Jump to content


Photo

Mod and Admin Roles


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
86 replies to this topic

#1 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 11 October 2010 - 05:12 PM

This is something we've been working on for a couple months now. A lot of the frictions and problems we've been having are because of lack of clarity. The role of "Mod" and "Admin" have never been clearly defined, and Mods and Admins now act very differently from Mods and Admins six years ago. Some Admins felt Mods were encroaching on their territory, and some Mods felt the reverse. Also, several Admins expressed confusion as to what exactly their place was. Finally, many issues were becoming intractable because there was no method of making any decision short of group consensus, which is a long and tedious process in the best of times.

This re-definition of the roles was designed to address those concerns. It was voted on last week, and passed with a large majority among the Admods.

I wrote it, through conversation with the rest of the Admod Team (which should be declassified at some point) and through some private conversations with relevant Admin. At this point, it represents a collaborative process between much of the Team, to try and move to a healthier way of doing business.

We hope for your support and understanding through this transition.



Moderators

Primary Responsibility - taking care of their forums.

Moderators are responsible for their forums. As such, they are required to check their forum at least once a day, preferably twice, and to deal with any situations that develop there. This may involve taking immediate action, or consulting the Admod Team and following their lead, at the Moderator's discretion. They may make polls in the Admod Forum to measure team feelings, but if new information comes up halfway through then it is, in the end, the Moderator's choice how to proceed.

No single Administrator has the power to overrule a Moderator in their own forum, but collectively they hold final authority. Moderators should recognize that any unilateral action they take may be challenged or undone by the Administrator Team, if they find it necessary. This may not always involve disciplinary actions, as we recognize that some innocent mistakes are always going to happen. However, if the Administrator Team find a Moderator to be irresponsible or otherwise inappropriate, that Moderator may be given the opportunity to resign gracefully, be forcibly de-modded, or even given a warning. If they resign, they are eligible to run for any Admod election except for the one to replace them. If they are forcibly de-modded, they are not eligible to run for another six months. And receiving an official warning also forcibly de-mods them, and brings them one step closer to being banned.

Moderators can pass jurisdiction of certain matters off to others if necessary. If an incident unfolds while a Moderator is away, it is the responsibility of the person who finds it. Additionally, Moderators are highly recommended to pass off jurisdiction of matters on which they aren't, or would be perceived to not be, objective (either for or against). In either of these cases, the Admod who assumes responsibility should be treated just like the Moderator would have been for the purpose of that issue.


Administrators

Administrators are responsible for the board at large. Each Administrator has specific areas of responsibility, but in an emergency Administrators can always cover for each other. Just because an Administrator has responsibility for something, that doesn't mean it necessarily must be them that does it. However, it is still their responsibility to make sure that it happens. This can happen through personal action, through a poll of the team, through delegating the matter to someone qualified, or through any other method they find appropriate. What matters is that the Administrator ensures that the issue has an eventual successful resolution

Responsibilities can also be officially shuffled between the Administrators from time to time, just as Moderators shuffle forums. Administrators can even switch their entire roles with other Administrators when necessary. Care should be taken to distribute the load evenly, and avoid putting too much power in any one pair of hands.

All Administrators are required to fill in for Mods when they're gone. When covering for a Moderator in a particular forum, they have the same authority and responsibility there as the Moderator they're covering for.

Account Administrator: Kelly
Spoiler


Chat/PM Administrator: Cashew
Spoiler


Policy Administrator: NigelFt
Spoiler


Admod Forum Administrator: Amcan
Spoiler


Information Administrator: Bipolar Bear
Spoiler

  • jealleano likes this
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#2 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 11 October 2010 - 11:33 PM

interesting read Zeal and I appreciate the time you personally have put in

but

given the anarchy over the last 6 months has largely been because of whats gone on behind closed doors I wonder why this was so prominant in main

by all means congratulations on finally recognising your own roles

i can't put my finger on it and why it feels wrong..but it almost feels your asking others to convince some in the backroom of this is how it should be by putting it in main as to avoid chalenging some of those who by clear blurring of thier roles were major parts of the dissunity

