Moderation in this forum

Advocate ,
Aug 06, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

OK, here goes.


For a long time there has been little or no evidence of any hosts, moderators or Adobe employees in here. John C and kanguyen make very welcome appearances from time to time, and both show an immaculate attitude, but little happens to improve things - although thanks to those who made a proper sticky about the use of this forum.


We have been relieved of a host who was allegedly a Community Expert in 'Creative Suite', but had apparently fulfilled none of the criteria for a Community Expert - such as being an expert in something. Nor did this person have more than a very wobbly grasp of how the forums actually work. With zero credibility, said person annoyed people by moralising and lecturing at them.


So now we have a pretty bolshy group of people who are sitting about, kicking their heels, hoping against hope that someone will sort out this buggy, defective software. Many have made very detailed, constructive suggestions and requests, others have gone to the trouble of making work-arounds. In the meantime they are chatting amongst themselves, which is normal behaviour for bored people in a waiting room who are still hoping for something to happen.


There are people who have used the WebX forums for years and years and appreciated them, even with their faults. These people are still grumpy about being shifted onto something they see as much worse. So there are bad moods around.


In my personal opinion, there have been quite a lot of posts, probably some of them mine, that are unnecessarily off-topic, sarcastic and hostile. A bit of a tug on the reins would be no bad thing in my view.


However, moderating a group such as the one gathered here is not easy. To be successful, it is necessary to show good humour, a sense of humour, a willingness to explain actions, and a degree of courtesy and respect, even to those who are not behaving particularly well at the time. Oz was a shining example, and brought a considerable degree of order to the Lounge (an even wilder corner of the West ) without antagonising anyone - well, maybe just the one serial reprobate who is unreachable anyway.


The proverbial 'firm but fair' - and a very nice bloke.


To suddenly begin mass deletions, without showing any of these qualities, may well be counter-productive.


For me, Jochem has a head start, since I believe he is the possessor of a minor-planet-sized brain and the skills to sort this mess out in minutes if he were given the chance. Good start. Now we need a better balance between discouragement of excessive pointless and snarky posts, information about what progress is being made / might be made / won't be made on forum fixes and improvements, individual help like JC has always provided for people who have weird stuff going on with their account, and a degree of visible humanity - please - to gain the consent of those being moderated.

I still can't get past the idea that "discussion" was invited and yet at the same time not needed.

Jochem,

I don't understand how you can be so hard-headed and stubborn!  I do understand that when we, any of us, do something, we generally feel we are correct in our actions.  BUT that does NOT mean we cannot learn from others and see that perhaps what we *thought* was correct, is just possibly slightly off-center from being correct.  One must be willing to see that there *are* other ways to look at things and that our way is not the only way.

I liken being a forum moderator to being a manager over staff that are from different cultural, socioeconomic and educational backgrounds.  You want them to work for you right?  If your goal is to have them work *with* you and not *against* you, then you can't take the approach you're taking in these forums right now.  In real life, you would have a full mutiny on your hands with the "my way or the highway approach".  It takes patience, sensitivity and a strong sense of fairness.  Believe me, it's not an easy task!  I am speaking from my own personal real life situation here, so I really do know where of I speak.

Please, take the positive, meant in the best way comments from here and allow yourself to grow.  It shouldn't hurt too much!

edited for grammar

Views

35.3K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
This conversation has been locked.

Moderation in this forum

Advocate ,
Aug 06, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

OK, here goes.


For a long time there has been little or no evidence of any hosts, moderators or Adobe employees in here. John C and kanguyen make very welcome appearances from time to time, and both show an immaculate attitude, but little happens to improve things - although thanks to those who made a proper sticky about the use of this forum.


We have been relieved of a host who was allegedly a Community Expert in 'Creative Suite', but had apparently fulfilled none of the criteria for a Community Expert - such as being an expert in something. Nor did this person have more than a very wobbly grasp of how the forums actually work. With zero credibility, said person annoyed people by moralising and lecturing at them.


So now we have a pretty bolshy group of people who are sitting about, kicking their heels, hoping against hope that someone will sort out this buggy, defective software. Many have made very detailed, constructive suggestions and requests, others have gone to the trouble of making work-arounds. In the meantime they are chatting amongst themselves, which is normal behaviour for bored people in a waiting room who are still hoping for something to happen.


There are people who have used the WebX forums for years and years and appreciated them, even with their faults. These people are still grumpy about being shifted onto something they see as much worse. So there are bad moods around.


