What constitutes baiting?

Well, I think it's time for a discussion. What, in the opinion of the current administration, constitutes baiting? To me, baiting is calling out a particular user, often as a certain type of flame, or making a post that's offensive or inflammatory in the hopes of galvanizing others into outraged action. *Edited* What I'd like to ask here is whether it is generally considered baiting to "talk back" to a mod that way. As a mod, I think my general attitude was to try to let light-hearted jokes about "fascist mods" roll off me unless it was obviously a serious attack. *edited*

I'm also rather curious about the issue of IP banning versus non-IP banning. At what point is an offense considered serious enough that a mod should decide to ban the IP address? At what point is a username ban considered sufficient? Personally, I don't think I ever did an IP ban (or host address ban, way back when that was still possible) unless the person in question was a serial troll along the lines of Beal, barry, etc., but I'm wondering if the general policy has changed (though I'll fully admit I may have been more laissez-faire than many).


Strilo edit: Comms is not a platform for a few users to address a specific situation with a specific mod or mods. I am locking this until an admin can come in and see if there is merit to discussion of the issues raised. Until then, let's leave this lie...

Edit 2: I'm going to unlock this to adress the larger issue of baiting, as its a legitimate question that I get questions about a lot. I'd rather the Fan Fic situation be taken to a Moderator Complaint Process for any discussion by the parties involved as there could be extenuating circumstances, context, etc. and the process allows for that to be handled by the user(s), admins and parties involved. So, again, discuss baiting, but I'm removing the part about Fan Fic, especially until we admins know exactly is going on. Thanks!

 

*edited: Mod Complaint Process

Well, surely, a lol type of response to a thread like that, obviously deserves an IP ban. Sure would cut out the pesky bother of a banned user making a sock to inquire about the reasoning, and length of the ban. Because, come on, it's not like user requests are ever ignored.

 

Honestly, I'm awfully curious myself. Ignoring the specifics of that thread, which I was a part of, is it baiting to joke about something someone says? Is it board-specific? 'Cause we joke about all kinds of stuff in the YJCC. I'm really looking for clairity here on what I can expect to have edited or not.

 

Considering it goes in your usernotes, and so many edits = a ban, you should be concerned.

 

I hear you loud and clear, Juli, and I share in your concern over the handling of this particular issue. But I also want to try to keep this discussion from veering too much into complaining over that one thread. What I'd like most is a straight answer on what baiting is and an explanation of what can be done to ensure that mods will adhere to the guidelines for editing and banning for baiting. Getting that rather baffling ban and lock resolved is only half of what I'm going for here.

 

Well, if it's a lighthearted comment, I don't think it should be considered a bait, period. It's fairly easy to see when someone is truly screwing with another user, and when they're just making a lighthearted comment. It's not that hard to distinguish.

 

*Edit*

Moderator Complaint Process

If there are specific rules in place regarding the specific baiting of mods, then it would be nice to have those laid out so we can all avoid this in the future.

It's unfortunate as well that the thread in question was locked, since I believe had the comment just been left alone the topic wouldn't have been derailed at all (and it was a very interesting topic of discussion, too). I saw it as a harmless joke and was posting a reply to the original discussion topic when I realized it was about to be locked.

I'd also be interested in seeing some clarifications as to what constitutes baiting, especially since I tend to be a bit sarcastic when making jokes as well and am just as likely to overstep the line.

 

I know we're trying to avoid that particular thread, but the whole thing baffled me. I was in the midst of drafting a response when the thread was suddenly locked. Over a side post? And am I to understand that a user got banned over laughing at a joke? I can't believe that any of those posts constitute baiting in any way. I saw the original post that was edited for baiting. It was basically a joke, playing on Padme's line from RotS about how liberty dies. He even connected it to the topic. Then he went as far as to point out that he was just kidding.

How can an intentional use of humor whose topic happens to be a mod bear the penalty of both an edit and a subsequent warning when it can be understood that it was done in jest? Or are the mods no go zones to anything other than praise and agreement?

 

Easy now people. This really is something that relates to one particular situation and thus should be directed in a PM to the mod in question. As for the IP ban, let's not be hasty in reacting to that. It is quite possible that was unintentional by the mod in question. Again that could be solved by a PM rather than starting a thread in Comms about it. Nothing has changed on the general rule of thumb for IP bans. We generally only do them in trolling or spamvertising cases.

As far as baiting goes, baiting a user is baiting a user. It makes no difference, nor does it change the severity, if that user happens to be a mod. Honestly, I try to err on the side of caution when it comes to baiting directed at a mod. After all, we should be experienced enough and professional enough to know that sometimes it comes with the territory.

 

Strilo, I beg to differ. I'm not just looking for an answer from the mods who were involved in the thread. I want a straightforward explanation of what the policy here is, whether things have changed when I wasn't looking or not, and how exactly mod behavior is controlled and the policies for moderating baiting enforced. This is not a matter for PM. I know the rules concerning taking it to PM vs. not taking it to PM quite well.

Edit: Okeydoke, thanks for the part you edited in.

Edit 2: What the heck, a lock? My question about mod accountability has yet to be answered (silly me, I should have known that question never gets answered), and incidentally, I don't think strilo is a Comms mod. If he thinks it's Rhonda's call to decide if the thread stays open or not, he should be letting her decide.

