• Announcements

    • Kisa the Cat

      World Watch Archiving Project

      Hello everyone, Please read this thread before posting to World Watch Thank you.
    • S.Kellyton

      New Team members Needed--Moderator, Declass, and Project Team: Voting   04/27/17

      Voting has started. See:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162280-new-project-team-member-needed-director-of-social-media-voting/     http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162282-new-moderator-member-needed-tea-and-sympathy-and-welcome-lounge-voting/   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162281-new-declass-team-member-needed-voting/  
    • Kisa the Cat

      Avenues PRIDE Special - Summer 2017   05/09/17

      Hello AVENites! The newest edition of AVENues is now ready! July/August/September
ItWasNiceKnowingYou

Constructive Criticisms of Mods/Admin

Mod/Admin Constructive Criticism   

29 members have voted

  1. 1. Should mods/admin make such threads/polls

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      4
    • Sometimes
      3
    • Abstain/Remain a Choice
      12


Recommended Posts

Puck   
Puck
3 minutes ago, .Lia said:

I do get what you're saying Puck. I suppose I simply believe that Admods (in general) are far too sensitive to criticism at all. It's a personal feeling, I've felt it since before I was an Admod and I find it difficult to not feel that way.

I get that and the more time I spend with admods the more I do see the sensitivity. I agree it's there, I agree that just because people are sensitive doesn't mean criticism shouldn't be given. I do think it needs to be given in a respectful way and for that it's fair to draw some lines on what isn't supportive to admods improving.

 

I really wish we had a proper assessment system and way for members (and of course admods) to feel they can safely voice their concerns. I also know you have been around here longer than I and have a different perspective thanks to that, so you may see some of my sentiments as more naive than what you are thinking, and I'll take ownership of that reality that I don't have as much experience ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran   
Serran
Just now, .Lia said:

PM me some of your ideas. I'd like to try to work on something like that, I think.

I will try to write them up in a cohesive format sometime this week. I'm trying to write a research paper at the moment though, so it might take me a few days. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Lia   
.Lia
11 minutes ago, Serran said:

I will try to write them up in a cohesive format sometime this week. I'm trying to write a research paper at the moment though, so it might take me a few days. :)

That's fine. I believe the TT and LG will start a group PM to hash out some project ideas for the TT, etc. I'd like to include this whenever it's ready :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpoopyWorld   
SpoopyWorld
6 hours ago, Puck said:

But those criticisms weren't written down and posted somewhere where the entire school could see them and could never be taken down, correct?

We didn't always write down our criticisms, we spoke it. And in a way, yes. We do sometimes do performances in front of hundreds of people, and the audience often make criticisms as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate

I'm bumping this and tagging @SimplyAce

 

Admods don't like constructive criticism. They don't want to hear it, they'll edit a post to remove it if they don't like it, they consider it inflammatory, and they'll try to make an example of anyone that gives it. Exhibit A:

As a moderator I decided to open up a line of constructive criticism in admods. I started this for several reasons. I felt admods had a lot of things they'd wish to say to me but are afraid of how I'll react was a main one. The fact that there is no assessment system of admods was another.

Exhibit B:

This is how they reacted. First of all, Jayce edited my post without my permission in the original thread. In which I tried to have a discussion with them to reach an agreement. I propose a compromise, and before there's a response my thread was locked. Now, in this report, Kisa was encouraging others repeatedly to edit my post without my permission AGAIN because I wasn't there to say anything. The admods wanted to make an example of me for being honest. Also, they proved my earlier point. All of admods brought up how much I was LOA (I was experiencing health issues) and funny that no one brought it up until I was reported. This is a problem constructive criticism would have fixed, because if an admod had brought up that I seemed to be sick a lot earlier, I'd have agreed and stepped down. If they told me at this point of time that I was sick a lot, I'd have told them that my doctor changed my prescription and I now had a handle on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItWasNiceKnowingYou   
ItWasNiceKnowingYou

Thanks for your input @FaerieFate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate
Just now, SimplyAce said:

Thanks for your input @FaerieFate

No problem. Sorry for the amount of time it took, I was waiting for the declass process to work it's magic powers before I could share ANY of this information, but now that I have the declassed threads I can give a more in-depth analysis of why constructive criticism of all admods is simply not possible. Also, everyone else can read why this is such a big issue as well. I know some members were worried that I left admods (as if I'd do that willingly...) Well, here's the answer to all of the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jayce   
Jayce

@FaerieFate since this is about me i won't get into that too much as we've already cleared this up together. 

