Jump to content

A place to discuss CO Admin's posts to the IMG thread. (Trust me, it's not bad.)


Recommended Posts

I'd like to thank CO admin for being courteous enough to edit posts, rather than shut down an entire thread. This is exactly the kind of moderation the forums need. Moderation on a case by case basis. It was referred to as "heavy handed". I beg to differ. "Heavy handed" would be the lockdown of the entire thread. The discussion continues on topic, and the thread has not lost momentum. I think it was much better than a quick lockdown, it shows an extra effort on the part of the moderators to be fair to those wishing to continue discussing a topic.

Thank you, CO admin.

 

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

icon_rolleyes.gif

 

Forum Moderators school:

 

http://www.moderatethis.com

 

*****

_You need a good command of the language to be a moderator._


 

I hafta agree with J5. Heavy handedness scores no points with me.

 

Keystone Approver should give a class in tactful moderation. His closing of the Jeepers thread is classic and deserves a standing ovation.

 

Snicon_razz.gificon_razz.gifgans

texasgeocaching_sm.gif Sacred cows make the best hamburger....Mark Twain.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Corp Of Discovery:

I see 2 things wrong with CO Admins post:

1: Is it so bad that we need a pre warning to not go off subject?

2: Other than 1, it was basically a post that just said not to comment on this post. That just doesn't make sense.

Note: I only saw the 2nd edit of the post in question.

 

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!


 

Post you saw, the one up there now, is this original post with some minor spelling correction. No content was changed

 

I work for the QOFE that works for the Frog

tongue.gif The Frog is my friend big_smile.gif

Link to comment

The problem here is that this is censoring -- it doesn't even closely resemble moderating.

 

Moderate means keeping discussions on topic and civil -- not heavy-handed threats at the beginning of a thread -- that technique got everyone worked up right off the bat.

 

Furthermore, a moderator should have a good command of the language so that he/she can adequately get their point across in a succinct manner.

 

If they don't have a good comprehension, writing, and reading skills, then perhaps they should stick to approving caches and stay away from moderating forums.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

I am apologizing in advance, because I CAN NOT let this one go...

 

quote:
Not everyone has to be a cunning linguist

 

Are you talking about your speaking skills or something entirely different?? icon_eek.gificon_biggrin.gif

 

---------------------------------------------------

Free your mind and the rest will follow 30296_400.gif

 

mystats.php?userid=Doc-Dean&vopt=user&txtdata=I%20am%20Still%20Ignoring%20Stats!!&bgcol=3333ff&fgcol=ffff99

Link to comment

quote:
Jeremy wrote:

Not everyone has to be a cunning linguist to get the point across.


Nobody said he had to be cunning. But being able to accurately express yourself to others is certainly necessary to be able to moderate forums.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

quote:
Jeremy wrote:

Heck, some folks with great linguistic skills often have nothing to add to a discussion.


Generally, if accompanied by a rational thought process, I find that those with good language skills do add favourably to discussions. The biggest downfall that I encounter is that most people don't *read* what is being written carefully enough.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

edit: typo

 

[This message was edited by Jomarac5 on October 11, 2003 at 01:40 AM.]

Link to comment

Well, it's a shame that an alternative to completly locking threads isn't well recieved. Too bad. You'd think people would be thankful that discussion was allowed to continue.

 

Then again, you could allways start another thread... icon_rolleyes.gif

 

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

Link to comment

quote:
Bloencustoms wrote:

Well, it's a shame that an alternative to completly locking threads isn't well recieved. Too bad. You'd think people would be thankful that discussion was allowed to continue.


I think you've got the wrong idea of what good forum moderation is.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

I do not like the idea of posts being edited, except in very exceptional circumstances. I would rather see a public warning given to the poster, which if not heeded would result in him/her being excluded from the remainder of the discussion. If the innappropriate posting continued on other threads, after further warnings, the poster should just be booted out altogether.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

quote:
Bloencustoms wrote:

Well, it's a shame that an alternative to completly locking threads isn't well recieved. Too bad. You'd think people would be thankful that discussion was allowed to continue.


I think you've got the wrong idea of what good forum moderation is.

