With all due respect that is exactly what nannies (or in my case mommies) do. They say things like “Of course its ok for you to go bowling/to the movies/to Steve’s house I just want to know what you are doing.”
When I first started on this board there were two basic rules, “Don’t be a jerk” and “Don’t post illegal stuff.” These exchanges violate neither of those two rules so why do the mods need to be informed?
I was plenty courteous in my first request in this thread for an explanation. Oddly, that post went without reply, while the one you describe as “hostile” got your attention like a shot. Perhaps it’s a bit Pavlovian on my part, but based on this admittedly small sample size it appears vinegar and not honey catches the flies.
Not that I felt like my second post to you was all that terribly hostile…
Aw.
I was nothing but courteous to you initially, and only the most sensitive of souls would have taken my second post to you as hostile. Arch, certainly. Annoyed, definitely. But hostile?
As I said, I tend not to bother with exchange threads. Generally though if a rule’s been around for five years I’ve heard of it even if I never frequent threads to which it applies.
Yes, I understand what the rule is. What I don’t understand is why “we want to know what’s going on” translates into “you must clear this with us first.” It’s a supremely silly rule, and it’s a rule that you’ve contradicted here with your own words. Or do you simply not understand what “imprimatur” means? Either the threads require your imprimatur (official sanction, thus permission) or they don’t. You can’t require permission without it involving your imprimatur.
Aren’t Moderators supposed to read the threads that get posted here? Is there some confusion, upon encountering a thread that has the words “Secret Santa” in the title, as to what’s going on?
A Mod posted to the thread in question ten hours after it was created. Clearly, staff knew about it. To pop in two weeks after the fact, closing the thread and then sanctioning a new one was absurd.
I hope someone explains the concept of “more than one member has told me personally that they aren’t going to renew because of Cajun Man’s moderation” to you someday. Although I suppose I’d settle for someone’s explaining the concept of “customer service” to him.
<adjusts tinfoil beanie>
My suspicion is that the shitty modding around here lately is by design. First they add the stupid google ads, then the mods turn into clueless dicks who make “mistakes” in every eight or ten threads. They’re hoping to drive us all away so they can close the boards down and not have to deal any longer with this supposed money pit.
Not one single non-mod in this thread has stated that they were aware of the rule or request or preferred way or whatever it is. I’m not being hostile, but you keep telling us that we’ve seen what we haven’t seen and that we should know what we’ve never been told. Your statements reek of disingenuousness.
So say that Omega Glory emails a mod for permission to organize a Secret Santa thread. Is there any possibility whatsoever that the mod is going to say “no”, considering that Secret Santa is done pretty much every year? And if there’s no possibility that permission will be denied, what is the bleeding point of having to ask for permission?
Check my post #3.
twicks, neither a mod nor a tool of the mods.
Harbourwolf,
If you re read tuba’s response you’ll see she used the word Nanny, I only reused it.
I am not trying to be disrespectful, but damn. We asked for an explanation and have been offered everything but.
As for hypersensitivity it seems to me the mods are the most guilty of this, not us.
This thread began because people wanted some answers to direct questions. All they have been offered, again and again, is non answers.
I don’t care about an admission of wrong doing but do explain to me why an answer is too much to expect. And while you’re at it tell me how it’s disrespectful to press for an answer when none is forthcoming? Because if that amounts to disrespectful, count me as guilty.
The tack the mods have thus far taken is, I agree, an insult the intelligence of the entire community. And a shining example of why people are growing so frustrated and disenchanted with this board.
I don’t see how you can say, “Help us make it better,” and then resent the people who raise issues.
Without splitting hairs, it’s just so we can keep an eye on the situation.
I know it seems harmless, but we try to act in anticipation of future problems. Any type of event where Dopers are giving out their personal information to other Dopers via e-mail is, to put it mildly, at least a potential risk. I realize that we have an online community here, but that’s not saying I’d want every Doper – or even just a random smattering – to come knocking at my door! We’d like to be informed so we can make sure to keep some eyes on the situation and make sure that everyone is safe. Like all online communities, we’re not immune to problems from the outside world; safety is a concern.
Soliciting mailings is also tricky. I don’t want to see the day when our forums are bursting with “send me your postcards!!!” and begging for presents for poor sick little Jimmy at Christmas. I realize that this is a different situation, but I feel a general rule is better – if you’re going to have organized mailings of any kind, check with a moderator or administrator. We just want to make sure it’s safe and appropriate.
I understand that some people are upset about this thread being closed. I think it’s a good idea to have clear rules and obviously some Dopers don’t feel it was clear. We are discussing the situation and, as TubaDiva said, the importance of having one location for the rules and FAQ has been brought up. Please be patient with us as we work on improving this. As has been noted, the thread can be restarted and a link posted to the old thread.
