Concerns about moderation

[iBlue]

I know it might be odd that you get warned for consecutive posting or other minor offenses but the problem is that there are lots of members who don't even know that rule exists. Merging the posts won't help because it doesn't let us to provide the member with instructions how to use multi-quote and tell him that we don't allow consecutive posting here. That is the dilemma. It's not about being trigger happy and power hungry, but providing the best overall solution. I would love to send an individual PM instead of a warning but on the other hand, I do like my free time as well.

Like I said before, we are working on making the infraction system better all the time. We know that the current system has shortages, especially when it comes to minor offenses like consecutive posting. I agree with you that a warning for first time consecutive posting is too harsh, but we still need some kind of easy, fast and convenient solution to lets the user know about the rule.

I know you've got some really clever people in the back room. Could something be written and implemented as a hack so that an automated PM is sent to the user about consecutive posts and how to use multi-quote when posts are merged? (such as under the moderation tools "merge posts and send PM") I don't know the ins and outs of how that could be done, if at all, but after some initial work it might save quite a lot of work in the long run. A theoretical idea anyway.

 

[rdowns]

I know I said I didn't want to have this debate again but since we're here…

Excellent post CalBoy.

I'll ask a question I've asked before. Why do so many mods disappear from the site, especially those that were once very active forum participants? And don't tell me that life changes and they don't have time as they are active online elsewhere.

I still maintain that moderators who don't participate actively in the forums are part of the problem.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I still maintain that moderators who don't participate actively in the forums are part of the problem.

Maybe that is a stretch but I believe that a mod should be an active forum member, which shows me they're vested in the site. My time as a mod at a site as large as if not larger than this, was cut after a couple of years when I could no longer visit the site. I did my "required" time and called it a day. It was a decision I made on my own to step down from it because I was no longer able to spend the time. They had no problem letting me stick around but I have a problem with a stealth mod who rarely, if ever, posts and is nothing more than a rule enforcer. It's similar to working from home. If you work from home there is really no love loss when they need to let you go. They're not vested in you as a person, you're just a name.

 

[MonkeySee....]

These discussions always seem to end with the same sad realization: MacRumors can't go home again.

In the past the community was small, more homogenous, and relatively more mature as a total percentage of active participants. The success of the iOS devices has made MacRumors' demography shift alongside Apple's. The finesse, sophistication, and charm of the forums has given way to the lowest common denominator.

While all of that is obvious, what isn't is what to do about it.

The rules that have cause members to feel as if their personal moderation is excessive are becoming a problem now because the moderators have no realistic way to maintain the kind of balance they once did. Before a team of roughly a dozen moderators would be responsible for a fairly low number of active participants. It was easy to know when someone was joking around, being earnest, or just trolling because the physical limitations hadn't become apparent yet.

Today the limitations are becoming more and more apparent at an accelerated rate. Long time members feel like moderation is no longer fair precisely because it's been forced to become more bureaucratic. The rules must be applied evenly now because there is no room left for personal discretion. This will not get any better as time goes on. Inevitably MacRumors will have even more new members and even more moderators.

The solution, I think, is to abandon the old way of doing things. The site clearly isn't the same anymore, so why should the moderation be that way too? The use of a "+1/-1" system and the hiring of sloppy front page writers seems to indicate, to me at least, that the tone of the site is changing. The ship is sailing towards "casual" whereas the moderation is still anchored to formal.

It may be time for MacRumors to toy with the idea of very limited moderation (or none at all in some instances), wherein only the most serious offenses are dealt with. Things like consecutive posts, offensive signatures, and one word posts might need to be ignored. After all, one can't quarrel about the decor when every post is littered with tiresome anonymous "hit points."

I'm sorry us "newbies" are lowing the finesse, sophistication, and charm of the site.

Maybe we should start drinking our tea with our little pinky sticking out?

Jesus

 

[robbieduncan]

I'll ask a question I've asked before. Why do so many mods disappear from the site, especially those that were once very active forum participants?

