# Is there any recourse for dubious modding? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [March 4, 2010, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248 "2010-03-04T05:46:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/1 "2010-03-04T05:46:58Z")
I’ve had a continuing problem with a particular mod who demonstrates little or no grasp of what I’ve been trying to explain to him for weeks now (because he kept PMing me over and over about it). It very much seems to me to be the result of poor reading comprehension, for I’ve explained it perhaps a dozen different ways without success. That leads to a broader issue, which is what this OP is all about: Is there any recourse for a poster when a mod demonstrates that he or she is not quite cut out for moderating a particular forum because the topics there seem to be a bit out of his depth? In other words, if they can’t quite grasp an only _slightly_ subtle explication, should they be moderating the most intellectually demanding forum here, GD? The mod in question has demonstrated clear bias against me as a result of his lack of understanding, too. There are few things more irritating than the uneven enforcement of rules such that one poster (myself) is issued a (fully justified) warning for something that another poster gets away with nothing more than a “head’s up”. What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander, but when that’s not the case it will usually bring on dissatisfaction and justified fear of reprisals and unfair judgments in the future. * * * On a separate issue about a separate moderator, I was told I had to post the following here. So here it is: > [@Why does evolutionary psychology get such a bum rap?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-evolutionary-psychology-get-such-a-bum-rap/524521/105): > > ambushed, I realize that you spent a lot of time carefully making sure that all your disparaging adjectives were directed at ideas and not the poster, but your toes are well across the line. Referring to another poster’s line of argument as “infantile” and then explaining what you meant by that remark works. Spending an enormous number of text bytes referring to every aspect of another poster’s ideas, (real or imagined), as infantile and immature and childish is pretty clearly an attack on the poster. I am going to let this slide–once. If it happens again, you will get the Warning you have worked so hard to tiptoe around. > > If you are that desperate to vent, take it to the BBQ Pit. > > [/Moderating] > Last edited by tomndebb; 02-22-2010 at 09:26 AM. By that reasoning, your judgment is that criticizing a poster’s racist views as infantile, immature, and childish is equivalent to calling the poster a racist! I didn’t merely “toe the line”, _let alone_ cross over it – in fact, I explicitly asserted in that post that my opponent was **NOT** “infantile”! And I genuinely apologized for my earlier behavior! If a poster can’t even correctly and accurately and fairly and with perfect justification characterize someone’s _views_ as infantile, immature, and childish – while taking pains to openly note that the poster him- or her-self is **not** infantile, immature, and childish – what other draconian restrictions on intellectual honesty are secretly in your rulebook? One seems to be related to the length of a post! I’ve avoided criticizing mods for the most part because of the fully justified fear of biased treatment in reprisal. I know the mods are human, too, and that they’re volunteers – and I respect them tremendously for their voluntary service. But they also have the power where we do not. Power imbalances always invite abuse. That, too, is human. So I can’t help thinking this complaint will end up hurting me far more than helping me… ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/2 "2010-03-04T05:54:43Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > I’ve had a continuing problem with a particular mod who demonstrates little or no grasp of what I’ve been trying to explain to him for weeks now (because he kept PMing me over and over about it). You know you wrote me first, right? > [@](#): > > Is there any recourse for a poster when a mod demonstrates that he or she is not quite cut out for moderating a particular forum because the topics there seem to be a bit out of his depth? In other words, if they can’t quite grasp an only _slightly_ subtle explication, should they be moderating the most intellectually demanding forum here, GD? You can always ask us - meaning the individual mod or the staff in general - to review or reconsider any decision. You can’t get a mod removed, no. > [@](#): > > The mod in question has demonstrated clear bias against me as a result of his lack of understanding, too. How so? > [@](#): > > What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander, but when that’s not the case it will usually bring on dissatisfaction and justified fear of reprisals and unfair judgments in the future. You received your warning about two weeks ago. You never disputed the warning itself (in fact you acknowledged it ahead of time), but since then you have attacked my reading comprehension and a number of other issues in PMs and in this post. Have you faced any kind of reprisals or punishment? ---
