We want Forum Feedback!

[~!~]

So, I was just thinking. We're not allowed to call out specific mods, because that can lead to personal attacks and drama and all that stuff. But I was thinking, I'm sure the mods would benefit (and in turn benefit the entire community) if we were allowed to give them concrit. We give artists concrit in DR, and that rarely spirals into drama-filled grief, so I imagine a similar level of civility would be attainable with concrit for the mods. Right now, the only crit mods get on the job they do is angry, because it's against the rules to criticize a specific mod, so whenever somebody is pissed off enough that they're willing to break that rule, they're probably not going to be nice about it.

 

I've got a question about this, though: how feasible/useful would member concrit for mods be? Namely, how tight a leash does TJ keep the mods on? Do they pretty much just do what he tells them to, or do they moderate at their own discretion? For that matter, how willing would mods be to let the people they moderate tell them how to do their job?

 

I see mods as more like cops than soldiers. Mods should strive to make the community comfortable and safe for everybody, and try to implement solutions that cater to the needs/wants (because this is the internet, after all, so "need" is a bit strong) of the current community (and, of course, TJ). I don't know every mod personally, so I don't know how much the mods already try to do this. I know that user-mod relations aren't a huge issue right now, but they have been in the past, and I think that all we need is a controversial issue to crop up and the tension will be back. I just think that allowing polite, constructive criticism from the members would help make the entire forum run more smoothly.

 

(Like, remember when there was a petition to have Cheeze demodded? That was done in a (mostly) polite manner, as I recall, with debate on both sides. I don't remember exactly how heated it got. The initial premise was not rude or insulting, and if "I don't like his political views" were replaced with "I don't like his modding style," I think it would have been a completely reasonable thread. And despite what may have happened in the thread about Cheeze, I think nowadays such a debate could be carried out without attacking the mod in question personally, just as a sprite can be critiqued without attacking the artist personally.)

[dragon_mando]

I can see where some people could get out of hand, given the opportunity with that, but I do think it could be beneficial to both the members and the mods overall. I mean, beyond just artists, say you work in customer service at a store--a lot of complaints from customers can have a negative impact on your ability to stay hired. At the same time, a lot of positive feedback from customers can get you a raise or a promotion. While modding isn't a paid job, having a little concrit now and then can only be a good thing.

[stogucheme]

So, I was just thinking. We're not allowed to call out specific mods, because that can lead to personal attacks and drama and all that stuff. But I was thinking, I'm sure the mods would benefit (and in turn benefit the entire community) if we were allowed to give them concrit. We give artists concrit in DR, and that rarely spirals into drama-filled grief, so I imagine a similar level of civility would be attainable with concrit for the mods. Right now, the only crit mods get on the job they do is angry, because it's against the rules to criticize a specific mod, so whenever somebody is pissed off enough that they're willing to break that rule, they're probably not going to be nice about it.

 

I've got a question about this, though: how feasible/useful would member concrit for mods be? Namely, how tight a leash does TJ keep the mods on? Do they pretty much just do what he tells them to, or do they moderate at their own discretion? For that matter, how willing would mods be to let the people they moderate tell them how to do their job?

 

I see mods as more like cops than soldiers. Mods should strive to make the community comfortable and safe for everybody, and try to implement solutions that cater to the needs/wants (because this is the internet, after all, so "need" is a bit strong) of the current community (and, of course, TJ). I don't know every mod personally, so I don't know how much the mods already try to do this. I know that user-mod relations aren't a huge issue right now, but they have been in the past, and I think that all we need is a controversial issue to crop up and the tension will be back. I just think that allowing polite, constructive criticism from the members would help make the entire forum run more smoothly.

 

(Like, remember when there was a petition to have Cheeze demodded? That was done in a (mostly) polite manner, as I recall, with debate on both sides. I don't remember exactly how heated it got. The initial premise was not rude or insulting, and if "I don't like his political views" were replaced with "I don't like his modding style," I think it would have been a completely reasonable thread. And despite what may have happened in the thread about Cheeze, I think nowadays such a debate could be carried out without attacking the mod in question personally, just as a sprite can be critiqued without attacking the artist personally.)

I like this. I would muchly appreciate it if we could do this.

