Backstage - OOC Forums
General Discussion => Moderation Discussion => Topic started by: Ashar Kor-Azor on 02 Oct 2010, 05:59
-
As I said in my return thread, I've read the catacombs. I've also taken the opportunity to brush up on this forum's contents.
I think it would be prudent to remind the caretakers of this particular array of ones and zeroes that people come here to interact with a userbase and review content.
They tolerate rules and moderation. They don't come here for either of them. Try not to forget this if you're a mod, (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=1023.msg11843#msg11843) because you'll be proven wrong again and again.
Laters, gotta mambo.
-
I disagree.
I come here FOR the rules and moderation.
Years of assholes fucking up all possible advances in OOC discussion with blatant attacks on others left me quite disillusioned. BackStage changes all that.
-
I disagree.
I come here FOR the rules and moderation.
Years of assholes fucking up all possible advances in OOC discussion with blatant attacks on others left me quite disillusioned. BackStage changes all that.
yeah I gotta agree with Graelyn, I know that having overzealous mods can cause issues (and I don't think the mods here are overzealous) , but I know what happens in a community where the mods are inactive or too lax.
The amount of moderation we have is good for the community makeup.
-
That's you two, which is great. It's decidedly not everyone I've been talking to.
-
I wrote the comment to which you linked before I became a mod. The moderation policy is at least half the reason I choose this EVE forum over others.
And to be clear, I just try to keep posts and threads within the guidelines somebody else wrote. Same as Cia and Morlag and Louella and such.
Nobody thinks that Backstage is for everyone. Those that don't like it have many choices. Those that do don't have very many.
-
I'm certainly here for the moderation.
-
I disagree.
I come here FOR the rules and moderation.
Years of assholes fucking up all possible advances in OOC discussion with blatant attacks on others left me quite disillusioned. BackStage changes all that.
The Big G says it well.
-
Add me to the "here for the moderation" group.
The older I get the less tolerance I have for juvenile antics and incivility.
If I want to subject myself to tantrums, name calling and hair pulling... well, I've got kids.
-
Came for the atmosphere, stayed for the atmosphere.
Good moderation seems to make the atmosphere possible.
-
Again, that's you folks, which is great.
It's decidedly not the view of everyone who I've been talking to, and not all of my talking has involved people that heavily use the boards at the moment.
A clever individual would likely see such indication as a cue that it was time to investigating an increase in appeal and perhaps get more members out of it long-term.
-
I don't really see it as a popularity contest. A high member count has never been the goal, to my knowledge.
People who prefer the atmosphere here can use this forum. People who prefer moderation that allows for more robust debate can use Chatsubo, or indeed are welcome to create their own board.
I would tend to agree with Ken, in that I think we have largely achieved the atmosphere that we wanted here, and that it is the moderation to a large degree that enables that along with the willingness of a lot of people in the RP community to participate within that framework.
I don't see how asking people to post constructively and not to attack each other is excessive. Similarly, I think it is reasonable to ask for discussions that create content, rather than having threads where there are two or more sides striving to be 'right' and win.
I understand that some people feel our guidelines are excessively restrictive. Still, I think that we have a reasonable level of activity, and I'm not inclined to support changing something that works.
I don't see much good down the road of trying to please everyone, and I think the forum has been fairly successful as it is. As mentioned above, there are plenty of options for people who want a less strict environment, and few options for those who want the atmosphere that we have here or something similar.
-
The purpose of threads not unlike this one is at the very least to occasionally say 'this far and no farther.' Which needs doing. You can't simply be the only person to draw the line in the sand, Silver, nor can a team of moderators. As such, here I am.
Not everyone considers such a position merely the obligatory stance of the member of the community who always finds himself singing the least popular message.
People who prefer the atmosphere here can use this forum. People who prefer moderation that allows for more robust debate can use Chatsubo, or indeed are welcome to create their own board.
Boldface mine, obviously.
This isn't really possible anymore, simply because of the pathetic number of active members. It doesn't work to attempt to advance a thoughtful position with a group whose chief interests do not always align with the sort of patchwork collaborative writing and content development we do here and whose scope does not represent anything like an appropriate number of people or perspectives for good results.