 

The main point i want make clear is that you pushed criticsism to your team mates without their explicit permission.When someone asked to opt out you refused to adhere but kept pushing the issue, that's simply not okay. Despite they might have been wrong by editing your post without your permission you shouldn't have  pushed the team member into something they're uncomfortable with especially when they explicitly request you to leave them out of it as per example you provided.

 

Also:  when you bring criticsism you  A bring 3 positives along with 3 negatives aswell as making it as constructive as possible so the member in question can work on it.B do it in PM so the person in question may have the option to opt out if they don't feel comfortable or get the time they need to Answer to the presented criticsism. Because  C publicly pushing criticsism without the team members consent simply won't work.If you want to do it public then at least try to ask for their permission to do so. Levying criticsism without "letting them off the hook" will only bring negativity to those you work with rather then that what you want to reach.

 

We know members can give admods public criticsism but there is a difference between bringing it nicely and constantly pushing it, same counts for constantly throwing them under the bus or making it constructive so they can actually do something with it.

 

TLDR: If you want people to listen to constructive criticsism, the key is in how you bring it and in how you present it to admods.

 

I tried to bring it as objective as possible so my apologies if it's not coming across that way :) 

 

Edit: I get that you are upset but i'm just trying to say what could be their point of view on this situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skıt   
skıt

The whole crux of this issue is whether admods need to consent before you give them any feedback that can be seen as negative. I personally think you shouldn't need to and requiring that you give them feedback the way they want it makes communication worse not better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jayce   
Jayce
8 hours ago, skıt said:

The whole crux of this issue is whether admods need to consent before you give them any feedback that can be seen as negative. I personally think you shouldn't need to and requiring that you give them feedback the way they want it makes communication worse not better. 

I agree and disagree, when I have an issue with my co worker I say it to them privately rather then organizing a team meeting unexpectedly to publicly give them feedback against their consent, we've got in office individual assessment for that at work.When it's a costumer it would be a different story, then you must be prepared to receive positive or negative feedback without your consent, you know that once you accept your position.Admods know they'll receive positive or negative criticsism but i'm honestly not a big fan of the "It's impossible to give admods criticsism!!!" logic while constantly pushing feedback in that manner, that will rather bring negatives then positives.

 

There honestly is a two way street in giving team feedback as a employee to your team mate: You either take it to the person in question/or public with the team mate's consent. Or you do the complete opposite and publicy push feedback on your team mates while you claim they won't accept it anyway, some will accept it and some won't: Everyone differs in the way they receive criticsism, that's something you simply can't change.But at least let them know you respect their boundaries by not pushing them into parcipiating in something without their consent, in a member's case you are prepared this might happen against your consent.Again, boundaries always comes along with team communication, that's not old news imo.

 

I get the crux of this issue is whether admods need to consent before they receive any feedback could be viewed as negative/make team communication worser and i partly agree but pushing criticsism under that logic might damage team morale even more then it would do any good.If this is read in the admods vs members context then it definetly would make sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate
10 hours ago, Jayce said:

I agree and disagree, when I have an issue with my co worker I say it to them privately rather then organizing a team meeting unexpectedly to publicly give them feedback against their consent, we've got in office individual assessment for that at work.When it's a costumer it would be a different story, then you must be prepared to receive positive or negative feedback without your consent, you know that once you accept your position.Admods know they'll receive positive or negative criticsism but i'm honestly not a big fan of the "It's impossible to give admods criticsism!!!" logic while constantly pushing feedback in that manner, that will rather bring negatives then positives.

 

There honestly is a two way street in giving team feedback as a employee to your team mate: You either take it to the person in question/or public with the team mate's consent. Or you do the complete opposite and publicy push feedback on your team mates while you claim they won't accept it anyway, some will accept it and some won't: Everyone differs in the way they receive criticsism, that's something you simply can't change.But at least let them know you respect their boundaries by not pushing them into parcipiating in something without their consent, in a member's case you are prepared this might happen against your consent.Again, boundaries always comes along with team communication, that's not old news imo.

 

I get the crux of this issue is whether admods need to consent before they receive any feedback could be viewed as negative/make team communication worser and i partly agree but pushing criticsism under that logic might damage team morale even more then it would do any good.If this is read in the admods vs members context then it definetly would make sense to me.

