Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Passive Aggressive Moderation?


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

Confusing development: my thread (here) has upvotes from established and presumably faithful members of this forum and no downvotes. Yet my thread was locked by @Nemesis shortly after it was created. @Nemesis provided no explanation and ignored my request for an explanation…. Is it typical for mods to be passive-aggressive?

I don't remember what the thread was about anymore but was it political (or could it easily devolve into political arguments)?  That's a good way for a thread to be shut down quick.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

Confusing development: my thread (here) has upvotes from established and presumably faithful members of this forum and no downvotes. Yet my thread was locked by @Nemesis shortly after it was created. @Nemesis provided no explanation and ignored my request for an explanation…. Is it typical for mods to be passive-aggressive?

I would guess it violated the Seriously No Politics rule.

Link to comment

Two things -

First, the potential reasons to shut down a thread are fairly broad.

Second, the moderators are not interested in having to take the time to deal with questions about it. Threads like this are themselves against the rules:

Quote

BE RESPECTFUL OF Moderators and honor their decisions: don’t argue their decisions in posts or private messages.

So expect this one to be closed down as well (even if a long term poster like myself has responded to it). I don't think this is passive-aggressive - moderating a forum like this can become a time-sink with no end to people debating why something is or isn't or should or shouldn't be allowed.

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I don't remember what the thread was about anymore but was it political (or could it easily devolve into political arguments)?  That's a good way for a thread to be shut down quick.

 

33 minutes ago, halconero said:

There is a big red bar that says "Seriously No Politics" at the top of your screen.

 

33 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I would guess it violated the Seriously No Politics rule.

A rule that is enforced as consistently as a child with adhd. My thread was at most tangentially political in discussing the psychology of religious belief.

Seriously, Smac would have been banned a while ago if this forum was serious about “no politics.”

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

the moderators are not interested in having to take the time to deal with questions about it

Then don’t be a moderator. There are plenty of posters here who spend a more than significant portion of their day on this forum, have them moderate.

A two or three word reason can be provided for a shutdown without moderating becoming a time sink

Edited by Smiley McGee
Link to comment

I recall Smac posts church related news posts, he does not write the news, he tries not to step into politics, and fails sometimes and had a few threads shut down before, if I recall.

Though I'm not sure I like hearing what-about-isms and dry snitching. What if all you did here is make sure Smac will be in trouble more often? Would it make you feel better since the rules are then equally applied?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Smiley McGee said:

A rule that is enforced as consistently as a child with adhd.

Actually they are pretty consistent in my experience. There is one or two mods at the most right now I am guessing and they have a busy life quite often.  So they respond to reports rather than read every post themselves.  And they are not on the board 24/7, so what made appear to be allowing some posts is actually them not seeing it yet. Every post I have reported has eventually been addressed (can usually take a few hours to a few days, longest has been around a week iirc, shortest has been by the time I finished my next post) except a few over the years (I try to be very careful on what I report not to waste their time and I report only stuff I would moderate if I was a mod using their rules, not because I am pissed off and hope the mods agree with me, I have reported myself a few times.)

They learned from watching boards that existed before this and took the advice of at least me, who was a moderator at ZLMB, and likely other ex moderators on what they should do to make a workable board without investing a massive effort or having to babysit it 24/7 like I did and I saw other mods having to do with FAIR message board attempts.

I was a very hands on moderator, provided detailed info on why I moderated posts, allowed appeals, etc, all thinking it would cause posters who were problems to change their behaviour for the better.

The reverse was true.  My experience was very few posters I took the time with even tried to improve.  Most just tried instead to justify their behaviour forever and made my life hell at times.  Allowing appeals and discussion just carried any conflict linger and wider across the board, getting other posters involved, ruining more threads.  
 

ZLMB had a life of a few years before it was getting abandoned because of a couple of posters turning into a whine fest, targeting posters they didn’t like, trying to manipulate me and other moderators into banning them. 
 

This board has lasted almost 20 years.  I think a huge reason for that is posters learn to behave because they don’t waste hope on trying to persuade moderators to change their mind.  Their only option is to change their own behaviour or leave.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

1. It had political written all over the title. 

2. You try moderating, maybe you'd understand and empathize. I do love when Nemesis posts regular posts maybe he/she will post on this and give you an answer. But maybe he/she doesn't have to, lol!

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Smiley McGee said:

Then don’t be a moderator. There are plenty of posters here who spend a more than significant portion of their day on this forum, have them moderate.

Nope, doesn’t work.  Just makes things worse in my experience. 
 

I would not be the least surprised if not knowing exactly why one is banned or a thread locked and another thread isn’t may make quite a few posters more careful with their own behaviour rather than trying to walk as close to the line without crossing it, which is what I see happen in most cases with problem posters when there is a lot of moderation explanation.  Happens here as well, but a lot less.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

has upvotes from established and presumably faithful members of this forum and no downvotes.

Not the first post I have upvoted knowing it broke the rules.  Unfortunately not all interesting threads are capable of staying civil and political threads tend to get personal and judgmental of other posters quickly.

And using “woke” is probably a red flag.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...