Moderation on AO - Poll

[AGD]

All,

I am doing a survey of the members in order to properly frame the moderaton rules. Please vote so we can do a better job.

Thanks

AGD

[PissedGodzilla]

I think that the moves that the mod team have made in the past few days are the right step and I want to give the current ideas a chance. I think the ban list is a great thing. Props to the mods for stepping up and listening to the community as a whole and making changes to keep them walking down the middle.

Good to hear from you Tom, hope all is well.

[nato]

The AO mods know their stuff. No objections here
:rolleyes:

N.A.T.O.

[teufelhunden]

I think it's too broad of a generalization to make. Not to put words in people's mouths, but I believe the incident(s) that spurred this thread are as a result of disagreements and/or actions/reactions of a small number of mods.


Welcome back, Tom.

[WenULiVeUdiE]

It's about right. The only thing is they sometimes close threads for odd reasons. But they are doing a great job so...

[peewee]

Not bad overall. there has seemed to be some tension with all AO'ers recently. Cabin fever or something...

[Vanced]

Tom,

If you have moderators you trust with the fate & well being of AO... (and that doesn't have to be all of them) ... then give um free reign to work on their best judgment... just leave a few checks and balances in place for multiple moderators or yourself to override any single moderator’s decision. I look at AO as a privilege not a right, so it certainly doesn’t have to be democracy. Because I am not paying the bills for it now that it isn’t owned by AGD by buying their product. I am just happy it is here, and I want the steps taken to ensure it stays here as the best possible forum it can be.

But again thank you for asking mine and our opinion, but it is just my worthless virtual 2 cents worth…

[Raven001]

I don't know if it already exists but if a Mod makes a decision and one is not in agreement with it, there should be a formal way to appeal it.

[Target Practice]

I have the feeling that this is going to turn into a huge rumpkissing session for the Mods.

Oh well.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Bottom Line:

Rules. Enforce them equally and with consistency.

[SAW]

Bottom Line:

Rules. Enforce them equally and with consistency.
Correct.

[TheTramp]

I'd like to see them get tougher on a few things but mostly stay the same.

[Mighty Mike]

I think the lifetime ban rule is too excessive and needs to be changed. A 10 day ban turned into a lifetime ban is ridiculous. :rolleyes:

[shartley]

Bottom Line:

Rules. Enforce them equally and with consistency.
Exactly. No matter how much folks want to say the moderators do/did a great job, they have been inconsistent with rules enforcement (understatement).

Let the actions of the person posting determine what happens (in accordance with the set rules), not the relationship of that person with one or more moderators.

Let the rules dictate any action taken against a member, not whether you agree with what they are saying or like them personally.

I think if the rules are simply enforced with no regard to who is posting, things will take care of themselves. Impartiality is a hard thing sometimes, but anything less than it creates an environment for abuse.

[brianlojeck]

my concern is not the tightness or looseness of the control, but the fairness and the comunicativeness of the mods.

if I get banned for having *'s show up in my post, then so should the next guy. If someone gets banned for saying "damn", then so should the next guy.

if they are enforced fairly, the rules are not really an issue I find...

[Fred]

I vote D: They just need to be consistant.

---Fred

[Muzikman]

my concern is not the tightness or looseness of the control, but the fairness and the comunicativeness of the mods.

if I get banned for having *'s show up in my post, then so should the next guy. If someone gets banned for saying "damn", then so should the next guy.

if they are enforced fairly, the rules are not really an issue I find...


The only problem with that is that a mod will only react to what they actually see. If they see you do it, they will react. If they don't see the other person's post, they will not. I am sure it's hard to read every post in every thread in every forum. If they miss one, I don't think people should get upset.

As for the perm bands. They are there for a reason. Have they been dished out too easily in the past, maybe, but to be honest, I bet the perm ban list is not as long as you think and I bet most are from those people that register to spam the forums and never plan on returning.

I know last week there was a huge uproar, but to be honest, maybe this is just what AO needed to stop and take a look at the way the mods do their job as well as the users look at themselves and maybe change the way they post. It's a two way road. If people would post with thought, maybe the mods would moderate with thought.

[PBX Ronin 23]

I know last week there was a huge uproar, but to be honest, maybe this is just what AO needed to stop and take a look at the way the mods do their job as well as the users look at themselves and maybe change the way they post. It's a two way road. If people would post with thought, maybe the mods would moderate with thought.