In my personal opinion, there have been quite a lot of posts, probably some of them mine, that are unnecessarily off-topic, sarcastic and hostile. A bit of a tug on the reins would be no bad thing in my view.


However, moderating a group such as the one gathered here is not easy. To be successful, it is necessary to show good humour, a sense of humour, a willingness to explain actions, and a degree of courtesy and respect, even to those who are not behaving particularly well at the time. Oz was a shining example, and brought a considerable degree of order to the Lounge (an even wilder corner of the West ) without antagonising anyone - well, maybe just the one serial reprobate who is unreachable anyway.


The proverbial 'firm but fair' - and a very nice bloke.


To suddenly begin mass deletions, without showing any of these qualities, may well be counter-productive.


For me, Jochem has a head start, since I believe he is the possessor of a minor-planet-sized brain and the skills to sort this mess out in minutes if he were given the chance. Good start. Now we need a better balance between discouragement of excessive pointless and snarky posts, information about what progress is being made / might be made / won't be made on forum fixes and improvements, individual help like JC has always provided for people who have weird stuff going on with their account, and a degree of visible humanity - please - to gain the consent of those being moderated.

I still can't get past the idea that "discussion" was invited and yet at the same time not needed.

Jochem,

I don't understand how you can be so hard-headed and stubborn!  I do understand that when we, any of us, do something, we generally feel we are correct in our actions.  BUT that does NOT mean we cannot learn from others and see that perhaps what we *thought* was correct, is just possibly slightly off-center from being correct.  One must be willing to see that there *are* other ways to look at things and that our way is not the only way.

I liken being a forum moderator to being a manager over staff that are from different cultural, socioeconomic and educational backgrounds.  You want them to work for you right?  If your goal is to have them work *with* you and not *against* you, then you can't take the approach you're taking in these forums right now.  In real life, you would have a full mutiny on your hands with the "my way or the highway approach".  It takes patience, sensitivity and a strong sense of fairness.  Believe me, it's not an easy task!  I am speaking from my own personal real life situation here, so I really do know where of I speak.

Please, take the positive, meant in the best way comments from here and allow yourself to grow.  It shouldn't hurt too much!

edited for grammar

Views

35.3K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 06, 2009 1
119 Replies 119
Advocate ,
Aug 06, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

But Dave knows it doesn't work that way anymore. So I am concluding he

is knowingly sending someone the wrong way and being very vocal about

how 'helpful' he is, and would like to know why.

See, comments like that (from Jochem) send off all kinds of fireworks - dave's been around the forums since Adam was a lad and the notion that he would behave that way is quite breathtakingly insulting to one of the most helpful and good-hearted people around here.


Policing/moderating by consent is the only way that works Jochem - please try harder. An apology for the above would be a good start.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 06, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

[Edit: Do as you would be done by, Jochem.]

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Do as you would be done by.

The Ethic of Reciprocity

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Kath-H wrote:

But Dave knows it doesn't work that way anymore. So I am concluding he

is knowingly sending someone the wrong way and being very vocal about

how 'helpful' he is, and would like to know why.

See, comments like that (from Jochem) send off all kinds of fireworks - dave's been around the forums since Adam was a lad and the notion that he would behave that way is quite breathtakingly insulting to one of the most helpful and good-hearted people around here.

If Dave and JC first have a vocal discussion about how the support procedures for login retrieval have changed, and Dave subsequently sends somebody along the old procedure that no longer works, conclusing that he does so knowingly is the only sensible conclusion. So I ask why. And while I do realize the inflammatory nature of that question, I still consider the conclusion I reached valid.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Kath-H wrote:

So now we have a pretty bolshy group of people who are sitting about, kicking their heels, hoping against hope that someone will sort out this buggy, defective software. Many have made very detailed, constructive suggestions and requests, others have gone to the trouble of making work-arounds. In the meantime they are chatting amongst themselves, which is normal behaviour for bored people in a waiting room who are still hoping for something to happen.

Normal or not, there are places where lounging is appropriate, and places where it isn't.

However, moderating a group such as the one gathered here is not easy. To be successful, it is necessary to show good humour, a sense of humour, a willingness to explain actions, and a degree of courtesy and respect, even to those who are not behaving particularly well at the time.

But all of that needs to be balanced against the goal of the moderation. It is counterproductive if threads about topic X end up with posts about other topics, only to have those posts edited, and then an explanation of the edit being posted.