 

Nothing has changed with any of these issues and this thread was precipitated by the situation in Fan Fiction. This is a situation where you should have PM'd the mod in question. As I said before, the situation with IP bans has not changed. And baiting is addressed here:

 

Since this involved me mainly let me reply.

I have been unbanned but that was only a side note to a much bigger problem. Leaving aside the fact that the situation given as an example was a display of moderator abuse over a lame joke, this issue is important. We can't edit things that sound negative otherwise how would Wilderness Comedian still post? I jest, of course.

Seriously, this is an important issue. No way in hell should something be edited because someone thinks its unfunny. This is but on case of many examples in fan fic mostly but also elsewhere. There needs to be a discussion on this matter immediately.

 

Honestly, it really should be clearcut across the boards, because if a user wonders in to a forum they aren't used to posting in, and it's run completely differently than places they're used to, like the JCC for instance, is it really that hard to understand why you'd be perplexed at getting a ban for a simple joke that was directed at nobody?

 

As usual, ASG has the right of it. Ignoring this specific situation nothing can be baiting if it isn't directed at anyone. If we start assuming what something might've meant and ban because of that we are heading down a bad road.

 

We can go onto baiting and it's something I'd like to come back to, but as far as IP bans go, we don't like to do them unless it's completely necessary and there's no one else on the IP. (naughty siblings aside)

I think most times when its done, it's a mistake. In this case it was, and then it was rebanned without an IP ban.

 

Right. The IP address is there by default, so if the mod forgets to delete it out of the field before clicking the ban button, they are IP banned. It's an easy mistake to make, and usually corrected as soon as they realize it.

 

Yeah, I did that recently. IP Ban is the "default", so is easy to miss out sometimes

 

I'm going to reiterate so we are very clear on this: Individual Moderator complaints have a process, so that we don't have a free for all. So, anything, anything regarding that particular situation is being looked into in its appropriate context with all parties involved (if the users so choose to be) and away from this thread.


So now, we move to baiting, the topic of the thread.

 

Indeed.

Is it baiting a moderator, or group of mods, to publicly (i.e., in a thread, not via PM) raise questions about whether they are treating users fairly? Is it baiting a moderator to make a post presenting the reasons why there appears to be unfairness?

For example (and I am trying to make this as hypothetical as possible to avoid discussing any actual thread...) -- Let's say User A, User B, and User C all post in a discussion thread and make the same point. User B's post is edited, but A's and C's are not. Is it baiting a moderator for User D to then post in the thread, questioning why B was edited but A and C were not? Is it baiting for D to explain why it appears that A's and C's posts present exactly the same situation as B's, yet theirs are allowed to stand and B's is edited?

Now, we can make the "editing B's post" scenario into anything else we want. It can be a post edit, or locking a thread, or enforcing a rule about sexual content, or anything else. The point is, will it be considered baiting a mod for a user (any user, the affected one or not) to question the moderator publicly?

 

That sounds like it would be a question about an individual moderating action, and thus a question for a PM. Baiting or not, it seems it would be derailing whatever thread it was in in any case.

 

It's always best to PM a mod to ask why something was edited or you were warned. We rarely let that go on in threads, in fact, it's pretty much not something we'll ever allow. You are allowed to disagree with a mod, absolutely. But when you question an action, and then you bring your friends, who come QFT, it will turn a thread into a train wreck. We have a Moderator Complaint process for a reason, as well as the age old "PM and ask". I get them all the time, "Why did you lock my thread?", "Dude, that was not a bait.", "That was SO not a parody!1!!",etc. We'll be glad to answer questions on our actions, if we don't, ecalate it and go from there.

As far as the baiting question goes, it can be subjective and sometimes may encompass all kinds of things, so it's hard to moderate. We know what sets us off, but others may not. Then again, others may know exactly what sets us off. Myself, I always try to go back and read who said what in an argument and look at who drew first blood and start from there. Also, it helps to know your members. In both Fan Fic and JCC, that's easier than say the movie forums as we are more community oriented. \


Edit(s): Clarity and pre- and post-coffee grammar and spelling.

 

All right. No train wrecking threads, whatever that means...

But let's keep the focus on baiting of a moderator, not baiting between users. That's what Dark Lady Mara raised in the first post.

Again --

So without getting into the actual thread that inspired the question, let's take that general scenario: User makes a post. Mod edits the post. Lots of people - not just User - think the edit is unjustified. You want ALL of those people to PM Mod about the questionable edit, and then ALL of them to pursue the Mod Complaint Process if they think the answer is unacceptable?

Because that's the point that people are raising in this thread: An edit for baiting a moderator doesn't only affect the user who's edited. It affects everyone, because we all have to wonder whether we'll be next. Especially if there's inconsistency in when things are edited and when they aren't, or if the definition of what's editable isn't clear.

It's entirely possible that many people will have questions about what a mod did, not just the person who got edited. So the desired process is that ALL of them take it up by PM, either to the mod in question or the admins.

Just making sure we're clear.


[edit - clarification]

 

What constitutes baiting for me is a comment that elicits a certain type of response. That response can be inflammatory, or just plain off-topic and not appropriate for the current discussion.