Which is exactly what happens when we have to start a thread everytime a mod breaks a posting rule.
And do we even know if Ed reads these threads? Why doesn’t he pop in and say “I acknowledge the complaint.”?
I know this is a misspelling, but I’ve got to say - that’s hilarious
Kinky! No over-sight, but maybe from behind a curtain? On a monitor maybe? With popcorn?
[sub]just lightening the mood[/sub]
[sub]pstt!! Rented mule.[/sub]
What? No! I was told I SOLD myself to the board.
I could have just rented?
Ed doesn’t post here much, but he does check on the board. He also gave us a list of things that we are to notify him about immediately, and one of the things on that list is if a mod does something actionable (meaning that if it were a normal user you’d be warned or noted).
If anyone starts a thread about a mod doing something actionable, Ed will be notified as soon as one of us sees the thread.
What if someone just reports it instead of starting a whole new thread about it?
Nope - gotta start a thread here - here in the ‘As The Moderator Burns’ forum.
You could do both with the same action, if the beer were a Miller Lite.
Just keep in mind discipline never goes down the chain of command. I had an intermediate supervisor who messed up w.r.t. me 3 years ago, but I never knew what my boss said to her, nor did I have any business knowing.
You were content not knowing whether anything had been done regarding their mistake with you?
I can understand not literally calling everyone into their office to hear a bollocking. But if my superior at work had made a mistake that involved me, I’d want to know that it had been handled, how seriously or not seriously it was being taken, and what the actual problem was as far as the company was concerned.
Rebuking a superior (or a mod, in this case) can undermine their authority. But an opaque system undermines it, too.
You are not owed anything and being content is irrelevant. That type of handling both on the board and in the workplace is common and expected. Do you have experience in this area?
I want a pony for Christmas, too.
I’ve never worked for a place which goes into details about any of these things you want.
I don’t think I’ve claimed I’m owed anything. As for being content, certainly it’s relevant; it plays a role in whether you’d want to continue in that job, or at least it does for me. If I wasn’t content in a position, I might seek a new position, or seek to improve the current one.
It depends how specific you’d consider applicable. I’ve been a member at other forums, and a moderator at one, in which it was expected and practiced that mods who broke the posting rules were modded in the same way as regular posters. As far as work, where I currently work there’s a huge long list of various rules and procedures that are to be followed if mistakes or errors from genuine malice are made, and they include specific provision for a wronged party to know details of how complaints have been dealt with. We get an email company-wide every… month, I think it is? It might be fortnightly. Anyway, we get regular emails detailing issues that have occurred recently that needed following up on, what the problem was in the first place, and how seriously the company took the matter. And ways to avoid it in the future for everyone else. It’s also made clear that if we raise an issue that heads up the chain, we’re not only supposed to be kept in the loop on a response to that, but it’s our responsibility to keep at it if we don’t get that.
[QUOTE=TokyoBayer]
I want a pony for Christmas, too.
I’ve never worked for a place which goes into details about any of these things you want.
[/QUOTE]
I’m honestly surprised this isn’t common practice. How do you know that a complaint you might make has been dealt with satisfactorily if you aren’t told how it’s been handled or how seriously it was taken or what the problem was as far as the company goes? Where mistakes or issues get reported, and then just vanish into the ether beyond vague assurances that’s something’s been done about them?
These seem like shitty places to work for, honestly.
If you’ve been sexually harassed or otherwise discriminated against in the workplace, and you report it to the appropriate people, are you content with them saying, “Don’t worry, we’ll take care of it internally?”
WTF? Comparing the complaints about moderation in these threads to illegal sexual harassment is just silly.
My guess is that you work in government, or maybe a union shop. In any case, what you describe is certainly unusual in any private company I’ve seen. There is no special treatment for those who report incidents. Thank you for letting us know, we’ll look into the matter and handle it appropriately. If you want more than that you’d better get used to being disappointed.