So if you want to know about why moderators make certain decisions, ask away. Just don't do it in the thread were it occured. Nor by private message, but just in a thread like this one. And without the name-calling.

To suddenly begin mass deletions, without showing any of these qualities, may well be counter-productive.

It probably is. That is one of the reasons why moderators have so far restrained from purging the archives and are focussing only on new messages.

Now we need a better balance between discouragement of excessive pointless and snarky posts, information about what progress is being made / might be made / won't be made on forum fixes and improvements, individual help like JC has always provided for people who have weird stuff going on with their account, and a degree of visible humanity - please - to gain the consent of those being moderated.

Gaining consent is not a purpose of moderation. In some cases it may be a means to an end, an end being for instance a reduction in the number of off-topic messages and thread highjacks.

Seriously, I don't understand what the big deal is. Let's see what happened in the first 48 hours of me being a moderator:

1. I moved a thread with explanation to the right forum.

2. I locked a thread moving off-topic with explanation.

3. I locked a thread moving off-topic with explanation.

4. I locked a new off-topic thread with explanation.

5. I deleted a thread in which the originator of thread 4 started name-calling.

Everything after that is people swooping in, calling me heavy handed, hijacking threads about other topics etc. I fail to see why this chain of events would surprise anybody. And while I am willing to entertain it, I even fail to see why this chain of events would be reason to start a thread about moderation

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 1
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The analogy of the circus and the lion tamer is not name-calling: it is a reflection of the chaotic state of the forums and the valiant attempts to bring things to a more docile level.


I am sorry if my poetic allusions elude you Jochem!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Contributor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What I believe to be legitimate reasons for deleting posts or locking threads are Spam & Profanity.  Name calling is not really reason to lock a thread.  I've been called Q-Ball, Q-Tip and I've had my intelligence questioned a number of times, by a couple of people.  I wasn't pleased by that but I don't see any reason to remove, or lock, a thread over it.  That's just silly.  Being a good moderator is commendable, but we don't need our mommies to do that.

I have been asking for people to use reasonably good manners here for a long time.  I wish we would respect each other.  Most of us do so, even if we disagree.  But when people are less than polite, censorship is not the answer.  Threads disappear for the most trivial reasons.

And yes, I agree we need to be less "snarky".  We also need a forum that isn't plagued with so many problems.  It's a two way street.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I even fail to see why this chain of events would be reason to start a thread about moderation

Short memory Jochem - this is just what you suggested someone should do if the matter needing discussing. Indeed, I believe you said you welcomed discussion of such - this may well have been in a PM, but people talk to each other, you know


And what post did you delete because of name calling? There was one lamenting the loss of some good moderators, which then suggested a bit more courtesy by moderators would be a good thing, then made a mild comment about lion-tamers - which you picked up and responded to, even though you'd deleted the post.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And you've deleted more than that - often they have already gone out via email. Maybe it was someone else, but these days we often don't get told.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Gaining consent is not a purpose of moderation. In some cases it may be a means to an end, an end being for instance a reduction in the number of off-topic messages and thread highjacks.

Well, that's pretty much what I'm suggesting, and why.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Q Photo wrote:

What I believe to be legitimate reasons for deleting posts or locking threads are Spam & Profanity.  Name calling is not really reason to lock a thread.

Depends on the circumstances. For many things I tend to give newbies a pass while I hold people who have been here longer to a higher standard. If somebody with a DreamWeaver problem posts his first post ever here instead of the DreamWeaver forum, I move it. When somebody who knows better does so, I lock it. When somebody tries a subtle (or not) dig at me in this thread, I am far less likely to do something about it then if it is about somebody else or if it is in a thread about a different subject.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

than

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Kath-H wrote:

I even fail to see why this chain of events would be reason to start a thread about moderation

Short memory Jochem - this is just what you suggested someone should do if the matter needing discussing. Indeed, I believe you said you welcomed discussion of such - this may well have been in a PM, but people talk to each other, you know

I wrote "If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

And what post did you delete because of name calling? There was one lamenting the loss of some good moderators, which then suggested a bit more courtesy by moderators would be a good thing, then made a mild comment about lion-tamers - which you picked up and responded to, even though you'd deleted the post.

Actually it started with several towards another host. And the lion tamer post was first deleted without comment, the comment was only posted when the post re-appeared to prevent further post and delete cycles.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Mentor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

jochemd wrote:

I hold people who have been here longer to a higher standard.