But the team never felt comfortable giving  or receiving criticism public or private. Proof is in the report on me. Team members felt more comfortable reporting me for my health issues than coming around to talk to me about them. As I've previously stated, I'd either have agreed and stepped down or I'd have told them my health was under control. The whole situation would have been worked out if the admods changed their negative views on criticism and just been honest with me.

 

In fact, the report on me proves exactly why admods need to be comfortable giving each other criticism. A point again proven by the fact I knew I was gone a lot, but when I asks admods how they felt about it I was told it's okay I need to think of my health first. Yet the moment I turn my back they're upset? They'd rather just report me instead of talking to me about my health?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate
18 hours ago, Jayce said:

@FaerieFate since this is about me i won't get into that too much as we've already cleared this up together. 

Also, the initial point wasn't about you. I just had to give the context of the situation which involved you. You edited my post without my permission and with no good reason to do so. I expressed I was upset about it. Yes, we did clear up any misgivings about the whole situation that happened. However, what upsets me more is after I was clearly upset with you about this behavior another admod said, "Hey, faerie's gone now! Let's all edit her post without her permission!" And how did the other admods respond? "No! We need to keep this post as is and make an example of her and show what happens if you try to give us criticism. Even though the real reason why we're warning her is because she's in bad health. Also, no we didn't feel the need to tell her ahead of time that we thought she was gone too much, she had to mind-read that part."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate
On 9/5/2017 at 5:05 PM, Jayce said:

@FaerieFate since this is about me i won't get into that too much as we've already cleared this up together. 

 

The main point i want make clear is that you pushed criticsism to your team mates without their explicit permission.When someone asked to opt out you refused to adhere but kept pushing the issue, that's simply not okay. Despite they might have been wrong by editing your post without your permission you shouldn't have  pushed the team member into something they're uncomfortable with especially when they explicitly request you to leave them out of it as per example you provided.

 

Also:  when you bring criticsism you  A bring 3 positives along with 3 negatives aswell as making it as constructive as possible so the member in question can work on it.B do it in PM so the person in question may have the option to opt out if they don't feel comfortable or get the time they need to Answer to the presented criticsism. Because  C publicly pushing criticsism without the team members consent simply won't work.If you want to do it public then at least try to ask for their permission to do so. Levying criticsism without "letting them off the hook" will only bring negativity to those you work with rather then that what you want to reach.

 

We know members can give admods public criticsism but there is a difference between bringing it nicely and constantly pushing it, same counts for constantly throwing them under the bus or making it constructive so they can actually do something with it.

 

TLDR: If you want people to listen to constructive criticsism, the key is in how you bring it and in how you present it to admods.

 

I tried to bring it as objective as possible so my apologies if it's not coming across that way :) 

 

Edit: I get that you are upset but i'm just trying to say what could be their point of view on this situation.

Not letting my point on this die.

 

The very fact that admods went IN DEPTH about my health issues in the report proves this point that the admods seem to have non-existent. Why? Because a primary issue admods seemed to have with me was my health issues making me gone a lot. I mean, they even went as far as to say they were about to report me and get me demodded simply because I was gone a lot for my health issues. No one spoke to me about it. Those that I asked said it was fine, and I should worry about my health first. There was no rule about how often admods could be LOA. I had no reason to believe that there was any issues here.

 

If admods support constructive criticism as much as they claim, they'd have told me I was gone a lot for my health and perhaps I should step down. You know, rather than report me when I'm not even fully aware that admods have a problem. For all that admods cared, they didn't even try to understand my problem in depth, otherwise they would have learned that by that point I had mostly recovered. 

 

No one can claim, "Constructive Criticism should be given in private" when they result to reporting me for my health reasons instead of talking to be first. Because that shows the admods don't even want to deal with criticism regardless of whether they're giving or receiving it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItWasNiceKnowingYou   
ItWasNiceKnowingYou
On 9/8/2017 at 2:37 PM, FaerieFate said:

Not letting my point on this die.

 

The very fact that admods went IN DEPTH about my health issues in the report proves this point that the admods seem to have non-existent. Why? Because a primary issue admods seemed to have with me was my health issues making me gone a lot. I mean, they even went as far as to say they were about to report me and get me demodded simply because I was gone a lot for my health issues. No one spoke to me about it. Those that I asked said it was fine, and I should worry about my health first. There was no rule about how often admods could be LOA. I had no reason to believe that there was any issues here.

 

If admods support constructive criticism as much as they claim, they'd have told me I was gone a lot for my health and perhaps I should step down. You know, rather than report me when I'm not even fully aware that admods have a problem. For all that admods cared, they didn't even try to understand my problem in depth, otherwise they would have learned that by that point I had mostly recovered. 

