Critique of relicnews moderators

[FerociousBeast]

(if this is not the right forum, please move)

I have two main issues with the way these forums are moderated. Simple ones that don't require a whole lot of explanation.

1 - There appear to be just too many moderators for a forum community of this size. Mods understandably like to use their powers, and when you have hordes of moderators, there will be hordes of lockings and deletions and bannings, many of which will not be completely justified. For example, one of my threads was locked, with a regretful note from the mod (no sarcasm intended, it was nice and respectful), but then fifteen minutes later another mod posted the exact same thing. It of course was not locked.

So, when there are many mods, many more mistakes will occur. However, this is unlikely to be changed, so on to #2.

2 - Why the emphasis on locking threads when deletion will do the trick? Many's the time I've seen a good thread get locked because a couple members get into a flame war on it. Because of two people's stupidity, an entire thread is killed.

Locking these threads does nothing except punish everyone. However, if posts were deleted and individuals banned from posting in particular threads, then the valuable threads could stay up and the community as a whole would be warned that bad behavior is punished.


So. These are my two critiques. I guess my suggestions would be to use deletions rather than lockings, and to limit further mod recruiting.

[Progenitor]

i'd say someone please move this to forum issues.

[Benjamin]

I guess my suggestions would be to use deletions rather than lockings,

Somtimes there can be a good thread that only tails off on another tanjent towards the end. you said yourself "Many's the time I've seen a good thread get locked".

Also the many question threads on "how do I do such and such" need to be left open to read. If it is deleated right afterwards,the person asking may not have hada chance to read it.

This is pritty counter productive, for obvious reasons.

...so, deleating such a thread would be a mistake in my opinion.

On the other point on there being too many mods,
well there are in exess of 12,000 memebers & a huge amount of threads. True, all the memebers dont all post constantly, but these forums are big. Cutting the mods would leave the others left a bigger workload, consiquently makingthe standard of "modding" less.

The thread of yours that got locked was about the new DoW expansion E3 news. I can see why it was locked since we have a few of those threads.

Not to brown nose, but I do like the way these forums are run, the "modding" can seem like a bit much and locking alot of threads, but from what I see most of the time it's perfectly reasonable responce and I like the idea of not having 20 threads on the same subject and not having to siv through the "junk"...you get the idea.

Thats my take on it.

[BeserkWraithlor]

Forum issues would be a good start.

But I think the Mods are actually doing very well. The only threads they lock, are spam,rants,flames,and pointless discussions, which is something that needs to be locked. Mods do provide help, even when theres soo many.

I do agree that 2 people in a thread who are flaming, just ruin the entire thead alone. Those 2 should be in trouble, not get the thread killed complely.

[Tiresias]

Firstly locking is much better than deletion, as then we will get thousands of repeat threads, because they haven't seen them get locked, secondly we do not get hordes of bannings and they are all justified, and lastly better we are strict than lenient, just look at blizzards forums for what happens with under-moderation

[ÜberJumper]

1) We have a lot of mods in the dow community because it is active, prone to spam, needs 24/7 coverage, and has a high turn-over rate for moderators. We need to keep more moderators on staff to cover those reasons.

2) Locked or deleted, both are bad. I'm an advocate of merging similar threads together. However, when it comes down to having to lock or delete, locking is better as the info in that thread is still available for searching. Of course if the thread is total crap, deletion is better.

The moderating and admin staff is continually evaluating how everyone is performing. There is a similar thread on this happening right now in our admin forums.

[SquidDNA]

All complaints autolaunching

[Starblade]

Out of curiosity, Ferocious, what was your locked thread? Can you give a link?

Oh, and congrats on actually going about this intelligently, and for managing to not call the moderators Nazis.

[The Collector]

The idea behind locking threads is that locking is reversible and leaves a record, where deletions do not.

Mod recruiting is pretty low.

Right now 120 people are online. These would be:



The Collector, !Klams, -Norbert-, ACE, acturas, AHH! MOTHERLAND, Akalamanaia, akmdw, Akranadas, Aldaris, Apoc, Aron_DeTomado, B.B., bane of horus, BL4D3W4LK3R, bloodthirster90, Canderous, Captain Wicha, cbone1, cfoley, Colonel Commisa, Colonel_Kraze, ConanBuddah, crazytechpriest, CrossOrion, Crystalking52, Cworth, Daemonic_Fire, Danimator, Dark Watcher, DAStheAlmighty, DatonKallandor, Deadline2602, Decoupler, Digital_Hero, DivineOne, don85259, Donut, Dooks Dizzo, dragontailxx, dreddnott, Dryden, Eleemental, Ethrion, eToDD, EvoCaliber, ExCrEtIuM, Fake Sinatra, fingersandteeth, Flail, forinax, Gaalsien, Grabnutz, GreatCornholio, Grim666, hallaonline, Handarazuur, havoc, Hio-Reaper, Holy Chaos Ryu, Hostage, hybris, Ifitmovesnukeit, ignus, ika, JeffreyQJr, Kalimac, karma_sleeper, KingLouis, Konman, KRMZ, lastmay, Le Sun Tzu, Major_Blackhart, mase, MasterSpartan, mh2, Mig Mek, Mnementh, Nadril, No1lives4ever, Noir, Panama, Peter, pinkyclown, Pokey ork, Praxis, ranathari, Rayden, Retroboy, retroholyfire, RFT, Riker2800, sad_mage, sanjaypotter, ShatteredFaith, Shorty, Sjappo, Skullcap, Slow_Runner, Steelo, STEVOCARTY, stirkster, TeurastajaFin, thePreacher, thudmeizer, Tiresias, TS_ahriman, tuebor, Water, Waterbizkit, ÜberJumper, Zarkonan, Zepherian, [WA]Jock