 

I mean, if things get out of hand, another mod (to avoid personal bias) can just post a warning to the others.

[LadyLyzar]

Technically, you are not permitted to call out ANY member. Mods are members too. If you have an issue with someone, take it to PM. You are always welcome to contact another mod if you cannot reach an agreement.

 

Sorry, but I do not see this sort of thing going well. I imagine it would turn into "So and so warned me for NOTHING" when it was clearly a violation of the forum rules. I also wouldn't be so keen about being told what to do by anyone other than other mods and TJ, because they know what needs to be done.

 

Personally I was not amused with the thread calling out Cheeze and that was long before I got my modhat. IMO that thread was very disrespectful and rude and amounted to airing a lot of dirty laundry. It needed to be handled privately with TJ and never brought out onto the forum.

 

If you think a mod is doing a good job, tell us! Those sorts of PM's really brighten our day. If you think a mistake has been made, tell us! Just please do so respectfully - I am less inclined to react favorably to someone swearing at me.

 

TJ trusts us to keep things in hand around the forum, or else he would not have picked us. I don't necessarily like performing the job of "cop", as you put it, but that is a role I will take if I have to in order to keep the DC forums a user-friendly place.

[~!~]

I also wouldn't be so keen about being told what to do by anyone other than other mods and TJ, because they know what needs to be done.

I don't really understand this. I mean, yeah, I can see the whole "don't tell me how to do my job" side, but when the job you're doing is keeping everybody happy, I'd think having input from everybody would be useful.

 

For instance, take wandering topics in News threads. Announcement threads often end up kind of chatty, and it seems like only the staff have a problem with this. I don't really think that the staff needs to be so strict on staying to the topic on News threads--I think "go make a new thread about this in SR" would be a better message than "back on topic or I'll lock the thread/start dishing out warns."

 

And while I was able to say that with without calling anybody out (I've seen lots of mods do that, not just... who you'd expect) I think that being able to cite specific instances ("I disagreed with so-and-so-mod's action in this particular thread") would make it easier for us to give crits. After all, artists are "called out" when someone says "I think that sprite you made needs more contrast," but it's nothing personal. I don't think "I think you need to be more lenient with chatter" is that different. And, just as an artist has the right to say "I think the contrast is fine," mods would have the right to defend their actions.

[Cinnamin Draconna]

The problem with PM communication is the lack of witnesses.. the issue winds up being one persons word against another without proof to back up a claim. PMs can be edited or deleted and there goes the whole chain of evidence. The ONLY way to bring evidence against another person, is to do it in public (on the forum) with lots of witnesses.

 

However, this can lead to even more problems if more than one person has a gripe against the person accused. Which in itself, tells me that there IS a problem. Simply said, it's a catch 22.. doing something in public gets you in trouble, but taking it to PMs means nothing gets done.

 

As I have proved in the recent past, I am NOT afraid to speak my mind, and if I get in trouble, so be it. But if/when I see a problem, I WILL say something about it or them or s/he. And truth be told, I'd rather speak to TJ himself rather than one of his Modly minions, because while I might not like TJ or fully trust him, I have even less faith or trust in any of the Mods.

[Fuzzbucket]

OH - right.

 

Well - I have disagreed with mods on occasion, and while I have NO idea who is being thought of here (I have the gut feeling some people "know" who other people are "talking about" - I have no idea !) every single mod I have disagreed with enough that I cared, I have PMd and they have all been very nice about it. And the mod I PMd to say "THANKS for that" after something rather unpleasant was also very delighted - and it was a mod I had never had any contact with before. You could just see how thankless a task it is by the reaction I got !

 

I know personally many mods on another forum. I would absolutely agree that letting political opinion, personal feelings about other members, etc cloud your actions is a no-no - but I also know how very hurtful members can be. Mods are people too, with feelings of their very own - and they have to do their job.They defend us against one another, and few defend them; it's a lonely life.

 

And I well recall here, when there were some RATHER fine sigs going around among them, they were - as I understand - told to take them down. There are clearly rules attached to the job, whether those apply to police or soldiers.

[Khallayne]

I love concrit! I adore concrit! I squee when I get it, and I feel like it makes me a better moderator. Especially since I know I can be on the strict side at times. =D

 

However, as they say, too many chefs can spoil a soup. I moderated on a site where members were given free rein to call out moderators, and to give out concrit as they felt the moderators needed it... I also saw how some moderators there severely started to resent any crit received, even if always polite.