I don't really have a good answer to this but I'll let you know... (if and when I stop participating)

 

[arkitect]

In the past the community was small, more homogenous, and relatively more mature as a total percentage of active participants. The success of the iOS devices has made MacRumors' demography shift alongside Apple's. The finesse, sophistication, and charm of the forums has given way to the lowest common denominator.

I'm sorry us "newbies" are lowing the finesse, sophistication, and charm of the site.

I also read that and thought it a very arrogant comment.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds. Where would MR's valuation be today without this influx of "unsophisticates"?

For myself I mostly have no problems with the moderators. I do think they are heavy handed with what they perceive to be off-topic posts.

I wear my one infraction as a light badge of honour. I was slapped with it by an overzealous mod (yes, she knows who she is) over a post more than 2 years old at the time. Do I "respect" that judgement? *******, no.

 

[iBlue]

I also read that and thought it a very arrogant comment.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds. Where would MR's valuation be today without this influx of "unsophisticates"?
...

I didn't read it that way. Of course it's generalizing but it's fair to say that with the iPhone came a lot of new users, many quite young and rude. Sure it drives up traffic but that can change things for the worse. Anyway, all that aside I still think CalBoy made some very valid points about moderation.

 

[fireshot91]

I think a quote from my old friend Thomas Jefferson is necessary.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

. I went there.

 

[arkitect]

I think a quote from my old friend Thomas Jefferson is necessary.



. I went there.

Except MacRumors is not a Democracy.
Nice try though.

 

[MacDawg]

I know I said I didn't want to have this debate again but since we're here…

Excellent post CalBoy.

I'll ask a question I've asked before. Why do so many mods disappear from the site, especially those that were once very active forum participants? And don't tell me that life changes and they don't have time as they are active online elsewhere.

I still maintain that moderators who don't participate actively in the forums are part of the problem.

All of the moderators past and present were active members at the time of their selection as a moderator, and they were/are heavily invested in MR

Why does that change? I can only offer up my own personal experience and I in no way want to speak for any other moderators

1. Time is an issue. Whereas before, I would log in to MR and immediately join in a conversation or look for some place to participate, now I feel my first responsibility is to modding, not participating. You look at every thread and every post differently, and you open and check threads you would probably never have looked at otherwise. I have a duty to do, and based on the feedback we receive from some, we aren't doing a very good job, so it puts additional pressure to seek and destroy trolls, spammers and such. There is a LOT going on here in the Forums, and tracking down disputes, quotes, he said/she said takes a lot of time and effort. In the end, there is less time left for participation to the extent there once was. It is as simple as that.

2. It wears on you. Again, before I was a moderator, I could ignore insane trolling threads (or just report and move on), and I could bait and give a snarky response to some idiot who posts yet again about Flash, Blu-ray, Android, et. al. Now, instead of avoiding things, I have a responsibility to not only get involved but to mediate them in a professional and responsible manner to represent the site. While I encourage post reports, the junior high food fights of pointing fingers and reporting each other over and over for petty remarks takes its toll. After time, it gets really tiresome to deal with re-registrations of the same individuals who join here as their form of entertainment - baiting others. Of course there are the constant stream of "is this the iPhone X" threads and "how much is this worth" or "what should I do" or "Apple sux" or (fill in the blank, you've seen them all too). The difference is, while they are annoying to the Forum Users, they are work for the moderators, and it does wear on you.

3. Nothing is as black and white as it seems. As a user, I thought I knew what should be done. Ban this guy. Delete this thread. Put that guy in time out. But when you actually have the ability to do these things, it changes your perspective. With great power comes great responsibility so to speak. Black and white suddenly became a million shades of gray and you had to look at the big picture and try to be consistent and fair, because you will be held accountable for how you use the power you now have. Monday Morning and Arm Chair Quarterbacking is easy. Not so much on the field on Sundays. We as moderators have all made our mistakes and taken our lumps from time to time. I have had to apologize to folks for misunderstanding things and taking them too far. I have restored deleted posts and been subject to the scorn of the general population and the demis alike, but I think I speak for all the moderators when I say we try to do our very best, be consistent and fair without allowing personal feelings to interfere.

