Off topic for a moment, that image has me giggling; it reminds me of Bob Barker in Happy Gilmore: “I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast!”
Just a question from me. Through all of this noise, the one thing I’m curious about is moderator protocol. I don’t recall ever seeing one mod criticize another mod on these boards, which leads me to believe that it is verboten to speak out against a moderator in a public forum. Is this the case? If it’s not written down anywhere, is it implied?
Hashing out things behind the scenes is certainly within your rights (and in most cases makes sense), but I think it strains the bounds of logic and credibility to believe that every mod action has been agreed to by every other member of the mod staff… so when the behind-the-scenes sausage making is done, a unified front is presented… dissenters are silenced, and defense of the mod action begins in earnest by the other mods.
Not a great way to run a railroad, in my opinion. As you say, this is an adult message board. With that, I think it is safe to assume that a mod can make a mistake once in a while… and a correction of that mistake in public would be respected by the TM. Mods, like the rest of us, aren’t perfect. Why pretend to be?
And honestly, I’m not that fussed either way about avatars, I kind of like them, but if TPTB here just plain don’t want them, fine, say so. It’s not the issue itself, it’s the way that this whole thing has been utterly mishandled that has escalated it to its current proportions, because one mod made a dreadful call and the others refuse to admit it. If I could be arsed I’d insert an analogy here.
That’s simply not true. Yes, we try to hash out things behind the scenes for a number of reasons. One of them is: some people here NEVER EVER let go, and public disagreement amongst mods would only fuel those fires. We have disagreed, we have convinced a mod to reverse a decision. Public defense of mod action is usually (like in this case) when we’re unanimous… which, frankly, happens WAY more often than not.
Summary: we discuss behind the scenes to be able to reach consensus. Once we’ve reached consensus, we do not challenge it. We have had several occasions in the past of a mod saying, “I didn’t agree with that decision, but once there’s been thorough mod discussion and the decision is made (by massive majority), there’s no point in wasting time by further arguing.”
I can think of a mod that might fit that description.
Which is disappointing but not too surprising.
Generally speaking I think the moderation of this board is fantastic (intertubally speaking). Some are stellar at what they do, in fact. And I appreciate the time they give of themselves to do it. It’s also too bad that the bad actions of some can reflect badly on the staff as a whole. But at some point, when said moderation becomes a bigger disruption than a help, maybe you should consider board health over a united front.
.
Don’t you think maybe you should, though? This “unanimous” decision led to ten different threads started by eight different posters all stemming from one mod’s behavior in one thread. The mods lost containment on this. Y’all didn’t keep the peace, you started a goddamn riot that metaphorically left four injuries and one suicide. Look around at all the destruction, Dex. Don’t you think it could have been handled better? Maybe it’s time to rethink that “consensus”.
Also, I find it funny that Seven and Soulfrost are two longtime members I can think of who were instabanned without warnings/suspensions for being snarky/insulting/mean/butthurting the mods, but the mods had to agonize for like a month and a half before banning infant-rape advocate Cesario.
So…poster squicks out almost every other person by advocating toddler-rape? Agonizing decision taking like a month and a half of mod-forum shirt-rending (and Cesario was given one or two suspensions and a number of warnings). Someone who’s been here for 12+ years and takes a few forum-inappropriate shots at mods and they get butthurt? Instaban with no warnings. Well done folks. Kudos SDMB staff. Very well placed priorities. :rolleyes:
*Actually, I think Seven had one minor warning for saying “cunt” in the Pit with malice aforethought.
I’m sorry, C. K. Which part is simply not true?
The one part I **did **make a mistake on is that after thinking about it some more, I DO remember a mod decision being reversed. So, my apologies for that. It happens very rarely, but it **does **happen. If this is the part you were referring to, then I agree with you and humbly apologize to you and the rest of the mods.
There is another part of my note that could use some clarification. When I said that “dissenters are silenced”, I was referring to the group of mods, NOT the TM. And you confirmed it by saying:
I wanted to make it clear, however, because you can also read what I said as dissenters from the TM are quickly silenced, which is not always true. For the most part, TPTB **do **permit civil discussion of mod actions, so I wasn’t referring to mods silencing the general board population. Just themselves. Sorry if this was unclear.