 

Moderators were getting backed into corners... Because we aren't allowed to talk about incidents, and the actions that we took with others. When someone comes in, screaming unfairness in a situation, we couldn't go out publicly and try to say something... And when unbiased moderators came in to talk about the situation, even if a moderator who didn't like the other moderator came in to say that the situation fell into the rules, often members didn't agree, and didn't believe the moderators at all, and felt that they were all taking each other's point.

 

It astounded me the /negative/ moderator-member relationship that was on that site, and how the moderators didn't like the members for the most part, and the members didn't trust a moderator.

 

I don't disagree so much with a member sending a moderator concrit privately, and despite people thinking that it never does anything, most concrit that we get, we talk about amongst each other. We're a fairly social bunch.

 

The chance of all that negativity scares me again. I danced on eggshells once. I know that right now, I don't have any ill feelings towards any members of DC, and I really like that.

 

Moderators are already under the rules of privacy about most things that we do, and most of the things that we know. I believe that in a situation were concrit would be open, and all members could add their two cents, things will get out of hand quick, and moderators won't always be able to give answers that people want to hear, even if they are the only ones that we can give...

 

Maybe I just like to dance around conflict, but having been there, and seeing the more negative end-side of things... Going there again really puts me up against the wall.

 

I much prefer a one on one conversation, where I can try to make sure that one person understands, rather than having a group conversation where some people understand, and others don't, and it is hard to focus on one person at a time... Not to mention that then members jump in, and contradict everything that someone else said.

 

It's a complicated mess. o.o...

 

However, I know that I'm seeing this through the moderator point of view. Which is why I always tell someone to PM me crit. Despite believing that I don't listen, and thinking that it won't do anything... I like to think that I'm not that moderator, and that I do enjoy concrit.

 

Still, understanding something in a text-based format isn't as easy as hearing it with all the intonations and emotions. =)

 

In short: I don't agree with an open thread for criticism because things can get heated, and things can turn negative quickly (amongst mods to members, members to mods, and members to members). Saying that, I do agree with concrit. =)

 

Edit: *dies* Sorry, had D&D things in here.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Khallayne

[Aeriaa]

May I ask something to the mods here? (Hopefully this can be answered and not be taken the wrong way)

 

Do you guys have "quotas"? Monthly performance reviews?

 

Reason I ask is... when I was a mod for Subeta, these things were brought up. One person was designated to be the head of the Mod Squad (UA department, as it were), and if users had problems, sure, they were welcome to PM the mod themself to handle things, but they could also go to their department head, file a complaint, and at the end of the month, we were told by a mature and responsible person things we could do to improve our modding styles. It was a beneficial learning experience for us, and we really did seem to work better as a team (especially when she would quote the message exactly, but never tell who sent it... EVER. All that mattered was that she knew who sent it and they could see for themselves if things changed). If it ever became a case of "this mod is SEVERELY disliked", we were placed on a 2 month probation and complaints from other non-related users could determine if we stayed or not... Especially when it was also against the rules to publicly name people in the forums in a negative light. (Harassment, is what we put it under).

 

I do agree that having an open thread for criticism on any specific mod COULD get nasty very quickly, but I also feel a compromise could be reached on this. Perhaps the PM system and if the mods here wanted to do a monthly review, could post the logs of that for all to see (minus things that absolutely cannot be shared, I'll admit... users don't need to see EVERYTHING that goes on behind the scenes. Period.)

[olympe]

Although I can see that concrit can be of some value, especially if many members are involved, I'm afraid things might turn into a drama-fest pretty soon. Because, let's be honest for a few minutes, there are too many people here who love to cause drama. And, despite everything (and all the grievances some of us might have), we don't want to scare away most of the mods.

 

On the other hand, a discussion in a small chat group (like, two people for the mods and two for the members that feel like they need to discuss a point) would not be too bad an idea. This way, things can (hopefully) be settled quickly and civilly, without half the community jumping in and thereby needlessly complicating things.

[Obscure_Trash]

I'd like to point out this thread.