Well said Jason. Not wanting to sound like my grandfather but a house will only be as good as the parents/elders of that house will let it.

[Lee]

things are about right. lets give the new set up a chance.

glad to see you're still around tom!

[Chronobreak]

i saw things slacking on AO for awhile im glad to see the mods finaly cracking down and enforcing rules.

some mods(shal remain naimless) although do get a little abusive with their power either by messing with things they shouldnt or making snide comments. :nono:

[RRfireblade]

It's generally fine as long as it's 'evenly' distributed. There sometimes seem to be too much selective moderation.

Not sure if there's really hidden agenda or just to many 'friendships'. 'Cept I'm not sure what can be done about that.


Otherwise it's seems reasonable.

[Eric Cartman]

I think the steps being taken are certainly in the right direction. I think the ban thread is a good idea. I'd also like to see the mods come to a consensus before taking any drastic actions - long or perm bans. The past brouhaha seems to indicate that there's been some dissension in the mod ranks of late. That's not good for anyone.

I don't think it's possible to have a set of rules that can cover every possible situation and therefore, the rules will always be open to interpretation. This means that a post which doesn't actually break a rule may be closed or result in a warning and that's not always going to sit well with everyone.
There are members who are quick to call any complaint or disagreement "whining" which can be mighty annoying. No rules have actually been broken though. There are also members who simply can not let an argument die, let's face it, no one really wants someone else to get the last word in, but frequently threads turn into arguments between a couple of posters that no longer has anything to do with the topic of the thread. As long as there's been no flaming, then no rules have been broken, yet again people are annoyed when the thread gets closed because of it. Members who are frequently involved in this type of behaviour should be warned about it IMO whether they're breaking rules or not, it's still disruptive. Others will disagree.

No matter what happens with the mods, members are going to have to try to excercise a bit more tolerance and learn to just let things go for AO to get back to being the fun and educational place it used to be. Sometimes it's better to just bite your tongue and try to ignore a post that may annoy you. If you see a thread started by someone you don't like, maybe it's better to just not click on it in the first place. It's not always easy, but it's better in the long run.


My $0.02

[-=Squid=-]

Well, after random-ban the other day, I think the moderates have just gone completely nuts.

They can't ban some people for causing extreme disruptiveness, but I took a 3 day for... Well, I still don't really know why, they just told me I was taking a three day.

[REDRT]

I think perma bands are bull. Better have a darn good reason. In case of an instance of curcumventing a band, to then get perma band, I thought it was crappy. Should've reband for a longer amount of time. Not perma band. We are a small group and to through out a member forever isn't good for us or the company. It is like sending someone to the chair without a trial & lawyer.

[Kevmaster]

My only issue is consistancy.

Whatever the rules are determined to be, we will play by them. Treat us all as equals and we'll be happy.



however, IMO, the rules should be made a little laxer...but if not, then whatev...just call it fair both ways

[stop whining buy a mag]

Most of the time the Mods have been doing great. If things get out of hand in a thread they give a warning or sometimes ban the personn starting everything.

There have been a few instances lately were unjustified bans were given.

[cledford]

I just think the "banned thread" at the top of the page sends the wrong message. After hearing a little it seems that the mods put it up to publically keep track of bannings as there were accusations of unfair treatment. That makes sense but IMHO could serve the same purpose at the BOTTOM of the page and not send as strong a negitive message as it does where it is now.

The mods are great and this is the best run, best moderated forum I've been in on the entire web. May hat is off to them and the above comment is not intended to detract from what they do.

-Calvin

[Bolter]

I have no problem with the mods or the rules. Thanks for asking us :)

[joez]

For the most part it is pretty good. There are some instances where the mods have gone to far, and others where they have not gone far enough. My personal opinion*, is that the intelligence level of AO in FC has dropped to fast for the mods to know how to handle it in recent times. There are some rules they seem to enforce to harshly, and others not enough.



*Disclaimer: This is just an observation i have made and is only my opinion. The mods to a fantastic job everywhere, except sometimes seem to be on different pages when it comes to FC. Again, this is only an observation and opinion, it is not a fact.

