Why so heavily moderated?

Is there a reason why these forums are so heavily moderated? I see useful posts getting squashed because they are deemed to not be in exactly the right forum. I see a very heavy hand just about everywhere. I can see it in the new movies forum where you have to try to control spoilers in titles, etc, but this isn't 1998 anymore - it's a much more free and loose internet these days. I don't get it.

 

We're looking at cats and dogs living together! Disaster of Biblical proportions!

 

I haven't seen much of this. Could you give examples?

 

Are you talking about locked threads that say something to the equivalent of "this thread does not belong here" or "there are plenty of threads you can discuss this" then I agree you have a point. In the old days I know it wasn't possible to just redirect threads to where they are supposed to go but this is no longer the case. But to lock a thread without even a link on where you can discuss it seems overly dismissive at best. I've seen this on a number of occasions to new members, 9/10 don't post again after this funnily enough...

As for the heavy handed approach well unfortunately that depends on what forum you visit and what mods you get. This place doesn't have a direct consensus on how mods SHOULD mod, they are there to make sure TOS is enforced, how they do it is up to them. ergo, you will get a mod that will simply edit a post like one would expect from a moderator. Others will use a meme or gif in attempt to be funny I guess. But this is not new, it has been like that since the beginning.

 

It's actually more like the opposite-- things were very much anything goes in those days. Not so much anymore. Comparatively speaking, this is an ancient community. Consequently, most existing guidelines and policies go back a long time, having been hammered out over two decades. Things aren't so much the way they are because they've always been a certain way, but rather because this is the way moderation and the community evolved.

 

Things used to be a lot messier and cluttered. The sheer level of redundant threads became very annoying. Mods had to crack down to avoid having ten threads on the same topic on page one. They had to do a certain amount of busy work every day just to get rid of the redundancies. That’s one of the reasons mods started locking threads more often. Sometimes I disagree with a mod’s decision to lock a thread, but I’ll take a slightly heavy hand over no hand and the total, unnavigable mess that will result.

Mods decide what topics belong in the forum(s) they moderate, and in the process they can (and usually do) teach new users where certain topics belong (and where they don’t belong). If mods don’t correct them, they may not learn. It’s important they learn; posting in the right forum will get the best response, posting in the wrong forum is unlikely to get a good response and may annoy the regular userbase if it happens too often. Of course, mods have to go to some effort to actually educate new users, but sometimes they don’t because they’re human beings and don’t always give 100%. Usually they provide explanations, however.

 

I think the mods do a good job. The only question I have is the off topic thing. Like sometimes it will just be 2 people talking slightly off topic and boom. Then there will be no conversation at all. I can understand a thread going endlessly off topic but I've seen this kill threads many times.

 

That's a good thing. Mods can help keep things neat and not so cluttered. Also the world and people are not so very nice or trustworthy. I used to work in retail, so I know.

 

I don't mind at all the moderation of the moving and locking type. I think it makes the forum much more organized and well structured.

But also when it comes to moderation, is there a relevant topic for discussing bans and banning policy? Where can someone publicly address complaints of that nature, if there even is a spot?

My excitement for these forums has dropped quite a bit, and getting banned half a year ago in what I consider a very unfair manner, has partially caused that. It's no fun when you post good willed posts and then you open the page to see the crimson screen of death. Let alone the fact that you get a longer penalty, because a previous (100%) misunderstanding had resulted in a 3 days ban.

Which sucks, cause I really want to engage in any and every kind of conversation about Star Wars (positive AND negative, but always in a respectful manner) and sometimes it feels like you cannot joke about anything, even when it's obvious that it's a joke. This post is supposed to be a question? Don't ban me for asking please?

 

We don't discuss particular banned users here - that's between the user and the mods. However if you want to discuss bans in general you can open a thread here in Comms.

 

But it needs to be general and high level if posted publicly here. Specific circumstances should have been discussed directly with mods during the unban request process.

 

My experience of the moderation here recently has been pretty good, and fair.

 

Who moderates the moderators?

 

They mod one another.

 

Heirarchy is (from lowest to highest) - moderator, manager, admin, head admin, site owner.

 

I'd ban you all, would make my life a lot easier

 

So when the mods get wild you're the boss? And admins can read unban threads?

 

A lot of the answers you seek are in The Rules Of The JC sub-forum, also located at the top of every page.

Particularly
Moderation Guidlines and Mod Complaint Resolution Process

And yes all staff members can read unban threads

 

I don't have any complaints. All of my interactions with moderators in the unban forum have been pleasant and professional. The said, without knowing who can read the unban threads, I had considered the possibility of such a setup being ripe for abuse if a moderator were to lose their professional tenor.