I don't see how asking people to post constructively and not to attack each other is excessive. Similarly, I think it is reasonable to ask for discussions that create content, rather than having threads where there are two or more sides striving to be 'right' and win.
I understand that some people feel our guidelines are excessively restrictive. Still, I think that we have a reasonable level of activity, and I'm not inclined to support changing something that works.
I didn't lay out criteria for you above, I merely underscored the existence of one of this forum's problems. This problem is a hurdle for a good number of potential users that might be here contributing if it were corrected.
I won't even get into the perceived problems, which are significant. But they need to be engaged with, and the only way they're engaged with is if someone points out that they exist and are detrimental. So there you are.
-
I don't understand.
It seems as if you are trying to say your thoughts, but hiding it under vague wording. What's the problem?
-
your point seems sort of incorrect Ashar, to shorten and paraphrase, you basically seem to be saying "I want to be able to have looser debates, like on chatsubo."
however, your argument that a lot of people want to be able to do that is invalid because, if they did they'd still be on chatsubo. People knew about the moderation and things here. thats why they came here in the first place.
Saying you want loose rules and moderation seems to me like going to an amusement park then complaining that its not a carnival. Everyone is here because of the moderation.
-
I'm not.
-
Ashar, what are the problems that you and others see with the forums? What are the perceived problems?
I understand that you have a different way of going about things but this isn't constructive. As you've said to me before in not so many words, "if you're the only one that gets it, what's the point?" I see that one of your points is in regards to appeals, what do you see as needing change in this regard?
I didn't lay out criteria for you above, I merely underscored the existence of one of this forum's problems. This problem is a hurdle for a good number of potential users that might be here contributing if it were corrected.
How would a simple change of moderation alleviate this problem?
This isn't really possible anymore, simply because of the pathetic number of active members. It doesn't work to attempt to advance a thoughtful position with a group whose chief interests do not always align with the sort of patchwork collaborative writing and content development we do here and whose scope does not represent anything like an appropriate number of people or perspectives for good results.
Sometimes it's best to work with what you do have available. I remember when you yourself promoted Chatsubo, and got a young player of a character by the name of Amann Karris to look there for the first time. It's how I found out about a certain contest that led to me acquiring a character by the name of Nikilaiki Ruutarhara. It was a wonderful place once. Times change, people change. Look at your own statements and think about this: Is it really the moderation that is the problem? Is it the rules? Is it your own expectations, or how those expectations are met?
To quote a certain pointy-eared philosopher, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." There's a reason (http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/IDIC) Spock is my favorite character in Star Trek. ;) McCoy (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090528105646/memoryalpha/en/images/c/c7/Kirk_and_Bones_on_shuttlecraft_to_Academy.jpg) is my second favorite, for different reasons. :D
-
I'm not.
Which begs the question, why are you here, Lallara dear?
-
For want of a more constructive input into this thread - how about a private feedback system is created (e.g. with appropriate pro-forma that can be filled in via a link)? I imagine this would allow people to suggest changes directly without the same 'exposure' that may be interpreted to be felt from posting a public thread/forcing a discussion of a potentially less popular idea, that would in turn be diluted in the discussion of them whom the OP would view as incompatible opinioned.
-
I watched chatsubo for more than a year. I never posted until just before I stopped watching, because frankly I didn't like the atmosphere.
I post here. In large part because of the atmosphere, which I put down to the moderation.
-
I don't understand.
It seems as if you are trying to say your thoughts, but hiding it under vague wording. What's the problem?
The problem is twofold - primarily, it is that when we're talking to someone with my level of experience with the pitfalls of certain portions of the community, I must work very hard not to light any fuses, my own or otherwise, and secondarily, it is that I'm trying to avoid putting together an inaccurate list of percieved symptoms for this particular ailment that I claims exists.
These things mean there's going to be a certain vagueness to my thoughts.
your point seems sort of incorrect Ashar, to shorten and paraphrase, you basically seem to be saying "I want to be able to have looser debates, like on chatsubo."
I don't mention that in any way connected to my primary point.however, your argument that a lot of people want to be able to do that is invalid because, if they did they'd still be on chatsubo. People knew about the moderation and things here. thats why they came here in the first place.
