You are correct.
Ninja’d! You must type faster than me. I’m disadvantaged, using only one finger on this mobile device whose manufacturer doesn’t pay me to mention by name. 
I’m the ninja mod. I travel by dark! I am the wind!
Missed edit window: At any rate, thanks to tomndebb for fessing up, and thanks to ITD for confirming it. We now know the rules regarding accusations and circumlocutions about lies.
What the post was addressing isn’t at issue. I know I can’t do what he did, furthermore if someone asked me a question in a thread that was closed and I started a new one just to do that, it may not be looked up in a good light.
So, just to be clear, you’re saying a mod is, effectively, allowed to continue a discussion in a closed thread? Keeping in mind that should the person they were replying to wanted to reply back, they can’t. That is, by definition, ‘getting in the last word’.
We should keep in mind that zombie threads are often closed for the sole reason that posters can’t respond, yet you’re implying (but I’m waiting for clarification) that it’s okay for mods to keep posting in closed threads where posters can’t reply.
Interestingly, I found a thread where he was called out for ‘getting in the last word’ then locking the thread before anyone could reply (something I know other mods of have been called out on as well). I didn’t read through the thread or click on the links so I really don’t have an opinion, but one post of his did catch my attention.
6 years ago and he was already talking about deleting his own posts. :dubious:
Sure, maybe a joke, maybe a sarcastic comment, but the fact that eventually happened makes me think it’s a trick he’s always known he had up his sleeve.
If they aren’t modded in public for poster actions, then Ed is doing a disservice to the mods. He’s making it where the posters have no clue that any moderation happened, and thus will result in another ATMB thread where the posters are mad at the mods for abusing their power, and will treat them poorly. People don’t know they fucked up, and will think they are able to do the same thing without punishment, creating strife when they find out otherwise.
It also is bad management. Ed barely has time for us due to his main job. Which is fine. He should be delegating and rarely have to be involved. But to have to take on the task of moderating even obvious violations that your mods could handle among themselves? That’s just silly.
In short, his decision (assuming we understand it, since he hasn’t responded) is making things worse both for you mods and for himself.
PS, I should probably mention that a good chunk of my days tend to be reading over state codes and dealing with compliance, issues, so sometimes this stuff is just in my head. While I may not always follow all the rules, picking through them, asking TPTB about them and challenging conflicing ones, is sometimes still in my head.
This week I spent upteen hours split between trying to get our health insurance into complance as well getting our I-9 and W4 procedures locked down better. It invovled an ungodly amount of code reading on both the federal and state level. Ya know what it amount to…both nothing and the fact that if I just left everything totally out of code and at status quo, no one would have ever noticed, cared or caught us. He’ll we’re probably more likely to have someone looking at us just because we’ve made some changes.
Of course. They are mods after all. They don’t have to follow the restrictions the rest of us have.
I can’t directly quote from Miller since the thread is closed but here is his exact quote on the matter.
Miller:
You can find the quote on this page second post, which would be post 52, as it is on page two.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=798302&page=2
What about this:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7697048&postcount=11
Sure, Miller can say that there’s no actual rule against editing threads, it’s just that we normal members don’t have the ability to do it. However, CK, back when he was an admin(?) specifically posted a rule that said Moderators 'do not edit posts, except to rectify coding errors or remove unacceptable links". He went on to say that they will delete offensive posts, on request, if they feel it’s warranted, but there’s hardly a precedent for that. From what I’ve seen, offensive posts have always recieved a warning, not been deleted. Deletion has been reserved for really over the top offensive posts. Things like posting porn or a new user posting spam or going way over board of berating another poster, usually incorporating hateful/racist speech. IOW, if this was a ‘regular poster’, I think we all know, regardless of what if it would be given a note, warning or something else, it would not have been deleted.
Just an opinion from the guy who started the thread in question. I don’t think Tom did anything wrong by posting in a closed thread. It’s good that he has finally admitted he was in the wrong. But really, he should have answered a lot sooner.
Adding a post to a closed thread is NOT the same as editing a post after the 5 minute window has expired.
In this case, we were discussing things in the mod loop and we felt that the previous answer (which I posted upthread) wasn’t clear enough. So Tom added the response to the closed thread.
As much as some of you like to believe that we mods are teh evil, Tom didn’t just add a post so that he could get the last word in. We were trying to clarify the issue since it kept coming up.
In any event, there have been many times in the past when a mod has added something to a closed thread for clarity or for some other reason. This isn’t anything new.
Hey, it’s almost as if having discussions in private about mod mistakes led to some kind of bad outcome and assumptions because posters didn’t know that something was going on. How about that.
The “as much as some of you like to believe that we mods are teh evil” was an especially nice touch, suggesting bias and and over-the-top reaction while keeping an air of humour.
“Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.”
If a mod breaks the rules, and receives his Warning from Ed in private, then it looks to the board as if he has got away with it.
Well, it was a direct answer, so thanks.
It seems rather convoluted - a poster starts a thread, discussion continues for several pages, a mod locks the thread and directs us to this thread, the question gets asked again, so the mod goes back to the locked thread, reopens it, adds the clarifying comment, relocks the thread, and no mod mentions it in this thread. As opposed to posting the one word in this thread.
Anyway, kudos to Miller for his retraction and apology. That was well done.
Regards,
Shodan
A suggestion to avoid confusion in the future:
-
If something is being discussed in the mod loop, a mod could post that so we know. Silence is generally not interpreted positively.
-
Don’t close a thread containing an open question that is being discussed in the loop. As one of the people asking that question, it would never have occurred to me to go back and look for the answer after the thread was closed.
Missed the edit window: How about:
We’re discussing this in the mod loop, so I’m going to lock this thread for now. Check back in a couple days for the answer.
There was no ongoing discussion in the mod loop. We thought that the matter was closed. When it came up again in this thread, we had a brief discussion, and as a result Tom added that small clarification.
Discussions in the mod loop are private. I only mentioned it in this case because some folks had a very wrong impression of what Tom did.
Just off topic, but mods can post in a locked thread without going to the trouble of reopening it, then locking it again. They still have a quick reply box available to them, or they can hit the button that says Closed Thread and reply as normal. They just post and hit Submit and it’s as though the lock isn’t there.
Because of a question in another thread, we need an additional clarification from you, Ed.
When mods make posts as members, not in an official capacity, and do something modworthy, can other mods note or warn them for their comments?
I have seen Mods having been given a Note by another.