Count the mods & admins. Akran is a junior mod and Uber is supermod. I don't think I see any others. If these are the maximum amount on at any given moment, you have a 120:2 or 60:1 ratio of users to mods.

Edit: Ohh, you meant excising posts in a thread rather than locking down the whole thread! The theory is that if you excise posts and excise the wrong one, people get pissed. Or if people /really/ want to fight, they'll just keep going at it regardless of what happens to posts. It doesn't really stop the fighting, it just...hobbles it. The locking is supposed to be like the drunk tank, which terminates the argument neatly. Usually conflict arises based on differences based on the thread topic, so once the thread is locked, there's little left to say and the posters go their seperate ways.

[ceejayoz]

1.


For example, one of my threads was locked, with a regretful note from the mod (no sarcasm intended, it was nice and respectful), but then fifteen minutes later another mod posted the exact same thing. You're really gonna need to back that up with a link, please.

2.

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/core/pics/0001/img0013.jpg

[Mnementh]

Nice to see the senior members arent the ones posting stupid replies to FI threads, just the mods/admins.

1. Yeah, a link to that would be nice. Sounds a bit silly that someone would lock a thread and then re-start one on the same topic, but I suppose it could happen.

2. He's suggesting deleting the off tangent posts from the threads rather than just simply locking the thread because it got off topic. Ive always thought that this was a better solution, as locking a thread simply because of a few random posts smacks of lazy moderation. Shouldnt you be 'moderating' the threads content to allow a sensible discussion on whatever topic the thread is about, not killing threads because you didnt do your job in the first place?

[ceejayoz]

Deleting them, as my image was intended to convey, doesn't show others that that sort of posting is unacceptable. Locking the threads often functions as a warning to others.

If we get some actual links to the threads in question, we can address individual cases.

[Mnementh]

Deleting the threads wouldnt, no. But that isnt what he is saying.

Deleting the garbage posts and warning the user about future crap/giving warning points would. Locking entire threads gives trolls the idea that if they dont like a thread, they can get it locked by trying to entice others into arguing with them on a topic not even related to the thread.

[ceejayoz]

Again, specific examples would be helpful.

[General Nuke Em]

After running a search for threads created by the topic creater, I'd say it was probably this thread (http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=92758).

[ceejayoz]

SELECT *
FROM `post`
WHERE `postid` >1487310
AND `threadid` >92758
AND `dateline` >=1146684656
AND `pagetext` LIKE '%http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer40000dawnofwarexp2/%'

Only result: http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?p=1496527

Can't be that one, it got locked for the same reason, and wasn't a moderator either.

[The Collector]

Well, I've seen mods threaten people who post again in a thread with suspension from the forum for a set period of time.

Ed:
A random search brings up this thread (http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=5670&highlight=dont+post+in+this+thread+again). It highlights the warning policy.

Was the auto-lock-old-threads system implemented yet, or did this thread get locked for whatever reason without a notation post noting who locked it and why?

[ceejayoz]

Yes, we do like to try that when there's only one or two people derailing a thread.

[A176]

a1 requests unadulterated forum, for the purpose of scaring away pansy mods.

[ceejayoz]

That's what IRC is for.

[reki]

what he's saying is that this thread: http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=92758 (his)

...was locked by Akranadas with a link to another thread (to avoid dupes): http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=92587

...which was also a locked thread (by Adonis).

Yes, it's a bit of a pain FerociousBeast, but you've fallen victim to a well-meaning, but rather convoluted attempt by the jr mods to centralize all the threads on E3 into one to make it easier for everyone to follow the latest news.

With respect to the mods in question, perhaps a merging of threads or a simple change of the thread titles (to reflect the updates) might have been a better idea, but it really is a minor issue that probably isn't worthy of this two page discussion about it.

@ TheCollector: many of the staff choose not to display their online status. There are an awful lot of mods at the moment, but some new ones are being trialled and broken in, mostly due to Relic having two new games and an expansion pack being released soon on the horizon.

Yes, some minor errors are occasionally made and some of them are overly keen to do their bit, but rest assured they are all trying their best, learning lots, and will soon settle in.

[FerociousBeast]

Hehe, kind of forgot about this thread. Sorry I didn't reply to your posts.

Issue 1 -

My locked thread: http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=92758. Akranadas locked it, thinking it had already been posted.