**Author:** ![statsman1982](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e79b87/32.png) [@statsman1982](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/statsman1982)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/3 "2010-03-04T06:15:30Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > I’ve had a continuing problem with a particular mod who demonstrates little or no grasp of what I’ve been trying to explain to him for weeks now (because he kept PMing me over and over about it). It very much seems to me to be the result of poor reading comprehension, for I’ve explained it perhaps a dozen different ways without success. > > That leads to a broader issue, which is what this OP is all about: Is there any recourse for a poster when a mod demonstrates that he or she is not quite cut out for moderating a particular forum because the topics there seem to be a bit out of his depth? In other words, if they can’t quite grasp an only _slightly_ subtle explication, should they be moderating the most intellectually demanding forum here, GD? > > (snip) As some have mentioned in other forums, part of your problem could be your communication style. Not the length of your posts, necessarily, but your tone. Accuse me of poor reading comprehension all you want, but there is a haughtiness and condescension in your writing that is simply off-putting. You may not mean to sound that way, but I and several others have told you that you do. It may not be fair or logical, but the emotions that writing can evoke are not bound by such concepts. Here is what most of us are hearing in the above-quoted excerpt: “If someone can’t understand what I’m saying, even when I try to say it different ways, it _must_ be their problem. I am perfectly clear and coherent in my writing, after all. No one with a brain could fail to understand anything I write.” “While I appreciate the enthusiasm of this cute little moderator [patting the mod on the head], I don’t think he’s quite up to snuff intellectually with the rest of us Great Debators. If he but understood a modicum of our brilliance, he would certainly not rule against me.” I don’t think you intend your posts to come off like that, but, as I said, interpretation sometimes defies logic. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/4 "2010-03-04T06:31:44Z")
[Here is a link to the thread that prompted this discussion.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12132677) [**ambushed** was warned for this post.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12132677#post12132677) It begins as follows: > [@Why does evolutionary psychology get such a bum rap?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-evolutionary-psychology-get-such-a-bum-rap/524521/94): > > So, you somehow imagine _that’s_ a valuable contribution, do you, **orcenio**? That and all the rest of your delightfully simplistic and endearingly naive, sophomoric, far too full-of-yourself for a backwoods community-college student pseudo-pedantry? > > How proud the hill folk must be! Why, you probably still have all your own teeth and everything! And continues in this vein. He hasn’t disputed the warning, but thinks **orcenio** should have been warned for some other posts, including [this one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12044928#post12044928): > [@Why does evolutionary psychology get such a bum rap?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-evolutionary-psychology-get-such-a-bum-rap/524521/93): > > Enough hot air for a sauna. Yeah, you’d fit in well with philosophy majors. [and this one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12133579#post12133579) > [@Why does evolutionary psychology get such a bum rap?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-evolutionary-psychology-get-such-a-bum-rap/524521/97): > > Yep, yours is a simple case of red-faced bluster. Bluster away, pal.Lol, you’re suppose to mix argumentative points and logic within your flaming; otherwise people will only see your hot air. 😉 Those comments are not exactly polite, but I didn’t feel they rose to the level of being personal insults. So I didn’t issue a warning to him and I think that was the correct decision. I did give **orcenio** a note saying he should avoid any other personal remarks and stick to the arguments. (I admit I forgot to do this while I was writing my warning to **ambushed**. I did it in a separate note the following morning.) The rest of the problems **ambushed** has with me come from private messages. ---
**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:** [March 4, 2010, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/5 "2010-03-04T06:44:58Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The rest of the problems **ambushed** has with me come from private messages. I’m not feeling the rant, but, if you were acting as a moderator in those PMs, then their contents are still relevant to this thread. And if you were acting as a poster, then he can Pit you for it. Although, based on what he seems to be mad about now, that would probably backfire quickly. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/6 "2010-03-04T06:48:27Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I’m not feeling the rant, but, if you were acting as a moderator in those PMs, then their contents are still relevant to this thread. I’m not commenting on their relevance. I’m saying it’s up to **ambushed** to decide if we’re going to publicly discuss any of what was said. I’m not going to be the one to make any of the contents public. I don’t think it would be appropriate, and it could make problems for me in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/7 "2010-03-04T07:06:41Z")
Maybe this isn’t intended to be a rehash of any issues between **ambushed** and me. So I’ll reiterate: anyone can ask questions about any moderating decision due to bias or any other reason, and ask that we reconsider anything we’ve done. If a poster feels any given mod is no good, he’s free to say so. There’s no process by which the poster can remove a mod or exclude a mod from commenting on his posts. ---