i'm glad as a starting base that you have reaffirmed to some in the back room what there roles are..and are not

dunno ..it seems more relevent to the backroom thats all

it's a bit like a piece of art by salvador dali.....the more and more I look at it...the more i think..wtf..and it becomes even more confusing as to what it's purpose is
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#3 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:16 AM

i can't put my finger on it and why it feels wrong..but it almost feels your asking others to convince some in the backroom of this is how it should be by putting it in main as to avoid chalenging some of those who by clear blurring of thier roles were major parts of the dissunity

Actually, to be honest, I was one of the ones guilty of some of the blurring, getting myself too involved in issues that really were Admin domain. This isn't targeted at anyone, and if it is then I'm one of the ones it's targeted at.
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#4 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:23 AM

I think it's good that you overlap when there is a need to be a strong constructive consistent forward team zeal and although we differ on some things I have always admired yours and paws open candor

still if it reaffirms and reminds with a view to a clean slate and now as a starting point..then it can't do no harm..just confused me personally why it was in main when it seemed to be a back room self admission and re-enlightening


mind you..many things confuse me these days :redface:
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#5 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:28 AM

still if it reaffirms and reminds with a view to a clean slate and now as a starting point..then it can't do no harm..just confused me personally why it was in main when it seemed to be a back room self admission and re-enlightening

It's out here because I asked for it to be, and Pawprint (as our new Information Admin) gave me the go-ahead. I wanted it out here because I like to show that we're doing things, and because it's come up in several conversations in Mod Forum and Site Comments over the two months we've been working on it, and until now I've only been able to vaguely refer to "we're working on it". And I like being able to talk about things I'm working on.

So here it is, we worked on it, and now we're giving it an actual shot. We'll see if it helps. :D
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#6 Gatto

Gatto

    A-phrodite

  • AVEN Members
  • 2,854 posts
  • Location:No one sleeps in this room without the dream of a common language.

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:52 AM

Chat/PM Administrator: Cashew


Wow. I haven't known a C/PM administrator since around 1980.
I've become the sort of man who once will have been what I am.

Sunny lies softly sleeping, resting, peaceful seeming. Bright eyes cloaked in darkness slumber. What dreams he? I wonder.

Posted Image

Sic transit gloria mundi.

#7 JoD

JoD

    Mega Mitosis

  • AVEN Members
  • 217 posts
  • Location:away from home

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:48 AM

Thanks for the update Zeal, check will Paw ---

Maybe the admins responsibilities could also be added to the following post

http://www.asexualit...e__pid__1461745

That way anyone needed to PM someone in the related area will know who to direct the PM to, just to avoid unnecessary overlaps.

[Edit - for PM information maybe show full user names for all admons]

Again thanks to the Admon team for all you do.

#8 pawprint prettysure

pawprint prettysure

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,539 posts
  • Location:Danger Line

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:48 PM

Maybe the admins responsibilities could also be added to the following post

http://www.asexualit...e__pid__1461745

That way anyone needed to PM someone in the related area will know who to direct the PM to, just to avoid unnecessary overlaps.

[Edit - for PM information maybe show full user names for all admons]


I've posted the admin roles to the "Who mods what" thread with full usernames.

When it feels like a kick in the teeth, I can take it.
Throw your stones and you won't see me breaking.
Say what you want, take your shots.
You're setting me free with one more kick in the teeth.


#9 ShahidAfridiBOOMBOOM

ShahidAfridiBOOMBOOM

    Asexy

  • AVEN Members
  • 401 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:58 PM

Moderators

Primary Responsibility - taking care of their forums.

Moderators are responsible for their forums. As such, they are required to check their forum at least once a day, preferably twice, and to deal with any situations that develop there. This may involve taking immediate action, or consulting the Admod Team and following their lead, at the Moderator's discretion. They may make polls in the Admod Forum to measure team feelings, but if new information comes up halfway through then it is, in the end, the Moderator's choice how to proceed.