[Rebel46_99]

I think the steps being taken are certainly in the right direction. I think the ban thread is a good idea. I'd also like to see the mods come to a consensus before taking any drastic actions - long or perm bans. The past brouhaha seems to indicate that there's been some dissension in the mod ranks of late. That's not good for anyone.

I don't think it's possible to have a set of rules that can cover every possible situation and therefore, the rules will always be open to interpretation. This means that a post which doesn't actually break a rule may be closed or result in a warning and that's not always going to sit well with everyone.
There are members who are quick to call any complaint or disagreement "whining" which can be mighty annoying. No rules have actually been broken though. There are also members who simply can not let an argument die, let's face it, no one really wants someone else to get the last word in, but frequently threads turn into arguments between a couple of posters that no longer has anything to do with the topic of the thread. As long as there's been no flaming, then no rules have been broken, yet again people are annoyed when the thread gets closed because of it. Members who are frequently involved in this type of behaviour should be warned about it IMO whether they're breaking rules or not, it's still disruptive. Others will disagree.

No matter what happens with the mods, members are going to have to try to excercise a bit more tolerance and learn to just let things go for AO to get back to being the fun and educational place it used to be. Sometimes it's better to just bite your tongue and try to ignore a post that may annoy you. If you see a thread started by someone you don't like, maybe it's better to just not click on it in the first place. It's not always easy, but it's better in the long run.


My $0.02

I agree with this. The biggest problem I see is the juvenile testosterone that gets thrown around. The constant "get the last word" mentality only ramps things out of control and even when one or the other of the parties involved offers a way to calm things down or is "given an out", it is rarely taken. Also, the ever-present "lack of reading comprehension" retorts and various other slaps at one's intelligence only add fuel to the fire. We can read just fine thank you. Your spelling may be dreadfully lacking but that's a different problem.

One of the best things that happened was for the "political" discussions to disappear. Although I enjoy discussing "politics", I don't enjoy being told by someone who can't even vote yet, that my point of view is unacceptable because of their vast "experience" on the subject at hand.

One last thing..... If every member of this community is as big as they say they are, AO would have a lineup every other team in the NFL would envy. Frankly, I don't give a Holy Hoot and Holler how big you say you are and neither does anybody else.

To the Mods.... Keep the permanent bans. If an individual knows he'll only be gone for a specified time, chances are the behavior will be repeated when he returns.

Thanx
DW

[Magaman]

Bottom Line:

Rules. Enforce them equally and with consistency.

Exactly!

The Rules need to be enforced equally. Too often do I see the rules being bent by some of the well known members. Not that they have bent them all that bad, just not fair to others if some get away with breaking the rules.

[CaliMagFan]

When the mods replace your sig image with the "forgive me AO, I dont know the sig rules." picture, they are overstepping authority and becomming abusively snide.

I'm out left on this issue and I mostly think that freedom takes precidence over order, especially when you're talking about an innocuous thing like an internet forum.

My response is a "back off" with a hint of finger extension from a choice digit on my right hand.

-kyro

[Rebel46_99]

My response is a "back off" with a hint of finger extension from a choice digit on my right hand.

-kyro

Thank you. You just proved my point.

[Smoke]

Exactly!

The Rules need to be enforced equally. Too often do I see the rules being bent by some of the well known members. Not that they have bent them all that bad, just not fair to others if some get away with breaking the rules.


*cough* Mango *cough*

[PBX Ronin 23]

When the mods replace your sig image with the "forgive me AO, I dont know the sig rules." picture, they are overstepping authority and becomming abusively snide.

I'm out left on this issue and I mostly think that freedom takes precidence over order, especially when you're talking about an innocuous thing like an internet forum.

My response is a "back off" with a hint of finger extension from a choice digit on my right hand.

-kyro

First and foremost, you need to understand that AO, although public in nature, is a privately owned forum that serves as a resource for Mag users and other members of the paintball community. Its reach on the 'net is wide not only in geography but also demographics. AO sees a lot of both adults and under age minors. Some of those minors have parents who would find some of the items seen on the 'net as objectionable. This is something that AO as a 'business' must safeguard itself against.

Seeing that your second paragraph seems to imply that you have a slant in your personal beliefs that can be construed as 'anarchy', although perhaps acceptable in certain places, it is not acceptable in AO. Freedom may take "precidence" over order in some places, but not here.

