PD & GD

[Guest]

@Jennifer:

What if locking a thread was limited to djensen or Yanny?  Moderators could recommend it be locked, give djensen and Yanny the reason why, and then they could make the final decision?  This would stop the very irritating habit of moderators posting a personal, heated opinion and then locking out any counter arguments.  Just reading this thread I know I’m not the only person irritated by that too common occurrence that frequents these boards.

I am going to be blunt and honest because I am tired of the catty-ness.

Just say you are tired of ME being the Mod of PD and be done with it.

And if you think I am doing such a terrible job, then IF PD/GD are restored at this site, ask the Admins to remove me from Mod duties there.

Or, as someone else posted… follow the rules (not like you were on your first forum ban Jen, you are a repeat offender).

Lastly, if Mods can;t at least lock threads (we are very limited on what we can do, and locking threads is about the only tool we have, restrictions on posting, banning, etc. are all reserved to the Admins), then there would be no way for a Mod to even take action if needed.

[cystic crypt]

@dezrtfish:

@Jennifer:

What if locking a thread was limited to djensen or Yanny?  Moderators could recommend it be locked, give djensen and Yanny the reason why, and then they could make the final decision?  This would stop the very irritating habit of moderators posting a personal, heated opinion and then locking out any counter arguments.  Just reading this thread I know I’m not the only person irritated by that too common occurrence that frequents these boards.

That would defeat the purpose of having moderators.

Also the statement is unfair and implies that the mods operate to further their own agendas rather than to help optimize this forum - which is IMO a rude accusation.

[djensen]

Truly.

Being a mod is not easy, folks.

[djensen]

Yes.

@AJ:

Yanny hasn’t been active for a while … is he coming back?

[Guest]

@cystic:

Also the statement is unfair and implies that the mods operate to further their own agendas rather than to help optimize this forum - which is IMO a rude accusation.

Thanks CC.

If I were indeed using my “Mod Powers” to get in the last word or further my own agenda…  I would delete every post that disagreed with me, and/or lock every thread after my first post that contained my “great wisdom” (  :roll: ) so that when anyone ever went to any thread in PD, the final entry would always be MY final word on every subject being brought down from the mountaintop…

However, I will admit that, as the primary mod for PD for a year, I DO often have the final post in a locked thread.  And the text of that final post is almost always a very salient point of wisdon regarding the status of the thread…

“LOCKED!”
:mrgreen:

[jsp4563]

@ncscswitch:

JSP:
The rules pretty much ARE restricted to actual criminal actions, unless you think handling an issue you have with a Mod by contacting an admin or another mod is too much, or unless you want a pure unadulterated flame fest, in which case there are many, many other forums to fill that need.

These are the forum rules as posted for PD.  (copy and pasted direct from the PD Rules thread)

Political Discussion Forum Policies and Rules:

Political Discussion venue of the AxisandAllies.org web site is NOT A&A related.  It exists as a courtesy to the forum users to allow the discussion of non-Axis and Allies topics.  Abuse of this forum will not be tolerated.  Excessive problems caused by the use of the forum can result in the removal of users from the forum, as well as temporary or permanent closure of the forum.

This forum is to diuscuss all matters regarding politics, religion, policy, current events, or other similar issues.

The following are are prohibited:
1.  Ad Hominum attacks.  Discussing issues and disagreeing with an issue is permitted.  Personal attacks are not.

2.  Flaming is explicitly prohibited.  A flame is considered a blatant and ill-intentioned attack on a fellow forum member for a particular post or viewpoint posted by that forum member. The use of racial slurs, open racism, or advocacy of genocide based on race are considered flames against an entire group and are thus prohibited.  Whether a comment is a flame or not is up to the discretion of the moderators.

3.  Flame Baiting is explicitly prohibited. Baiting is a comment intended to draw a fellow forum member into making a flame. Whether a comment is baiting will be up to the discretion of the moderators.

4.  All posts are subject to the laws of the United States of America.  As such, any activity or post which violates those laws is explicitly prhobited.  This would include, but is not limitted to:  violation of copyright laws, slander/libel, terroristic threats, fraud, criminal solicitation, etc.

5.  Questionable posts should be reported.  In the event you see a post that you feel may be a violation of any of the above policies, or is otherwise detrimental to the forum, you are asked to NOT respond publicly via posting to any thread or post, but to use the “Report to Moderator” link that is at the bottom right of every post made to the forums.

The Moderators of this site have exclusive and final authority as to what constitutes a violation.

Questions regarding any of these policies should be directed to any of the site moderators.  Questions regarding any decision of a moderator should be directed to site co-owner Yanny.

I do not see a problem with those rules for what SHOULD be a rational and reasoned discussion that is a SIDE TOPIC AREA for a group of GAMERS.

And to be honest, after re-reading the rules, I have let a HECK of a lot slide by over the past several months that should NOT have been permitted to let stand.

Rule #'s 1, 2, 3 and 5 are NOT criminal acts.  Including those rules in the PD forum places someone in the position of making subjective judgments.  The PD forum should be unrestricted in content.  Remember, you chose to read the posts on that forum, if you don’t like what’s said there visit another forum, http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php has plenty to choose from.

