The second two only happened after my initial comment here.
This is the “Everyone gets a trophy” style of mod criticism, and I’m not down with it. Note that this whole conversation has been about my initial, pre-warning post.
I was supportive of the good outcome.
And then people came for my original post.
They could have made the shirt quicker, more emphatically, and nearly everyone with any taste and style would have loved how they made it (as the accompanying Pit thread shows).
Are you taking credit for it?
WTF? No, I’m saying it had no bearing on my initial criticism of the mod system.
Okay, so what do you want us to do about it? Forbid new mods to mention that they’re new? There’s no seniority system at play. That’s explicitly part of the rules for moderators. If there’s a disagreement between moderators that can’t be settled by talking it out, we’re supposed to go to Ed about it. None of us have any authority over any of the rest of us. I am, I think, the most senior mod, and I can’t command or correct any other moderator. I can offer advice and the perspective of experience, and some mods - God help them - see that as valuable, but that’s the extent of my influence.
Encourage the newer mods to mod for themselves.
We know who the new mods are. There’s announcement threads and everything. After the first couple months, they shouldn’t have to mention it.
Are you saying there was actually disagreement about this one?
Do you think this wasn’t an open-and-shut case for a warning?
I guess that’s what I’m struggling with - why AG felt there was even a need to consult. It was clearly hate speech, they said so themselves. Why isn’t that an automatic warning? Does tomndebb cast such a long shadow with his “I don’t mod hate speech” crap?
Your advice and perspective is usually very helpful. Sorry to out you like this.
I think there is a variety of reasons why mods will stick to a modnote pending further discussions. I often defer as I feel weird in some cases as a middle-aged white male making decision on misogyny. In this case I often wait for more input from the other mods. And yes, mainly the women mods in those cases.
I also had a tendency to I guess shoot from the hip and have to go back and reverse my moderation. It is kind of funny I get credit for it, but it is almost always because I overreached to start or misread the post.
As to hate speech, I think you see things more clearly than some of us. I’m not always 100% on board with what some posters declare hate speech. I’m often on the fence for some of it. I don’t think I would have declared the OP in question here hate speech without the background of the posters pulling these borderline OPs so frequently.
I absolutely can see that with borderline cases, or where the mod indicates feeling ambiguity, but when a mod makes a modnote that mentions they consider the post to be hate speech (or racism) right then and there, but then does nothing immediate about it, that grates.
I disagree completely with @MrDibble. As a person with experience as a board moderator (elsewhere, not here) and who serves as an admin on Wikipedia, a good mod is cautious at first. This dissatisfaction with a mod taking care at first is just wrong. Aspenglow is doing what she should do. You should not go in “guns blazing” before you’re able to feel things out in a place. That leads to mistakes and bad moderation.
Not everyone knows who is new in each forum. Heck, just a month ago when someone was Pitting a poster I mentioned how that person was a mod, and more than one person didn’t realize that. If folks can’t remember who is or isn’t a mod at all, you definitely can’t assume everyone knows who is new to being a mod in a particular forum or the entire board.
What’s “cautious” about directly calling a post out as bigoted?
By doing what, exactly? If aspenglow sends an email to the modloop asking for advice on an issue, I should… refuse to help?
They… don’t have to mention it? I’m genuinely confused about what you’re looking for, here. I don’t have any control over how any other moderator describes their self. It sounds like your beef here is that aspenglow described herself as a new moderator, and you don’t think she’s “new” any more. Which… fine, but why are you framing this as a disagreement with board policy, and not a disagreement with a specific mod’s word choice?
I am, obviously, speaking in the general, not the specific.
You could just say “You said it was hate speech. I trust that instinct. Warn him”
I said nothing about policy. I have a disagreement with mod culture (which also gets into “circle the wagons” aspects, which I can see are in full force already)
I would greatly prefer mods issue the warnings their initial, publically-declared assessment warrants, then have an open discussion about it here. Rather than the mod Star Chamber system we currently have.
There was a second question after that quoted one, just saying…
I can look at a post and come to a quick conclusion about whether or not it’s bigoted. It doesn’t take any experience as a moderator to do that.