I will be honest, I didn't want to become a moderator for those very reasons. I had long correspondence with Q before I agreed. But in the end, somebody has to do the work of cleaning the toilets, and I care about this place.

 

[xUKHCx]

over a post more than 2 years old at the time. Do I "respect" that judgement? *******, no.

Strictly speaking the rules apply to all posts from all time as it where but in reality I doubt any of the mods would view it as such. We do have relaxed policies for "lost in time" minor issues but moderators do make mistakes and we do admit when we do. It is sometimes easy to miss the date a post was made having gone to a thread for one reason or another.

I think it is something we should review again and it is something that we will be discussing.

With all cases of moderation if anyone has a question or query or felt that a moderator has made a mistake you should send a contact us.

In this case if you had we would've reviewd it at the time and it would've been done and dusted long ago.

I will follow this up in a PM to you.

 

[tobefirst ⚽️]

Do the mods have a term of service they agree to when they are "promoted?" I understand they do their job voluntarily and there may be some hesitation to say "we need a commitment from you of [1 year/6 months/etc.]" because of the lack of pay, but I also feel it is important to acknowledge that moderating, like many volunteer opportunities, is also a commitment. Like rdowns, I have noticed that many mods don't stick around very often. If they had a definable term of service, after which they could re-up or decline to continue, it might make it easier to see the light at the end of the tunnel and remain a part of the community.

Just curious.

 

[Blue Velvet]

It wears on you.

This is true.

We as moderators have all made our mistakes and taken our lumps from time to time.

This very also.

Although, as per usual, given my time here, I can see both sides of this issue, but this sort of post is worth more on a human level than some technocratic missive concocted in the back room, guaranteed to make people's eyes glaze over.

As far as arkitect's little incident is concerned, if true, then that's an appalling way to deal with people. I don't care one jot who you are, will always compliment good work where I see it, but if you're dishing out warnings for posts two years old, then a) you've lost sight of what it is to be part of a community, b) you're not paying attention and c) you're losing your soul.

In one word: Milgram.

 

[arkitect]

As far as arkitect's little incident is concerned, if true, then that's an appalling way to deal with people. I don't care one jot who you are, will always compliment good work where I see it, but if you're dishing out warnings for posts two years old, then a) you've lost sight of what it is to be part of a community, b) you're not paying attention and c) you're losing your soul.

In one word: Milgram.

If true? *ouch*
Ask xUKHCx he'll vouch for it.

@xUKHCx Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[rdowns]

I wear my one infraction as a light badge of honour. I was slapped with it by an overzealous mod (yes, she knows who she is) over a post more than 2 years old at the time. Do I "respect" that judgement? *******, no.

I wish I could say I'm surprised but I'm not. That would never have happened years ago.

My favorite warning I received was for telling someone to grow up. The very next post was the guy saying, yeah, you're right, I need to grow up. Talk about losing sight of your job.

All of the moderators past and present were active members at the time of their selection as a moderator, and they were/are heavily invested in MR

Why does that change? I can only offer up my own personal experience and I in no way want to speak for any other moderators
<snip>

Thanks for the reply.

Maybe the site has grown too large but when mods were active, in many cases prolific, posters, the need for moderation was lessened as they were part of the threads. Just not the case any longer and I believe it to be one reason why things are different. Instead of being participants with modding responsibilities, mods have turned into policemen who are infrequent participants.

 

[robbieduncan]

If true? *ouch*
Ask xUKHCx he'll vouch for it.

@xUKHCx Thanks for clearing it up.

This brings up a good point: if anyone is unhappy about moderation "received" then they don't have to suffer in silence. Use the Contact Us form...

