The OFFICIAL GRIPE THREAD

[Lancer]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
I just got back from a few days on the road and noticed Asher and KH had disappeared from the NHL playoff threads. Odd. Then I saw Rah's Gripe thread OP and thought maybe he and Asher had gone ahead and done a disastrous OTcast. But no...

I've now read about half this thread, but now I'm going to sleep. So it seems we have a Feedback area that doesn't accept feedback. And we have a topped Gripe thread, yet the "disappointing" incident that triggered it (and, apparently, several follow-up threads) have been "cleansed" from the site.

As far as I can tell:
It appears that Asher provided site coding feedback, and Locutus took it as some sort of personal attack. So Asher is banned again, and, with this thread, it "seems" to be a topic open for discussion -- except nothing remotely relating to the facts is available for viewing.

And given that all actual history/evidence has been systematically eliminated from public view, I have to rely on my instincts and the scant facts available to the viewing public. They tell me that: Locutus overreacted to Asher's tone, and the rest of the administration feels constrained to back him, since Locutus seems to be supplying the spittle and string that holds the site code together. Fair enough, I guess.

I understand the dynamic. But if Locutus' role is to do critical coding, why is he spending his time modding (i.e. swinging the banning rod, deleting threads, etc.)? I don't want my carpenter disciplining my kids.

Poly is disfunctional

[MarkG]

But if Locutus' role is to do critical coding, why is he spending his time modding (i.e. swinging the banning rod, deleting threads, etc.)? I don't want my carpenter disciplining my kids.

because this isnt a corporation. this is a site maintained by a very small number of people (for the amount of work needed) who basically do this for their own fun. so when someone who has always been a negative aspect of this community is trolling about the quality of their (voluntary) work, you can be sure they will take things personally and respond.

[Lancer]

Nobody likes being treated like crap. When you get a situation where people have been by a representative of the site who is allowed to continue, well don't cry when the people over him catch some crap of their own. Comes around goes around. Alot of it came around too.

Personally I'd expect the crap to continue.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Solver
To be fair, though, Spec, I don't believe we ever claimed to have by-the-book moderation. We could indeed do it like CFC and go by-the-book, but we never have really and haven't particularly aimed to.

Repeat offenders get treated more strictly. Certain offenses that we let slide in the OTF are viewed seriously in on-topic areas. Each of the five admins and the regular mods has a different style - one mod might ban where another would only give a warning.

We sure make mistakes and I'll be damned if I agreed with every decision ever made by a mod here but I think that our moderation generally works well. I've always thought that Ming in particular does a great job at it.

Somebody has Rah's phrase in his signature, like "people are screaming for consistency but they're not going to get it from us".

Virtually all valid complaints about moderation on any forum are down to inconsistency, the reason 'poly moderation is seen as bad is not because of the strictness, but because it's so incredibly inconsistent. Each mod has their own style and varies because different mods apply rules with their own personal interpretation of rules and punishments. Like if I'm going to post a thread I consider funny, but think will get deleted, I wait 'till Ming's shift.

Yet it almost seems from your post like the inconsistency is something that's seen as a positive. It's really, really not a good thing and I think there are a lot of decent posts from valued posters here in this thread that echo that.

Making the Off Topic moderation a lot more relaxed is a good thing, but it hasn't stopped this kind of problem because the inconsistency is still there. I don't think any Apolyton poster could say "this offence would result in this punishment" and be correct. In my view that's a very bad thing. Someone already mentioned it but Agathon has posted stuff in this thread that I think Asher would have been banned for if someone complained about it.

It's incredibly hard for people to complain about unfair treatment if everyone is pretty much getting treated the same. Personally I think a public log of moderator action like bans would be a great thing to have, making the moderation more transparent would really help with consistency. It wouldn't be for discussion, for mods only to post in, and they could say something as simple as

"MikeH, 1 week ban for posting another unfunny copycat thread in Off Topic after ignoring 2 PMed warnings".
"MikeH, 2 week ban for posting another unfunny copycat thread in Off Topic. Increased ban to 2 weeks because it's his 2nd offence.".

Having to publicly record a judgement would I think help prevent the kind of behind the scenes "OMG, has Asher been banned again? What for?" type chatter and all the misinformation that goes with it. The only real reason for not doing this is because it'd highlight the inconsistencies, and that's why I think it'd help eliminate them.

One of the things that really drives people crazy is being told they aren't allowed to discuss an issue. Ming's pretty good at discussing reasons for banning, but leaving people feeling wronged and unable to respond is probably worse than the actual banning.

Which is one of the reasons that this thread was such a good idea. As others have said, I very much respect the fact Rah started the discussion and I think generally since the change of ownership the site has been making good progress, this is an example of that.

[Colonâ„¢]

I'd rather not delete stuff unless for legal, security or privacy reasons.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Arrian
Is it really that friggin' hard to stay out of trouble on this Site? I don't get it.

Yes, if you spend too much time in the Civ4 forum, which is (unbelievably) far more idiot-infested than the OTF.

Every time I see another "the RNG is unfair" thread I lose a few IQ points

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Agathon
Arrian is right. The owners have to decide whether they want Asher to post here on a permanent basis. In my view, his last long ban (for the continual antisemitic stalking of another poster) should never have been rescinded.

Yes, but that's because he constantly destroys your arguments. Everyone here knows your agenda.

[Kuciwalker]

What bothers me about this isn't the inconsistency (that's old and hard to get annoyed about anymore) but the fact that two of the most interesting posters on the site are gone. Again.

[Lancer]

MikeH..."Which is one of the reasons that this thread was such a good idea. As others have said, I very much respect the fact Rah started the discussion and I think generally since the change of ownership the site has been making good progress, this is an example of that."

Mike, by change of ownership I presume you mean Markos stepping down and Ming, Locutus, and Solver stepping up. In your opinion, how did this help things?

[MarkG]

Mike hates me

[Lancer]

Oh? Why's that?

[MarkG]

i dont know

[MikeH]

Not at all. I just love Ming.

My perception (and it might be wrong) is that DanQ doesn't really care about the Off Topic side of the site at all, MarkG had/has some views on how the OT should run and since he stepped down there has been a review and a relaxing of the OT rules, which suits me and I think suits the mods who I always felt weren't always 100% behind all the rules they were applying (again, just my perception).

The other thing is that IIRC part of stated reason for the change was that Mark didn't have the time to put into the site that he'd like, and with the change some people who do have the time to invest are investing it and there seems to be more going on behind the scenes to improve the site now. It could just be that I'm more aware of that behind the scenes work now and either way that's a positive change. That's not meant as a slight on Markos, most of us don't have the spare time in real life to put the work required into a site like this or if we do, we're not prepared to put that work in for such little reward and it must be very hard to step back from something you've put so much into and allow others to take over, even if it's for the benefit of the site in the long run.

[Lancer]

You don't know why he hates you, just that he does, okally dokally doo.

Nice answer Mike, I'll read it again tomorrow after some sleep, and thanks.

[MikeH]

Ok, I hate him. Fine.