In the thread, you posted this mod note on page 3:
Why not just use the multi-quote function and point out the “astonishing” number of posts you think are questionable? To my mind, there were 2 posts* that were out of line, but otherwise the thread was typical of any GD thread. A certain level of snark, yes, but nothing out of the ordinary.
The net result of this blanket modding is that 2 posters broker the rules w/o getting a mod note or a warning, and the rest of us are left as to who these “astonishing” number of out-of-line poster are. That was my reaction to your mod note, and I was a pretty active participant in that thread. I’m eager to hear from other participants to see if my perception is similar to theirs.
Heh–this is almost exactly my reaction as well (although I’m not sure if the “grow up” was the other one that bothered me–I only remember it was Kobal2).
If folks are out of line, a specific call-out is helpful, both for them (so they can see how to mend their ways) and for others (so others can see what’s specifically considered out of line).
I almost wrote this OP myself in response to this specific post of JC’s, but was just too lazy to do so.
*Originally Posted by JC
…
I’m putting an end to it right now. The very next bit of unpleasantness toward any other poster will earn a warning. And the next after that. And the next after that.
I came into that thread with multiple reports. Both sides dinging the other.
So I decided to go with what was essentially a mass mod-note to try to calm things down.
I’m not going to name names here because there was no formal warnings issued. But the number of posts I saw that could earn a ‘calm down, it’s just a thread’ mod note prior to my note is…
Counting.
Carry the nothin’
Add nothin’
With possibly a few of them carrying on after the mod-note.
I’ll confess it doesn’t look as bad to me here as it did last night. Mea culpa. On the other hand, it’s a contentious thread with some emotions running high and putting a note out there not to cross lines is generally a productive thing.
But… How does it help if no one involved know which things you found out of line?
I don’t see anyone disagreeing with your evaluation of the need for a note, in the thread. But there isn’t much take away for those involved if they don’t know what was over the line. Surely you can see that?
I can understand not wanting to name names. Totally.
The question is can you understand that without more input from you there really isn’t ANY take away from this act of moderation for anyone? Surely you understand the posters who most needed a warning are likely to be thinking you didn’t mean them.
Maybe you just didn’t feel like going thru the trouble of issuing warnings late on a Sunday, which I can understand. But I did find the mod note confusing, as I think others might have as well.
Huh. See, I think issuing mod notes (not warnings, mod notes) to specific posters (not general, specific) is a really, really useful tool in the mod toolbox. In this case, for example, I only saw two posts that I thought crossed the line–one from each side, as it happened. I’m not clear which other two posts you think were linecrossers, and it’d be nice to know.
I understand if you don’t want to revisit this incident at this point, but going forward, please consider specific notes, rather than general admonishments.
Is every poster required to read every post before posting? How can a Mod expect to really enforce this:
**Quote:
Originally Posted by JC
The number of posters who have behaved poorly in this thread is astonishing.
I’m putting an end to it right now. The very next bit of unpleasantness toward any other poster will earn a warning. And the next after that. And the next after that.
**
Emphasis added. A very unwise threat, IMO. Going back to that thread I can see at least 3 posters who should have received warnings, if that threat were real.
Heh. I know it gets up some people’s noses when I mention my career, but damn if that line, and the subsequent lack of follow-through, don’t remind me of some of my less stellar on-the-job moments :).
it must suck to be a moderator here. bunch of posters who think their shit doesn’t stink, demanding explanations any time a moderator glances in their general direction.
As for the ‘how can people be responsible for reading every post to look for notes’ thing? I honestly don’t see a means by which to avoid such things. Using that line it would be impossible to use notes at all because a basic ‘I didn’t see it’ would be a get out of jail free card. Down that path lies madness.
But really, all most mod notes do it reinforce what should already be self-evident. They tend to be a reminder of the rules without resorting to actual sanctions. It’s not like a mod note can say, “Everyone from this point on my start each post with ‘Hail the glorious revolution!’” They tend towards the more mundane ‘getting a bit overexcited, here. Let’s get things under control.’ Failure to follow a note is one of the easiest ways to get a warning.
Hah! I had written in that post “not that I want anyone to get a warning for being ‘unpleasant’, whatever that is”, but decided I would delete it. So no, I didn’t get my wish. I don’t think the mods should issue warnings for “being unpleasant”.
Having said that… Of those 3 warnings, I think only elucidator’s post qualifies as the having violated the new, thread specific, “unpleasant” rule. The other two were legit, attack the post not the poster, violations.
Telling someone they are “oblivious to the lives of others” or that they “have serious psychological damage” seem like attacks on the poster to me (especially the latter).
as to who these “astonishing” number of out-of-line poster are. That was my reaction to your mod note, and I was a pretty active participant in that thread. I’m eager to hear from other participants to see if my perception is similar to theirs.