 

No one can claim, "Constructive Criticism should be given in private" when they result to reporting me for my health reasons instead of talking to be first. Because that shows the admods don't even want to deal with criticism regardless of whether they're giving or receiving it.

No means for disrespect Faerie, but the report button or right to report is a universal option here. Members report one another to avoid conflict (which i personally don't care for this method at times but it's an option,so whatever). Members don't have to say a word to one another or give a heads up on "Oh btw your are reaching my limits, so i am about to report you now". So why should admods be expected to do it any differently? They're members of Aven first & foremost. They have the same access as any other member first & foremost. If they felt as though your health was affecting your work & ability to be here, which it did by the sounds of it, then that's in their using their universal right to report you. 

 

Secondly, if you knew you were gone a lot, why not acknowledge that & step down yourself without someone having to suggest it to you? If live was hectic with your health & you going LoA a lot, what shame would there have been in saying "You guys, i know i am in & out a lot. I don't feel as though balancing Aven & my health is good for me. I may possibly have to step down and maybe run in a reelection at a later time"? 

I am not trying to say your health is your fault (because it's not), but you seem to be looking at this situation from a one-sided point of view and not accessing the options that you had in this situation & focusing only on the option the admod who reported you took. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ciri   
Ciri

The report button doesn't work when Admods twist the ToS in a way that favours certain individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItWasNiceKnowingYou   
ItWasNiceKnowingYou
13 minutes ago, Ciri said:

The report button doesn't work when Admods twist the ToS in a way that favours certain individuals.

The report button doesn't work when people do not acknowledge the fact that just like they are able to report anonymously/in private, those who are reported are dealt with in the same manner.

And how is having a vote  on what action to take against an individual who has broken ToS showing favoritism? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ciri   
Ciri

Well when the majority of Admods are Bias to a situation...oh this reminds me of that other thread!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItWasNiceKnowingYou   
ItWasNiceKnowingYou

This reminds me of the other thread as well. Neither are going much of anywhere & the commentary is nowhere near constructive. Not surprising though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Lia   
.Lia
38 minutes ago, SimplyAce said:

Secondly, if you knew you were gone a lot, why not acknowledge that & step down yourself without someone having to suggest it to you?

Fae addressed this, that she was feeling better by the time the warning was sent with her absences mentioned (the first time they were mentioned to her).  This isn't about why Fae didn't step down, this comment specifically is why the mention of her absences were in the warn, but never anywhere else (and it should never have been that way, from a Trainer's standpoint, but I wasn't a trainer at the time of the warn). I just wanted to clarify :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItWasNiceKnowingYou   
ItWasNiceKnowingYou
1 minute ago, .Lia said:

Fae addressed this, that she was feeling better by the time the warning was sent with her absences mentioned (the first time they were mentioned to her).  This isn't about why Fae didn't step down, this comment specifically is why the mention of her absences were in the warn, but never anywhere else (and it should never have been that way, from a Trainer's standpoint, but I wasn't a trainer at the time of the warn). I just wanted to clarify :)

Thanks for the clarification.

From a trainers perspective then, why shouldn't her absences have been mentioned in the warn if that's what she was partially reported for in that the higher number of absences (though no fault of her own) affected her being present & her work?

The number of LoAs would have been evident in the LoA thread, so a record of her absences is indeed elsewhere.... Or are you saying it shouldn't have been mentioned because no one was explicitly keeping track of them? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Lia   
.Lia
1 minute ago, SimplyAce said:

Thanks for the clarification.

From a trainers perspective then, why shouldn't her absences have been mentioned in the warn if that's what she was partially reported for in that the higher number of absences (though no fault of her own) affected her being present & her work?

The number of LoAs would have been evident in the LoA thread, so a record of her absences is indeed elsewhere.... Or are you saying it shouldn't have been mentioned because no one was explicitly keeping track of them? :huh:

I'll PM you, as to not derail this thread :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran   
Serran

Re: The LoA issue 

 

It was brought up because that was a report that was likely to come up and it's best to just combine rather than review multiple times. However, since the vote started before any evidence was submitted, I don't think it should have been considered at all, personally. And it didn't play into my vote at all, since it wasn't properly submitted.

