Moderators Are People Too. (and they have opinions)

Ok, so what mildly controversial thing did a mod post now that made some screaming mimis go complain?



[edit on 8/22/2007 by djohnsto77]

Not me! I don't have no stinkin' opinions! I never say anything controversial, nor do I ever share any opinions!
Nope not me.

maybe one day Skeptic will invent automated mods without discretion or opinions, who can screen every post the very second it made.

i think there should be a citizens-arrest type feature for members reporting mods, or giving mods 20 point deductions for short answers and excessive quoting.

Why?



not a one line post... I don't think 20 point deducts for Mods are a good thing.

why? same reasons police should be held accountable to the same laws as everyone else

do we know this phenomenon from somewhere?

"once the politician gets elected into office, he is no longer allowed to freely state his opinion".

Its not only the people getting elected, its also the populace who pressurizes them into conforming to their personal views. Id like to live in a world in which the elected are allowed to say anything they truly believe.

That feature already exists here.

Some members have this naive assertion that staff members are above the law, and are not held accountable for their actions. It truly is quite the opposite. If anything, we hold ourselves to a much tighter standard then we would ever hold a member to.

Moderators, Forum or Super, are accountable to their fellow staff members, the Administrators, and the Amigos. And I'd be quite shocked if the members did not raise hell over a decision by the Administration and/or Amigos if they disagreed with it.

So everyone who is involved in this community, is held accountable for their actions.

While staff members are responsible for moderating the behaviours of members, members are quite capable of keeping an eye on the behaviour of any staff member.

Moderators Are Not Above The Terms & Conditions

While some members may under estimate the power of the Complaint function, they truly should not. There is a very strong sense of comradery among all staff members involved with this community. Very strong! However, none of us are above this community. And as close as we are, we are the first to touch base with one another when somebody acts inappropriately. (It just doesn't happen very often)

This community, and our members, are always first and foremost. That will never change.

If you have a problem with anything, let your concerns be heard. Just go about it in the appropriate manner.

WAIT JUST A MINUTE!!!!!

I thought that's what you guys were?????

Originally members, taken to a secret facility and "incorporated" into the Great and Mysterious ATS Machine, to emerge as AUTOMATED FUNCTIONAL MODS...

Isn't that what happens?

Semper

thats cool in theory. Just somwhat contrary to what I've actually seen. It has more to do with how much everyone else in a thread agrees with a mod. If there is a minority in a thread, they can have their posts edited and alerts issued without much commotion - and in fact, most of the thread may applaud said mod - including other mods.

I'm not going to cite any specifics - but for instance, making a complaint everytime a mod violates the smaller rules, like quick responses, excessive quoting, etc. - its overkill. Also it's a bit like being a pest to keep tattling for small things.

Something less serious, as a quick warning - just like we get being the peeon populace of ATS

reply to post by scientist

---

Mods cannot applaud other Mods
And members cannot applaud Mods either, only mods can applaud members.

I thinking you're thinking the "star" system and yes anyone can use that system, however I don't think I've witnessed any abuse of "starring" yet.

What? Again I would like examples.



There's a frickin surprise. No specifics but dissing the staff.

If it's so damn bad here, why are you still here?

Maybe you were the only person in the thread in question who was wrong. Not everyone who recognizes that Mods are infallible is a brownnose. (have a sense of humor, I know I'm not infallible)


Popularity or lack thereof is not a consideration in enforcement of terms and conditions. Majorities can and do get their posts edited too, in those weird threads where the majority of posters are speaking from the wrong orifice.


Yet here you are, asking for a tattle button with spikes on it. You've already got a tattle button- it's the complaint feature- and the amigos have some big honkin spikes to apply if your complaint against a mod has merit. The ability of the chain of command to police itself, from amigos to admins, from admins to supers, from supers to my sorry butt, is a matter of historical record.


We who? Have you got a mouse in your pocket? The vast majority of members have never faced any staff action. I also can't name too many members who are officially (or to my knowledge, unofficially) classified as peons.

So, is there anything else which isn't broken that I can fix for you today?

reply to post by semperfortis

---

Only FredT, and his only automated function as ATSNN posting- everything else he does is achieved by an admin operating a complex system of pulleys.

Hey, since we're on the subject of the alert button, may I ask - can the button be used not to complain, but to alert a mod of an exceptional post by another member, something worthy of consideration and applause? Especially posts by new members and those that don't post very often. Or in threads that seem like the mods have been scarce for quite a while.

Final decision is still that of the mods but I thinks that would be a constructive use of the alert button and it would encourage people to post better quality material leading to a better discussion overall.

Don't see why not. Don't forget to star the post too.

Edit to add: But please, let it be because it's an exceptional post, not just one that satisfies your personal political bent.

[edit on 17-10-2007 by intrepid]

reply to post by intrepid

---

My criteria for exceptional posts are -

1. Well laid out, as in the points are not lost in rhetoric
2. Reasonable, as in it makes sense
3. Objective, as in it's not emotion charged (with rhetoric)

and not so importantly, though it helps

4. Properly punctuated with good spelling and grammar. Leniency if English isn't the primary language of the poster.

There certainly are some posts that I don't agree with, ideologically, but the points made by the poster are solid and I can't argue that sort of objectivity -- it's Vulcan precision

It's time for a reminder on this subject.

Please keep in mind that before our roster of volunteer moderators were on our staff, they were productive contributors to the vast knowledge base that is AboveTopSecret.com. They were members long before they were moderators, and their position on staff has not happened because of their desire to control membership on a forum, but of their love for what ATS represents.

With that in mind, please remember that moderators are not just "people too," they're also members with a passion for the topics we discuss.

1) Their opinion is theirs, and in no way represents the opinion of ATS or ATS management.

2) Their opinions in threads will not influence their moderation decisions.

3) Members should not be concerned about engaging our staff in provocative discussions about critical subjects... disagreeing with a staff member will not increase your odds of being targeted for being banned.



From time to time, the need may arise where our staff members must use their moderator capabilities within threads where they have participated in the conversation as regular members. While we try to avoid this as much as possible, it can happen. When this happens, it does not indicate our staff is attempting to use their moderator influence to manage a topic, it just means that another participant needs a reminder of our Terms & Conditions.

Too bad it is not like IRC, where operators (moderators) can easily de-op themselves to engage in debates with other people, and make it clear they are NOT going to use their operator status to win the argument or punish those that disagree with them.

It seems a bit too complicated here to be realistic, but as an idea, if the moderators were to partipate as a contributor, and share opinions and engage in debates, they could do so while signaling (perhaps the same avatar without the moderator statement) that they are simply participating and the OTHER mods will police that particular thread.

It would be much more politically correct, and it might allow moderators to enjoy the fun without feeling as if they are dampening the discussion. Of course the mods would only use that option if they WANTED to, if they chose to engage in debate with "super moderator" all over their avatar that would be an option as well.