Hypothectical question

[+Cav Scout]

Just a hypothetical question...

 

What do you think about a thread moderator replying to a thread under their geocaching name other than the moderator name? And this is in a thread they would moderate.

 

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

[Neos2]

If you disregard the forum protocols, they should advise you of the breech.

 

Just because they enter into the discussion doesn't absolve them of their responsibility to moderate the forum.

Just because they moderate the forum doesn't preclude their being able to participate under their caching name.

 

It's not like you would/should say something to "some person on the forum" that you wouldn't say to "some moderator on the forum" after all.

[O-Mega]

Just a hypothetical question...

 

What do you think about a thread moderator replying to a thread under their geocaching name other than the moderator name? And this is in a thread they would moderate.

 

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

As long as you don't violate the forum guidelines, you should be allowed to disagree with anyone, even a mod.

[Keystone]

When I choose to become involved in a thread using my player account, as is my right, then generally I don't act as a moderator in that thread. For me, it is a personal choice to avoid any possible conflict of interest. If a problem arises in the thread where I'm actively involved in the discussion, I use the "report this post" feature just like anyone else, in order to summon another moderator. That's why there are several moderators per forum.

 

This ought not be something to be unduly worried about. If, however, you have a concern about a moderator's actions, you should write an e-mail to the special address for that purpose: appeals at geocaching.com.

[+SeventhSon]

Maybe it would be best if they were always in their street clothes when taking part in a discussion. Ever slow down when a cop is approaching even tho you're not speeding?

[+Totem Clan]

Ever slow down when a cop is approaching even tho you're not speeding?

No, because I never speed so I know I never have to worry about it.

 

The same applies to the Mods. I could care less where they post or what they do, because I'm staying within the guidelines so I don't have carp to worry about.

 

 

 

Plus the bribes I always pay them helps.

Edited May 11, 2008 by Totem Clan

[+StarBrand]

If you disregard the forum protocols, they should advise you of the breech.

 

Just because they enter into the discussion doesn't absolve them of their responsibility to moderate the forum.

Just because they moderate the forum doesn't preclude their being able to participate under their caching name.

 

It's not like you would/should say something to "some person on the forum" that you wouldn't say to "some moderator on the forum" after all.

I fully agree.

[+FireRef]

I agree that it is an obvious conflict of interest, and applaud Keystone for a good decision on how to handle this.

[+ComputerCacheBug]

Maybe it would be best if they were always in their street clothes when taking part in a discussion. Ever slow down when a cop is approaching even tho you're not speeding?

 

I don't slow down even if I am going the usual 5 mph over the limit like I am usually doing. And those that are going the speed limit or even barely and then slow down tick me off and I tend to hit the next lane and speed past them right by the cop. (Speeding past them is doing the 5 over limit). People that slow down when they see a cop are those that arn't aware of their surroundings and are a danger.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

mmm..That's like cleaning up your language in front of your mother.......if you're saying something Mom would slap you for, maybe you ought not to be saying it at all.

[+SeventhSon]

Maybe it would be best if they were always in their street clothes when taking part in a discussion. Ever slow down when a cop is approaching even tho you're not speeding?

 

I don't slow down even if I am going the usual 5 mph over the limit like I am usually doing. And those that are going the speed limit or even barely and then slow down tick me off and I tend to hit the next lane and speed past them right by the cop. (Speeding past them is doing the 5 over limit). People that slow down when they see a cop are those that arn't aware of their surroundings and are a danger.

 

If you aren't aware of your surroundings, you wouldn't see the cop.

[+BlueDeuce]

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

 

heck ya.

[+briansnat]

If I'm involved in a thread in a forum where I'm a moderator, I will recuse myself from any moderation duties in that thread. I believe most, if not all moderators have a similar ethic.

[+TeamGumbo]

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

 

I've never seen anyone get banned for simply replying with a negative comment. It's always much, much more.

[+FireRef]

On that point, I must disagree. I have been banned several times - they always say I was being disrespectful, but based on the way the policies are written (and similar to what I say in my signature line), everything everyone says is offensive in some way to someone. I feel they were trying to influence the discussion by removing members/posters who voice opposition.