I think the PD forum should be brought back with the caveat that it may contain material you might find offensive and you enter at your own risk.  Also I think the new forum should have a new moderator, nothing personal Switch but a new moderator would remove all the bad blood that’s built up, and give the forum a chance to start fresh.

[Jennifer]

@ncscswitch:

@Jennifer:

What if locking a thread was limited to djensen or Yanny?  Moderators could recommend it be locked, give djensen and Yanny the reason why, and then they could make the final decision?  This would stop the very irritating habit of moderators posting a personal, heated opinion and then locking out any counter arguments.  Just reading this thread I know I’m not the only person irritated by that too common occurrence that frequents these boards.

I am going to be blunt and honest because I am tired of the catty-ness.

Just say you are tired of ME being the Mod of PD and be done with it.

I can’t say that, I’ll be banned for attacking a moderator publically instead of forwarding my disconnect privately to the admins.  Nice try trying to trap me though.  :P

Seriously, Moderators don’t need the power to lock threads.  The admins seem to have time to handle bans, handling locked threads shouldnt be too much more work.  Moderators can police them, guide, issue warnings and then recommend they are locked.  How many get locked annually anyway?  I don’t have hard numbers, but it can’t be much more then twice as many as people who get suspended for periods of time, can it?  Like what, a dozen or two tops?

And if someone other then the person engaged in the argument makes the decision to lock a thread, the odds of getting someone’s political agenda in their locking post and then having it locked thus making the final say so on a political opinion and thus, giving the appearance that all moderators and administrators agree and support that statement will be much smaller.  It may still happen, but the odds are much lower because it will, hopefully, be a cooler head locking the thread and describing why.

[Guest]

@Emperor:

Rule #'s 1, 2, 3 and 5 are NOT criminal acts.  Including those rules in the PD forum places someone in the position of making subjective judgments.  The PD forum should be unrestricted in content.  Remember, you chose to read the posts on that forum, if you don’t like what’s said there visit another forum, http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php has plenty to choose from.

I think the PD forum should be brought back with the caveat that it may contain material you might find offensive and you enter at your own risk.  Also I think the new forum should have a new moderator, nothing personal Switch but a new moderator would remove all the bad blood that’s built up, and give the forum a chance to start fresh.

We prohibit slander/libel (#1 & #2)
We prohibit posts that are designed to lead to slander/libel (or could in and of themselves be defamation) (#3)
We prohibit unspecified (but examples listed) of all other criminal acts (#4)
And #5 is the METHOD of reporting an issue that was established in this forum long before you or I were even participants here JSP.

The ONLY major change to the forum rules that has been made since I joined in November 2005 is the ADDITION OF #4… that we actually specified that criminal acts were not permitted, and that was done at my urging.

If you want unbridled flame fests, if you want no-holds-barred, there are plenty of forums like that already in existence.  Asking DJensen to change what he established in 2001 to become something that he does not want is, in my personal opinion, a bit uncouth.  This is after all HIS website, and all of us participate here and utilize the services provided free of charge.

I guess for me the whole thing of asking for PD to become something very different, indeed to become something that our site owner and host has worked for SIX YEARS to avoid, is akin to the house guest who comes in, changes the channel on the TV, raids the fridge, and curls up in the master bedroom to sleep.  My job this past year has been to help keep PD what it was originally DESIGNED to be.  And I have to take full blame for the FAILURE of that attempt.  I chose to let many threads run that should have been locked earlier.  I chose to let many posts stand that probably should have been edited.  I allowed many threads to proceed even when there were clear violations of our host’s intent.  The fact that I let many threads run instead of being more vigilant in enforcement for MONTHS is something that was discussed in the Mod forum on more than one occasion.

And to me it is OBVIOUS now that I was dead wrong.

I never should have allowed the restraints to be loosened.

My experiment was a total failure, and your reply JSP simply illustrates the axiom that I violated when I chose to let PD be a bit more “adult”… give an inch and folks will take a mile.

And now, with all of this discussion and debate, and all of this urging for unmoderated forums, etc. our gracious host is stuck with the task of trying to fix MY mistake… to try to undo the fact that I made a conscious decision many many months ago to let folks bend the rules in the thought that a bit more freedom to discuss would be beneficial to the site, instead of tearing it into factions which is what happened.

[Jennifer]

I’m not asking for UNMODERATED forums.  I’m asking for MULTIPLE MODERATORS to police the forums and ADMINISTRATORS to make final decision to lock threads.

[Guest]

@Jennifer:

I’m not asking for UNMODERATED forums.  I’m asking for MULTIPLE MODERATORS to police the forums and ADMINISTRATORS to make final decision to lock threads.

We have ALWAYS had that.

A single Moderator can take a TEMPORARY action (like locking a thread) and then the issue can be reviewed by ALL moderators and admins.  Then a thread lock can remain in place, or posts can be edited/removed, or threads deleted, or a thread unlocked, etc.

That has ALWAYS been the way the forums work.

