| Author |
Topic:
Moderator Accountability
|
Myri_Antilles
Registered:
Aug '04
|
Date Posted:
7/1/05 3:55pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
TKeira_Lea posted:
I didn't make a thread in Comms or Resource about the specific events, and of the Rebels, or whatever you want to call us, Breezy was the one who did. And her Comms thread was apropos IMO. I think that things boiling just spewed over on their own. What happened at WHTG? was a clear indication of that. RS asked where all the readers/writers had gone and there had been much discussion among writers that these boards were just unbearable to come to. So an innocent question got some honest responses. I don't know how anyone could have stopped that ball rolling.
I didn't say you personally did.  And I mostly included that to say that the petition was on the same, public level.
What happened in WHTG came after the petition and after things had already started getting out of control. Hopefully, in the future, things will be resolved even before that.
TKeira_Lea posted:
As far as making sense, I am a bit confused. You say in the first sentence to point out one or two mods by name but then in the second sentence above you say use a general thread. So which is it? And as far as locking threads, that's always been a sure way to make people get even hotter. I'm not sure anyone could come in with a general thread, get the discussion started then, "Sorry. Locking this."
Sorry, guess that wasn't as clear as I thought.  I meant that as long as the thread or petition points out mods by name or strongly implies that it's a particular person, it should be a last resort. Sorry about that.
Also, if the discussion going is good, it shouldn't be stopped, no. But, if people are just getting fed up, locking it with an explanation might give people a chance to calm down. <shrugs> Just my two cents.
-----signature-----
big sis of Myra  adopter of Jedi_Tigris | Master to correllian_ale padawan sis of MysteriousRaven13, Jaina_Solo_15, and any other padawans my crazy master gets  "boys can't live with 'em, can freeze 'em in carbonite" - Jaina_Solo_15 
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
LadyPadme
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Sep '02
|
Date Posted:
7/1/05 7:10pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
In the interest of moving things along, I would like to set Tuesday, July 5 at 6PM as the end point for this thread. The issues that had been discussed in this thread were:
1) Moderator accountability/moderator activity
2) Role of admininstrators in evaluating/redressing issues related to moderators
3) Grievance process in TFN
4) PM privacy
If there are still issues you feel are unresolved regarding moderator accountability, please bring them up now. If there is still an active ongoing discussion by Tuesday evening, we can re-evaluate the close time.
-----signature-----
Crest MD Naimé Evil Twin of Gabri_Jade  When a baby smiles the world is happy  VOTE OBAMA '08
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ophelia
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/1/05 10:35pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
- Date Edited:
7/1/05 10:41pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
ophelia
|
I would like to see greater flexibility in TFN's grievance policy, in order to encourage more reporting of early-stage complaints. It's true that some of these complaints would die a natural death if ignored, but others would grow to nightmarish proportions. The more legitimate avenues there are to communicate concerns to mods and admins, the lower the likelihood that something will mistakenly be ignored and swell into a monster.
One option for increased flexibility would be to open up legitimate avenues for group complaints. The fact that there were more signatures on the "no confidence" petition than there were PM's to admins suggests that some people are more comfortable expressing their unhappiness alongside others, and/or believe that others can express their concerns better than they can. Admins don't have to promise to perform the action requested in a petition to "listen to" it. The number of signatories will say something about the extent of the problem--probably more accurately so than the number of PM's admins receive--unless PM-sending patterns change dramatically. Simply professing willingness to read petitions and consider them on their own merits would likely encourage more complainants to attempt communication, and thereby open more avenues for possible solutions. A related idea is the "boilerplate" style of sending grievance communications. This is used by nearly all professional activists, since people often balk at trying to come up with original text to express their concerns, especially when the issue is complex and extensive evidence is required (and in our case, links as well, perhaps to deeply-buried threads). The boilerplate format is essentially a form letter that people can customize to express their individual concerns. It performs much the same function as a petition, but allows people to remove or add to the original text in order to reflect individual differences of opinion. Given the state of admins' in-boxes, the petition format is probably better than 20 near-identical PM's, but both methods encourage communication from a wider variety of users. It takes time, effort, good communication skills, and not a little courage to write up an evidence-filled, link-referenced original PM involving a complaint about the boards, and then send it to an administrator a user doesn't really know. The number of individuals willing and able to do this is small. If they frequently contact staff members about problems, they may be dismissed as "the usual whiners." Making it easier for users with less time, confidence, or skill in communication to seek help from the administration will help reveal which problems really do touch everyuser and which only matter to a select few. (Actually, I'm sure admins get a lot of PM's that are bewildering and nearly-illiterate, but I'm making the assumption that "everyuser" is at least moderately sane and coherant, and will at times have legitimate complaints.)