No single Administrator has the power to overrule a Moderator in their own forum, but collectively they hold final authority. Moderators should recognize that any unilateral action they take may be challenged or undone by the Administrator Team, if they find it necessary. This may not always involve disciplinary actions, as we recognize that some innocent mistakes are always going to happen. However, if the Administrator Team find a Moderator to be irresponsible or otherwise inappropriate, that Moderator may be given the opportunity to resign gracefully, be forcibly de-modded, or even given a warning. If they resign, they are eligible to run for any Admod election except for the one to replace them. If they are forcibly de-modded, they are not eligible to run for another six months. And receiving an official warning also forcibly de-mods them, and brings them one step closer to being banned.


I don't really get why if they choose to resign they get to run for another andmod election but if they're forcibly de-modded they can't? Surely if the point is you've all lost trust/find them irresponsible etc then you don't want them running full-stop.

#10 Kelly

Kelly

    A Fixture

  • Administrators
  • 26,058 posts
  • Gender:Higgs Boson
  • Location:Hogwarts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 01:04 PM

given the anarchy over the last 6 months has largely been because of whats gone on behind closed doors

:blink:

Hardly anarchy. Keeping AVEN running smoothly is a lot of work, but I think that the mods have done an awesome job and deserve :cake: and even thanks.

*awards :cake: to the mods*

And for the admins, we do seem to have special skills in certain areas, so we are more formally assuming the roles. We are capable of any of them, but we may as well stick to what areas we do best.

Quotes from the TV show NUMB3RS

Sometimes cake is a series of algorithms to formulate an analysis. And sometimes cake is just...cake - Professor Charlie Eppes

Is this about the cake problem? What's the matter with you mathematicians, cake is never a problem. - Professor Lazlo


#11 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 12 October 2010 - 01:26 PM

I don't really get why if they choose to resign they get to run for another andmod election but if they're forcibly de-modded they can't? Surely if the point is you've all lost trust/find them irresponsible etc then you don't want them running full-stop.

Even someone with a Warning is eligible to mod again in 6 months. Beyond that, we want to at least leave the door open to the potential for reconciliation, no matter how bad things can seem at the time.
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#12 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 02:35 PM

i did mention this some time ago

when a mod understandably leaves through real life issues I personally think it's not enough time to resolve those issues to then again apply for a vacancy within a certian time limit

I personally felt leave or pushed..there should be an absence from applying for a period of 3 months

this allows the ex mod time to resolve whatever real life issues there are..take stock and if they want to re-apply then the door is still open for them

good mods are hard to find so when one leaves we must always leave the door open to rejoin

However....we must also have a duty of care to ensure we havn't let them back to soon after the need that was
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#13 Herr Joseph von Löthing

Herr Joseph von Löthing

    AVENistor

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,100 posts
  • Location:Plymouth/Bristol UK
  • A/Sexuality:Clingy.

Posted 12 October 2010 - 05:05 PM


Chat/PM Administrator: Cashew


Wow. I haven't known a C/PM administrator since around 1980.


That's bad. That's really, really bad. I still smiled a little geeky smile, though.
Singular they me, bitch.

http://www.transyada.net - "Take absolutely everything you know about gender, chuck it in a bowl, blend it, and you get the transyadas" (Bristrek at Pride)

#14 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:17 PM

i did mention this some time ago

when a mod understandably leaves through real life issues I personally think it's not enough time to resolve those issues to then again apply for a vacancy within a certian time limit

I personally felt leave or pushed..there should be an absence from applying for a period of 3 months

this allows the ex mod time to resolve whatever real life issues there are..take stock and if they want to re-apply then the door is still open for them

good mods are hard to find so when one leaves we must always leave the door open to rejoin

However....we must also have a duty of care to ensure we havn't let them back to soon after the need that was

It may help to give a more specific example.

