Mod Note for that to get it back on track. (And if people don’t comply, Warn for not following mod instructions.) Honestly, I thought that was pretty much how it was done, up until recently. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/26 "2014-08-04T01:30:04Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think an issue here is that some of us (and I include myself) would rather address a minor problem ourselves rather than call in a moderator to deal with trivia. And to some extent, that’s fine. But on tother hand, that’s the whole prob with “junior modding.” Poster b thinks that Poster A has insulted them. Rather than call in a Moderator, Poster B tells Poster A that they’ve broken the rules and been rude. Then Poster A replies even harsher, the original wasn’t an insult, so stuff it. Then Poster B says “Was too” and accuses Poster A of being a jackass. Then Poster A responds in kind. The escalation means that, by the time the moderator does get involved, BOTH A and B have crossed the line, and both get reprimanded. Much, much better to call in the moderator for something trivial, than to wait until it becomes a big mess. We don’t mind dealing with the trivial; we prefer it, to trying to sort of a massive tangled web. > [@Big T](#): > > The problem I have is that I’ve seen people say someone is threadshitting quite often, and seen mods go ahead and respond in such threads without any indication that the claim should not have been made. > > Heck, I will do it, since the rule appears to say that not all threadshitting is moderatable. And this rule seems to even say that not all junior modding is moderateable, as sometimes it just comes across as rude. > > These two overlapping fuzzy lines are why I think handing out Warnings for claims of threadshitting is a bad idea. If the person is insulting in their claim, moderate the insult. If it’s causing a hijack or otherwise harming the thread, Mod Note for that to get it back on track. (And if people don’t comply, Warn for not following mod instructions.) > > Honestly, I thought that was pretty much how it was done, up until recently. And I think it still is done that way, mostly, but there are exceptions. Some tangents or aside aren’t “threadshitting”, and no big deal. Some “junior modding” is absolutely acceptable – e.g., we want people to report Spam, and to note that they have done so (so we don’t sixteen reports of the same spam.) Or suggesting to a newbie that a better forum would be… Etc. Everything is situational, and there are very few absolutes. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/27 "2014-08-04T01:40:16Z")
OK, I’ve edited the definition as follows: > [@](#): > > When someone who is not a moderator asserts that something is a violation of SDMB rules. This usurps the role of moderators, who are the arbiters of rules and posting standards on the SDMB. At one end, “junior modding” is annoying and arrogant; at the other end, it’s a rules violation and warnable offense. (There are forms of “junior modding” that are helpful: reporting spam and posting that you’ve done so, or making helpful suggestions to new posters, for example.) NOTE: If you see what you think is a rules violation, don’t make the judgement call yourself, but click on the REPORT button (little ! in red triangle in upper right of post) and let the mods decide. I’m hoping that helps clarify. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/28 "2014-08-04T01:44:00Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > And to some extent, that’s fine. But on tother hand, that’s the whole prob with “junior modding.” Poster b thinks that Poster A has insulted them. Rather than call in a Moderator, Poster B tells Poster A that they’ve broken the rules and been rude. Then Poster A replies even harsher, the original wasn’t an insult, so stuff it. Then Poster B says “Was too” and accuses Poster A of being a jackass. Then Poster A responds in kind. The escalation means that, by the time the moderator does get involved, BOTH A and B have crossed the line, and both get reprimanded. Frankly sometimes I’m surprised you don’t throw up your hands and say “screw it, you knuckleheads are on your own” and let the board completely melt down. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/29 "2014-08-04T02:48:13Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > Frankly sometimes I’m surprised you don’t throw up your hands and say “screw it, you knuckleheads are on your own” and let the board completely melt down. Now _that_ would be worth the annual subscription to watch. I want the popcorn sales concession! ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/30 "2014-08-04T03:03:00Z")
“When someone who is not a moderator asserts that something is a violation of SDMB rules.” This constitutes a shift in policy in my view. > [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > And to some extent, that’s fine. But on [the] other hand, that’s the whole prob with “junior modding.” Poster b thinks that Poster A has insulted them. Rather than call in a Moderator, Poster B tells Poster A that they’ve broken the rules and been rude. Then Poster A replies even harsher, the original wasn’t an insult, so stuff it… Zoinks, that is a problem. I’d prefer not to deal with the tightening of the policy, but I can certainly live with it. I like this construction: “When someone who is **not** a moderator tries to dictate how another poster should act.” YMMV, and this is the mod’s business anyway. Is there any way of distinguishing between friendly and unfriendly assertions? The next time we have a no-rules weekend in the Pit, I’m opening up a Junior Moderator thread. (“Cease this activity at once. Your posting privileges are being discussed by the Junior Moderators”.) ETA: Ah. I suppose you can state the rules without claiming that somebody is actually breaking the rules. You can even do that politely, though that may be too much to ask at times. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/31 "2014-08-04T18:50:42Z")
