Discussion/Comments on the Moderator Announcement!

I'm taking a primarily wait-and-see attitude, but there's a trend I've been seeing lately, and it's one that I hope that our anonymous moderators don't continue.

We all want to maintain a civil attitude and make these forums a welcome place for players to engage in discussion. Occasionally, a discussion shifts from the topic of the original post, as normal conversations are wont to do. This might make it harder for someone later to find a past discussion because of the confluence of topics. I think the wrong approach to take to this is to chastise the community at large for straying off-topic. This does the opposite of keeping tone constructive and helping people to feel welcome. I have no problem with splitting threads, or other methods of maintaining topic coherence, but unless it's something completely out of left field, rebuke isn't the right answer.

Thanks for caring,
Jimmy


PS - I'm with Scott on the Paladin of Chaos
 
In fairness, that recent change has had more to do with my own involvement in certain threads than the moderation committee.

The forum rules will be posted this weekend. At that point you will all be able to see the standards the moderators will be enforcing. I would not expect them to be as heavy handed as I was in a few threads this week.

Cheers,

Stephen
 
I have thought about this for some time and here are my personal thoughts.

I don't want to know which moderator is associated with which Paladin name. But, I think, in fairness, we should be allowed to know who the moderators are as a whole. As long as we don't know which individual is which, there is no danger of an individual moderator being taken to task for moderator duties. But, because the moderators are completely anonymous, we have no way of knowing whether these are people that should be trusted. It is possible that someone on the moderation staff really shouldn't hold the position and that someone on the board can show evidence of that. But, due to complete anonymity, this is impossible. Please put faces to the staff, just not the names.

-MS
 
Let's just give the moderators a chance and see if it works. I'm seeing a lot of unfounded skepticism and negativity based on what has happened on other websites, other communities, and other anecdotal and personal biases. Let the process have a chance to work and evaluate its effectiveness after the moderators have had a fair shot.
 
I am very happy about this announcement. It makes sense for parts of this site's message boards, the rules section in particular, to have a more moderated discussion. If Michelle could moderate every thread by herself, I have no doubt that she would. A team of moderators distributes the task in a way that provides prompt and consistent coverage across the boards. I did have my initial concerns about a team of unnamed moderators.

This concern was mitigated by the fact that each moderator:
A.) Are bound by the same rules of the boards as everyone else.
B.) Are bound by a higher standard to remain unbiased in their application of moderation.
And C.) If said Moderator is breaching A or B they are accountable not only to their fellow Moderators, but to their public chairperson.

In this way, none of the moderators are truly anonymous. Every moderator will be empowered by the chairperson of the moderator committee, and therefore be accountable to that chairperson. I do not need to know who the Paladin of <Element> is in order to lodge a complaint about him/her, because I can talk to the chairperson. In this way each Paladin shares an extension of the chairperson's identity.

In this regard I would say Michelle has placed a lot of trust in these individuals, because each act of misconduct by her team of moderators has no place to be aimed initially but at her integrity as leader. If so much trust has been placed on this team. I promise to have that level of trust in the moderators while this organization is in its infancy. I will also promise that if there is a valid misconduct of the rules by a Paladin, that I will be the first to write a rational, well thought through, complaint to Michelle.

Cheers,
Mike D./Poalo
 
Here are my thoughts.

My initial guy reaction was "yay!" followed by a brief "wait, what" when I saw how the moderation was being applied. I will delve into this further.

For about three years, I moderated deviantART.com's forums and chat rooms with a team of fifteen or so people as staff for the website. I learned a lot. I believe moderation here is absolutely necessary to keep an enviornment that new and even returning players want to interact with. However, the big question seems to be two things: how heavy-handed should the moderation be should they remain faceless.

Admittedly, I can only cite from my experience.

There are pros to anonymity. For one thing, it can be very difficult making the right decision when moderating, especially when your friends may be involved. This gives our moderators the power to make the right decision without having to worry about the reprecussions -- which is a wonderful thing.

The other pro is the ability to for our moderators to have an opinion -- they can be disassociated from their duties on their other Alliance name and can continue to do as they wish. However, I don't think this is as big a concern as some people may expect. There is no reason why a person moderating can't have an opinion, a disagreement, a question. One of the great things about this community is that no matter how many differing opinions or disagreements generate themselves, we all put our various costumes on and still hit each other with plumbing supplies. For the most part, we're all friends, we're all familiar with each other. To force a moderator to become this personalityless, unopinionated and inhuman thing will put them on a higher standard -- which, to be honest, I don't think is fair to the moderator. They should be allowed to be human even while working for the community.

One of the cons is obvious -- and I think concerns people -- the other is less obvious, but honestly of more interest. Anonymity can lead to power trips, and that's what people worry about. Yes, they doubtlessly have their own set of rules to follow and they will be accountable, but how do we know they're being enforced? How can we trust them? We all want to be reassured that one of the moderators isn't Some Jerk Guy we met that one time that we got in an argument with about magic items. Keep in mind, I'm being very general, but I do think this is one of the biggest concerns for most people who disagree with the change.