I'm a mod now, and I'm also in Teacher's College. Let's assume for the time being that I'll need some time off during Practicum, which is allowed. However, if I fail to book that time off here, and there's a Rolecall, I lose my moddom even if my Practium is ending by the time the election for the vacancy comes up. The way we'd likely handle it, then, is that I'll be given a "forced resignation" or "honourable discharge". What this policy says is that I can't apply for my own vacancy, but I could apply for one a month later, once I'm clear of all those Practicum complications.

In that situation, I think that's the fairest course. I think it would be unreasonable to set a timeframe on it, since life complications can be of any length of time, and either way we'll be getting new blood into the team for the immediate replacement election. I don't think it's in any way unreasonable to allow someone who missed a rolecall to come back a month or two later, and I don't see any reason to enforce a three month time-out if their particular situation doesn't call for it.


(Honestly though, I expect to still mod through my Practicum. I may shuffle off MusiRants to another moderator with more time on their hands, but that's different.)
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#15 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:42 PM

rolecall? what a wierd way of doing things

simple..you cover each other in the event of a long term absence..

if however you said..look it's too much i need a break and a long one

then the backroom arranges all the election to run and advertise and then..the recently left member wants to come back..wasn't that a waste of time?

i remember only recently when describing why yearly elections would work..some in the backroom said it would take too much to organise but here we have the exact some issue

given egd was demodded but told no running and even then we are not sure AFTER 6 months..why would a mod who was missing without notification be given better preferences?..surely if you break the rules you break the rules?

you can see my point..

lets say though a mod leaves ..you don't want them too but understand..you then advertise the role get candidates and at the last minute the recent mod says hi..i fancy that again..do you say (a)scrap the election and fit them back in..(b)say no the elction runs or © say what a waste of time that was..which is the exact same thing that was said about yearly elections

it should be from the next election of any kind that when a mod leaves they understand that when they do they will not be able to re-run for 3 months

wether they have left voluntarily or left by being removed same rule same circumstance... a clear rule

we have talked about simplyfying aven and in particular making it clearer and less confusing back thier

this rule....brought in would level the playing field, give the mod time to resolve some personal issues and still within a matter of 12 weeks allow the door to open
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#16 sonofzeal

sonofzeal

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Moderators
  • 11,280 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 12 October 2010 - 10:12 PM

Your idea has merit. I think the system we have now is functional and fair, but what you're saying is reasonable too.


BTW, the policy on attendance is a little thorny. Basically, we're supposed to be checking every day (preferably twice a day), but sometimes stuff comes up and we either forget or are busy or are prevented somehow. Mods are totally allowed reasonable chunks of time off, as long as they clear it with the rest of the team so we know who's absent and can cover for them. If a mod's absent and hasn't informed us, you can imagine how that might be a problem. Usually it's innocent, a power outage or the flu or a family emergency. Still, it's their responsibility to get word to us somehow, because it's our responsibility to make sure that coverage happens.

Generally we trust that everyone's doing their job unless they contact us otherwise, and once a month we do a rollcall just to make sure. There's a lot of flexibility in the rollcall, we understand if someone's a little late, but if there's a substantial lag then it's a problem and we may need to clear the way for someone more active. Often we find out after the fact that there was some health concern or other situation that caused it, and we encourage them to run for mod again, but this is a position that does requires good attendance.

So there's a fair amount of flexibility, but we're trying to uphold our responsibility to the userbase at the same time, so there's some standards and a monthly rollcall's part of that.
Avatar editted by Spinneret, Dixie, and Hallu. Yay to all!

My Radar Graph!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

#17 Nugan

Nugan

    AVENator

  • AVEN Members
  • 3,961 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 03:52 AM

Good god, I feel like a time traveler. This still hasn't been resolved? This argument is, literally, 5 years old. That's not an exaggeration. I know, because I was one of the ones arguing loudest half a decade ago.

No amount of rules/roles clarification is going to end this dispute, because it's not a rules dispute, not really. It's a dispute of personalities, and semantic changes won't change the psychologies (pathologies?) of those involved.