Blah blah blah… can we just fast forward to the part where you guys wake the fuck up, fix your mistakes, and somebody else starts a thread to call Czarcasm a “class act”? This is retarded.
This whole thing has the makings of another cuntgate. Feelings are very high, and although I sometimes wonder if the consensus in the mod loop is that ‘if we keep our heads down and keep mainly schutm, it’ll all blow over’, because sometimes that happens, I don’t think this will disipate quickly.
Mods: you are in for the long haul over this, and it’s not going to be pretty. Just a thought: conciliation sometimes works wonders.
Would it not be possible to reinstate SoulFrost and perhaps just suspend him for a while? Then rescind those warnings.
One more clarification (sorry, missed the edit window). Can you address my question of board protocol vis-a-vis mods? Because even if a mod decision is overturned, I do NOT recall an instance where one mod disagreed with another mod in public. For the record, I understand why this rarely, if ever, occurs. But some mod actions are **obviously **wrong. It does seem like the wagons are circled before any discussion of any kind has begun. It would be refreshing to see a mod react to another mod’s actions based on what they’ve read/seen in the threads at the level of regular poster in real time, not after a mod note has been sent out regarding the issue and directing silence until a mod decision is reached.
To be fair, I think it happens more that you might think. Twickster reversed a warning at my request just last week, in fact. It was a reasonable exchange between the two of us, though, on a low-profile thread, so most likely few people noticed it.
On the other hand, for some reason it seems like the more high-profile the situation is, the more likely the entire mod staff will dig their heels in. Not sure why that’s the case.
Just so I’m clear…
…the discussion amongst moderators began, and ended, with unanimous agreement that Czarcasm’s actions were correct?
I really don’t get this. He wanted to be banned. His ATMB post was a condemnation of the entire board. What makes you think he’s going to act any better later on?
Or should the mods let people break the rules if they’re just being really really passionate?
I don’t know that I agree with the mod decisions that have been made lately. I can see why they’ve been made, certainly, but I’m not sure they should have been made. But my God people are losing their shit over this. It’s completely amazing.
We work out our decisions behind the scenes and announce the result and our reasoning. It’s always been that way, and the staff has been serious about it since the Melin meltdown, as long ago as that was. But it’s also practical: if you see two mods arguing about how to handle a situation, how do you know whose instructions you should follow?
No, that would be totally impractical. Most mod decisions are made by one mod and they aren’t discussed by the group because there’s no need for it. Sometimes the mods of a forum will get together and decide how to handle something. We discuss things on on an all-staff level when there’s a controversy or an argument like this one, or when we’re not sure how to handle a given situation.
We can and do admit mistakes and reverse warnings, thread closures and other decisions. Mods criticizing each other in public is a separate issue and probably not a good idea in terms of preserving whatever sanity we still have. It might respected and it might be very entertaining, but I don’t think it’d be very productive.
I can just see it.
Marley23: “I think tomndebb was probably wrong to give you that warning.”
later
tomndebb hands out a warning to a completely different poster.
Marley23 is flooded with PMs and ATMB threads demanding intercession.
Do you guys really want a place where the kids go ask dad for permission when mom’s already said no?
Marley, thanks for the rundown.
And for the record, I agree that mod arguments, discussions, etc. should be handled behind the scenes whenever possible.
SFP
that may hold water if it’s a free board. as a business, do you really want to encourage your staff to make up rules on the fly and piss off your customers because penis ensued?
I do think that **SoulFrost **is a slightly different case. He’s been here since 1999, and hasn’t been in trouble (I believe) before. He lost his rag, and I think a calming down period, as in a suspension, might have been more suitable.
That already happened almost a week ago:
It’s been said in the past, too.
He wanted to be banned. He made that abundantly clear and he acted on it. I appreciate the consideration you’re showing here and I know nobody likes seeing longtime posters banned precipitously, but he made it clear he wanted to be escorted out of here to prove a point. We gave him a chance to step back from the edge and didn’t provoke him, and he didn’t want to take the opportunity. I think we try to be respectful of people who’ve been here a long time, but we’re not obliged to tell people “you don’t really mean that” when they’re committed to being banned because of one injustice or another. I don’t think there’s much else to say about this except to point out you’re showing more concern about SoulFrost’s participation here than he did. Like any banned poster, he can ask for reinstatement if he wants it.