Then if people that have been here longer have a problem with you, it is valid. You should pay attention, and learn not delete their constructive criticism even if it includes a jab at you of some other host for acting badly. Like I said before this Jived Up forum has run off all the good hosts who everyone respected. Nobody respects you.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And while I do realize the inflammatory nature of that question, I still consider the conclusion I reached valid.

You don't know dave. Your conclusion is literally impossible in his case. It's a misuse of your powers to insult people but delete any breath of criticism towards yourself.


To say you welcome discussion, then reject it because you don't think any discussion of your moderating style can possibly be entertained is horrendously arrogant.


You don't get hosting powers to be one of an elite who may not be criticised.

Your considerable skills do not seem to include personal interaction. I would very much like to see you exercise them in beneficial ways, like the redesign of the FAQ forum. Your confrontational hosting style is and will be counter productive. Control-freakery has its place, but please exercise it on improving these defective forums, human beings won't wear it.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

jochemd wrote:

I wrote "If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

That is simply (IMO) one of the most forthrightly arrogant things I have ever read written by a forum host! It seems inconsistent (to put it kindly) to say that you welcome discussion, and then say that you feel your moderation is not in need of discussion. I question whether you are really as intelligent as some here seem to think you are.

Obviously we, the users feel differently about your "moderation". You are acting (IMO) like a petty dictator - and as I am not the only one, but one of many who are expressing criticisms of your "moderating" "style", if I were you, I would be asking myself if some of the criticisms were valid, however, your obviously large regard for yourself seems to be rendering you deaf.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Mentor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Be prepared to be deleted Fr.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Be prepared to be deleted Fr.

Oh, I am!

Seems like a lot of us are!

I just realized one of Mr. Dieten's statements needs to be re-written slightly (bolding mine):

I wrote "If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

That should actually read:

I wrote "If I believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Enthusiast ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I wrote "If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

did someone say jochem had no sense of humor? i think that's pretty funny! a little dry maybe, but funny...

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Crossed my mind - but I wasn't ready to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Enthusiast ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Crossed my mind - but I wasn't ready to give him the benefit of the doubt.

that's cuz you youngins are all hepped up on yer mountain dew and yer pepsis...

everyone do like bob weir says on a hot day in an outdoor amphitheater...

one... two... three. take a step back. one... two... three. 'nother step back.

deep breaths everyone. let it go. in the big scheme, it's not important.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 1
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Crossed my mind - but I wasn't ready to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Me neither; he eschewed the winkie after all!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

dave milbut wrote:

deep breaths everyone. let it go. in the big scheme, it's not important.

That's perhaps the most sensible comment I've seen in this thread.

Everybody needs to take several steps back and calm down. It's also a good idea to take another look at the Forum etiquette and best practices. They have some things to say that should be taken on board by everyone - moderators and non-moderators alike:

Do:

  • Respect others
  • Assume good faith
  • Be kind to newbies — we were all new once

Respect is a two-way street. Someone who has been a member of the community for a long time, and made a lot of contributions, deserves respect. But there are some long-term members (not necessarily people who have participated in this thread), who have been extremely disruptive and discourteous to others. Long-term membership alone doesn't command respect. It's the way that person acts within the community towards all comers, not just a select clique, that matters.

Assume good faith. I have seen lots of accusations leveled at Zeno Bokor and Jochem van Dieten as "bad moderators". Both are new at the job, and may have done things you don't like, but did they do it in bad faith? I have never met Zeno, but I do know Jochem. He's an honest and dedicated guy. Among all the people with moderator status in the new forums, he has probably done more than anyone else to try to get technical improvements implemented. Zeno, by the way, has also been very active behind the scenes, among other things removing a torrent of spam.

Don't:

  • Personally attack people, their edits (including spelling or grammar), or their comments
  • Rant or otherwise harass, abuse, or intimidate other

I have been deeply shocked the the level of personal abuse in some forums. Some people seem to think it's OK to be rude because you're not meeting face to face. It's not OK. If you don't like what someone writes, take a deep breath, and walk away from the keyboard.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Contributor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I wrote "If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion." Obviously I believe my moderation is fair and not in need of discussion.

Wow.  dave, I hope you are right in that it's an attempt at dry humor, because if it's not ... whoa. 

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Contributor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

David_Powers wrote:

Do:

  • Respect others
  • Assume good faith
  • Be kind to newbies — we were all new once

Respect is a two-way street.