If you want to solve this problem, drastically reduce the size of the Admod team. How many posts does this forum get daily, a hundred, two hundred? How often is any kind of disciplinary action really necessary? Once a month? One every two weeks?

One Admin and two or three moderators could easily handle everything, assuming they met two criteria: 1) they were really, honestly active on a daily basis and not just camping the position to compensate for feelings of inadequacy to prove something to themselves, 2) they were long time members who were honestly respected by the vast majority of members, had no history of pettiness or overreactions, and were transparent and trustworthy.

This isn't a problem unique to AVEN. I've seen it play out in other online communities. If admin/moderator roles are treated like political positions rather than simple jobs, you have a problem. If you have nearly as many mods as forums, and only a moderately active community, you will also have problems.

I'm not suggested that mods be fired. I'm saying that those mods who have become inactive should step down in an amiable way, and understand that losing a meaningless title doesn't decrease their value in the community. Also, I think that mods who leave--for whatever reason--should not be replaced. This would allow the team to be gradually reduced to a more reasonable size.
"With all this extra stressin'
The question I wonder is after death, after my last breath
When will I finally get to rest?" - Tupac Amaru Shakur, "Me Against The World"


Henry lay in de netting, wild,
while the brainfever bird did scales;
Mr. Heartbreak. the New Man,
come to farm a crazy land;
an image of the dead on the fingernail
of a newborn child.
- John Berryman, "Dream Song 5"


www.dykal.net

#18 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 12:59 PM

Good god, I feel like a time traveler. This still hasn't been resolved? This argument is, literally, 5 years old. That's not an exaggeration. I know, because I was one of the ones arguing loudest half a decade ago.

No amount of rules/roles clarification is going to end this dispute, because it's not a rules dispute, not really. It's a dispute of personalities, and semantic changes won't change the psychologies (pathologies?) of those involved.



Hi Nug

this bit ^^^^^^^^^^^^

is what worries me the most and I have mentioned it

when the same problems happen you always have to look at the consistencies and the variables

when there is a problem year in year out if you do not change the consistent all you will have is a old book with a new cover and that's my biggest fear on any review within aven

someone/some people in the back room are the cause of this..not all but some..if they are not changed then the same standard will prevail but under a slightly more polished less obvious way externally but the same internally never the less and this boomerang of poor performance will no doubt come around again
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#19 Nugan

Nugan

    AVENator

  • AVEN Members
  • 3,961 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 02:13 PM

when there is a problem year in year out if you do not change the consistent all you will have is a old book with a new cover and that's my biggest fear on any review within aven

someone/some people in the back room are the cause of this..not all but some..if they are not changed then the same standard will prevail but under a slightly more polished less obvious way externally but the same internally never the less and this boomerang of poor performance will no doubt come around again


This is exactly it. Whether it's in two week or two years, the problem will recur. It's like a rotting tooth. You can take antibiotics whenever the infection spreads to your gums and sinuses, watch the symptoms disappear, and wait for the infection to return a few months later, or you can pull the tooth.

Unfortunately, we're too squeamish to pull it, and we have been for years. We are letting this problem return again and again, because we are worried about the temporary pain it would cause the community.

But I guess that's understandable. No one wants to be singled out for removal from the team. That's why I suggested dumping all nonessential mods and admins, and that would be nearly everyone, good or bad.

