Jump to content

Should cache reviewers also be forum moderators?


tozainamboku

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have the impression that when a thread is started on a cache that was turned down because it was in violation of the guidelines the moderators are very quick to warn about off-topic posts and posts that even mildly imply a reviewer is not doing their job are likely to draw a warning about the forum guidelines.

 

I don't think there is anything nefarious happening. Perhaps is just that reviewers are paying more attention to these threads to get feedback on how they are doing and so those that are also moderators are more likely to see problems that need moderation. Threads that are of less interest to reviewers may just not be getting as much scrutiny. One thing I am learning is that I can get away with more in threads that aren't about reviewers. :(

Posted (edited)

When you are directly involved, you are not as objective as an outside observer.

 

I've always thought the mods should not come from the pool of "usual suspects" the people you expect to see posting. They should be the silent ones who used to lurk but track everthing. Until you asked though I never thought about approvers being mods. You may have a point. They are also involved and not as objective. (You could make the same case for cache owners appealing their cache)

Edited by Renegade Knight
Posted

As a general rule you will find that the reviewer in question will not the the one modding the thread. It is normally another mod handling any issues.

Posted

I've been wondering some similar things myself. On some topics I've seen the mods be very active in the discussion on one side or the other, while they are also moderation the same discussion. This can lead to the opposing side getting more heavily moderated, while the side in agreement get's away with more. It's my opinion that if a mod would like to participate activly in discussion, they should change into their "street Clothes" rather than wearing their moderator uniform.

 

As an example, a moderator who loves micros will be more likely to see violations in the statements of those who hate them as opposed to the other players who love them. I am not placing blame on anyone, as it's human nature to see things this way, they are probabaly not even aware thet this is happening. On the other hand, it could be just the viewpoint of the one getting moderated.

Posted (edited)

Groundspeak trusts its moderators and reviewers to do a good job for the community. The community should too.

If you feel that you are not getting the level of service you should be from the reviewers or forum moderators simply e-mail; reviewers@geocaching.com with your concerns.

This e-mail address is only for reporting concerns regarding Cache reviewers and Forum Moderators.

Happy Geocaching

Edited by Michael
Posted

I honestly think the mods do a good job. My theory is that some of these threads are lower importance and as long as they remain civil, the mods won't intervene much. Other threads are of more interest and so the mods try to keep those threads on the track and will be stricter. So if you know what kind of thread you are in then you'll know where the fence is.

Posted

Groundspeak trusts its moderators and reviewers to do a good job for the community. The community should too.

 

Hmmmm, interesting choice of words.

 

This site DEPENDS on the community to be in business. It's JUST a listing service.

 

I think for the most part the reviewers and moderators do a great job. A thankless one I wouldn't want to do.... but some...... could take a chill pill or at least know when to take a rest and come back with a NEW attitude.

 

However, I'm leary of anyone that tells me I should give blanket trust on their say so.

 

I give my trust on an individual basis and when I lose trust with a reviewer I STOP hiding caches and hosting events. I went over a year without hiding a cache and a little less without hosting an event after being needlessly insulted by a reviewer over a recent change in the guidelines for posting an event. It was just a poor choice of words on the reviewer's part, (he was basically right) but it was totally unnecessary and not the first instance of such behavior. When I lose trust with a mod I become the critic from heck and I don't back down. :)

 

Thankfully, I have been able to patch up the relationships I have with the mods and reviewers I've dusted it up with, but only when mutual respect is given. Geocaching is not worth getting stressed over.

 

I'll keep my own counsel on who to trust. Thanks for the suggestion though. :)

Posted

Groundspeak trusts its moderators and reviewers to do a good job for the community. The community should too.

 

Hmmmm, interesting choice of words.

 

This site DEPENDS on the community to be in business. It's JUST a listing service.

 

I think for the most part the reviewers and moderators do a great job. A thankless one I wouldn't want to do.... but some...... could take a chill pill or at least know when to take a rest and come back with a NEW attitude.

 

However, I'm leary of anyone that tells me I should give blanket trust on their say so.

 

I give my trust on an individual basis and when I lose trust with a reviewer I STOP hiding caches and hosting events. I went over a year without hiding a cache and a little less without hosting an event after being needlessly insulted by a reviewer over a recent change in the guidelines for posting an event. It was just a poor choice of words on the reviewer's part, (he was basically right) but it was totally unnecessary and not the first instance of such behavior. When I lose trust with a mod I become the critic from heck and I don't back down. :)

 

Thankfully, I have been able to patch up the relationships I have with the mods and reviewers I've dusted it up with, but only when mutual respect is given. Geocaching is not worth getting stressed over.

 

I'll keep my own counsel on who to trust. Thanks for the suggestion though. :)

I guess my sceptism comes from a similar experience, where the topic of a statement I made was misunderstood.

