Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Moderation Issues - Official Thread

RyanN
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:33:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Moderation Issues" appear to be a hot topic within the DDO community.

The purpose of this thread is to tap the collective wisdom of DDO members. With your help, I hope to better understand the "moderation issues" presently hindering the community and detracting from the user experience.

What works with the existing system? What is broken? Are new features are required? Are user conduct guidelines adequately or inadequately enforced?

Tomorrow I will post the aggregated list and we can then transition the discussion towards solving the problems.

I appreciate your feedback.

Ryan

P.S. Please be constructive and refrain from calling out names of individual community members… (aka: "So and so is such an a**hole. He said he was going to eat my first born child. Ban him!")
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:38:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:33:04 PM, RyanN wrote:
Whatever we do.. we shouldn't crack down on people misquoting people It's just too much fun!

I agree :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:40:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What we need are active moderators, who can remove improper content in due time so that we can prevent conflicts between members.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:44:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:33:04 PM, RyanN wrote:


What works with the existing system?

The moderator can effectively ban someone and their IP. There is a dedicated page oto submit complaints.

What is broken?

The relative inaction of the previous mod. The lack of transparency (e.g. why X was banned, how long they will be gone, etc.)

Are new features are required?

Possibly. Perhaps allowing for a users profile to still be up if they are only temporarily suspended, or at least parts of it. I think user moderators would be good if we could effectively implement a fair system of them.

Are user conduct guidelines adequately or inadequately enforced?

Inadequately. Only certain suers are banned for breaching the TOS while others get away with it. I think the TOS need to be re-evaluated, with a gradual system of banning rather than a one-chance system.

Overall, I think what's most important is that the moderator listens to the community on a regular basis, and learns everything about Debate.org and it's relevant history in terms of users.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:45:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't think any mods are needed except the owner(s). That's how it's always been and it worked (except in a few cases where the past mods banned people that shouldn't have been). I suppose in the event that a bunch of new active users sign up, perhaps some extra moderation would be necessary.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:46:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Wow, our owner is actually listening to us. This is so exciting :)

The thing is we don't have moderators. If the admin isn't around, and a really bad troll occurs, then it is a major problem. For example, a troll existed on this site that basically just clogged the site with useless debates, and created many user names to create over a hundred "stupid" debate. I forget who it was, but if anybody remembers that, it was an issue that could have been cleaned up easily if we had mods that could at lease cause temporary bans.

Another problem is that there really isn't a set form to get rid of inappropriate material for a while.

I'm not sure of the rest of the community feel this way, but there's also another issue of banning members who do not strictly adhere to the TOS. Although, it is important to follow, some feel Phil enforced it too strictly. Many people feel that the user 'askbob' should not have been banned.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
ChristianM
Posts: 1,764
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:46:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:33:04 PM, RyanN wrote:
"Moderation Issues" appear to be a hot topic within the DDO community.

The purpose of this thread is to tap the collective wisdom of DDO members. With your help, I hope to better understand the "moderation issues" presently hindering the community and detracting from the user experience.

What works with the existing system? What is broken? Are new features are required? Are user conduct guidelines adequately or inadequately enforced?

Tomorrow I will post the aggregated list and we can then transition the discussion towards solving the problems.

I appreciate your feedback.

Ryan

P.S. Please be constructive and refrain from calling out names of individual community members… (aka: "So and so is such an a**hole. He said he was going to eat my first born child. Ban him!")

For a long while, the "Forum Moderator" (i.e. Webcorp) did not pay a single bit of attention to what was happening. For a while we went about a year without any updates at all. We also have asked time and time again for user moderators to ensure forums abide by the rules. Too many times have people come in and just endlessly break rules for weeks until "Forum Moderator" came back.
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:52:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:40:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
What we need are active moderators, who can remove improper content in due time so that we can prevent conflicts between members.

That's the biggest issue. Who decides what is improper. Strict TOS would be the only way. But, there are varied opinions on the definitions of the TOS. Some think person in underwear is porn while others do not.

Some think saying someone is an idiot is abuse others do not.

I can't think of anyone I would trust to be bias. That includes myself.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:53:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd like to just echo what others have said. The site was, I wouldn't say "neglected" but pretty well ignored, by the old guy for a long while. We had spammers and a-holes galore, and he only ever bothered to lift a finger whenever one particular member came on that he didn't like. I'm appreciative of what he did, but still, we had to wait a hell of a long time.