 

If there's an action you disagree with bring it up to the mod, TJ, or, has been done before, this thread. PM'ing for warns, merging more instead of closing, etc. have been brought up here and taken into consideration.

 

If you feel the need to call out a specific mod - PM TJ. It has been done before and TJ will talk to the mod and user and sort out the situation and see what needs to be done.

 

As Khay said you can also PM a mod, even if to just get a situation cleared up. ("This thread doesn't really seem like a dupe of this one, so couldn't we keep it open?" for example.)

 

So giving concrit to mods kinda already exists. ?

 

And I have to comment on this as someone else who remembers the Cheeze thing - definitely a dramafest and I would like to never have to see a repeat of that, whether against an admin, mod, member, or artist. 3=

 

EDIT: Opp, missed your question Aeriaa. Dx

Nu, we're not actually like cops - there is no quota we have to fulfill of modly actions. x3

We don't have a monthly review either, but I feel like we're basically always under review, anyway. At any time if someone has a problem with something they've done, they can report it to us or TJ and it'll get taken care of. ^^ We do also communicate with each other and make group decisions as a group and such to balance each other out. ;3

Edited October 13, 2011 by SockPuppet Strangler

[Aeriaa]

Thanks SPS, and Khallayne (holycrapIspelleditrightwithoutlooking! LOL)

 

As a member who received a fair bit of drama, I can agree that its nothing anyone should have to go through. Mod, member, or otherwise.

[dragon_mando]

Before the discussion cropped up in this thread, I'd be completely unaware anything had gone on with Cheeze o_O

 

After reading some of the responses in here though, I can see where everyone is coming from. Luckily I don't have major issues with anyone, mod or member, very often, but I'm that person that's too chicken to PM someone if I have a problem and typically just let it sit until I forget...so thinking about it, I'd probably be even less likely to use a thread >_>

[~!~]

All right, all right, the Cheeze thing was a bad example. I wasn't particularly interested in it and so I didn't pay much attention to it, but as I've been told, it was a lot uglier than I saw.

 

I'm just going to say that I've complained to TJ about a particular mod more than once, and as far as I can tell, nothing's been done about the situation. Although, I have a feeling that if a particular mod's attitude towards his job and responsibilities is a certain way, there's not much TJ can do to change that.

[HeatherMarie]

Although, I have a feeling that if a particular mod's attitude towards his job and responsibilities is a certain way, there's not much TJ can do to change that.

I'm sure that if enough users complained about a Mod's attitude, TJ would do something. There is always the option of, yunno, not being a Mod anymore, if their attitude presents Mod-related problems. But I guess it would depend on how bad it was and how many people complained.

 

I'm not a Mod, and I have never been a Mod anywhere, but I have to say I completely agree with everything in Khallayne's post. I have seen how drama-llama and upsetting things can get when users are allowed to call out Mods on the forum.

 

In another forum I frequent, there was so much drama and name-calling and accusations flying that it ended with three long-time users/Mods deleting their accounts, and five other non-Mod users left as well. Because the drama started as "I don't agree with what so-and-so did in this instance", but it quickly turned into "so-and-so is totally wrong and always has an agenda and needs to be stopped!". (Which wasn't true in the least)

 

Since Mods can't discuss incidents with non-Mods, that's basically what would happen. Someone says something about a Mod, and the Mod can't exactly defend themselves or give details about what actually happened, so other people start ganging up against the Mod even if it's completely unjustified...

 

I've seen it happen. I've seen it happen here, to certain extents. And I don't think it's a good idea to encourage it by allowing users to publicly talk about things they think Mods did wrong.

[Walker]

All right, all right, the Cheeze thing was a bad example. I wasn't particularly interested in it and so I didn't pay much attention to it, but as I've been told, it was a lot uglier than I saw.

 

I'm just going to say that I've complained to TJ about a particular mod more than once, and as far as I can tell, nothing's been done about the situation. Although, I have a feeling that if a particular mod's attitude towards his job and responsibilities is a certain way, there's not much TJ can do to change that.

You also have to consider, if we are reprimanded/punished, it's as private as any other users. Just because you didn't hear about a punishment doesn't mean it did or did not occur. Mods have the same right to privacy as any user.

[Fuzzbucket]

Yes indeed - it isn't as if we ordinary members can all see each other's warn levels either....