Posted
I guess my sceptism comes from a similar experience, where the topic of a statement I made was misunderstood.
If there is a wrong way to take something someone will find it. One thing I have learned from these forums is that getting people to understand exactly what you mean is an art.
Posted
I guess my sceptism comes from a similar experience, where the topic of a statement I made was misunderstood.
If there is a wrong way to take something someone will find it. One thing I have learned from these forums is that getting people to understand exactly what you mean is an art.

Sometimes I wonder if that is on purpose. Some of the things I've said could not possibly be as hard to understand as some make them. Many times I think they just don't agree, and make that out to be misunderstanding.

Posted
I guess my sceptism comes from a similar experience, where the topic of a statement I made was misunderstood.
If there is a wrong way to take something someone will find it. One thing I have learned from these forums is that getting people to understand exactly what you mean is an art.

Sometimes I wonder if that is on purpose. Some of the things I've said could not possibly be as hard to understand as some make them. Many times I think they just don't agree, and make that out to be misunderstanding.

That happens whenever you run into one of these:5197dd78-c228-4794-8e41-e38065b03918.jpg

 

But then all you need is some of this:

a412eeb5-c57b-433c-9228-54601af1166b.jpg

Posted

Seems that a new thread today proves my point. Criticism of reviewers over a guidelines question will get you a warning and your thread lock. Granted there were harsh words that likely deserved the warning. But with the reviewer/moderators piling on and thread being quickly locked (maybe because there were many responses sympathetic to the OP) it looks to me like discussions as to whether the guidelines were properly followed or not are not allowed in the forum. :unsure:

Posted

Seems that a new thread today proves my point. Criticism of reviewers over a guidelines question will get you a warning and your thread lock. Granted there were harsh words that likely deserved the warning. But with the reviewer/moderators piling on and thread being quickly locked (maybe because there were many responses sympathetic to the OP) it looks to me like discussions as to whether the guidelines were properly followed or not are not allowed in the forum. :unsure:

Many people are capable of discussing guideline issues without resorting to name-calling. for examples, look at all the threads that *aren't* closed.

 

Gurk.

 

:blink:

Posted

Seems that a new thread today proves my point. Criticism of reviewers over a guidelines question will get you a warning and your thread lock. Granted there were harsh words that likely deserved the warning. But with the reviewer/moderators piling on and thread being quickly locked (maybe because there were many responses sympathetic to the OP) it looks to me like discussions as to whether the guidelines were properly followed or not are not allowed in the forum. :unsure:

I was disappointed to see that one shut down. :blink: I was hoping to see the OP's concerns addressed; it seems he had a legitimate issue.

Posted

Seems that a new thread today proves my point. Criticism of reviewers over a guidelines question will get you a warning and your thread lock. Granted there were harsh words that likely deserved the warning. But with the reviewer/moderators piling on and thread being quickly locked (maybe because there were many responses sympathetic to the OP) it looks to me like discussions as to whether the guidelines were properly followed or not are not allowed in the forum. :blink:

I was disappointed to see that one shut down. :lol: I was hoping to see the OP's concerns addressed; it seems he had a legitimate issue.

 

Hopefully he'll come back and tell us how it all worked out. :unsure:

Posted

Why not? Every Moderator or Reviewer I'ver ever dealt with has been very respectable and above board. When they stop being that, they stop being Moderators and Reviewers. I've seen that happen a few times in the last 7 years.

 

So personally I do give them a blanket of trust, and I trust TPTB to keep that blanket wrinkle free.

 

El Diablo

Posted
I guess my sceptism comes from a similar experience, where the topic of a statement I made was misunderstood.
If there is a wrong way to take something someone will find it. One thing I have learned from these forums is that getting people to understand exactly what you mean is an art.

Now flip the coin to the otherside. Mods and reviewers are earthlings too. As such, they can make mistakes in wording and attitude the same as anybody else. As pointed out above, if you have a bonafide issue with one of them, the e-mail addressing that issue is the correct way to bring it to somebody else's attention.

 

I for one am glad someone is willing to do this job. It's mostly a thankless job. The gripes and criticisms are generally posted without a minimum of a pat on the back for attempting to do the job in the face of attitude filled people.

 

My experience is if you received attitude, you probably gave it first. Go back and re-read your post to see if it can be taken differently. If it can and it was, then you owe somebody an apology for not making yourself more clear.

Posted

Why not? Every Moderator or Reviewer I'ver ever dealt with has been very respectable and above board. When they stop being that, they stop being Moderators and Reviewers. I've seen that happen a few times in the last 7 years.

 

So personally I do give them a blanket of trust, and I trust TPTB to keep that blanket wrinkle free.El Diablo

 

Well said!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...