However, the thing that concerns me about anonymity is the inability to create a rapport, which is one of the strongest tools you can use in moderating any community. Building rapport and being able to ask or tell someone "hey, this is against the rules, chill out, all right?" is infinitely easier than just flat-out forcing an outcome. While the moderators are here to make sure the rules are followed, it's (in my opinion) better to have a connection to the community your moderating to generate respect and understanding.

What's stopping an anonymous moderator from building rapport? It stops them from being anonymous. If you bring forward your personality, it's probable that it will be recognizable.

I like moderating that has a face and a name, but I do understand why the staff has chose to do it this way. To those of you who are skeptical, give it some time -- this is not an easy task. This is trying to find the fine line between guiding the community and policing it, which is not as black and white as it seems, especially given the circumstances. With any new policy and system, I expect a lot of it will be a learning experience that will grow from there. Trust your team and your friends in what they've decided to do and give these guys a chance. Despite my own concerns, I'm going to try and do the same.
 
mikestrauss said:
I have thought about this for some time and here are my personal thoughts.

I don't want to know which moderator is associated with which Paladin name. But, I think, in fairness, we should be allowed to know who the moderators are as a whole. As long as we don't know which individual is which, there is no danger of an individual moderator being taken to task for moderator duties. But, because the moderators are completely anonymous, we have no way of knowing whether these are people that should be trusted. It is possible that someone on the moderation staff really shouldn't hold the position and that someone on the board can show evidence of that. But, due to complete anonymity, this is impossible. Please put faces to the staff, just not the names.

-MS
Click to expand...

The only problem with that is once you know the list, people will try to play guessing games and figure out which is which. It's natural human curiosity.

As Mike D pointed out, they're not really anonymous. They have linked identities that you can (and should) report to me should they act in a manner unbecoming of a National Staff member.

And yes, I am putting a great deal of trust in my staff. Trust me when I say they have earned it. And I thank you all for putting your trust in us. We are not perfect, and I realize that the institution of this perhaps could have been a little smoother; we are getting our feet under us and learning as we go. I've already had some very useful constructive criticism from one of the owners that I intend to put to good use.

As always, my inbox is always open to concerns, questions, suggestions, constructive criticism or complaints. Only by telling me what is wrong can I even hope to fix it.
 
Ezri said:
mikestrauss said:
I have thought about this for some time and here are my personal thoughts.

I don't want to know which moderator is associated with which Paladin name. But, I think, in fairness, we should be allowed to know who the moderators are as a whole. As long as we don't know which individual is which, there is no danger of an individual moderator being taken to task for moderator duties. But, because the moderators are completely anonymous, we have no way of knowing whether these are people that should be trusted. It is possible that someone on the moderation staff really shouldn't hold the position and that someone on the board can show evidence of that. But, due to complete anonymity, this is impossible. Please put faces to the staff, just not the names.

-MS
Click to expand...

The only problem with that is once you know the list, people will try to play guessing games and figure out which is which. It's natural human curiosity.

As Mike D pointed out, they're not really anonymous. They have linked identities that you can (and should) report to me should they act in a manner unbecoming of a National Staff member.

And yes, I am putting a great deal of trust in my staff. Trust me when I say they have earned it. And I thank you all for putting your trust in us. We are not perfect, and I realize that the institution of this perhaps could have been a little smoother; we are getting our feet under us and learning as we go. I've already had some very useful constructive criticism from one of the owners that I intend to put to good use.

As always, my inbox is always open to concerns, questions, suggestions, constructive criticism or complaints. Only by telling me what is wrong can I even hope to fix it.
Click to expand...

May we at least know what chapters are represented?
 
Fair Enough:

Caldaria, Crossroads, Headquarters, New Jersey, Ohio, San Francisco, Seattle.

And to answer the question I'm sure is coming: no, I'm not sure what the representatives from Ohio who are on National Staff will choose to do. If they wish to stay involved with Alliance under another chapter we will continue to welcome them and work with them, but if they choose to leave and pursue other LARP activities we wish our friends well.
 
Ezri said:
Fair Enough:

Caldaria, Crossroads, Headquarters, New Jersey, Ohio, San Francisco, Seattle.

And to answer the question I'm sure is coming: no, I'm not sure what the representatives from Ohio who are on National Staff will choose to do. If they wish to stay involved with Alliance under another chapter we will continue to welcome them and work with them, but if they choose to leave and pursue other LARP activities we wish our friends well.
Click to expand...

Thank you for showing that.

What happened to the midwest? (Yes, those of us in the midwest count OH in the east coast) Just no volunteers?

Rob Sachs
Official "Midwest Always Needs To Be Repped" Advocate :mer:
 
Nope no volunteers from your neck of the woods. If someone missed the call for volunteers and is interested tell them to PM me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top