Users already can, and obviously do, turn to solutions like these, but the message thus far is that nothing besides the individual, original PM, preferably with evidence, will be seriously considered. Since this method discourages such a large percentage of users from seeking communication with TFN staff, those who are "weeded out" are left with two choices--they can either give up and live with whatever is bothering them, or they can go through extra-legitimate channels. The fact that there were more no-confidence petition signatures than individual, original PM's shows that some users skipped at least one step in the official grievance process entirely, and went straight to a "non-legitimate" means of protest. When the mere act of protesting becomes an expression of defiance, attempts at true communication tend to be blighted from the start. I have no idea why the "Rebel Alliance" chose that name, other than the fact that they're Star Wars fans, but their sole act of rebellion wasn't the content of their protest, it was the method--or at least it's the method that is most widely-criticized. Remove the "forbidden" nature of the method, and you remove much of the "rebellion," and the unnecessarily adversarial dynamic it creates. I imagine that the admins get a fair number of PM's that say, "I don't like Mod X. Get rid of him," and no one gets unduly excited. Turn that same sentiment into a petition, and suddenly it becomes an act of insurrection, and therefore a perceived threat not only to the mod in question, but the order of the boards in general. (I suspect that this potential threat to the boards' underlying order is what many "Loyalists" were reacting to. If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?)
By expressing a willingness to consider grievances expressed in a format other than individual, original PM's, the administration can keep more unhappy "everyusers" in the fold rather than inadvertently encouraging them to "rebel." "Real-life" politicians, appointed officials, and those who serve the public in any capacity most definitely pay attention to forms of protest other than individually-written original letters. If they waited for that comparatively-rare form of communication, they would miss what the majority of their constituency was saying to them.
Again, mods and admins don't have to "obey" petitions, form letters, or one original PM with 23 "I agree with him" PM's that come after it. If 100 people have a stupid idea, it's still a stupid idea. However, even if a request is stupid, it makes a big difference in terms of board functioning whether 10 people or 100 people have that stupid idea. It would be a shame to set up the grievance process in such a way that 90 possible attempts at communication don't materialize, and admins were left with a misleadingly-low number of complaints.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
TKeira_Lea
Registered:
Oct '02
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 5:04am
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
Ophelia: If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?
I'm going to not sound as offended as I am, but how did the Rebels break the rules? We used a PM to contact the admin with one voice. We changed our icons and changed our sigs. Did you see Rebels getting banned or mod edited? Just because someone doesn't like the way we chose to express our concerns for the state of the boards does not mean it was "breaking the rules."
And how exactly did the Rebels get rid of a mod? What I saw was Sape acknowledge that we had legitimate complaints and then publicly question Dana and Herman on them. Dana never came back to answer him. Herman never even joined the party, was demoted for inactivity and chose to not fight the demotion when he returned.
It is statements like that which generally result in "mobs" wanting to defend themselves. I am sure any Rebel would feel offended and want to defend themselves. What you made was a statement of perception not based on any fact, but it appears as a statement of fact which is entirely false.
As for another point you made, a form letter - sort of like the example KK gave - posted with the greivance process might help people formulate their thoughts.
In respect to people using PMs, everyone is going to have to try harder. I think the admin came to a realization - actually read the PMs and investigate them. Honestly, why some people thought a petition would work and why they chose to sign it was because they had no doubt that my original PM was clear on the issues as where the PMs of other users who had admitted sending one. Many were disappointed and disallusioned when nothing happened. And even an admin edit of the PM quote would have looked like something. The feeling expressed to me was that Sape obviously felt it was a couple disgruntled users who had it out for Dana and that he was given that impression because he trusted Dana's defense of the situations. So we felt that if we expressed in one PM with a cluster of names all the reasons we lacked confidence in Dana's modding that it would give the impression that it was more than a couple. That was the underlying reason for the petition.
So yes users need to exercise their right to approach a mod or admin. Will this experience make me less likely to? No. Will I wonder if I'm getting heard? A little, but I have to think we've all learned to be better users, mods and admin through the course of this.
-----signature-----
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthBreezy
Title: Retired Mos Everett Cantina Founder & JMPR
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 5:41am
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
TKeira_Lea posted:
Ophelia: If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?
I'm going to not sound as offended as I am, but how did the Rebels break the rules? We used a PM to contact the admin with one voice. We changed our icons and changed our sigs. Did you see Rebels getting banned or mod edited? Just because someone doesn't like the way we chose to express our concerns for the state of the boards does not mean it was "breaking the rules."
*sigh* I agree.
Look, for people to take the attitude that someone (or a group of people) "Broke the rules" is compleatly acinine. There was no co-ordinated trolling attacks, no mass flaming, no mass violation of any TOS. Just a loose, large conglomerate of people who saw that something was wrong.