 

*****

_You need a good command of the language to be a moderator._


Please tell me you don't believe good moderation is locking a thread because of one or two posts. I preffer the other option.

 

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

Link to comment

quote:
Bloencustoms wrote:

Please tell me you don't believe good moderation is locking a thread because of one or two posts. I prefer the other option.


Hardly. Forum moderation is neither deleting threads, closing thread, deleting posts, or editing posts. It is regulating the discussion to keep it on track and civil. Only in the most extreme instances should editing, closing or deleting be necessary.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

quote:
Doc-Dean wrote:

I don't think either of those should be a choice. Those should be implements of last resort.


Absolutely. Neither is a choice until things have gone past the point of no return. A good moderator will interject only when necessary and will keep personal opinions about the discussion to him/herself. In a well moderated discussion there should be almost no time when a thread should be closed -- and virtually never should a thread or post be deleted.

 

Moderation does not equal censorship.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

I think that's exactly how they are being used. How bad does it have to get before a moderator steps in? Thankfully I have yet to see threats of bodily harm, but people do take it a little too far all too often. Sure enough, when things get too heated, threads get moderated. Often this means they are shut down entirely. Here is a way to keep the real discussion going while dealing with the offending material. How bad would you let it get before you decided to step in?

 

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

Link to comment

quote:
Bloencustoms wrote:

I think that's exactly how they are being used.


It's not how it's being done at all. The moderator should step in far before it gets *bad*. That's the whole idea of moderating forums -- to stop discussions from getting out of hand in the first place. Done properly, you should all but notice that the moderator is even there.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

WOW talk about a gang bang here, I propose that all you loud mouth posters all me made moderators, and when you are done with a thread nothing at all would have been said because you would be to busy editing and deleting each others post, and why is that you ask, because you all think you are right.

 

As someone mentioned it’s hydee job, look at the top on the page her name ain’t up there but CO’s is. CO and those other mods are, so live with it. All you got to do is follow the rules but I believe ya ll don’t think they apply to you but they do.

 

It looks like ya ll may be a little jealous because you got passed over for the job, each of you seem to know everything there is to know about everything and being a master debater , and I wonder why is

 

I don’t cache in any of there areas so this ain’t no brown noseing post. ESAD……JOE

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

 

Sorry. An old Chinese Linguist pun. We also used master debater, but not as often (or in mixed company).

 


Heh, in a meeting in Boston we asked the speaker if he received his master beta copy. It was hilarious as he tried to remember, and kept repeating master beta in that funny East coast accent.

 

I'm glad we don't have an accent here in Chicago.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by JoGPS:

WOW talk about a gang bang here, I propose that all you loud mouth posters all me made moderators, and when you are done with a thread nothing at all would have been said because you would be to busy editing and deleting each others post, and why is that you ask, because you all think you are right.

 

As someone mentioned it’s hydee job, look at the top on the page her name ain’t up there but CO’s is. CO and those other mods are, so live with it. All you got to do is follow the rules but I believe ya ll don’t think they apply to you but they do.

 

It looks like ya ll may be a little jealous because you got passed over for the job, each of you seem to know everything there is to know about everything and being a master debater , and I wonder why is

 

I don’t cache in any of there areas so this ain’t no brown noseing post. ESAD……JOE


 

You win. You have the longest post so far.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

 

The moderator should step in far before it gets *bad*. That's the whole idea of moderating forums -- to stop discussions from getting out of hand in the first place. Done properly, you should all but notice that the moderator is even there.

 


 

Done properly, we would be self moderating on these forums (like we used to be, or tried to be).

 

CO Admin did *exactly* what J5 states should be done: '(S)top discussions from getting out of hand in the first place.' (In so much, as they warned people to stay on topic ahead of time...)

Link to comment

quote:
Zuuk wrote:

Done properly, we would be self moderating on these forums (like we used to be, or tried to be).


You mean like the private thread that you hosted?

 

Zuuky, I don't want to get into it with you here. This is a serious topic and it's very much on track. If you insist on posting unsubstantiated posts, I will simply ignore what you have to say. If you want to add something to the discussion that will be of positive benefit to the problem at hand, then please, let's hear from you and I'll respond if you'd like.