Edited October 14, 2011 by fuzzbucket

[digipup]

By R rated, you guys mean more mature right? x3 Because if it was R rated, we'd have to restrict the forums to 18+ with parental accompaniment for those under.

I would not like that. >.>' I think a clear statement slapped into the section that gives the idea of 'Things are not sugar and spice here, enter at your own discretion' would be enough.

After all, I watch R-rated movies, and I'm fifteen. For goodness sakes

Edit: ... Or, perhaps an email could be sent to new under-18 users about the R-rated section so it's made even more clear.

 

Anyways, the forum runs pretty smoothly as it is now, and I don't have much to suggest. I dislike the nitpicky censors, though (such as the no-offense one), although I get my amusement out of the censor-kips and the like.

I'd also like it if the RP sections were a little more organized. I highly approve of the way they have to be accepted before being used, but they seem to have gone into some backlag, like the dragon descriptions did before we had description day.

Edited October 14, 2011 by digipup

[Walker]

I would not like that. >.>' I think a clear statement slapped into the section that gives the idea of 'Things are not sugar and spice here, enter at your own discretion' would be enough.

After all, I watch R-rated movies, and I'm fifteen. For goodness sakes

 

Anyways, the forum runs pretty smoothly as it is now, and I don't have much to suggest. I dislike the nitpicky censors, though (such as the no-offense one), although I get my amusement out of the censor-kips and the like.

I'd also like it if the RP sections were a little more organized. I highly approve of the way they have to be accepted before being used, but they seem to have gone into some backlag, like the dragon descriptions did before we had description day.

Merp, not really. Unapproved used to be 4 pages long or so, and half of the ones in there are just inactive ones awaiting deletion. So all things considered, there are really only 15 or 20 so RPs waiting to be approved at a time right now. And this weekend I'll be doing another RP raid, as I've started doing recently. It's been slow progress but it's a whole lot better than it used to be. And, also, no one at all is taking advantage of the rule change that you can now RP in unapproved. We do offer that option though.

 

Also, no offense was taken off the censor.

[digipup]

Merp, not really. Unapproved used to be 4 pages long or so, and half of the ones in there are just inactive ones awaiting deletion. So all things considered, there are really only 15 or 20 so RPs waiting to be approved at a time right now. And this weekend I'll be doing another RP raid, as I've started doing recently. It's been slow progress but it's a whole lot better than it used to be. And, also, no one at all is taking advantage of the rule change that you can now RP in unapproved. We do offer that option though.

 

Also, no offense was taken off the censor.

Really now?

/derp

That's what I get for not being as active as I once was.

[Fuzzbucket]

I would not like that. >.>' I think a clear statement slapped into the section that gives the idea of 'Things are not sugar and spice here, enter at your own discretion' would be enough.

After all, I watch R-rated movies, and I'm fifteen. For goodness sakes

Edit: ... Or, perhaps an email could be sent to new under-18 users about the R-rated section so it's made even more clear.

Well you'll have to get over that.

 

There are so many parents who would bar their kids from here if it didn't exist. And even as a fairly foul-mouthed adult, I REALLY would rather not see R-rated posts on here. It's so boring and unimaginative.

[~!~]

You also have to consider, if we are reprimanded/punished, it's as private as any other users. Just because you didn't hear about a punishment doesn't mean it did or did not occur. Mods have the same right to privacy as any user.

Well, I'd think if the mod is punished, their behavior would change...

[kiffren]

Well, I'd think if the mod is punished, their behavior would change...

Just because a mod is reprimanded doesn't mean that everyone else will know that. This includes behavioral changes. It may have been something as small as not properly closing a thread, or something to do with warns. The general public will most likely not notice any behavioral changes, as most modly activities are not announced.

[Bandahar]

I do not think we want R-rated posts on this forum. My kids both have scrolls and this is one place I feel comfortable enough letting them be on the computer without a ton of supervision. If someone feels thee need to use R-rate language, they can PM the other user.

[dragon_mando]

Even if there were to be an R-rated board, I would want language to still be warn-worthy because swearing is unnecessary. I would only want it to be there for more adult discussions, not unneeded language. Swearing does not an adult make.

 

--though a discussion on the origins of various curses and swears would be fascinating...