- Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:49 am
#17284
As an aside, I think Duga's point about the relative inflexibility of the "ignore user" function on the board is a good one, though I wonder if phpBB software allows for any workarounds?
not at all what i was saying! giving up a social life implies you very much have one! and i did also say that i didn't think it was healthy for anyone to do so! a failed attempt at humourBeerfola wrote:Retirees don't have social lives?
good point. i will refer that for discussion among the mods, but i'll share my point of view anyway, which is that yes, we the mods should refer something we find personally objectionable, rather than respond to it in the forum. but sometimes a comment from a moderator on or off-list (usually the latter) can save the situation very early on in the course of things. if not, it should get referred to the moderating team.Beerfola wrote:can I ask whether moderators are bound by the same rules? Specifically, " when a person finds a post made on the forum objectionable, the rules and guidelines direct him/her to use the 'report post' button.
bubudi wrote:if i wasn't tied down with dealing with all the other stuff around this issue, i probably would have withdrawn my statements about the company, in light of all the good rap it has received. i have no problem admitting when i'm wrong.
bubudi wrote:dugafola is right that people who have actually seen the drums are more qualified to comment, but i do have years of experience with drums and can offer an opinion based on what i can see and hear on the website. i apologise if this offended anyone.
on second thoughts, i didn't word that third one quite as i intended. i wanted to say that i mistook dugafola's words. this is a text-only medium and if you would have seen 'you can edit my posts' in a text-only medium, you may have made the same mistake. it's a very sad mistake, to be sure, and unfortunately one i can't take back.bubudi wrote:this situation was deceptive in that i took dugafola's 'you can edit my posts' to be his consent, and i think that could easily have happened to any moderator. as i said, most situations arise from misunderstandings.
for your earlier comments and for all the others who commented. i do appreciate the perspective. really.e2c wrote:??? "Thanks"? What for?bubudi wrote
thanks folks!
i may have stuffed up with the deletion, but i haven't personally attacked anyone.I can't speak for anyone else, but my comments about personal attacks were directed at both you and Duga.
my apologies if you feel 'dragged in', that that was not my intention and i was careful not to name anyone (although you've already made some of these details public in another thread). however the similarity where a person (or people) decide to try to prohibit another person from expressing their views immediately came to mind here and i thought it went well to illustrate how that feels.Look, b- leave me out of it!!!
as i have already explained that was done with the genuine impression of full consent from dugafola. anyone can make a mistake, including moderators. i've apologised for this but i unfortunately can't undo it. we will however be able to undo edits in the future, with the help of a mod that will be installed soon.Do you have a right to delete posts that are displeasing to you personally?. imo, NO WAY.
i try to avoid these kinds of situations and i'm not interested in 'duking' with anyone. however, i am entitled to set the record straight about what happened, especially when i did so respectfully. had the comments been made off-list as they should (and had remained civil), i would be responding off-list.... If you and Duga are gonna duke it out, please take it off-list. There is no need for lengthy self-justifying posts by either of you.
i agree, and my post contained very little about dugafola, and much more about moderation in general, the process that occurred here and the steps now in progress.Nobody's interested in this stuff.
those are the exact points i addressed in my previous post.I think we care about how the board is - or is not - being moderated.
agreed! but again, that would have been the course of action in this case had dugafola not written 'you can edit my posts'. with the new mod we'll be properly equipped to keep track of what went down after edits took place.I personally believe that it would be far better to have other mods (James, Rachel) look at supposedly offensive posts before anyone deletes them.
that has already happened. once i involved james, i naturally stepped down from moderating this thread (and the original one), otherwise it would be a conflict of interest.It's in James' hands now. (I'd advocate bubudi's taking a break from modding - something frequently done on other forums - and having someone who's removed from this conflict stepping in, even if only temporarily.)
I agree that a moderator needs to be able to act without referring to other moderators, but if the deem it may be controversial they are encouraged to do so. As a fail safe, from now on no posts will ever be permanently deleted.James: I would like to request that post deletion not be up to one person alone, but that it be run by you and rachel, too. (Excepting spam, of course.)
All online communities have rules and guidelines and for good reason. I am afraid we need rules, so that we have something to refer people to when we need to take action.Whatever, I still can't get over the rules and guidlines.. I knew it would never be the same again
i can see how one may get that impression, and i've often said to the team that i feel as though the moderation workload should be more shared, both for a fair distribution of responsibilities, and for the balance that it gives.e2c wrote:I just have this feeling that the board belongs primarily to one person, rather than a place where there is a moderating team that's actively working to moderate when necessary.