Looking at Son's list of Admin tasks, it's clear what ridiculous lengths we are willing to go to in order to hold multiple people in positions that could be performed by a single person. Aside from having a separate Admin for the chats, which seems reasonable, the other positions simply entail taking the generic role performed easily by one admin on most sites, and splitting it into needless subsections.
"With all this extra stressin'
The question I wonder is after death, after my last breath
When will I finally get to rest?" - Tupac Amaru Shakur, "Me Against The World"


Henry lay in de netting, wild,
while the brainfever bird did scales;
Mr. Heartbreak. the New Man,
come to farm a crazy land;
an image of the dead on the fingernail
of a newborn child.
- John Berryman, "Dream Song 5"


www.dykal.net

#20 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 02:33 PM

another site i use and one of the best...... tends to speak in basic english not this fancy schmancy..they have very few mods and the situation is largely member regulated

but even then those mods are only replaced as in dead mans shoes type of situations and do not give a situation for regular performance reviews much in the way yearly elections would

I do see the effort is being made..but with the same key ingredients still in place I feel we are getting the emperors new clothes rather than a new shiny properly fixed something
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#21 Nalle Neversure

Nalle Neversure

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,982 posts
  • A/Sexuality:Cutie sniffer-dog ;)

Posted 13 October 2010 - 06:30 PM

I would like to share some information about being a mod. It can take up to 4 hours to read one single forum (in my case, Gender). It usually takes 2 to 3 hours, every day. And Gender Forum isn't even that busy...

How many volunteers would want to spend all day modding if AVEN only had a few mods? :mellow:

Posted Image ~ it takes a fool to remain sane ~ Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


#22 pawprint prettysure

pawprint prettysure

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,539 posts
  • Location:Danger Line

Posted 13 October 2010 - 06:35 PM

So, first we are told that we HAVE TO refill every single mod position that comes open. And now you're basically saying that we should NOT refill the positions? Which one is it?

And if you think two or three moderators could read through the whole boards, then those mods better have nothing else to do. Reading every single post takes a hell of a lot of time. Unless you're suggesting that we stop moderating altogether and let members moderate themselves?

You've been a moderator, right, Nugan? When was this? Do you know what it's like now? Do you know how many reports we get? How many disciplinary discussions we have? I'm asking because I'm curious.

When it feels like a kick in the teeth, I can take it.
Throw your stones and you won't see me breaking.
Say what you want, take your shots.
You're setting me free with one more kick in the teeth.


#23 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 06:49 PM

I don't think I said this forum should have less paw..in fact you may rememebr I have said more..but you can't take that as okay and then have elections yearly poo poo'd

i personally..because of the time zones feel we will tend to have more mods than most domestic sites and lets face it more forums are just largely that one country..aven covers most of america, canada and europe

given that we have a lot of young people who all seem to think every word must be heard from the latest anime craze to ..my parents don't understand me..that is a lot of shit to trawl through to see if any of it is worthy of mod attention

we could..like ebay..largely not moderate the forums and have mods act when members contact them..but we all know ebays customer service has more shite in it than my toilet

but..given our mods are volunteers do they need to read every single thread when most of them are non mod worthy?

it might take some pressure off the mods if they were alerted by members rather than go looking for that needle in a haystack and reading every bloody word in every sentence?

this then might free them up to deal with the day to day stuff that is mod worthy?
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#24 Nalle Neversure

Nalle Neversure

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,982 posts
  • A/Sexuality:Cutie sniffer-dog ;)

Posted 13 October 2010 - 07:00 PM

but..given our mods are volunteers do they need to read every single thread when most of them are non mod worthy?

it might take some pressure off the mods if they were alerted by members rather than go looking for that needle in a haystack and reading every bloody word in every sentence?

this then might free them up to deal with the day to day stuff that is mod worthy?

Yes, we do need to read everything.

Most of what we read requires no actions but the things that do -deleting duplicate posts, moving things, possible TOS breaks etc- need to be found somehow. For example, if I split a discussion from another topic, I need to read every post and tick those that I want to split.

Unless you suggest we should leave duplicates and stuff as they are and only act on TOS breaks when/if someone reports them?

Posted Image ~ it takes a fool to remain sane ~ Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


#25 Nugan

Nugan

    AVENator

  • AVEN Members
  • 3,961 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 07:32 PM

If you are reading every post, maybe that's part of the problem.

Do police sit on every street corner, waiting for a law to be broken? Of course not. Sure they might set up a speed trap on a stretch of highway know to attract scofflaws, or camp a dangerous neighborhood, but otherwise they most wait for crimes to be reported, then act to clean up the situation and prevent it from recurring.