I have been deeply shocked the the level of personal abuse in some forums. Some people seem to think it's OK to be rude because you're not meeting face to face. It's not OK. If you don't like what someone writes, take a deep breath, and walk away from the keyboard.

those are words of wisdom for ALL to follow, (mods and forum users alike) both in real life and online.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Mentor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

David_Powers wrote:

  • Assume good faith

Hard to do when the hosts have proven otherwise.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Guide ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Buko. wrote:


Hard to do when the hosts have proven otherwise.

Two things to remember, Buko.

• some folks forget that they cease to be "one of us" when they become hosts; and

• they've never read the Gandhi quote.  It is time, therefore, to repeat it:

This is a genuine, well-known quote by Mahatma Ghandi, the Indian spiritual leader and activist:

• A customer is the most important visitor on our premises, he is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him.


• He is not an interruption in our work. He is the purpose of it.


• He is not an outsider in our business. He is part of it.


• We are not doing him a favor by serving him.     He is doing us a favor by giving us an opportunity to do so.

http://tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:QU-_-MGLrrqQhM:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Gandhi_costume.jpg

Employees of any entity, whether in government or in private business, will do well to keep it in mind and at heart.

The recent post by Kim A. Nguyen, universally well received here, shows that she knows this principle and puts it into practice.

However, a few Adobe staff and associates seem somehow to think that Adobe's customers are lowly adversaries in some sort of Internet game or in a newsgroup.  Those who manifest that misguided and poisonous attitude in this forum and in their blogs are showing their incompetence and their ignorance of basic business principles.  To them I say:  you're dead wrong!  You are far from being our superiors, you are our servants.

They should know well who they are—and we certainly do.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

David


Thank you for your calm and reasoned post. It appears that you missed something though.


I have been posting in these forums for a long time (since Compuserve days) and it is something I do because I enjoy helping people. This whole outpouring of criticism towards van Dieten was triggered because he arbitrarily deleted without comment a post which he (wrongly) thought was personally directed at him and other moderators. He then compounded the error by responding in an unfriendly and very autocratic manner.


The deleted post was neither about him nor unfriendly. The allusion to a circus and lion tamers was an attempt – understood by others but not him – to lament the situation engendered by the move to this Jive software and the inevitable reaction of so many users to the very real difficulties which this move has created.


Tempers have become short over the months since adobe made this mistake and the situation has been exacerbated for those who did not leave in disgust (as many valuable helpers did) by the loss of some valuable on-line "friends".


The situation certainly needed bringing under control, but the reason this forum became a secondary lounge was because there was almost no feedback from Admin.

Moderation needs to be by people who earn respect. And it needs to be moderate.



Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 1
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I certainly appreciate Jochem's efforts to improve these defective forums, and the email system - and I had nothing against Zeno.


However, it was a big mistake on Jochem's part not to 'assume good faith' by dave milbut, who is one of the most unlikely people around the forums to ever deserve such an accusation. Worse, he will not reconsider when told how offensive his comment was.


As I said, being a host does not confer the right to delete posts with the slightest real or imagined criticism, while simultaneously being gratuitously rude to contributors.


Also, inviting discussion of his moderating style, only to immediately reject it, does not engender respect.


Yes, we all make mistakes, especially when new in a job - admitting them goes a long way to restore that respect. A confrontational, 'like it or lump it' attitude certainly does not.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

... and I've just re-read my original post - I stand by it.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

Confrontational. Stubborn. Thin-skinned. Sarcastic. If the job description for 'host' is any good, those qualities aren't in it.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Engaged ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

jochemd wrote:


5. I deleted a thread in which the originator of thread 4 started name-calling.

There was no name calling... If the person in question had a name not easily rememberable –  by me – i fail to see how it is name calling... Perhaps, i should have checked the fora for his real name... but <shrug>.

In any event, you could well have remedied the situation by spelling out the name and asking me to kindly use the correct name in future. That is 'Moderation'. A behaviour that is meant to be practised by a 'Moderator'. Your high-handed actions are definitely not those of a Moderator. They are high-handed and your tone is pompous. Definitely not conducive to be respected as a Moderator.

If you wish to delete this post kindly go ahead. You have my full permission.

PS: Captiv8r shows, far more, the qualities of a good moderator.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JayJhabrix wrote:

In any event, you could well have remedied the situation by spelling out the name and asking me to kindly use the correct name in future.

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

A good moderator will earn the respect of the forum.


He needs to show judgement and maturity, not just blatant censorship.


Anyone can run around with a big stick!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

jochemd wrote:

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

You say that as if you are proud of it!