Post 304, by Praxis, here: http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?p=1487400#post1487400. Posted ~fifteen minutes after mine.

Issue 2 -

I'm not saying to delete threads. I'm saying to delete individual posts within a thread and ban repeat offenders from those threads, preferably with a note from the moderator who did it, serving both as warning and explanation.

This is a wonderful thread, http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=90799, that was locked due to a few members getting off topic. It seems evident to me that this situation would have been much better handled with individual actions rather than across the board locking. I mean seriously, what a great, useful thread. Gone.


Edit: Well, after reading over the other posts again, let me just clarify that I'm not angling to get my thread unlocked. I don't particularly care about it anymore since the content of it has become common knowledge. This is rather an inquiry into the philosophy of the moderators. I have no vested personal interest.

[ionfish]

Because normal members can't see deleted posts, it tends not to be immediately obvious when we're deleting posts and PMing offenders instead of locking the thread. Doing this is an integral part of our strategy for dealing with problematic postings and is, in general, what we prefer to do. However, it's not always the appropriate or most effective action to take. Locking a thread does more than stop the discussion: it sends a message in a public way that simply deleting certain posts and warning the offenders will never do.

[Bonnet]

Yes, and trust me they do it alot. Its extremly anoying to see in the dow section...

[FerociousBeast]

Granted, a deleted post has zero warning value . . . unless the moderator says he has deleted it. I guess what I would really like to see is rather than a literal deletion, the moderator could edit the post, erasing all the text in it and leaving a message like, "Post deleted due to being off topic" or "This member's posts deleted in this thread for sustaining a flame war."

Or something.

Just seems to me that this would be much more effective and at the same time would preserve otherwise valuable threads from the malpractices of an unseemly few.

[Agdune]

That could probably mean more trouble for moderators, as Arch put it:


"then you'll have the person who's post was edited getting all enraged about people messing with his posts and putting what he said back in, just with more flaming and language."

edit: Though admittedly, I've seen it work a number of times, however, I think that the success rate would decline a fair bit if it were to become standard practice.

[ionfish]

Well, the problem with replacing the text in a problematic post with a warning is that it doesn't preserve the original post, thus rather putting the kibosh on any appeal from the member in question, as well as removing the evidence of any misdemeanor.

We're currently considering whether to allow all members to see that a post has been deleted, along with the reason it was removed, but in some ways this causes more problems than it solves, firstly because it makes some threads very messy, and secondly because we often prune useful info threads so there's no discussion, just the important content, and the visual overload tends to obscure what we're trying to bring into focus.

[cfoley]

Ion, I'm sure that weeding out discussion to make information more visible is much rarer than deleting posts because they are crap. In the case of the former, couldn't the discussion posts be removed from the database to stop them from showing up.

If the risk of accidentally removing the wrong stuff is too high then create a dummy table that they can be moved to so they could be restored if they are eventually needed.

[ÜberJumper]

cfoley:

When posts are "deleted" (it's a soft delete), they're still attached in the thread, but not visible. There are hacks that show that a post was deleted, and where it sat in the thread.

[FerociousBeast]

My final word: yes, there are some bad things which may come along with the practices I am suggesting, however I believe that these "bad things" are lesser in severity than the "bad things" of punishment for the whole community and the killing of valuable threads.

Well, I pretty much just wanted to bring the issue up for consideration. I thank you all for at least reading and thinking about it. If you continue to disagree, well, then we disagree but relicnews will go on.

Let me also say here, as I should have said in my first post, that I don't think the moderators are doing an overall bad job. I've been around for a couple years and this forum is a good one. Just had a couple of points to raise due to the recent spike in moderators and the plethora of worthy yet locked threads.

[cfoley]

ÜberJumper, I do understand that. My suggestion was for threads like the ones Ionfish was referring to. Here's an example:
http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=82911

At the moment, this looks a complete mess to me. However, most members will only see three posts. I suggested doing hard deletes (or semi-hard if you use the dummy table method) in threads like these.

[ÜberJumper]

cfoley:

Log out and go look at the thread you linked. Notice how the thread doesn't look ugly?

We just need to determine if there's something easy we can do to prevent users from seeing the deleted threads on a user group basis.

[cfoley]

Yes, I know. I really do understand how the deletes work, honest.

Here's the section of ionfish's post that I was replying to, with added emphasis on the specific problem.


We're currently considering whether to allow all members to see that a post has been deleted, along with the reason it was removed, but in some ways this causes more problems than it solves, firstly because it makes some threads very messy, and secondly because we often prune useful info threads so there's no discussion, just the important content, and the visual overload tends to obscure what we're trying to bring into focus.

If all members are allowed to see the location (and reason for deletion) of posts then most deletions will still work the way they do now.

For the few that are removed to declutter specific threads, they could be deleted via a different mechanism - perhaps one of the ones I suggested.

This way, we could have the best of both worlds: Everyone can see that posts have been deleted because of naughtiness, and clutter can be removed from information threads effectively.

[ÜberJumper]

From information threads/stickies posts can be permanently deleted out actually.