There have been a lot of positive changes, some administraive, some user based. There is now a 'regular' greivance proceedure in place. Our mods have bent over backwards to help remedy the situations that they can, Users are taking a more proactive role in community building.
Monday morning quarterbacking and accusations are nothing but a giant leap backwards.
-----signature-----
Although the singer is silent, There is still the truth of the song. http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/28747916/p1/ Sailing little Boats - with GoldenJedi Anywhere is possible.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Healer_Leona
Registered:
Jul '00
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 7:17am
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
My understandings...
1) Moderator accountability/moderator activity
While mod activity is still somewhat of an odd expectation in some respects, it has proven obvious that being visible beyond the strict modding actions gives the users the feel of being approachable and a part of community both of which are beneficial in modding.
Mod Accountibilty is an easy one to me. We are role models in our actions and posts. As we have more power (I dislike that word) than regular users, we are held to a higher standard and therefore have a greater responsibility to act accordingly.
2) Role of admininstrators in evaluating/redressing issues related to moderators
3) Grievance process in TFN
I see these two things together adn feel that the new guidelines related to Moderator Complaint Resolution Process is a step in the right direction. I'm going to remain positive that this will help in curtailing something like what the fanfic boards have been through.
4) PM privacy
My now informed understanding is that posting of a PM without the permission of both parties is strictly forbidden and can result in a punitive actions that may include a ban.
Beyond this, I don't think I have anything to add to this particular discussion.
As to ( If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?)
I'm going to go by the assumption it is used as a mean to show what the 'loyalists' perception may have been. Not what someone is saying as factually happened. Because IMHO I agree that while people may have not like what was done, that it was extreme and hurtful as well, I did not see it as breaking any rules.
-----signature-----
Still crazy after all these years.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
LadyPadme
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Sep '02
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 9:05am
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
ophelia,
While I do agree that a good grievance process is one step in getting grievances solved here, I think the larger problem in this particular case wasn't that grievances weren't being aired, as that grievances weren't being heard. A complaint is a complaint is a complaint, and even if DarthSapient gets 50 a day, as head admin, he needs to look into them. If he can't he should delegate to other admins. If they can't they should have more admins doing the work. It's nice that the word 'communication problem' now raises a red flag for him, but still, there could one day be another big bruhaha brewing that's under a different red flag. What happens then? My only hope is that the method of review of grievances will allow the admins to spot early on which issues deserve more immediate attention than others. Unless grievances are heard, no system of airing them will work.
As for the statement: "If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?" I think that's a little extreme. The petition was definitely going outside of the box, but there was no actual rule breaking involved in any of this process.
-----signature-----
Crest MD Naimé Evil Twin of Gabri_Jade When a baby smiles the world is happy VOTE OBAMA '08
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ophelia
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 1:05pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
For the love of Pete, will people please look at the whole quote?(I suspect that this potential threat to the boards' underlying order is what many "Loyalists" were reacting to. If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?) People have reapeatedly said they don't understand what the "Loyalists" are complaining about. The parenthetical comment above contains my theory about what bothers them. We have people here who are associated with that position, whether they label themselves "Loyalists" or not. They can confirm or deny whether this theory is true. If you're still offended, tell them.
Thank you for trying not to show how offended you are, TKL. I will try not to show how irritated I am. It's quite possible I won't be very successful. I have tried very hard to name names in this FG, since it only seems to cause trouble when I don't. When I'm talking about Herman, I say "Herman." When I'm talking about Leona, I say "Leona." When I mean, "The Rebels scared a lot of people with the WHTG thread," I say, "The Rebels scared a lot of people with the WHTG thread."
So, when I say, (I suspect that this potential threat to the boards' underlying order is what many "Loyalists" were reacting to. If you can "break the rules" to get rid of a mod, what will you do next?) That is exact what I mean. I do not mean, "Breezy and TKL are terrible people who ought never to have signed a petition that I just spent 300 words defending as a legitimate form of protest."
Please notice "Loyalist" is in quotation marks. Notice "break the rules" is in quotation marks. Notice the use of the word "suspect," which is generally not used in relation to one's own convictions. Please notice the whole thing being in a parenthetical comment starting with a tentative attribution to the Loyalists, a group I have never been associated with. Most of all, please notice the fact that the sentiment expressed is 180 degrees counter to the rest of my argument. If you don't notice that, then there is some kind of terrible communication problem going on here.
This is the second time in a handful of days that I've had people get upset and accuse me of somehow aiming veiled criticisms at them. What is the problem here? The crisis is supposedly past. Why are people still gunning for dreadful things the other person "really means" by what they said?