The only time that it has ever been an issue is when a member choses to try to short-circuit the established oversight process by not doing what they are supposed to do.  Instead of contacting another moderator or admins to review a situation that they feel was handled in error they instead attempt to take their own actions, to the detriment of themselves AND the site as a whole.

Yanny and DJensen established the appeal process and set it up to be DIRECT PRIVATE CONTACT for a reason.

Again, a bit of respect for our hosts and following THEIR procedures might not be a bad idea for all of us who are FREE MEMBERS of this website.

[cystic crypt]

@Emperor:

Also I think the new forum should have a new moderator, nothing personal Switch but a new moderator would remove all the bad blood that’s built up, and give the forum a chance to start fresh.

i’m looking for a phrase other than “this is bullshit” in which to describe this, but somehow i am having trouble finishing this sentance . . . .
IMO Switch has done an admirable job, despite flame/attacks that cross over onto slander.  Other people pushing their agenda to press the abdication of a mod simply because they have philosophical differences with him and he has determined it necessary to close threads in serving out his mandate as expressed by the admin - is a load of crap.  I mean really - if people - clients, lets say - determined that because you had a philosophical difference with them, and you did your job too well that you should be fired, you might feel a little bit of resentment, and rightfully so.  I don’t support the “time-off-work” notes that every patient comes to me with for medical reasons- should i lose my job because of that?
bullshit.

[ezto]

Like you say about immigration “enforce the current laws” ahahahaha so ironic and funny!!!  :-D

[djensen]

Please drop it. The later WILL NOT happen. Furthermore, stop goading and badgering Switch. I really don’t want to read it anymore.

@Jennifer:

I’m not asking for UNMODERATED forums.  I’m asking for MULTIPLE MODERATORS to police the forums and ADMINISTRATORS to make final decision to lock threads.

[frood]

Wow where have I been?

Way to go. The PD forum was one of the main reasons I have been pretty absent from this board for the last few months. I just have always found it more upsetting than enlightening. I don’t think I saw any discussions where anyone was open to the other side’s view or indeed where any progress was made. Instead there was just vitriolic hatred of the other side.

Of course, the way I would have dealt with it would have been to permanently ban certain individuals. Or at least set the threshold for temporary banning much, much lower. Ie. any ad hominem would result in immediate suspension. You say “damn liberals” and I say “suspended”.

Don’t get me wrong, I am open to debating with the other side, but it needs to be respectful. Eg:

Acceptable “In my view, the liberal perspective on this issue is a little naive.”
Unacceptable: “Liberals are all brainwashed by the Daily show.”

There are a lot of people on this board whose viewpoints I find offensive at times, but there are only one or two who express their views in an offensive way. Without the influence of those one or two individuals I think the PD / GD forums would be civilized enough for me to come back to them.

I wasn’t in the general discussion forum as much, but shouldn’t there be a place to discuss things like septuplets being born or the price of tea in china? But I guess how would you prevent that from becoming the defacto PD forum.

The problem with it is that I worry how many people have been turned off / away by the PD forum? Ie. they come to check out some AAR strategies, browse around a bit - “holy cow this place is infested with neo-nazis! Ick! I’ll hang out somewhere else maybe…”

Anyhow, for the time being I will stick to pure A&A play / discussion / and maybe development.

[dezrtfish]

I’m ok with Jens suggestion.  from now on if I think a thread has gone wrong I’ll just delete it. :roll:

[guildofblades]

As for moderation, all the current rules are just fine.

A moderator should not be empowered to delete posts or lock a thread in any discussion where they have been a participant in any manner other making moderator oriented comments. Regardless of impartial a moderator is in adjudicating an issue, the appearance of bias is there.

So we either need one moderator that won’t participate in the discussions, or two or more moderators who would steer clear of discussions already being engaged in by one of the other moderators.

Other than that, so long as moderators set their own political opinions aside and moderate only as based by the rules, then the rules are fine as is and simply need to be enforced.

Ryan S. Johnson
Guild of Blades Publishing Group
http://www.guildofblades.com
http://www.1483online.com
http://www.thermopylae-online.com

[Weekend Gamer]

Jeez, the mods have no sense of humor anymore.  A guy tries to post a lighter post (where else was I supposed to post it?) and it gets deleted.  Can we at least bring back the GD forum and delete any political threads that get posted in it?

[frood]

I think the suggestion above makes sense - mods should not moderate threads where they are active participants in the discussion.

[balungaloaf]

why doesnt everyone stay big boys and net let anyone bother them.  everyone needs to grow thick skin and quit crying, its a political thread.  if someone thinks your politics are rediculous, they just might tell you that.  laugh it off, it doesnt matter anyways.

[djensen]

The problem is that then the moderators do not get to have any fun. This is supposed to be fun and not a job. If I’m posting in a boardgame forum and and somebody starts acting like a jerk, should I wait until another mod gets online and deals with it or should I deal with it right now? The correct answer is right now.

One of the original criteria for moderators was frequency of posts. If you’re posting a lot anyway, it’s easier to find the crap and deal with it.

@Frood:

I think the suggestion above makes sense - mods should not moderate threads where they are active participants in the discussion.