**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:** [March 4, 2010, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/8 "2010-03-04T07:32:09Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m not commenting on their relevance. I’m saying it’s up to **ambushed** to decide if we’re going to publicly discuss any of what was said. I’m not going to be the one to make any of the contents public. I don’t think it would be appropriate, and it could make problems for me in the future. Kewl. I just misread you. In fact, I probably shouldn’t have said anything. I have a bad habit of feeling the need to respond in this forum when I really don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/9 "2010-03-04T17:26:12Z")
**ambushed** said: > [@](#): > > The mod in question has demonstrated clear bias against me as a result of his lack of understanding, too. There are few things more irritating than the uneven enforcement of rules such that one poster (myself) is issued a (fully justified) warning for something that another poster gets away with nothing more than a “head’s up”. What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander, but when that’s not the case it will usually bring on dissatisfaction and justified fear of reprisals and unfair judgments in the future. Wait, you called **orcenio** a toothless hillbilly, and he called you a philosophy major, and you think it was unfair that you got an official warning and he didn’t? ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/10 "2010-03-04T17:35:15Z")
Well, in all fairness, “philosophy major” is pretty strong stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/11 "2010-03-04T17:40:31Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > Well, in all fairness, “philosophy major” is pretty strong stuff. It does carry with it certain…implications. Implications which **ambushed** is not exactly dispelling. ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/12 "2010-03-04T17:59:12Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > It does carry with it certain…implications. Implications which **ambushed** is not exactly dispelling. Did you just call him stupid? Personal insults in ATMB. _Banned!_ ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/13 "2010-03-04T18:24:20Z")
In the end there is NO recourse when it comes to moderators. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/14 "2010-03-04T18:27:29Z")
Is there any recourse for being insufferably tedious? ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/15 "2010-03-04T22:28:12Z")
My experience differs. If there is a contested moderator action, it does get reviewed and sometimes reversed. It just might take longer than a couple of hours. And you actually have to have a case, not just not like getting called on your bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/16 "2010-03-04T23:04:32Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > My experience differs. If there is a contested moderator action, it does get reviewed and sometimes reversed. > > It just might take longer than a couple of hours. And you actually have to have a case, not just not like getting called on your bullshit. There’s no recourse for consistently shitty moderation. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2010, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/17 "2010-03-04T23:23:02Z")
If the moderation around here is consistently shitty, why do you stick around? ---
**Author:** ![ivn1188](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e480ec/32.png) [@ivn1188](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivn1188)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/18 "2010-03-05T03:40:40Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > In other words, if they can’t quite grasp an only _slightly_ subtle explication, should they be moderating **the most intellectually demanding forum here, GD?** Funniest thing I’ve read all week. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/19 "2010-03-05T05:50:39Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > By that reasoning, your judgment is that criticizing a poster’s racist views as infantile, immature, and childish is equivalent to calling the poster a racist! Piffle. Noting that a comment appears to be racist or even noting that a post appeared to be infantile falls within the realm of attacking the post, not the poster. Go back and read the post to which I responded. You did not merely make a comment and then explain it, you went on, at length, across multiple paragraphs, repeatedly making derogatory comments throughout your post. ---
**Author:** ![statsman1982](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e79b87/32.png) [@statsman1982](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/statsman1982)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/20 "2010-03-05T06:05:00Z")
> [@ivn1188](#): > > Funniest thing I’ve read all week. I prefer dick jokes. Much more sophisticated. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248.md?page=2)