 

[xUKHCx]

If true? *ouch*
Ask xUKHCx he'll vouch for it.

@xUKHCx Thanks for clearing it up.

No problem

...

I'm surprised that in the one post you admit that moderators can and do make mistakes and then write a long paragraph about how one incidence is suddenly

a) you've lost sight of what it is to be part of a community, b) you're not paying attention and c) you're losing your soul.

In one word: Milgram.

I think it is terribly unfair to make such a large leap from one case of moderation which was most likely a slight mistake.

I wish I could say I'm surprised but I'm not. That would never have happened years ago.

A small mistake by a moderator. It most certainly happened years ago and will happen in the future.

When people recieve moderation if they feel it is wrong for one reason or another (or just need to ask further questions or clarifications etc.) they are more than welcome to contact the moderator in question or send a contact us form. They are a friendly bunch and will bring up issues where they have got something wrong and correct it. We do ask members do so in a polite way but do also understand when people vent.

 

[chrono1081]

I tracked down those posts to see what you meant. You were posting about how you were moderated but you didn't say (either publicly or privately) that we could discuss it publicly, which put it back into the category of moderation that should be handled privately. You have to be explicit about waiving the privacy you get by default. When we've assumed in the past that a user asking about their case publicly wanted the answer publicly we've sometimes gotten burned by subsequent accusations that we violated their privacy and our own privacy policy by replying to their posts.

Ah ok, makes sense. Thank you for the clarification

 

[tigres]

No problem
When people recieve moderation if they feel it is wrong for one reason or another (or just need to ask further questions or clarifications etc.) they are more than welcome to contact the moderator in question or send a contact us form. They are a friendly bunch and will bring up issues where they have got something wrong and correct it. We do ask members do so in a polite way but do also understand when people vent.

I for one will keep this in mind, should I ever find myself in the waters.
Appreciate the advice.

 

[fireshot91]

Question, do you mods talk it over when deleting a post?

Like, if somebody calls somebody else an idiot, which is the example given in the FAQ/Rules, would it be talked over by a group, or the first person to see it goes to town deleting?

 

[Blue Velvet]

I think it is terribly unfair to make such a large leap from one case of moderation which was most likely a slight mistake.

Perhaps. But for some, it's clearly felt to be part of a larger pattern. One can brush it off or *shrug* all you like, but that reaction only compounds others perceptions.

It personally doesn't bother me too much, because I'm not here nearly as often as I used to be and am busy with other things and other people. Some of this has much to do with how boring and narrow the forums have become when you're not interested in discussing Apple and tech stuff. The community and its longstanding members, a key aspect for me, has suffered over the years and just isn't the place it used to be.

All things change, but sometimes change is in our own hands, to shape the things we care about and to make a difference. Sometimes, you have to look up from what you're doing on the micro-level and think about what community and relationship-building means.

But contrary to expressed opinion, you'd be surprised how little I have to do with people and topics from MR, probably more posts here in the last two months than any emails, facebook updates or any other communique.

So I don't think talking about fairness is a route that is particularly productive in public. When you guys stop nitpicking people's posts, misrepresenting and speculating on their motives and actions behind the scenes with little foundation, then we can have an interesting conversation about fairness; one which I'm fully prepared for.

I'm logging out, got work to do... and will not participate in this thread further.

Chill and stay loose.

 

[Doctor Q]

I'll ask a question I've asked before. Why do so many mods disappear from the site, especially those that were once very active forum participants?

I'll try to answer without talking about any specific moderator without their permission.

wpotere explained one of the reasons. Some moderators get tired of dealing with rude and uncooperative users and just don't want the hassle any more.

Every forum that I have been on have people complaining about the moderation. Having done it in the past I can say that it is a thankless and tiresome job and you can never make everyone happy.

Life changes cause forum members to leave MacRumors all the time, mods included. That's why eyelikeart and Mr. Anderson, who were here in MacRumors' prehistoric era, are no longer here to chat and joke with us all day long and to moderate as well, even though they're still our friends.