Not exactly, but I’ve dealt with these complaints before. We communicate that there is an ongoing investigation and the matter will be handled appropriately. We advise if they experience any retaliatory action that they should inform. That’s it. They may be involved in the investigation to the extent they would answer questions or be interviewed, but in no way would the results ever be made public. If the person is disciplined up to and including termination, there will never be a reason stated. Ever.
No, and no; it’s a private company. I do work in the UK; perhaps it’s a culture thing, who knows, though the company I work for has a worldwide hand. But I certainly wouldn’t describe how it works where I am as “special treatment”. Just sensible treatment, something which benefits all parties concerned and the company itself. The person who makes the error benefits from knowing exactly what the problem made was, and how seriously the company takes the matter. The people affected by the mistake within the company likewise know a mistake was made and how serious it’s been taken, as well as understand how the mistake could have come about. If people are affected by the mistake outside the company, likewise, they can be soothed by the knowledge not only that the company thinks it’s important to do better, but also simply in that there are policies in place to address the inevitable mistakes that every company will make at some point. And the company itself benefits by making it clear what’s tolerated and what’s not, to what extent, and making clear exactly what the rules are for any future problems.
Compare to an opaque process. People have no reason to believe complaints will be actioned on, so why make them? If there’s the potential for a mistake, they don’t know that the results may be dire, so why care about a fuckup? If the mistake is potentially common, how is information to avoid it spread? If people outside the company see the mistake, why would they continue to patronise when there’s the appearance of disinterest? All of which adds together to mean more potential for problems, a dissatisfied and unhelpful workforce, and turned-off customers.
This isn’t a case of strange, special treatment, going above and beyond the call of duty because you love your employees so much. It’s the simplest business sense. You can - and, I have little doubt, companies do - make a purely practical case for it.
That said, we’re getting a little far from the OP here. Suffice it to say, an non-opaque process is better in a lot of ways, not because it’s something we’re “owed”, not because it’d be nice, not because it’s something we should expect, but because it works better to solve problems and avoid future ones.
Ahh, UK. Well I’m not familiar with how any company operates in the UK so there’s that. You describe potential benefits, but not the costs. If the process and actions taken are transparent, then it opens up for criticism or complaint about how it was done, which could perpetuate the cycle. In addition, if a company discloses disciplinary action for say, something embarrassing, then they open themselves up to charges of slander or libel, or even defamation. Suffice to say the level of transparency you describe is not common in US non governmental companies.
As for the board - if it were up to me I’d do the same as has been stated. Describing every detail opens up opportunity to nit pick each and every action which on balance I’d consider a net negative.
We don’t have a transparent process or action here, yet I’m complaining. Complaints aren’t eliminated by hiding the process; to the contrary, there’s the potential for even MORE complaints, because behind the screen anything could be going on.
If a company doesn’t disclose disciplinary action for something embarrassing, then they open themselves up to those same charges by a victim of that embarrassment, or by a customer affected by it. And, by having a process that doesn’t explain what problem occurred, welcomes others to commit the same mistake, and further charges. You’re also assuming that an opaque process can never be breached; just because the company would like something to stay quiet, doesn’t guarantee it. And revealed wrongdoing, or a discovered mistake, is always worse than honesty.
To their detriment, if so.
Why? Let’s assume a situation where we have an open process here, and there are no cogent disagreements, no reasonable complaints, no enlightening questions and answers, just pure and simple mindless nitpickery to no purpose.
What’s the downside of that? The mods could just ignore it. Posters could just ignore it. What’s the negative in your net negative to counterbalance the positive?
It takes away from the purpose of the board which in my mind is discussion about substantive topics. Nitpickery about mod action or inaction isn’t desirable. A board like you describe would be worthless.
The examples thus far aren’t great. I think more of a CSR at a retail shop. Even if they act out, the customer isn’t going to be personally communicated with about the nature and extent of dis ciliary action, if any. It’s between the CSR and their employer, not the person complaining.
Not disclosing does not open up charges of libel, slander, or defamation.