Your last sentence, although fragmented in a grammatical sense, tells us definitively that perhaps you may need a few more years to better understand the true nature of the issues on hand.

Thank you very much for your post and I'm sure that some people may actually find it....informative.

[hitech]

Some of those minors have parents who would find some of the items seen on the 'net as objectionable.

AO is NOT a site I would allow my 11 yearold on unsupervised.

[CaliMagFan]

"Seeing that your second paragraph seems to imply that you have a slant in your personal beliefs that can be construed as 'anarchy'..."

Since we're clearly here to correct grammar, I feel obliged to help you. You wrote "anarchy" where you should have written "anarchistic." Also, when you use quotation marks in a piece of writing, it is incorrect to use apostrophes like you did in this quote, "This is something that AO as a 'business' must safeguard itself against." Apostrophes are used to denote a quote within the body of another quote, not to just lightly emphasise the fact that you're using synonyms.
You should steer clear of ending your sentances in prepositions or prepositional phrases as seen here,"This is something that AO as a 'business' must safeguard itself AGAINST."

The ideals that are conveyed in the post to which you responded are actually libertarian and not anarchistic. So, before you next time make a statement with regard to "governmental philosophy", please know of what you are speaking.

You kind of cornered me and "forced" me to respond in a negative and defensive way here. It is something that I do not like to do, but many times I feel compelled to do so for the sake of playing your game. Ronin, you generally do not display the lack of an all-acceptant attitude toward fellow board members, but in this instance you have fallen into the norm.

To further my point- In case you wondered to which choice digit I was referring, I'll let you know that it is my thumb, and it's pointed towards the floor at the bottom of a fist, all in your direction for your ill-conceived post.

Interesting that you went on an offensive against my post and not on that of any other member. I wonder, do you have an issue with diversity of thought? Is a pluralist society too much for you? Or does thinking about something in more ways than your own just hurt too much?

To you I say----- Gimme a break, man!

-kyro

[PBX Ronin 23]

The biggest problem I see is the juvenile testosterone that gets thrown around. The constant "get the last word" mentality only ramps things out of control and even when one or the other of the parties involved offers a way to calm things down or is "given an out", it is rarely taken. Also, the ever-present "lack of reading comprehension" retorts and various other slaps at one's intelligence only add fuel to the fire. We can read just fine thank you. Your spelling may be dreadfully lacking but that's a different problem.


AO is NOT a site I would allow my 11 yearold on unsupervised.

I couldn't agree anymore than these two statements.

[hitech]

My two cents worth...

I don't have any problems with most of the rules on AO. However, I think that permanent bans should be handed out less often. After all, it's the same as saying "we don't want YOU here". Not "your actions" but "you". In the case of someone circumventing a ban by creating a new account. If the only post a few NON-DISRUPTIVE posts I don't think a perm ban is warranted. If my kids played Nintendo after being grounded from it I wouldn't get rid of the game system. After a long lecture I would probably double their grounding. Now, I realize that not everyone on here is a kid, but many are. I also realize that the mods are not parents. However, a perm ban is the most sever "punishment" available. It should be reserved for the most sever cases. And I think that we need to remember that everyone is only human, and some of them are only children.

Not everyone needs to be given the same "punishment" for the same infraction. As an example I don't have a problem with giving a new poster a perm ban when they are posting spam. A long-term poster should not get one. Same rule infraction, different "punishments".

I think the mods do a wonderful job. If it wasn't for all their hard work I would not participate on AO. Next time I see any of you, I owe you a beer. :cheers:

[Aegis]

AO is NOT a site I would allow my 11 yearold on unsupervised.

Funny thing - I actually thought AO was OK for a kid. What is really funny is that I would have said that was due to the moderators. Compared to what is out there, AO has been great. The alternative would be to forbid just about any participation in any forum.

As far as supervision, that is pretty tough to do. I supported AO for my son because it seemed like an on-line community that was overall fairly civil, and when it became otherwise there were responsible people that would step in and correct the behavior. That seemed to be a good compromise - you might be exposed to something stupid, but you would also see that the community at large didn't go for that kind of thing.

Through AO, My son and I met up with the finest group of paintballers I could have wished for, the AO NorCal crew. Imagine having a young son and taking him to a paintball field, to be exposed to the usual behavior. Not pretty. The AO crew always conducted themselves in a way that I could feel good about. The language and goofing around was a bit over the 11 year old level at times, of course. But never over the top, and compared to the rest of the crowd, kids & adults, cussing like sailors, they were true gentlemen.