In regards to those who insist on assuming the worst or who are resorting to conspiracy theories – please remember Occam’s Razor. We have a staff of eighteen moderators and administrators trying to work together, managing very different kinds of forums, and trying to keep a semblance of order. Of course we won’t all be perfect and completely identical in how we moderate. Moderating is not an exact science, and we try to moderate based on the spirit of the rules and the community. We will never be perfect, though we struggle to find a good balance between keeping this board well-moderated and letting everyone have their fun. We don’t all always agree, but when concerns come up, we discuss them and try to reach consensus on how we can best handle various situations as they come up. I can’t speak for the whole SDMB staff, but I assume that I do share this sentiment: we work on this staff out of love for this community. I am not here in my first step to take over the world, so for those reasonable souls among you, remember that we are not here to “power trip” or to act like jack-booted thugs. Judgement calls need to be made, and I think that all of you who have been out on other, less moderated forums, can realize that moderation is needed (sometimes even with a strong hand). I know in my few months as a moderator, I have been nothing but extremely impressed with my colleagues and their patience and commitment in the face of near constant criticism.
In any case, I appreciate the people who have come forward and pointed out that they didn’t know the rule and they’d like some clarification. I agree and, again as TubaDiva stated, we’re working on it.
We will if you will.
If you see a Secret Santa thread in early December, and you know that there has been a Secret Santa thread lo these past five holiday periods, why assume that it is anything other than a harmless Secret Santa thread?
And if you do want to check on whether or not anything untoward is going on, then read the fucking thing and you’ll find out that it’s just like all the other Secret Santa threads.
But why the NEED for a new thread? Why can’t the original thread be re-opened and restored? IMHO that’s part of the crux of the matter - sure, admonish the OP for flaunting a supposed ‘rule’ that few people seem to know anything about - but why the hell trash 2 weeks worth of posting just because someone wants to flex their ModMuscle™?
Top 10 “Exchange” Threads Which Are Likely To Be Vetoed:
1: Bodily Fluids Exchange
2: Wanna Swap Bowel Movements?
3: SDMB Avian Diplomacy: International Chicken Exchange
4: 70’s Flashback: The Wife-Swapping Thread
5: Attention Childless Couples: The Rambunctious Toddlers For XBox 360’s Challenge
6: Secret Satan
7: Want A Week Off Work? Let’s Infect Each Other!
8: Used Sex Toys White Elephant
9: Wanna Trade Lunches?
10: Secret Secretions: The Soiled Undergarments Exchange
**fluiddruid **, please correct me if I’m not understanding this. You think that dopers exchanging personal information is a bad thing, but instead of stopping it, you only allow it if the staff hears about it. So, what if something does happen? Your knowing about it makes it safer? You could go to the police and say, “Yep, I knew they were exchanging personal information. They all told me they were doing it.” Personally, I would much rather point to a clearly established rule that states this sort of thing is not endorsed, encouraged, or approved of by the Chicago Reader, SDMB, etc., but such threads are permitted.
Having the administration feel (and state) that they are responsible for my personal well-being seems to increase the liability of the Reader, rather than diminish it.
Obviously, I’m not a lawyer, so I’m probably missing something basic here. Anybody want to clear it up for me?
I wouldn’t state at all that we are responsible for your well being. These things have a way of affecting the board, though. We want to make sure that there’s a step in the process where someone checks with a moderator or administrator first in case a particular case is excessively risky, as well as making sure it’s appropriate for the 'Dope in other ways (i.e. not spam or abuse of the board). However, if people feel the need to share personal information, we don’t want to be overly draconian (disallowing everything). Forewarned is forearmed, so it’s just a precaution.
This is exactly the problem. You are no longer acting as moderators but as our mommies. Dopers aren’t stupid, they understand the risks associated with giving their address out over the internet. They don’t need the administration of the board holding their hands to make sure they will be ok and its really fucking presumptuous to think that they do. This is the crux of the problem I have with the moderation around here as of late. Its gone way past enforcing the “Don’t be a jerk” rule, the nothing illegal rule and moving inappropiately placed threads.
Now we get threads closed becuase they are “trainwrecks” whatever the heck those are or becuase a thread in GQ has devolved into jokes. How those violate the don’t be a jerk rule and warrant thread closure is beyond me. The Dopers are intelligent adults and can decide for themselves what they want to talk about. If what they choose to talk about makes some other Dopers uncomfortable there is a really easy solution. Have the ones that are uncomfortable not read the threads that make them uncomfortable.
