I’m with this. I would never take “dial it back” to be literal instruction for what someone can and cannot say. Does anyone in real life use it this way? Same if someone told me to “chill the fuck out.” To me, that’s a stronger version of the former. It just means, perhaps you’re over-reacting a bit and if you want to engage in intelligent conversation, I would appreciate it if you would tone down the emotion. But “dial it back” is such that it would never even register to me in conversation as being something offensive or “junior modding” or telling me what I can and cannot say. It just means “keep your emotions in check” to me. And it’s useful when I do get all het up in an argument to be told to “dial it back.”
I agree completely. There are far too many fine lines being drawn on this board: You can say this but not that. X is fine but Y is forbidden and Z is pretty close to Y, so that’s out, too.
We go from general principles (“Don’t be a jerk”) to good advice ("You’re not a moderator, so don’t try to interpret the rules) to hard-and-fast rules (“No junior-modding”) to splitting hairs (“This approaches the neighborhood of junior-modding, so knock it off”).
How about sticking to the big questions, like “Was this person’s comment disruptive? Was he on the verge of being a jerk?”
Both of these explain my thoughts when starting the thread better than I could or did.
What you are alluding to is precisely why I am. I get very close to the line on junior modding, but have only been noted for such once. So I know where the line normally is. And I know that this doesn’t cross it.
The line is usually where you are acting like a moderator, not making an imperative statement to another poster, or saying something a mod normally says. I’ve done both without so much as a peep from a mod–even when they wound up moderating the post I was responding to.
I also know that JC tends to overmoderate, relative to past precedent. It’s been a perennial complaint with his moderation–brought up with his first ATMB thread. I also know from personal experience that ecg does not ordinarily call it junior moderating when a poster gives a direct command to another poster about how he’d prefer they post.
And, as I’ve said before, I hate this moderating direction towards minor nitpicks instead of the entire thrust of the post. I hate this ignorance of context and lack of the principle of charity.
I don’t know about a fine line between permissible and junior modding but this I do know. If someone replies to me and tells me to dial it back I would take it much amiss. My thought would be, who is this guy that he’s issuing instructions to me. I would understand and accede to the instruction from a moderator. But from an ordinary member? No, that is junior modding and, from sheer cussedness, would probably have the exact opposite effect on me that was intended
And in the context of the thread in question, it seemed exactly like a command, and a disproportionate one as well.
As I perceive it, JohnT’s posts weren’t causing problems. I like it that way. He did use the imperative form (which is problematic) in 2 instances. I perceive that the mod note was administered before a problem arose.
I think Junior Modding is mostly a lesser sin. But it opens the door for piss-poor advice administered by non-moderators. I’ve seen that happen. To curb it, we allow friendly notes directed at posts that aren’t currently causing problems.
BigT: With respect and apologetic use of the imperative, question not how you would have modded one post or another. Question not whether the moderators are acting in accordance to some abstract sense of proper or improper modding. Because frankly, much of what they do is guided by practicalities and experience. This case isn’t a bad example.
Best practice? IMHO, think twice before using the imperative on this message board. (I did that above, and decided to use it anyway for the sake of clarity and vividness. I did insert a softener. I intended to indicate that I wasn’t issuing instructions.)