No. People came here to escape the attitudes and tendencies encountered in discussion on chatsubo. There was still moderation of a variety of inappropriate forms of content there; the problem wasn't the policies or the practice of moderating content. It was the practice of not reigning in or effectively reforming those who regularly committed a cardinal sin while the petty blasphemers were thrown in the stocks and handed whippings left and right.
Over a period of years, his behavior finally destroyed the capacity of that forum to be useful to its userbase, save for those who were using it to feed off each other.
Let's not feed off each other in this thread, please.
Let's also not make the mistake that being an improvement over the old regime makes one a servant of undeniable virtue.Saying you want loose rules and moderation seems to me like going to an amusement park then complaining that its not a carnival.
I guess the takeaway here is unclear, unless you're trying to tell me that your typical carnival is less strict than an amusement park? I don't know.
Everyone is here because of the moderation.
I was hoping we would learn by now not to speak for others.
Ashar, what are the problems that you and others see with the forums? What are the perceived problems?
I'll go into this shortly, in another post.I understand that you have a different way of going about things but this isn't constructive. As you've said to me before in not so many words, "if you're the only one that gets it, what's the point?"
I will be blunt because we have a friendship and a mutual understanding.
There's a difference between you being the only one to see a massive network of connections in some fiction and getting myopic about it on the one hand and me talking to a few dozen people, getting a certain response rather often, and being the only one here to voice it because the response invariably starts with 'I don't post or read backstage because _________' on the other hand. This is due to the the supporting parties definitely existing - in numbers - in my case and 'getting it,' but being disinclined to come here and state their case because they don't come here.
Forgive me if I wish not to put words in their mouths.I see that one of your points is in regards to appeals, what do you see as needing change in this regard?
I'll think about it and see if I can put it more concretely.I didn't lay out criteria for you above, I merely underscored the existence of one of this forum's problems. This problem is a hurdle for a good number of potential users that might be here contributing if it were corrected.
How would a simple change of moderation alleviate this problem?
I don't think I suggested that just yet, so I'll put the question down to your own initiative to get the conversation moving along towards a proposal. Don't think I'm prepared to go there at this point.Sometimes it's best to work with what you do have available. I remember when you yourself promoted Chatsubo, and got a young player of a character by the name of Amann Karris to look there for the first time. It's how I found out about a certain contest that led to me acquiring a character by the name of Nikilaiki Ruutarhara. It was a wonderful place once. Times change, people change.
You were a new player then? Damn.Look at your own statements and think about this: Is it really the moderation that is the problem? Is it the rules? Is it your own expectations, or how those expectations are met?
'Kay.To quote a certain pointy-eared philosopher, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." There's a reason (http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/IDIC) Spock is my favorite character in Star Trek. ;) McCoy (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090528105646/memoryalpha/en/images/c/c7/Kirk_and_Bones_on_shuttlecraft_to_Academy.jpg) is my second favorite, for different reasons. :D
Got nothin' left but ma bones.
Also, you have no taste, elf-lover.
For want of a more constructive input into this thread - how about a private feedback system is created (e.g. with appropriate pro-forma that can be filled in via a link)? I imagine this would allow people to suggest changes directly without the same 'exposure' that may be interpreted to be felt from posting a public thread/forcing a discussion of a potentially less popular idea, that would in turn be diluted in the discussion of them whom the OP would view as incompatible opinioned.
How about, as a courtesy to the staff, we ensure that whatever solution we propose is something the party that will bear the weight of instituting solutions can bear? I can't code that shit, can you? Be awesome if you could.I'm not.
Which begs the question, why are you here, Lallara dear?
...This came off a bit more combative than you likely intended it, despite the kind tone in it. Possibly because it sounds like certain other users.
-
What are the reasons that the people you have talked to give for not posting here? Specifically?
-
Welp. I'm at work so I don't have my notes, but let's see what I can remember.
Incidentally, none of these people are members of any kind of cadre, if you take my meaning, Silver.
Three or four of the people I spoke to complained primarily of the lack of utility for them; comments related to the access to useful critiques of their content were common in this group, because most of them were writers.
A full half-dozen was wary of the strictness of moderation and not fond of the principle of a forum being 'offensively inoffensive.'
However, one particularly intelligent individual who would be quite useful to have around maintained that the atmosphere of moderation was detrimental to people's capability to offer criticism to such a point that it was harming the capacity of the viewer to express themselves in regard to the quality of content, and this had resulted in nothing less than the collection of useless trivialities in a variety of sections.