Some of the other long-time moderators still pop in now and then. Some mods left with gripes about the site/job/staff but hard feelings are the exception. We still talk to most ex-mods. Multiple moderators have told us they are busy in the real world but trying to find more time to get back to MacRumors.

Finally, moderators have two jobs: day-to-day handling of post reports and helping with back-room discussions of rules and policies and planning and testing of new features. Their mod work is roughly proportional to overall forum participation but some mods shift their balance between planning and post moderation. It's a volunteer job so how they help is up to them.

Question, do you mods talk it over when deleting a post?

Like, if somebody calls somebody else an idiot, which is the example given in the FAQ/Rules, would it be talked over by a group, or the first person to see it goes to town deleting?

Calling a forum member (as opposed to a public figure) an idiot is always against the rules, so a moderator will usually delete the post, check the user's history to see if it's a first offense or repeat offense, and record any other action they decide to take. Other moderators see this and can throw in comments or questions.

If it's not such a clear cut rules violation, discussions can sort it out, even though they delay the resulting actions. One moderator asks a question or proposes something and the others who are around give their feedback. Sometimes it takes more than a day, and we wait to get a consensus. The moderators decide most cases among themselves, but grab administrators to help with the tough calls. Our policy for borderline cases is "when in doubt, don't moderate".

If a user contacts us, we review the posts and mod actions and explain them or correct any mistakes or misunderstandings. Most users simply need an explanation. Mod mistakes (like not noticing that a post is very old, which I've done myself) are remarkably rare given how much goes on here each day.

 

[fireshot91]

Very well, thanks for the answer.


But really Dr. Q, two posts in a row? We have a multi-quote feature in place for a reason .

 

[xUKHCx]

Do the mods have a term of service they agree to when they are "promoted?" I understand they do their job voluntarily and there may be some hesitation to say "we need a commitment from you of [1 year/6 months/etc.]" because of the lack of pay, but I also feel it is important to acknowledge that moderating, like many volunteer opportunities, is also a commitment. Like rdowns, I have noticed that many mods don't stick around very often. If they had a definable term of service, after which they could re-up or decline to continue, it might make it easier to see the light at the end of the tunnel and remain a part of the community.

Just curious.

There is no set time that moderators agree to. So in theory it is forever Interesting suggestion, it is one that I shall bring up as I feel it is very worthwhile of discussion. We try to impress on the moderators that whatever time they can give is great and we understand that real life can and will creep up to take over your time. It certainly has for me recently although I am over most of that now and posting more. Some moderators most certainly have had real life jump up and take them away (from participating at MR not to the afterlife )

Perhaps. But for some, it's clearly felt to be part of a larger pattern. One can brush it off or *shrug* all you like, but that reaction only compounds others perceptions.

In what way did I brush it off?

I stated in my original post the issue, the policies and that I would be bringing it up for review and discussion. I also stated that I would be following it up (reviewing the case) with the member in question.

That was a pretty comprehensive review of the situation.

So I don't think talking about fairness is a route that is particularly productive in public. When you guys stop nitpicking people's posts, misrepresenting and speculating on their motives and actions behind the scenes with little foundation, then we can have an interesting conversation about fairness; one which I'm fully prepared for.

I'm logging out, got work to do... and will not participate in this thread further.

There was no nitpicking of your post or misrepresentation. I was stating that I think it is unfair to make those claims against the moderators based on the evidence given in front of you. I don't see how you think it is fair to call someone out as "losing their soul" over a slight oversight.

 

[rdowns]

Thanks for your input, BV.

I've heard similar accounts from 2 other former/current mods.

So I don't think talking about fairness is a route that is particularly productive in public. When you guys stop nitpicking people's posts, misrepresenting and speculating on their motives and actions behind the scenes with little foundation, then we can have an interesting conversation about fairness; one which I'm fully prepared for.