This is a joke. An absolute joke. You have a half dozen long time posters here saying they have never heard of this rule and one (me) specifically asking for an example where it was previously enforced. You have plenty of reasonable posts to answer yet you choose the most hostile one. This whole situation is laughable. You are telling us its a long standing rule when the official rules for the board specifically exempt SD related activities. This rule isn’t written down anywhere and as far as I can tell has never been enforced prior to this.
The moderators need to stop completely going on the defensive and holding onto a position no matter how ridiculous it is. You have a bunch of long time posters saying they have never heard of this rule and the official rules of the board are contrary to your position. You come in here and say “We’ve always asked that whenever someone wanted to do something out of the everyday here involving interaction with other members beyond making posts and running threads, we’d like to be apprised of it in advance.” when its clearly not true. Whatever you think has been done in the past hasn’t and whatever unwritten rule you think exists is vitrually unknown.
There have been many exchanges like the SS that have occured without mod approval. Why in the world do you continue to hold onto the position that they have always required mod approval? Why not just say “While some exchanges have occured and though its not written down anywhere we would appreciate it if you would clear these exchanges with the administration in the future.” At least then we can move on from the nonsense that these threads have always required mod approval and talk about the ridiculousness of the rule.
The fact that the thread was closed in the first place and remains closed is simply indefensible. Dopers are not little monkeys that will do tricks to satisfy arbitrary and capricious moderator demands.
I have an idea! Whenever GingerOfTheNorth and Weirddave plan to host their annual Dope-the-Halls, they should be required to type up a letter of intent on gold-leaf paper (in triplicate!), have TubaDiva, Ed Zotti, and Cecil Himself sign it, then down to Virginia it goes so Bricker can notarize it. The administration will then authorize the thread to be opened, on the condition that TubaDiva receives a full guest list and half the leftover food.
Or, we could just do it every year like we have, with no problems and a lot of fun. You decide. :rolleyes:
Adam
Uh, I really think that a number of other posts were much more hostile than mine. The one that included “fuck off, you dopey bint” for example.
fluiddruid, thank you for your response. I don’t agree with the reasoning, but I appreciate that you took the time to spell it out and your not being a diva about it.
Thanks for the response and clarification; I have a better idea of where you’re coming from now. I don’t agree with it, but what’cha gonna do.
Actually that’s Skinnerian. Well, Herrnsteinian to be more accurate. Meh, nobody cares but geeks like me. Let’s just move on.
Its’ all been said. Bad moderators. Bad. Pass me a tinfoil hat, elfkin477. Either you’re correct or our staff has been abducted by reverse vampires.
At last.
Thank you Fluid Druid.
This thread would not be the ‘train wreck’ it is if the question asked,( Why), had been answered instead of a bunch of “we’re doing our best, Cajun Man’s really a good boy” nonsense.
I can’t say I agree with it, it still seems heavy handed to me, but at least you addressed the issue everyone was pressing you about. At least we now know where you’re coming from.
Don’t like being alluded to as ‘power tripping’? Next time speak to the question asked and save the equivocation and fancy footwork for the dance floor.
:rolleyes:
So basically the reason for this decision is blatant nannyism. That’s all well and good of course, except for the fact TubaDiva specifically said that the mods don’t want to be our nannies.
Yet the justification for this “rule” amounts to a reason that basically boils down to nannyism.
And even if it is nannyism, I’m not even a moderator here, but I read these forums every day. I knew about the Secret Santa thread the moment it was posted. 3-4 times per day I scroll through the first two pages of all the major forums I enjoy reading (GQ, GD, IMHO, MPSIMs, BBQ Pit.) I’m confident that I’ve seen the title of every thread posted in those forums for any day in which I choose to read these forums. I don’t think it’s too much to expect someone in a moderator position to at least have the same sort of familiarity with the forum. And if the moderators have/had that sort of familiarity with the forums then even your need to be “apprised of the situation” would be satisfied by you know, looking in to the thread. I don’t see why mod pre-notification would matter at all when any good moderator would notice the clearly descriptive title the first time they saw it.
Also, it’s confusing to call something like this, that’s never been posted in the rules or FAQ thread a “rule.” I think if the SDMB’s official position is that mods can basically change or add the rules as they see fit, then I’d like to have that spelled out clearly so I know what I’m getting in to here.
Dear moderators and administrators,
Some four years ago, I met and fell in love with another poster on these boards. Three and a half years ago we were married, just over a year ago we had a son. I now realize that I neglected to get the permission of the moderating staff to do any of these things. Is it too late to get a belated permission slip? I would hate to have to ship my wife back to Canada, I’m rather fond of her and if she leaves I’ll have to do my own dishes again, a chore I detest. I look forward to reading your (hopefully affirmative) response soonest, and will be waiting on pins and needles. I remain,
Respectfully yours,
Weirddave