There was at least one incident of someone being turned off by a given user's ability to get away with posting self-aggrandizing content and then to not be chastened for it because no-one wished to run afoul of the moderators, leading this poster to go and be freely egocentric for thousands of words. Then again, they were also pretty freaked out by the D/S thread and a few of our in-jokes, so who knows.
The rest, I'll tell you about later. I was thinking of making a graph.
-
Three or four of the people I spoke to complained primarily of the lack of utility for them; comments related to the access to useful critiques of their content were common in this group, because most of them were writers.
This seems to be a misunderstanding, so if people aren't aware, let me clarify: Critiques of writing are perfectly acceptable. Of course, we can't force people to critique other people's writing, but it is certainly allowed within the rules as long as it's constructive as opposed to 'I didn't like your story, and you're a terrible writer' type stuff.
We could even add something to the description(s) of the relevant section(s) to make it clear that it's perfectly alright to provide constructive feedback.
A full half-dozen was wary of the strictness of moderation and not fond of the principle of a forum being 'offensively inoffensive.'
Were these people who had actually posted? Or did they just feel that the moderation was to strict based on...? What they'd heard? I would like to point you back to the rules and guidelines, which I think are pretty reasonable. I don't think anyone is fond of 'offensively inoffensive' and it is something we are aware of, when we moderate. I realize that it may be too restrictive for some. As I mentioned earlier, pleasing everyone isn't going to happen.
Part of the idea in setting up this forum was to have a moderation environment that would prevent the causes, not just the specific symptoms, of some of the issues people have had with Chatsubo and other internet forums in general. I think that we have largely been successful in that.
However, one particularly intelligent individual who would be quite useful to have around maintained that the atmosphere of moderation was detrimental to people's capability to offer criticism to such a point that it was harming the capacity of the viewer to express themselves in regard to the quality of content, and this had resulted in nothing less than the collection of useless trivialities in a variety of sections.
There was at least one incident of someone being turned off by a given user's ability to get away with posting self-aggrandizing content and then to not be chastened for it because no-one wished to run afoul of the moderators, leading this poster to go and be freely egocentric for thousands of words. Then again, they were also pretty freaked out by the D/S thread and a few of our in-jokes, so who knows.
I will say it again: There is nothing wrong with posting constructive criticism. If someone isn't able to distinguish between that and a personal attack or other breach of the rules, they can feel free to ask here or PM a mod about what would be acceptable, using the specific situation.
However, users here don't 'get away with' posting self-aggrandizing content. They are free to post it if they would like. Everyone else is free to not read it. People can be as egocentric as they would like. If it makes them happy, more power to them, and I don't see that it hurts anyone else. Of course, it may lead to others not particularly wanting to interact with them, but that's how it goes.
While it isn't to my taste, or many people's taste, clearly they think it is a worthwhile use of their time. They aren't forcing anyone else to read it. If someone does want to critique it, they can feel free, and as I said above, if they are concerned about moderation, they can ask. Legitimate, constructive critiques on the substance of someone's writing isn't going to draw moderation. The key is the constructive part: Suggest what they might have done differently that you feel would improve the piece. Don't attack them.
As you mention, we have threads addressing fairly adult issues. I don't think in that area we are 'offensively inoffensive.' What we do moderate for is to create an environment where that sort of discussion can be had without people being afraid that they will be attacked over their personal lives, or where novice writers can put up their work without having a bunch of people jump all over them for perceived poor writing or because they are 'doing it wrong'.
-
Silver has missed my points!
When I am out of this cold hell at work and my fingers have thawed enough to type, I will learn him good.
-
As Silver points out, constructive criticism is welcomed and unmoderated.
Ashar, do you think a subforum that doesn't receive quite such rigorous scrutiny from the moderators would satisfy the trepidations of this group? People could dip down there for some good old wall-of-text debates or whatever it is that they're missing in the rest of the forum. ::brainstorms:: Hmm... The No-Holds Bar :yar:
-
As Silver points out, constructive criticism is welcomed and unmoderated.