“You know you might be a Junior Moderator when …” ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/32 "2014-08-04T20:29:14Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > “When someone who is not a moderator asserts that something is a violation of SDMB rules.” This constitutes a shift in policy in my view. I think it’s just a more concise expression of the policy, and perhaps a narrowing. The prior “dictate how another poster should act” was being read to includes things like, “You really should vote for …” and “If you don’t like that actor, you shouldn’t go to this movie.” > [@](#): > > Is there any way of distinguishing between friendly and unfriendly assertions? Not infallibly, but often. “You’re new here, but you might want to use spoiler tags for that so as not to spoil…” (friendly) vs “Dammit, why the fuck didn’t you use spoiler tags?” (unfriendly.) But obviously, not always. 😉 > [@](#): > > Ah. I suppose you can state the rules without claiming that somebody is actually breaking the rules. You can even do that politely, though that may be too much to ask at times. Yes, absolutely. We rely, to a large extent, on people giving friendly advice (espesh to newbies.) The process of REPORT/wait for mod decision can take a while, no question. Again, this is just clarification because we’ve had several REPORTS in the last few weeks accusing folks of Junior Modding, that seem to have misunderstood entirely what Jr Modding is. We’re not trying to enforce the rules any stricter, we’re trying to cut down on people thinking something is a rules violation (and getting worked up about it) when it ain’t even close. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/33 "2014-08-04T20:41:12Z")
Possible edit: “When someone who is **not** a moderator asserts that [del]something is a violation of[/del] someone is violating SDMB rules.” ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/34 "2014-08-04T23:23:24Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > And, just to be clear, the following has never been considered “junior modding”: > > - Telling someone to act like an adult (This could be an insult, depends on circs, but it’s not junior modding.) > - Suggesting a forum change > - **Noting clear spam (and noting that it was reported)** > > OK? On a few occasions I’ve reported someone’s first post here because it contains a link to another site, and noted it as “reported”. It’s not always clear that the person is a spammer or that the link is spam; today’s reporting by me of same is a clear example, and it turns out that it was harmless. I always feel like I’m playing hall monitor when I do this, and want to make sure I’m not overstepping, if it’s not clearly spam. ---
**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2014, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/35 "2014-08-04T23:51:56Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > Frankly sometimes I’m surprised you don’t throw up your hands and say “screw it, you knuckleheads are on your own” and let the board completely melt down. Really? That what you see as the outcome? There’s a whole big internet out there that gets by just fine without nannying, you should get out more. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2014, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/36 "2014-08-05T00:07:58Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > On a few occasions I’ve reported someone’s first post here because it contains a link to another site, and noted it as “reported”. It’s not always clear that the person is a spammer or that the link is spam; today’s reporting by me of same is a clear example, and it turns out that it was harmless. I always feel like I’m playing hall monitor when I do this, and want to make sure I’m not overstepping, if it’s not clearly spam. Please report anything you perceive as spam. If you’re wrong, we don’t hold a grudge. We just keep going. If you’re correct, then you’re a real help. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2014, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/37 "2014-08-05T00:49:35Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > Frankly sometimes I’m surprised you don’t throw up your hands and say “screw it, you knuckleheads are on your own” and let the board completely melt down. I agree that it would melt down. Usenet shows what happens to discussion groups without moderation. Anybody familiar with blogging knows that moderating comments is an active issue. ([Disemvoweling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disemvoweling) is one way of managing problem commentors.) When John Oliver joked about internet commentators, most knew [exactly what he was talking about](http://www.writenews.com/john-oliver-gives-brilliant-explanation-of-net-neutrality-controversy-60320141). So maybe this post was unnecessary: you probably knew all this. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2014, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/38 "2014-08-05T00:59:27Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > Please report anything you perceive as spam. If you’re wrong, we don’t hold a grudge. We just keep going. If you’re correct, then you’re a real help. To reiterate and back up Sam: you canNOT go wrong reporting a post you find questionable. Don’t worry that you’re reporting too many. If that happens we’ll alert you. There are posters in Great Debates who report several per day and, even if Tom and I don’t act on all of them, there’s no resentment. It’s the best way for us to know when a thread is boiling over and one of us needs to hit them with the hose. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2014, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/39 "2014-08-05T18:07:54Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > To reiterate and back up Sam: you canNOT go wrong reporting a post you find questionable. Don’t worry that you’re reporting too many. If that happens we’ll alert you. . I got an email just the other day telling me I was reporting too many posts. 😕 Back to Jr Modding- In the CS “Peacekeeping” sticky it is noted: _Q: What should I do if I discover inappropriate posts? A: Do not Junior Mod. If someone posts inappropriately, report the post and walk away. Do not start fights. If one starts anyway, do not participate._ I note a lot of pile ons and Jr Modding in those threads. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2014, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703/40 "2014-08-06T15:55:22Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Don’t worry that you’re reporting too many. If that happens we’ll alert you. > [@DrDeth](#): > > I got an email just the other day telling me I was reporting too many posts. 😕 See? The system works. 😃 And don’t you _dare_ report this post! :mad: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-junior-modding/694703.md?page=3)