I will make no further comment.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

Now, sir,in another post (in the Lounge), you said:

If you believe my moderation is not fair, I welcome discussion. Just start a new thread in the Forum comments forum and explain what I should do differently.

You have been given a suggestion as to how you could do things differently, and in response, you say you will not. I must say that this is not terribly impressive.

To my list of things that (IMO) make you a poor moderator, I will now add that you are childish (IMO), and that you jump to conclusions (about Dave, about the misspelling of a name). I am sure other things will occur to me as time goes on and you alienate more and more people.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Engaged ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

jochemd wrote:

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

Understatement of the year!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Engaged ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Fr. Watson wrote:

I will now add that you are childish (IMO)

You left out pompous – i feel... so would that be 'childishly pompous' or 'pompously childish'? The latter me thinks....

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advocate ,
Aug 08, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Fr. Watson wrote:

You have been given a suggestion as to how you could do things differently, and in response, you say you will not. I must say that this is not terribly impressive.

I haven't heard any terribly impressive arguments either.

If you check back on the different invitations I sent out for a discussion on moderation, I said we could discuss moderation policies or moderation decisions, and I welcome a discussion on moderation fairness, Which arguments on these subjects have been presented that shoud impress me? Has any argument been presented at all that I should allow discussions on moderation to take over other threads? According to which compelling argument should I allow name-calling?

Instead, there have been plenty of messages in this thread on style and respect. I hadn't really intended to discuss that just yet, but considering the lack of arguments on the rest we kind of went that direction anyway. Though for input on moderation style I am primarily looking at the hints and nudges I get from other hosts (plenty of who are quietly reading this forum / thread).

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 08, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Aug 08, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Egotism. Count the uses of the word "I".


It's all about you isn't it?


You counter any critical remarks with the telling argument that if you think it's the way to go, everyone else can belt up.


This is a waste of time.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 08, 2009 0
New Here ,
Aug 08, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I haven't heard any terribly impressive arguments either.

I read no further: I have no time for you - you seem unreachable.

<plonk!>

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 08, 2009 0
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Seriously, I don't understand what the big deal is.

That's one of the reasons why (IMO) you are unsuitable for the position of Moderator.

You have an amazing ability to ignore specific criticisms - such as Kath's comment regarding Dave & YOUR assumption that Dave was wilfully misleading people - I agree with her that that was breathtakingly insulting, and an apology is called for. Your penchant for deleting posts for trivial reasons is another thing which makes you (IMO) a poor Moderator. Your lack of respect for participants is another. Your lack of humour is another. Your pettiness is another. Your moralizing is another. Your seeming lack of any sort of "warmth" is another.

Go ahead: delete my post!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Enthusiast ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

A customer is the most  important visitor on our premises.

He is not dependent on us.

We are dependent  on him.

He is not an interruption in our work.

He is the purpose of it.

He is not  an outsider in our business.

He is part of it.

We are not doing him a favor by  serving him.

He is doing us a favor by giving us an opportunity to do so.

- Gandhi

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 1
Mentor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

[personal attacks edited out]  is just another reason I find myself less interested in coming to these forums and helping out.

A host needs skin thicker than an onion.

This place is getting worse everyday.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Advisor ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This forum has a purpose.  It is not a lounge. 

When posts are made that have nothing to do with its purpose, they will be removed, edited or locked.   Behavior contrary to the general forum guidelines will result in same.

Most Hosts refuse to even come here (to this forum ) any more, since there is little to no real content anymore.   Distorting a forum where you have a voice for forum bugs/improvements to a playground is not wise.

All the posts that have been moderated here have been for legitimate reasons aligned with the forum guidelines.  The Hosts are doing their job (the ones who still come here).

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0
Community Beginner ,
Aug 07, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

All the posts that have been moderated here have been for legitimate reasons aligned with the forum guidelines.  The Hosts are doing their job (the ones who still come here).

Oh, so deleting a harmless remark about lion tamers was that important?

Have you no comment on the fact that Mr. Van Dieten asked for suggestions as how to do things differently, yet, when given a suggestion, said

I could have. I didn't. I will continue not to do so in the future. I am after all a poor, heavy handed host.

Do you think that is acceptable behaviour from a moderator? I don't. Do you not think that in order to be an effective forum Moderator that one should treat users with respect? Do you have no response at all to any of the criticisms of the way in which the moderation is being done? Or are you just here to lecture?

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Aug 07, 2009 0