 

If you're interested only in continuing your little personal vendetta, then please find a better way to do it.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

quote:
Doc-Dean wrote:

...a moderator is a guide or a leader not an executioner.


Exactly. The moderator guides the conversation -- gently, not with the thunder of a herd of elephants. The moderator will send a message to someone who is stepping out of line -- and remind them what the discussion is about, either in the post, or in a private e-mail -- which ever is most appropriate at the time.

 

If the discussion is in a lull, or if posts are getting too silly because people are bored, or the subject being discussed has been exhausted, the moderator will give it a little shove or lead it in another direction -- and encourage the discussion to remain headed in that direction until it once again needs to guided along.

 

Heavy-handed rule does not have a place in public forums in all but the most severe situations. And generally, if the discussion has become so contentious that it requires closing, the situation is either extraordinary, or the moderator has not done their job as best as it should have been done.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

quote:
Zuuk wrote:

Done properly, we would be self moderating on these forums (like we used to be, or tried to be).


You mean like the private thread that you hosted?

 

Zuuky, I don't want to get into it with you here. This is a serious topic and it's very much on track. If you insist on posting unsubstantiated posts, I will simply ignore what you have to say. If you want to add something to the discussion that will be of positive benefit to the problem at hand, then please, let's hear from you and I'll respond if you'd like.

 

If you're interested only in continuing your little personal vendetta, then please find a better way to do it.

 

*****

_You need a good command of the language to be a moderator._


 

Your opinion of yourself is much to low. You are not *a* god, you must be GOD.

 

Private topics according to you, have no bearing on public topics, so I'm not sure what *your* point is here. I can provide the Markwells for previous statements if you wish. (via private message)

 

My reply was serious. In case you did not notice, I was *agreeing* with the bolded portion of your statement.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

 

And generally, if the discussion has become so contentious that it requires closing, the situation is either extraordinary, or the moderator has not done their job as best as it should have been done.

 


 

Extraordinary seems to be the case in these forums 99% of the time.

 

Yet another slight against admins. Why is it their job to clean up our tripe? We should hardly see a moderator if we are responsible ourselves.

 

We now have instances where folks are starting threads for the sole purpose of annoying an admin after their other thread was closed with reason and explanation. (Check the Canada forum for some good examples.)

 

I say lock 'em down. Editing is a last resort. But editing is required when people purposely troll and try to start problems in a thread, that really needs to stay open and on topic. Without editing, others have shown that they will reply...

 

It is the responsibility of those who post to be reasonable and respectful.

 

This is simple stuff.

Link to comment

Hmmm... what was that noise? I thought I heard something -- guess it must have been the wind.

 

Anyway, back to the topic.

 

Moderating is a very difficult job. But done properly, a moderator is respected for being fair at all times. For showing restraint by not voicing their own opinion in situations that have gotten heated and staying focused on the main priority -- to keep the conversation on track.

 

For those who are having a problem understanding what a moderator does (and I don't mean this in an insulting way), there are a good many resources on the web about running discussion forums and online communities. Try doing a search at google -- you'll see that forum moderation is virtually and art form when done properly. There are also several books available on the topic at amazon.com.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Knight:

Once you edit my post please change the name to whatever moderator did the job. It's not my post any longer.

 

Thanks


RK, I just wanted to point out that the forum conduct guidelines do address this point. If you are unhappy with the way that your post has been edited, then let us know that and we will delete the post. You can send an e-mail to the moderator who did the editing (the post always indicates this). I suppose you could also use the yellow triangle alert button, so that *any* moderator can come back and take care of the matter.

 

Don't make me stop this car!

Link to comment

I'd like to point out that the thread referred to in this one is now 4 pages long, still on topic, and still has people discussing the topic. A moderator stepped in early on in the thread, and now it is humming along smoothly. The proof is in the pudding.

 

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

Link to comment

quote:
Bloencustoms wrote:

A moderator stepped in early on in the thread, and now it is humming along smoothly. The proof is in the pudding.


Actually, once the moderator stopped inputting into the discussion near the top of page 2, the discussion has stayed pretty much on topic.

 

That CO Admin stopped posting heavy-handed posts, couldn't have had anything to do with it? Nooooo.... of course not.

 

*****

You need a good command of the language to be a moderator.

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