I am trying to think of a way to be specific about how this makes me feel without saying anything that will make the situation worse. I probably can't, so I won't try. I'd hold off on posting until I was less upset, but 3 out of 4 posters above me have taken a quote wildly out of context and expressed what an awful thing to say it was, so I'm attempting damage control before this goes any further.
Here, in a nutshell, is what my post above was about:
SAPIENT I THINK YOU SHOULD LET PEOPLE SEND YOU PETITIONS.
I hope that clears up any misconceptions.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Healer_Leona
Registered:
Jul '00
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 3:07pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
Another prime example we have a ways to go in our communication.
For my part in continuing misconceptions, I apologize for while I wasn't sure of the context of lines used, I should have simply posted with a question to understand better what was meant, or even better PM'd the question before jumping to conclusions.
I am trying to think of a way to be specific about how this makes me feel without saying anything that will make the situation worse.
For this I'm sorry.
-----signature-----
Still crazy after all these years.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthBreezy
Title: Retired Mos Everett Cantina Founder & JMPR
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/2/05 5:21pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
ophelia posted:
That is exact what I mean. I do not mean, "Breezy and TKL are terrible people who ought never to have signed a petition that I just spent 300 words defending as a legitimate form of protest."
I hope that clears up any misconceptions.
Point of minor contention/misconception: My name was NOT on the petition. I think since so many people take what is written here as gospel, I'd better clear that up...
-----signature-----
Although the singer is silent, There is still the truth of the song. http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/28747916/p1/ Sailing little Boats - with GoldenJedi Anywhere is possible.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ophelia
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/3/05 2:16am
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
Point of minor contention/misconception: My name was NOT on the petition
Fair enough. I don't think the list was ever posted, so people tend to assume anyone who posted in the JEDI thread signed. For that matter, *I* posted in the JEDI thread, and I didn't sign either.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Myri_Antilles
Registered:
Aug '04
|
Date Posted:
7/5/05 4:56pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
I have one question I’d very much like the signers of the petition to answer:
Why, if you didn’t intend to oust Dana, as you’ve said several times, did you title your petition “a petition of no confidence,” which looks to any Star Wars fan like a bold reference to the ousting of the Chancellor in TPM?
-----signature-----
big sis of Myra adopter of Jedi_Tigris | Master to correllian_ale padawan sis of MysteriousRaven13, Jaina_Solo_15, and any other padawans my crazy master gets "boys can't live with 'em, can freeze 'em in carbonite" - Jaina_Solo_15
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthBreezy
Title: Retired Mos Everett Cantina Founder & JMPR
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/5/05 5:15pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
- Date Edited:
7/5/05 5:16pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
DarthBreezy
|
It was exactly that, a list of users who had lost confidance in Dana's Modding abilities, but I want to know is:
WHY ARE WE STILL ON THAT TOPIC?????
Dana is NO LONGER A MODERATOR, it is a NON-ISSUE and is only serving to stir up a topic (Edit: and a lot of hurt feelings I must Add) that has been laid to rest. If you want to discuss it, why not PM the people in question, though I think you'll get the same answer I posted above. 
-----signature-----
Although the singer is silent, There is still the truth of the song. http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/28747916/p1/ Sailing little Boats - with GoldenJedi Anywhere is possible.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
obi_ew
Registered:
Apr '02
|
Date Posted:
7/5/05 5:22pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
|
I agree. That's been explained over and over again. Perhaps if you still have questions you could PM the parties involved rather than rehash it here yet again.
-----signature-----
In Loving Memory Of CC Price of Courage- Obi/Whie/Luke- http://boards.theforce.net/The_Saga/b10476/20124958/?37 Updated 4/20 Finally!!
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Myri_Antilles
Registered:
Aug '04
|
Date Posted:
7/5/05 6:00pm
Subject:
RE: Moderator Accountability
|
|
Because, until this issue has been completely sorted out, there is a strong chance of something nearly identical happening again. I think we can all agree that we don't want that. Also, if petitions will be used in the future, we need to figure out what constitutes a good petition so that the same thing doens't happen all over again. Obviously, something went wrong here, and we need to discuss just what that is. The main problem with the petition, as I see it, was that it didn't just try to point out issues in fanfic; it demanded a "vote of no confidence" in a mod. This isn't a beneficial way to open communication. Ousting a mod should be done with extreme caution and used only as a very last resort. Also, the decision to even consider asking a mod to step down should only be made by the administration, not the users.
-----signature-----
big sis of Myra adopter of Jedi_Tigris | Master to correllian_ale padawan sis of MysteriousRaven13, Jaina_Solo_15, and any other padawans my crazy master gets "boys can't live with 'em, can freeze 'em in carbonite" - Jaina_Solo_15
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