But, depending on how much your involvement will even be with the website, depends if we'll need the moderators. If you're going to be active and attentive, then I don't see the need. If not, we need at least someone we can go to if we have a problem, someone that will act right away.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:56:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Also for the DDO awards it contains a list of those who were nominated for best-would-be-moderator
http://www.debate.org...

JBlake contained a majority of nominations although Innomen, Lwerd, Kleptin, Cody, and RoyLatham also were nominated for best-would-be-moderator.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:58:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:52:26 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:40:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
What we need are active moderators, who can remove improper content in due time so that we can prevent conflicts between members.

That's the biggest issue. Who decides what is improper. Strict TOS would be the only way. But, there are varied opinions on the definitions of the TOS. Some think person in underwear is porn while others do not.

Some think saying someone is an idiot is abuse others do not.

I can't think of anyone I would trust to be bias. That includes myself.
The ToS already says it. The moderator just has to follow it.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 12:59:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:33:04 PM, RyanN wrote:

What works with the existing system?
There is none.
What is broken?
Nothing since there isn't any.
Are user conduct guidelines adequately or inadequately enforced?
I suppose, the webcorp administrators were inactive generally let alone in regards to player support. Phil has banned approximately 20 different users and threatened a law suit against one particular user.

Overall, I wouldn't say the moderator issues are "detracting from the user experience", to be honest I don't think Moderators are even a necessity.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:56:53 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Also for the DDO awards it contains a list of those who were nominated for best-would-be-moderator
http://www.debate.org...

JBlake contained a majority of nominations although Innomen, Lwerd, Kleptin, Cody, and RoyLatham also were nominated for best-would-be-moderator.

Honestly I can only think of one maybe two that haven't insulted others on this site based on belief system.

I'm not calling names but that had always been an issue here.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What do people think about these 'powers':

- Ability to "hide" threads
- Ability to "hide" posts.
- Ability to "edit" posts.
- Ability to alert the moderator with priority reports.
- Ability to mute for up to 3 hours.

+ a 'trial' system in which users can take up cases against the moderator - The admin can decide whether the make these fully public, private to view or private to post.

N.B! - No Ban powers
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:10:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:00:55 PM, Mirza wrote:
A minute after this thread was created: http://img139.imageshack.us...
Admittedly, the friend requests were sent before, but the new moderator accepted then.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:11:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
What do people think about these 'powers':

- Ability to "hide" threads
- Ability to "hide" posts.
- Ability to "edit" posts.
- Ability to alert the moderator with priority reports.
- Ability to mute for up to 3 hours.

+ a 'trial' system in which users can take up cases against the moderator - The admin can decide whether the make these fully public, private to view or private to post.

N.B! - No Ban powers

I could get behind that.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:11:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:10:59 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/13/2010 1:00:55 PM, Mirza wrote:
A minute after this thread was created: http://img139.imageshack.us...
Admittedly, the friend requests were sent before, but the new moderator accepted then.

And the significance is...?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:13:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
What do people think about these 'powers':

- Ability to "hide" threads
No. There should be no ongoing discussions which are not public. Everybody should be able to participate and not feel that there is hidden content. There are PM's aready.

- Ability to "hide" posts.
Ditto.

- Ability to "edit" posts.
Yes, within 1-5 minutes after posting to edit errors and typos.

- Ability to alert the moderator with priority reports.
Yes.

- Ability to mute for up to 3 hours.
Mute threads? Yes, perhaps.

+ a 'trial' system in which users can take up cases against the moderator - The admin can decide whether the make these fully public, private to view or private to post.
I see no need for that.

N.B! - No Ban powers
Except for the main moderator. However, suspensions could be good, e.g., suspending a member from certain sub-forums for e.g., a day or more could be useful.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:13:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:11:38 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 12/13/2010 1:10:59 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/13/2010 1:00:55 PM, Mirza wrote:
A minute after this thread was created: http://img139.imageshack.us...
Admittedly, the friend requests were sent before, but the new moderator accepted then.

And the significance is...?
It could have been perceived as the members trying to get some good attention from the moderator.
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:16:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
What do people think about these 'powers':

- Ability to "hide" threads
- Ability to "hide" posts.
- Ability to "edit" posts.
- Ability to alert the moderator with priority reports.
- Ability to mute for up to 3 hours.