 

Some people do nothing other than make jokes about others postings, or argue the opposite of whatever is being posted. (I have been accused of the latter, but I actually do have a theme to my postings). They often continue to post without fail. Others get warned and banned because they point out flaws in the system and argue to have them fixed instead of just accepting the status quo.

[+Tiny Dancer]

On that point, I must disagree. I have been banned several times - they always say I was being disrespectful, but based on the way the policies are written (and similar to what I say in my signature line), everything everyone says is offensive in some way to someone. I feel they were trying to influence the discussion by removing members/posters who voice opposition.

 

Some people do nothing other than make jokes about others postings, or argue the opposite of whatever is being posted. (I have been accused of the latter, but I actually do have a theme to my postings). They often continue to post without fail. Others get warned and banned because they point out flaws in the system and argue to have them fixed instead of just accepting the status quo.

 

I would be willing to bet that there is a level of difference in the two. I would say that the jester is just that, joking and the other is intentionally causing issues and problems. So the Jester is treated that way and the other is getting what they earned due to the way they act in the forums.

 

Or they are just out to get you for no reason what so ever. Perhaps you have never ever done anything to make people suspicious of your actions. Its not like the mods are human and like every one, can get protective of the group they serve. Nahhhhhhh They are just out to get you.

Edited May 12, 2008 by Tiny Dancer

[+Mopar]

On that point, I must disagree. I have been banned several times - they always say I was being disrespectful, but based on the way the policies are written (and similar to what I say in my signature line), everything everyone says is offensive in some way to someone. I feel they were trying to influence the discussion by removing members/posters who voice opposition.

 

Some people do nothing other than make jokes about others postings, or argue the opposite of whatever is being posted. (I have been accused of the latter, but I actually do have a theme to my postings). They often continue to post without fail. Others get warned and banned because they point out flaws in the system and argue to have them fixed instead of just accepting the status quo.

By that logic you will be banned just for posting this, and your post and everything referencing it will be deleted from here and moved to a hard drive at Area 51.

[+joranda]

In a way, he is right. That's all I'm going to say, that way I won't get banned for a week.

[+FireRef]

On that point, I must disagree. I have been banned several times - they always say I was being disrespectful, but based on the way the policies are written (and similar to what I say in my signature line), everything everyone says is offensive in some way to someone. I feel they were trying to influence the discussion by removing members/posters who voice opposition.

 

Some people do nothing other than make jokes about others postings, or argue the opposite of whatever is being posted. (I have been accused of the latter, but I actually do have a theme to my postings). They often continue to post without fail. Others get warned and banned because they point out flaws in the system and argue to have them fixed instead of just accepting the status quo.

By that logic you will be banned just for posting this, and your post and everything referencing it will be deleted from here and moved to a hard drive at Area 51.

 

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

[+Renegade Knight]

Just a hypothetical question...

 

What do you think about a thread moderator replying to a thread under their geocaching name other than the moderator name? And this is in a thread they would moderate.

 

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

First, it's not hypothetical. Forum mods are also allowed to participate. I suspect they are asked to keep their duties separate via the two accounts.

 

In the day of old your host/mc/moderator also had the job of encouraging participation in addition to guiding the forum/event so it went smoothly.

 

My personal opinion is that Mods should be heavy lurkers but not speak so much due to potential personal involvment in topics getting in the way of an even keel.

Edited May 12, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+ReadyOrNot]

On that point, I must disagree. I have been banned several times - they always say I was being disrespectful, but based on the way the policies are written (and similar to what I say in my signature line), everything everyone says is offensive in some way to someone. I feel they were trying to influence the discussion by removing members/posters who voice opposition.

 

Some people do nothing other than make jokes about others postings, or argue the opposite of whatever is being posted. (I have been accused of the latter, but I actually do have a theme to my postings). They often continue to post without fail. Others get warned and banned because they point out flaws in the system and argue to have them fixed instead of just accepting the status quo.

