Your Least Favourite Moderator

[vern]

---

well, if you think you needed to react to that statement then maybe you're affected by it.

Your previous statement is one of those really obvious, kick-me upside the head statements where it is clear who it is directed at, but to stay innocent, you must be vague about it. I do not need your sugarcoated comments. Leave that for the other people who might not have the emotional capacity for straightforward comments.

okay. let's say it wasn't intended. but knowing that you said something that could be a little too sarcastic or too arrogant to say and still post it anyway, gives us the hint that you deliberately wanted to make us feel like so.

I beg you to tell me where I modded someone and where my message was directly or indirectly aimed to hurt or insult. Make sure you know the difference between what is moderating and what is posting as a member with your own views. Make sure you have read the discussion. Make sure I was acting as a mod, and not as a regular member.

then why is this becoming an issue for you if one's interpretation of each post is that person's problem? this is how we see things; your interpretation's your problem, right?

The issue here is not how people take it ... I could care less. Cry me a river for all I care. The issue here is that people seem to think that moderating has any connection with our own personal posts. Although personal opinions and ethics might guide a moderator in how they moderate, the moderation itself is based on the rules.

naa man gud uban na if mamadlong, naa pa ju'y pakapin nga side comments nga di naman jud ta kinahanglan. by doing so, an ordinary member might see that mod as bossy and obnoxious.

Mamadlong ra dii mi? Dili pwede mo apil sa discussion? Kamo ray pwede malingaw?

here's something else. what if kung mu post ang usa ka mod, saying something as a moderator, inyong e assign ug certain color ang text pero if personal opinion lang or comment, di lang. would that be helpful? could that be done?

This is on par with "ngano dili man mi ninyu e message?". Another "service" that we have to offer because a simple message like I gave Paklay's post that was locked wasn't enough for him

If you are going to pirate, don't ask for help

... but in reality contained more information than is required or necessary. Another "suggestion" just to prolong the discussion. Some moderators do this in fact, but not all will. I know ZN puts his comments in "[ ]" and if I need to edit people's post, I let them know by italicizing and putting "mod edit: reason". If ZN has nothing to say, that is all that he will say. I don't see why people should be told what is being said as a moderator because common sense escapes them.

I'm not going to continue this discussion with you. As far as I see it, you have not raised any points except that you feel we need to follow a script of how moderators should act. All I have to say is this ... people will be treated as an informed adult/teenager. People will not be be given special treatment. People will not be given free hugs because they can't feel good about themselves. People will be replied to on the basis of their post and only their post. I personally moderate friend and stranger the same way I moderate everyone as I have already done many times. If you think you've brought up anything other than "why can't you do it this way", "why are you mean?", "this is what I would do if I was you", etc ... feel free to message me privately. I promise I won't hurt your feelings. Hugs are on me.

[off^tangent]

just a view from my peep hole...
i saw that moderators are one personality above than ordinary members, that being able to moderate others...and members are having a hard time discerning between a moderator's 'being himself' personality and his 'robot with a mission' mod personality...and some mods are weilding this double-edged sword when moderating or participating discussions (based from the reactions on this thread, i can't possibly read all mods posts this time, sorrie).

my opinion...
of the former personality, that's none of our business, we can't even ask them to be humble. of the latter, the more clear-cut and emotionally-detached, the better. of the former and the latter to go together, it's a lethal combination. my sympathy goes to the really new ones in this forum thing. learning one's first lessons the hard way can be traumatic. and having bad first impressions can be alienating. either way, not good for all in istorya.
in fairness, some mods are discreet between the two when moderating or ordinary posting...

my suggestion (buot buot lang)...
something must be done about this personality mix-up. some suggestions above are practical. like the 'Mod' indication when moderating, otherwise, a free-for-all discussion.
or just leave the members on their own devices to reconcile the confusion.

[welemski]

What if we meet, and get togother once in a while?
Both members and moderators wel have a chance to know each other and drink together. Let us have a munting salo-salo or... go to a resto-bar and drink while we talk.

[irangejuice]

on the next updates moderators will have direct access to ban members through a "voting count system"--we just click to vote. we'll still be equal, that will always hold true. But to members: pretty soon it when updates will have been completed these rules will be very easy to shove down throats.

this can be a pretty BIASED system if ma ban ang member sa pag vote lang. ok ra nga voting pero what if the moderator(s) take it personally..nya sabotan.. go ko aning Voting system, but still the Admins have the final judgement kung dapat ba e ban ang ka2ng voted member.. as whats said here sa forums.. a moderator is no form higher than a member. they just have more duties.

you also might've taken n'gel's words too literally. How about an analogy to clear things up: civilians and police officers have equal rights as human beings, though at times a police officer must exercise additional rights given to him to keep his neighborhood the way it's supposed to be.

noted: BeoR.


Also Earlz, we already have a similar voting system right now. Not as automated as we'd want but close. It goes like this: a moderator posts a username that he recommends for ban. Moderators will review that members' posts and will post 2nds if they agree that the member be banned. Admin does his 3-clicks-of-bannishment supermove (lol beor).

Now you've had some heat with Vern, me, i dunno if you had one with chronnus, or visualC#. My point is--if you think we are capable of such things then don't you think we would've banned you already? think about it man.

[irangejuice]

welemski: i'd have absolutely no problem with that.. in fact that sounds like fun. Also anyone who'd like to jump me do it there... you can try. haha i'm trained in the arts of bar-fists-kung-'bog. Deadly with peanuts and an ashtray.

[welemski]

Great...

How about the rest? would they agree about this?

[giver_bert]

OT: we need a group hug!

[d`monyita]

OT: that is giver_bert's medicine talking...hehehehehehhe...i agree with him though....hugzzz to all!

[welemski]

So when do we get together?
The Beer Stuff...?
The Conversation Stuff...?
The Party Stuff..?
And the all bout MODERATOR and MEMBER stuff?

[irangejuice]

[ that would need another thread welemski there've been a lot of EBs already, some mods do join in. I usually skip these things. but heh if you pull this off, i just might go.]