[hitech]

Funny thing - I actually thought AO was OK for a kid. What is really funny is that I would have said that was due to the moderators. Compared to what is out there, AO has been great. The alternative would be to forbid just about any participation in any forum.


Well, the more I thought about it the more I realized that I would probably not allow an 11 year old on any forum unsupervised. As they go, AO is pretty good. And it is because of the mods. However, the HCT would be enough by itself to cause me to keep my kids out. Although I don’t know if "you" could make AO okay for an 11 year old. And I don't think "you" would want to.

So, it's not appropriate for an 11 year old by design. ;)

[Lohman446]

I'm out left on this issue and I mostly think that freedom takes precidence over order, especially when you're talking about an innocuous thing like an internet forum.

-kyro

The problem with this argument is simple to me. The owner of this forum has said these are the rules you will play by to post on this forum - either you obey those rules ore accept the consequences they see fit - fair or not. Frankly life is a pay to play society, if you want to play outside of the rules of this forum you have a series of choices. Create your own, fund your own, and handle it however you want. I doubt in that case you would allow freedom to take precidence over order. Find a forum that is anarchial (sp) in nature. Perhaps these work, but I have a bad feeling they turn into the flamefests that the internet is so common for.

The beleif in itself is not what I am debating here, it is the applying of it to a privately held forum. I picture a forum in a sense like someone's private clubhouse. Sure getting in may be easy, may be just acknowledging and agreeing to certain rules. However, the owner of that venue has every right to remove you at there sole discretion, with or without cause. Remember, in the end that this is a privately held forum. Normally the moderators have done a great job of enforcing the rules just enough to maintain order and keep costs within reason - remember overly large signatures cost more bandwidth and more funding. Have the moderators used the "forgive me AO but I don't know the sig rules" replacement before - of course they have. But they are doing this with the consent of the forum owner (assumed) within the rules of AO. Is it right? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Does it matter? Not at all.

Please don't mistake my comments to be in full support of everything done on this forum. I disagree with some of the actions taken. However, in the end it is not my forum, it is not mine to make rules as I see fit. Even if it were, there is not that much that I would change. For the most part AO is still a self-policing forum, with a level of respect not shared by most other forums. Is it as high as it once was? This is a question of perception, and most would disagree with me when I claim relatively it is.

[1stdeadeye]

Bottom Line:

Rules. Enforce them equally and with consistency.
Key word: Consistency! :spit_take

[AutomagRT1483]

As I have alreadyt told Miscue...

My Gripe:
Its good, but there needs to be more adherence to the enforcing of the rules that should be in-place but are not. Certain members (that I will not name) shouldn't be let off the hook because they've been around for a long time and everyone likes them. Also a certain moderator, (again not to be named) shouldn't let the said member off the hook just because they're a respected member and gun on the people that say something about that said member and their unacceptable posting (according to the rules ==> Oh thats right...you don't have a rule for posting just a smiley without any text what so ever besides the one word used for the title of the thread.......)

My suggestions:
I do understand that not everything can be moderated here. I know there isn't enough moderators to handle the amount of members that are here on AO either. Its a simple fact, the mod numbers are too few IMO. I used the AO Rules as a template for the forum that I Head Moderate. I can tell you from experience, that even with just over a 100 members we have trouble and there are 7 mods (Including the admins and myself) I would suggest to add perhaps 1-2 mods to atleast help out, I could offer my services if need be. When the Moderation Rules are re-done/re-furbished, my suggestion is that you provide an example of each punishable offense along with the rule. (i.e. After the rule is written give an example of 2 or 3 ways that the rule can be broken.) Cite the rule number that the members are in offense of when you warn them/ ban them. This way they know for certain exactly what rule they have broken.

Thank You for your time,

AutomagRT1483

[AutomagRT1483]

Thats considered to be Circumventing the Cuss/Word filter.

Copied straight from the rules

"Do not try to circumvent the cuss filters by using spaces or other characters"

By using the #@ symbols in the place of something we all know is a (for lack of a better term) naughty word, its easy to pass the correct judgement on such a case. Atleast thats how I interperet the rules. Especially in the reference to the word in the phrase used.