If they did camp every corner, you can bet they would get restless and start acting on minor infractions that would otherwise have gone unnoticed, starting more trouble than they prevent. The same is true of mods. If we expect them to read every post, looking for problems, they'll be tempted to find them or create them to feel like their work is worthwhile.

So, no, there is no way a smaller mod team could read every post, but that's not necessary, and, in fact, probably harmful.

A smaller team could easily respond to problems that do get reported and keep an eye on forums and threads that they think are likely to invite trouble. And this, really, is all mods need to do.

So, first we are told that we HAVE TO refill every single mod position that comes open. And now you're basically saying that we should NOT refill the positions? Which one is it?


Who told you that you had to refill every position? I don't think I made that argument.

Unless you're suggesting that we stop moderating altogether and let members moderate themselves?

Honestly, in a lot of instances, that would probably cause fewer problems. But I don't think mods should leave every dispute up to the members to fight out, just that their role should be decreased.

If you have mods reading every post in every thread in every forum, you are doing way more than you have to do. This also increases the likelihood that a mod will step into a dispute that would have resolved itself too early and incite a bigger problem.

You've been a moderator, right, Nugan? When was this? Do you know what it's like now? Do you know how many reports we get? How many disciplinary discussions we have? I'm asking because I'm curious.


Yes, I was a mod, years ago. Of course, I don't think the site is actually much larger now than it was then, since that was at the height of the asexuality fad in the media. I don't know exactly how many reports you are getting, but I imagine not much than one or two a week. Of course, you, as a mod, actually have that information, so, if I'm wrong, please correct me.

Unless you suggest we should leave duplicates and stuff as they are and only act on TOS breaks when/if someone reports them?


Yes, I do suggest that. Or, rather, mods should make cosmetic fixes if they happen to see them, but not spend an excessive amount of time looking for them. And, yes, absolutely, you should only enforce a TOS breach if it's reported. If there's no report, then likely no one was upset by it and forcing yourself into the situation with a warning or a ban will only invite conflict where it didn't exist.
"With all this extra stressin'
The question I wonder is after death, after my last breath
When will I finally get to rest?" - Tupac Amaru Shakur, "Me Against The World"


Henry lay in de netting, wild,
while the brainfever bird did scales;
Mr. Heartbreak. the New Man,
come to farm a crazy land;
an image of the dead on the fingernail
of a newborn child.
- John Berryman, "Dream Song 5"


www.dykal.net

#26 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:16 PM


Unless you suggest we should leave duplicates and stuff as they are and only act on TOS breaks when/if someone reports them?


Yes, I do suggest that. Or, rather, mods should make cosmetic fixes if they happen to see them, but not spend an excessive amount of time looking for them. And, yes, absolutely, you should only enforce a TOS breach if it's reported. If there's no report, then likely no one was upset by it and forcing yourself into the situation with a warning or a ban will only invite conflict where it didn't exist.



I have to agree on this part

quite often too many threads are being locked for mods purposes rather than a request of a member

when ever I am unhappy with something i always report it or pm a mod and ask them to have a look at it

why should the mods make unecessary work for themselves ?

the down side of that is that sometimes it depends..from my experiences..it depends on who is asking for a review rather than the need for a review

only today I have used a report button, then pm'd a mod..no action was taken and the abuse was allowed to continue

this i feel is because mods have too much to look at that is not neccessary and missing the things that are
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#27 Tanwen

Tanwen

    Phantom Poster

  • Moderators
  • 31,898 posts
  • Location:The Atrix is MINE!

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:19 PM

If someone makes the effort to post, don't you think it deserves to be read? Or are you implying that only certain posts are worthy of a mod's attention?