Ashar, do you think a subforum that doesn't receive quite such rigorous scrutiny from the moderators would satisfy the trepidations of this group? People could dip down there for some good old wall-of-text debates or whatever it is that they're missing in the rest of the forum. ::brainstorms:: Hmm... The No-Holds Bar :yar:
Check out the former "bitching" section of the chatsubo forums. Yeeeaaah. That one.
Let's not.
-
Personally - and this is strictly personally - I don't see why the creators of this forum should seek to access a wider user base at the cost of quality. After all, this board was explicitly designed with fairer and stricter moderation as integral to its existence. We didn't all just leave Chatsubo because it was unfair moderation - although it was, and blatantly so - but also because we just got tired of even the technically legal name-calling, combativeness, and etc. Here, whether people want to be nice or not, they have to be, because otherwise the catacombs will claim their post.
I like that. I like that so much that if I'm moderated in even part of a post, I consign the whole thing to oblivion. This kind of standard has led to a much higher amount of utility and/or content per post than was common on Chatsubo, and, moreover, has created a much more civil atmosphere.
Strict moderation breeds competent and interesting posting. Perhaps there is slightly less of it because of the high standards, but it is nonetheless worth it, if for no other reason, than that no one else seems to be offering it. There are many places to post without much moderation, and as a result, those many places are largely a waste of time to read (again, for me). Here, we have an island of civilized and emotionally controlled discussion, and I would hazard that that is why Backstage has been so successful thus far.
The instant we drop that is the instant I will find it is no longer worth it to come here.
-
Do I like it when arguments I approve of, or posts I felt to be justified, are clipped? No.
Do I recognize the importance of having a (hopefully) unbiased moderator TO clip my posts when I step over a line and save me from myself? Of course I do.
-
I came here for the popularity and activity - simple.
While I may be ideologically slightly opposed to heavy-handed moderation, on a practical level I don't really care because well, since 2004, none of my writings on various Eve forums have been moderated in any fashion (except to split a topic where requested, I suppose). Heh.
-
Do I like it when arguments I approve of, or posts I felt to be justified, are clipped? No.
Do I recognize the importance of having a (hopefully) unbiased moderator TO clip my posts when I step over a line and save me from myself? Of course I do.
This pretty much to a T
-
With respect, here's what I see:
Ashar presents the fact that some EVE players (including writers, roleplayers, and others with an interest in the general subject matter addressed on Backstage) don't come here, largely because of their perceptions of what the moderation and atmosphere include.
Some of the other members, including "core regulars" and staff, point out that we come here because of our perceptions of those things.
I don't doubt for a moment that Ashar tells the truth, and that some folks feel that way. I suspect that, rather than changing the underlying reality in any way, we might need to do a better job of explaining some things (cf. the discussion on writing critiques) and highlighting that "offensively inoffensive" may not apply to sites that allow open discussion of D/s, RL politics, and the like.
I understand that I have personality clashes with some users. I try not to let it affect any decisions I might make, and in fact the atmosphere this site promotes almost certainly keeps any resultant conflict to a bare minimum.
Which is a "win" for everyone involved.
-
I appreciate that Ashar wishes to elaborate upon the problem(s) he perceives, but could I ask/remind that attention is given to contribute such explanation with possible solutions with their respective rationale. Perhaps proposed solutions help people understand the nature of a problem better in such cases that it should seem elusive?
-
I don't doubt for a moment that Ashar tells the truth, and that some folks feel that way. I suspect that, rather than changing the underlying reality in any way, we might need to do a better job of explaining some things (cf. the discussion on writing critiques) and highlighting that "offensively inoffensive" may not apply to sites that allow open discussion of D/s, RL politics, and the like.
Oh my! I recall we had a politics section created on the CVA forums after the 'just for fun' section started to become a bit serious. My recollection was that it was the best place to go in smelling like a flower and come out smelling like shit, no matter what you said.
-
I personally think there has probably been an element of "trying too hard" here when it comes to laying down the rules and trying to establish the moderation style. It's a bit uptight. Entirely understandable given the history of The Other Place, however.
In general, though, I tend to think that moderation needs to scale with the growth of the forum. Small numbers and you can afford to be laissez-faire; once you get to a certain size, though, that simply stops working. This place has been lucky to quickly grow to a size that matches the moderation. The Chatsubo failed to adapt to growth due to ideology, in my opinion.