Knowing the best moderator action for that, that takes experience. That’s the sort of thing where you may not know whether the best thing to do is a warning, a topic ban, a suspension of posting privileges, etc. That is where I’d run it by others, especially if that’s not something I’d ever do before. Otherwise, folks will ask why this person only got a slap on the wrist, or why they got such harsh treatment when this was a first time uncharacteristic action for speech that could be interpreted differently.
I’d say the warning should be automatic for hate speech (and racism, and misogyny, and … pick your bigotry), and the other stuff I agree needs discussion.
That’s what this forum is for. Is there some kind of limit on threads here?
Yes, in that you should have as few threads questioning moderator decisions as possible. I don’t want to name names, but there was a moderator who was constantly having their actions questioned over and over again on this board. That’s not a good thing. People weren’t happy. Threads like that should be the last resort, not the norm.
Basically, this is like asking why we need to be careful when driving if we have seatbelts, air bags, and crumple zones. Just because there are ways to mitigate a problem, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try to avoid the problem.
What? No it isn’t.
Which is usually my response when aspenglow has a question about moderating, because she’s really quite good at this.
Maybe I should try yelling at her instead?
Here’s why that will never work: If I’m going to be wrong about something, I’d much rather be wrong in front of a small group of people that I can trust to be respectful, rather than in front of a large group of people, no small percentage of which are unrepentant assholes. Short of outright forbidding private communication between mods, there’s no way you’re going to prevent a moderator reaching out to another moderator and asking, “Am I making the right call here?” when they’re uncertain about a warning.
Okay.
Yeah, I think it wasn’t unreasonable to doublecheck her instinct on that one. When I have someone who claims to be a member of a particular group, and who is making prejudiced statements against that group, I think it’s fair to ask for a second opinion to make sure there’s not some context I’m missing, particularly if I am not a member of that group.
I don’t agree.
For one reason, because they often turn into threads supporting mod decisions. Especially when they’re started by obvious trolls and bigots.
We actually have quite a bit of advising each other in the flag system. It works like a group PM. Anytime we remove the flagger from the flag conversation it is so we can talk among ourselves.
Also there are some mechanics involved. As a modnote is just a post and nothing else, it is extremely easy to edit it or to elevate it to an actual warning. But the way Discourse works, a warning is quite a bit more to undo. In the end, I can’t think of a good example where waiting up to a day to issue a warning matters.
FTR, I’m fine with the ATMB threads. I don’t mind being corrected. I do think a few posters often come across overly aggressive, and yes, MrDibble, you’re one of them. You’re very passionate in your posting. More power to you, but it is hard not to be defensive about it.
To be honest I see @MrDibble 's reaction here as a reason for mods to be less open about their thinking behind their decisions. @Aspenglow was honest about her process she went through making the decision, and is basically being called out (even if it’s not intended to be individually targeted but targeted at “mod culture”) because of how she thought about the issue, with the expectation being she should have been able to act quickly without thinking. If I was in her shoes that would make me inclined to just keep my thought processes to myself in the future. I think we’re being a little silly getting riled up over how a mod thinks through something.
Then you are never going to be happy with my approach to moderation. I much prefer a collegiate approach. That’s my style, and it’s not going to change.
There are many things we take into consideration before taking action, even warnings. Was the poster previously mod-noted for the same type of behavior? Were they given an opportunity to correct that behavior and then chose to disregard the mod note?
You may not accept it, but I do still feel very new here. I am not a Charter Member. I am not intimately acquainted with the board history of every player. Some mods are much better at digging around past histories. Others have longer memories.
I had a vague, general impression of Jim_B, but in a cursory review of prior mod actions, there was nothing that indicated he had been specifically warned to lay off his gay culture garbage. I wasn’t in doubt that it was hate speech, wasn’t in doubt that I felt he should be warned. But my decisions can impact all other moderators in a forum, so I wanted to give them a chance to weigh in before formalizing the discipline. If you find that unreasonable, well, tough.
Thanks to my fellow mods, whose experiences and advice I value greatly, along with their willingness to share it.