+ a 'trial' system in which users can take up cases against the moderator - The admin can decide whether the make these fully public, private to view or private to post.

N.B! - No Ban powers

Absolutely no ban powers. But even the other suggestions could abused left in the wrong hands. If this site is to remain an open perspective site then caution must be taken.

If the were a XYZ site and only XYZ was allowed it would be feasible, but this site is not like that. The ability to silence is the ability to remove voices that the majority may not like to hear.

Only the owner can decide which way he/she wants this site to go.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:30:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 12:58:51 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:52:26 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:40:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
What we need are active moderators, who can remove improper content in due time so that we can prevent conflicts between members.

That's the biggest issue. Who decides what is improper. Strict TOS would be the only way. But, there are varied opinions on the definitions of the TOS. Some think person in underwear is porn while others do not.

Some think saying someone is an idiot is abuse others do not.

I can't think of anyone I would trust to be bias. That includes myself.
The ToS already says it. The moderator just has to follow it.

True. But the interpretation is key. Not long ago someone was banned for posting nudity and half said good call and the other half claimed fool. Then another member posted something that was close and nothing happened. Even the owner can be bias, but he/she owns the site and us the only one that will feel the results in profit.

Now there are clear violations that everyone agrees on. Maybe give mod powers (no ban) to one and mod can only act with the review of a well mixed panel that represents the major groups here. Complicated I know, but maybe the only way to keep checks and balances in such a unique site.
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:38:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:30:48 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:58:51 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:52:26 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/13/2010 12:40:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
What we need are active moderators, who can remove improper content in due time so that we can prevent conflicts between members.

That's the biggest issue. Who decides what is improper. Strict TOS would be the only way. But, there are varied opinions on the definitions of the TOS. Some think person in underwear is porn while others do not.

Some think saying someone is an idiot is abuse others do not.

I can't think of anyone I would trust to be bias. That includes myself.
The ToS already says it. The moderator just has to follow it.

True. But the interpretation is key. Not long ago someone was banned for posting nudity and half said good call and the other half claimed fool. Then another member posted something that was close and nothing happened. Even the owner can be bias, but he/she owns the site and us the only one that will feel the results in profit.

Now there are clear violations that everyone agrees on. Maybe give mod powers (no ban) to one and mod can only act with the review of a well mixed panel that represents the major groups here. Complicated I know, but maybe the only way to keep checks and balances in such a unique site.
It does not solve the interpretation problem of the ToS.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:45:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The problem before, as some have noted, is that the previous owner neglected the site. He really only came around to ban one specific member repeatedly due to some personal animosity between the two. So before, people would occasionally end up being banned without explanation - usually for some minor offense.

This brings me to the next major point. There should be a medium between doing nothing and banning someone. A suspension of X number of days would be a great new policy. And when someone is being banned or suspended, they are informed as to the reasoning behind it.

With the neglect mentioned before, if someone came to the site spamming, being overly abusive, &ct., it would take days for the issue to be addressed - if it was ever addressed at all. So either an owner who is attentive, or a couple of user-mods would be able to take care of such things more quickly. Also, with user mods there is less pressure on the owner to quickly handle issues. The responsibility is shared among a few select others.

The community is small enough that probably 2 people at most could handle things.

The role of the user-mod should really be someone that users can go to for dispute-resolution. It would be good for users to be able to go to someone with a little bit of authority to discuss a dispute that arises. Banning and suspension should be rare. Most issues that arise do not warrant banning or suspension and can be dealt with by the community. The problem so far is that no such infrastructure exists.

At any rate, that is my two cents.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 1:48:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:38:27 PM, Mirza wrote:
It does not solve the interpretation problem of the ToS.

I feel that only gross violations of the ToS should result in banning.
eg.
- VERY abusive behavior that cannot be resolved through dispute-resolution.
- Posting pornography
- &ct.

Anything else we can deal with without needing to resort to banning. Suspension for the more serious violations would nice as well.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 2:29:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 1:16:44 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/13/2010 1:08:22 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
What do people think about these 'powers':

- Ability to "hide" threads
- Ability to "hide" posts.
- Ability to "edit" posts.
- Ability to alert the moderator with priority reports.
- Ability to mute for up to 3 hours.

+ a 'trial' system in which users can take up cases against the moderator - The admin can decide whether the make these fully public, private to view or private to post.