 

Re: Criticism 

 

My stance is still the same as it was during the issue. If I posted a letter on the public bulletin board at my job saying all the things I had issues with and my co-workers names beside them, I would be fired, or at least get a write up (most likely fired). If I then, when confronted by the co-workers and asked to remove it, refused and kept reposting it, I would not even get to finish the work day. It's unprofessional and I know no work place or volunteer space IRL that I've ever been associated with that would allow it. 

 

What is allowed is talking to people as issues arise, or in private, or BoD/admins/TT have played mediator at various points when there is an issue. All of those options are available if there are issues. Or, criticisms that do not name names. Or, a thread that is opt-in, which I think most of the admod team would have opted in, if given the option.

 

Example: "This thread is so we can communicate with each other what we feel needs improved. I'll start, tell me what I can improve on! If you want to hear about yourself, edit your name into this OP"

 

Also, allowing it from admods would be favortism to them and assigning different rules between admods and users. Users cannot make a public thread saying what they feel is wrong with each other by name. Multiple users have gotten in trouble for doing it in the past. Admods must follow the same rules the users do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Una Salus Victus   
Una Salus Victus

After seeing how much of a shit fight the mods got into it, I dunno if this thread is too soon or just not a good idea in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68   
Telecaster68

8ef6ee1473a8c20ba5e113e0e5c9d11c725518f5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027   
Philip027
3 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

8ef6ee1473a8c20ba5e113e0e5c9d11c725518f5

God, no shit.

 

It's so relieving to know we have a bunch of children as (some of) our mods, not to mention that one by one they're chasing off the ones that actually want to try to turn things around.

 

But like my mom keeps telling me, you can lead a horse to the water but you can't make him drink...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate   
FaerieFate
On 9/16/2017 at 0:00 PM, ItWasNiceKnowingYou said:

No means for disrespect Faerie, but the report button or right to report is a universal option here. Members report one another to avoid conflict (which i personally don't care for this method at times but it's an option,so whatever). Members don't have to say a word to one another or give a heads up on "Oh btw your are reaching my limits, so i am about to report you now". So why should admods be expected to do it any differently? They're members of Aven first & foremost. They have the same access as any other member first & foremost. If they felt as though your health was affecting your work & ability to be here, which it did by the sounds of it, then that's in their using their universal right to report you. 

Admods are a team. They are supposed to communicate. As such, they need to learn to communicate together. You see, members don't HAVE to communicate. If I had an issues with MemberA as a member, I can just block them and pretend like they don't exist. Mods can't do that with each other. So, if I'm trying to communicate and it rubs admods the wrong way, they should say, "Yo, I don't like how you tried to talk to bring up these issues." And then we have a conversation about how to fix that. I bring up why I think it's a good reason, they bring up why it's a bad one. That way in the future as a team member I can be like, "Oh, shoot, AdmodA prefers I PM them." or another admod could be like, "Faeriefate responds better if we talk in public." Team dynamics are all about compromise. You figure's out what works best for the most people.

 

Some admods did this well. Don't get me wrong, not all were bad. Some messaged me and were like, "Hey, I prefer we talk about it in private in the future." And so we talked it out. In some cases, I was even wrong about my initial thoughts, and admit that. I'm not perfect. But you can't just report someone because they did something the wrong way. I didn't break the rules here. If they thought that I should have done it differently, they should have talked to me about it. Some of them did. We had a conversation, and I offered a compromise. That's how teamwork works. Someone does something wrong, the other points it out, they talk, they compromise. But a majority thought it was better to issue me a warning where I didn't break the rules instead. That is very wrong for the team dynamic because they aren't dealing with their issues. They are just holding grudges and staying angry at each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Randomchaos   
Randomchaos
10 minutes ago, FaerieFate said:

They are just holding grudges and staying angry at each other.

tbh I've never had an issue with this? If I think someone is angry at me personally I usually PM them if I think it's actually an issue. So far i haven't run into anything that was actually a problem. If there was an actual problem that I noticed I'd ask how to fix it.

If you would like feel free to PM me, but I really do not feel talking on the forum is the way to fix this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027   
Philip027
Quote

tbh I've never had an issue with this? If I think someone is angry at me personally I usually PM them if I think it's actually an issue. So far i haven't run into anything that was actually a problem. If there was an actual problem that I noticed I'd ask how to fix it.

If you would like feel free to PM me, but I really do not feel talking on the forum is the way to fix this.

I'm not even part of admods and it's extremely obvious that this:

 

Quote

That is very wrong for the team dynamic because they aren't dealing with their issues. They are just holding grudges and staying angry at each other.

is a recurring problem.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now