 

Of the times I've been suspended, I pretty much had it coming. The only issue I had is that I didn't know if others that were just as abusive as I received the same punishment. Come to find out that when you are an excessive "troublemaker", the suspensions are more harsh. Would be cool to be able to see ones current "Troublemaker" status though. I often wonder if my profile has a flashing red/blue light at the top when the mods look at it

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Just a hypothetical question...

 

What do you think about a thread moderator replying to a thread under their geocaching name other than the moderator name? And this is in a thread they would moderate.

 

If you reply with with negative comment to their post, is it fair if they can ban you or warn you under their moderator name?

The first scenario would not be a matter of concern for me at all, and I would not attach any importance or signifiance to such a matter at all.

 

As far as the second scenario, it would all depend upon the nature and exact content of the "negative comment" and whether I felt that it deserved a warning. You have, notably,, failed to give us a concrete example of the "negative comment" that may have elicited a warning, and thus we are left swimming in a sea of ambiguity and uncertainty.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

[O-Mega]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

Yes, but there is deleted and made unavailable. I have seen where some pictures I have "deleted" could still be referenced many months later. I wonder if those forum posts could be directly referenced the same way?

[+FireRef]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

 

Probably under extreme circumstances. But if you ask, they will state that is the reason they don't delete anything and they don't allow us to delete anything. Otherwise, they could delete (or we could) duplicate posts instead of having to call them duplicate posts. They make a point of keeping an accurate historical database of the threads.

[Mr.Yuck]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

 

Probably under extreme circumstances. But if you ask, they will state that is the reason they don't delete anything and they don't allow us to delete anything. Otherwise, they could delete (or we could) duplicate posts instead of having to call them duplicate posts. They make a point of keeping an accurate historical database of the threads.

 

An entire thread in the northeast forum (with about 6 or 7 replies) was erased, and moved to the hard drive at area 51 no more than a month ago. So it does happen. I agree it's quite rare though. I mean heck, you can still find Trackinthebox threads if anything should be erased, it would be them.

Edited May 12, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+gof1]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

 

Probably under extreme circumstances. But if you ask, they will state that is the reason they don't delete anything and they don't allow us to delete anything. Otherwise, they could delete (or we could) duplicate posts instead of having to call them duplicate posts. They make a point of keeping an accurate historical database of the threads.

 

An entire thread in the northeast forum (with about 6 or 7 replies) was erased, and moved to the hard drive at area 51 no more than a month ago. So it does happen. I agree it's quite rare though. I mean heck, you can still find Trackinthebox threads if anything should be erased, it would be them.

 

Ah yes. When does Trackinthebox take ownership?

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Heh - naah - they don't delete anything, remember? This site archives everything back to the beginning. One good thing about the place...

Not true. I have witnessed instances, in certain cases of egregious offenses (ahem... such as most of my posts... ), where individual posts and even entire threads have been erased into oblivion, both on the GC/Groundspeak forums and on the forum for my local geocaching society. I must say that in each case where a post or a thread was erased in its entirety, I entirely agreed with the decision of the moderator or site administrator, for in each case, the offensive posts or threads were quite "out there" and contained quite a bit of venom and hostility.

 

Probably under extreme circumstances. But if you ask, they will state that is the reason they don't delete anything and they don't allow us to delete anything. Otherwise, they could delete (or we could) duplicate posts instead of having to call them duplicate posts. They make a point of keeping an accurate historical database of the threads.

 

An entire thread in the northeast forum (with about 6 or 7 replies) was erased, and moved to the hard drive at area 51 no more than a month ago. So it does happen. I agree it's quite rare though. I mean heck, you can still find Trackinthebox threads if anything should be erased, it would be them.

Whooo! Thanks much for this link! Even though I am fairly active on the forums, I had never heard of Trackinthebox nor stumbled upon any of her/his posts before this moment! Wow! Beats out even the pharmaceutical-trade cache guy! My favorite (????) line from the post was this one:

You peed in this boy's Cheerios once too often so I'd advise you to be on the lookout for that Roto Rooter Truck backing down your driveway. It'll be dumping it's contents through the kitchen window into YOUR Cheerios.

I suspect that this person had been watching a few too many John Wayne movies and Rambo-type movies, and got a bit full of itself!

Thanks again for this hilarious link!