"You lose nothing when fighting for a cause ... In my mind the losers are those who don't have a cause they care about." - Muhammad Ali

 

"I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice"  - Abraham Lincoln

 

"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."  G. K. Chesterton
 

 


#28 User12345

User12345

    Aeros Incarnate

  • AVEN Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:29 PM

And, yes, absolutely, you should only enforce a TOS breach if it's reported. If there's no report, then likely no one was upset by it and forcing yourself into the situation with a warning or a ban will only invite conflict where it didn't exist.

I agree with this. I don't really know how often threads get locked or people get warned for other reasons than a report by a member but I think it shouldn't be done for another reason.

If someone makes the effort to post, don't you think it deserves to be read? Or are you implying that only certain posts are worthy of a mod's attention?

It deserves to be read, but does it necessarily have to be read by a mod?

#29 PiF

PiF

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • Banned
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:29 PM

If someone makes the effort to post, don't you think it deserves to be read? Or are you implying that only certain posts are worthy of a mod's attention?



I think tan..we hear time and time again how much pressure the mods are under

the mods roll is to ensure they monitor,...but not read every single letter and word...monitor and step in when a mod involvement is needed

most of what we type in aven as already admitted is not mod worthy so to tie up a valueable resource in such a way makes no sense at all..and if I am being honest..means some take thier eye off the ball due to this boring and monotanous task

a mods roll is not to be a proof reader..it is to ensure smooth forums happen and when they do not..step in for best resolution

to tie up a mod role resource with countless hours of proof reading seems harsh on the mods and a waste to the community
I am a vapid sod.... Apparently... Sounds kinda kinky

#30 pawprint prettysure

pawprint prettysure

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 4,539 posts
  • Location:Danger Line

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:34 PM

If they did camp every corner, you can bet they would get restless and start acting on minor infractions that would otherwise have gone unnoticed, starting more trouble than they prevent. The same is true of mods. If we expect them to read every post, looking for problems, they'll be tempted to find them or create them to feel like their work is worthwhile.


Apparently we have a different view, here. Or then I just have somehow failed to notice how moderators go looking for problems. Every instance that the moderators have brought up have been about serious issues that do need a closer look. Even if we decide that no action is necessary.


So, first we are told that we HAVE TO refill every single mod position that comes open. And now you're basically saying that we should NOT refill the positions? Which one is it?


Who told you that you had to refill every position? I don't think I made that argument.


No, PiF made that argument. So, you can see how impossible it is to please everyone.

I don't know exactly how many reports you are getting, but I imagine not much than one or two a week. Of course, you, as a mod, actually have that information, so, if I'm wrong, please correct me.


It really depends. Yeah, some weeks we do get only a few reports. But in the last few weeks we have dealt with 15 reports. That's way higher than "one or two a week". It highly depends on what kind of stuff people are talking about. And we have to take a look at every single report.

Or, rather, mods should make cosmetic fixes if they happen to see them, but not spend an excessive amount of time looking for them.


How are the moderators supposed to "happen to see something" if they're not even reading the forums? Isn't that what you're suggesting? That the moderators shouldn't be reading the forums but just leave it all up to the membership? And if something gets reported, then go take a look?

only today I have used a report button, then pm'd a mod..no action was taken and the abuse was allowed to continue


The problem with the report button is that moderators cannot see the reports. Only admins can. So, it might take a little while before the report reaches the moderator in question.
You can PM the moderator but if they're not online, it's gonna take some time before they read it. If they are online, they might not know what to do with it and want to ask the opinions of other admods. Again, this takes time.
Moderators do have the powers to act within their own fora, but especially new moderators are still trying to get the hang of things and aren't confident enough to "just do it" without consulting other admods.

We do read every report. In some cases, moderators act on their own and the results can be seen sooner. Sometimes the moderators don't know what to do / aren't sure what to do, so, there's a poll. And again, these take time.
I am aware of the fact that we are sometimes quite slow with our decisions. This clarification of roles hopefully will help with that at least somewhat.

When it feels like a kick in the teeth, I can take it.
Throw your stones and you won't see me breaking.
Say what you want, take your shots.
You're setting me free with one more kick in the teeth.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users