N.B! - No Ban powers

Absolutely no ban powers. But even the other suggestions could abused left in the wrong hands. If this site is to remain an open perspective site then caution must be taken.

If the were a XYZ site and only XYZ was allowed it would be feasible, but this site is not like that. The ability to silence is the ability to remove voices that the majority may not like to hear.

Only the owner can decide which way he/she wants this site to go.
The rights would be given to a benevolent user.

By benevolent I mean 'fair', it's original meaning.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 2:45:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
This is a rather shocking thread. From my experience, this site is filled with people who believe that morality is relative and a strong central government, or any government at all, is naught but detrimental. To see such an insistence on a strong moderation of this site just paints those perspectives as wholly insincere.

I have been here for... oh, almost a year, and have seen no real incidents. The people here are generally respectful and those that are not are usually too intimidated to become a real issue. There is very little, if any, harassment, but those who are most inclined also seem to be some of the most popular members. In fact, I feel that we're still too limited; for reasons that remain a mystery to me, people refuse to even type out curses. This site is a step away from puritan, with a more pedantic approach to internet rhetoric than any other social site, without active moderators.

I think that a strong moderation of this site would likely compromise this site's luster. We should be able to edit our own posts, but as far as having someone come in and police the place, that simply sounds disastrous. We should be free to voice our opinions, no matter what proportion of the site disagrees, and despite how specific those opinions are. We are no more than a collection of faux personas presenting ourselves through pictorial avatars and words.

Moderators should ban spammers only. Spammers are those who engage solely in advertising products for a foreseeable revenue with no other participation. We don't even really get those, so I think that active moderators are completely extraneous.

Just my two cents.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 2:51:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 2:45:02 PM, Ren wrote:
This is a rather shocking thread. From my experience, this site is filled with people who believe that morality is relative and a strong central government, or any government at all, is naught but detrimental. To see such an insistence on a strong moderation of this site just paints those perspectives as wholly insincere.

I have been here for... oh, almost a year, and have seen no real incidents. The people here are generally respectful and those that are not are usually too intimidated to become a real issue. There is very little, if any, harassment, but those who are most inclined also seem to be some of the most popular members. In fact, I feel that we're still too limited; for reasons that remain a mystery to me, people refuse to even type out curses. This site is a step away from puritan, with a more pedantic approach to internet rhetoric than any other social site, without active moderators.

I think that a strong moderation of this site would likely compromise this site's luster. We should be able to edit our own posts, but as far as having someone come in and police the place, that simply sounds disastrous. We should be free to voice our opinions, no matter what proportion of the site disagrees, and despite how specific those opinions are. We are no more than a collection of faux personas presenting ourselves through pictorial avatars and words.

Moderators should ban spammers only. Spammers are those who engage solely in advertising products for a foreseeable revenue with no other participation. We don't even really get those, so I think that active moderators are completely extraneous.

Just my two cents.

I don't think many, if any, are arguing for a strong moderator presence. Some of us would like a minimal moderator presence to take care of spammers, &ct. We have had those issues before and they took several days to be addressed by the owner - if they were even addressed at all.

Also, you must have missed the whole joshandr fiasco if you think that there has rarely been any drama on the site. That whole issue literally took months until Phil finally addressed it.

If you have read my previous posts on the issue, a very minimal moderator presence is what we seek.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 2:59:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think we definitely need some moderators for this forum and for debates. I've seen debates that are just plain ridiculous and ultimately make this site look like a joke.

At 12/13/2010 12:56:53 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Also for the DDO awards it contains a list of those who were nominated for best-would-be-moderator
http://www.debate.org...

JBlake contained a majority of nominations although Innomen, Lwerd, Kleptin, Cody, and RoyLatham also were nominated for best-would-be-moderator.

That looks like a pretty good list, except theLwerd. I absolutely do not want a votebomber for a moderator, especially one who then lies about the vote to appear to have integrity.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2010 3:06:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/13/2010 2:59:27 PM, mongeese wrote:
I think we definitely need some moderators for this forum and for debates. I've seen debates that are just plain ridiculous and ultimately make this site look like a joke.
I absolutely do not want a votebomber for a moderator, especially one who then lies about the vote to appear to have integrity.

I think we should scrap the user-mod idea altogether. It sounds like the Juggle people will have sufficient time to manage the site themselves.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light