Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2419

To moderate or not to moderate

Different styles to accomplish different things

I'm a moderator on many different websites and each site has its own rules of conduct not just for users, but for moderators as well.

On WinCustomize.com, moderators are encouraged to moderate politely but publicly. If a user is acting out, a moderator is supposed to make his presence felt so that observers can see that "the cops are on the beat".

On other sites, moderation is done discretely. If someone is misbehaving, a private message is sent to them letting them know they must stop or they face punishment. To users on the forums, the moderator's presence is almost invisible. This way, so goes the theory, the forum participants don't feel like big brother is watching.

Which begs the question, which way do you think is more effective?

No Need to Click Here - I'm just claiming my feed at Feedster feedster:99fa96d97dd67dbadc2839937ce79167

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

To moderate discretely, is to me, almost well... sneaky. "Let's see who we can catch in the act." To let users know who is moderating, that there are certain guidelines that need to be followed, and that moderators will enforce those guidlines, is more respectful of everyone involved.

Just my two cents.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Moderation on WC works well because of the maturity of the community elders, so to speak. Young punk gets kicked around a little by a moderator and realizes if he wants to play he has to play by the predetermined rules or the large group that already does won't put up with it.

Moderation on other sites that don't have the large number of mature people on the forums would turn into pure chaos if the WC method was used. So in that case the private message is better.

I guess I'm saying the moderation has to be appropriate for the patrons of the site and what works on one site may not be the best for another site.......

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'd go with public moderation. I'd rather have the cops telling me what's wrong instead of waiting in the shadows for me to breach a boundary.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sign Up or Login and this ad disappears!
There are many great features available to you once you register. Sign Up for a free account and browse the forums without ads.

Public and Polite is much better - IMHO.

It sets the standards in tangible ways, and shows the users that there are indeed active members helping and keeping things going in the right direction.

It also helps to know one can post a request to a moderator to address an issue, and that one can expect a response in a reasonable amount of time.

Successfully updated karma reason!

without some guidelines and rules enforced there would be total mayhem here, moderate on brad.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Public moderating means the moderator is also in the spotlight and is guaranteed to attract negativity...[see WIKI]...no matter how patient he or she may be.

Private moderation...that 'quietly' rewrites what is seen on the site/forums/etc can be disconcerting for the casual observer...as suddenly history appears to be rewritten.

Case in point....the [various] recent TSF uploads....their comment section/s 'needed' modification...[vehement, abusive, personal attack] ...so the result was/is that people have assumed references to inappropriate comment refers to them and not those which were removed, and that fuels indignation as well.

Personally I'm not fazed at being seen as the 'Evil Roy Slade' in public...if the result is an otherwise friendly site community....but I get a bit piqued when others are tarred with the same brush...

Successfully updated karma reason!

I can't speak for others, but if I cross the line, don't hold back, tell me how you really feel! ;~D

Successfully updated karma reason!

Oh....forgot to actually give an answer....public moderation.

It shows the 'line' beyond which people should really think about not passing.

The long-time member might push this limit...at times...but the 'lurker' looking to join in will get an idea of how the community expects its members to behave towards each other.

In more recent times it seems Wincustomize.com has had a little less of the 'feed the troll' 'let's flame' mentality...and a little more of the 'be nice'. Of course this 'might' be that everyone is becoming 'respectable'...but more likely we're just not attracting quite so many 'nutters'....

Successfully updated karma reason!

'Evil Roy Slade'

Git that shoe on now!

oooh.....uhhhhh...public.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think it would depend on the situation. Politely but publicly is the way to go normally, with moderators setting the example of what is normal and expected of members. But if things get out of hand, and the rules of the community are broken on a continuous basis, then more drastic measures may be called for. Either PM or email to calm the situation down.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm all for public moderation, and while we're at it, bring back public floggings, I sure do miss those.

On a serious note, I prefer the WC moderating style than some sites' middle of the night drive-byes. It makes everything much more personal, in a sense that the user feels that the moderators take the time to explain the rules and their reasoning for a decision, rather than just press the "delete" or "ban" buttons. It creates an aura of a higher level of involvement and better interpersonal connections, something that is consistent with a community, instead of a certain level of anonimity and "1984"-esqe shroud of mystery.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I prefer the public but polite moderation as well. I think it is a better way to achieve the desired result; the community as a whole knowing the boundaries. Moderation via private message has not only the potential to leave users uninformed of the rules, but may also encourage 'vigilante' moderators taking the rules into their own hands and flaming.

There is another method I have also seen. Rude and public. There is a forum I frequent, but rarely post on--which shall remain nameless--where the slightest infraction of rather esoteric and byzantine rules results in a three day ban! And notification of that ban is made right in the thread, sometimes within the offensive post (edited) itself.

Polite, public reprimand, when needed gets my vote.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Madam GoodMorphing

Join Date 03/2002

I think transparency is always the best policy. I also think moderation should be documented to avoid misinterpretation, to maintain the integrity of the communication, to avoid blame and innuendo. Anytime a thread or a post is altered by any person.. the author or the moderator... there should be an automatic and unavoidable notation. That way people know.. there was a thought here that is either missing or altered now. Nothing can mysteriously 'disappear' and no one can say something has disappeared that was never there. It is a public and enduring statement of moderation that provides assurance and consistency and serves to remind people that that the forum is moderated. It also provides a level of accountability which tempers the 'power' of moderation to some extent. Likewise, it makes the author accountable for the original post.

Private moderation.. disappearing posts and altered threads lead to speculation and suspicion and tends to lower trust levels since there is usually always someone that sees a comment then returns to find it missing or altered.

Successfully updated karma reason!

NightTrainthedark

Join Date 07/2003

+255

Public moderation is good. The drama is better.

Successfully updated karma reason!

ShelbyGT_The_Car

Join Date 01/2004

+103

Cooperation is what it all comes down too. The mods need all the public to be involved in a proper manner. Heck if we all stay mad at the world all the time - then whats the use? Moderation is just that - staying in a good state and finding the truth. What is good and accepted for postings. If there are no mods the whole thing is chaos. We have to take care of our mods and our site too! It's not just for us - it is seen by the world and we want them to see what is good. Hope I'm here on the right track? Thank You!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Fairyy~

Join Date 02/2004

+49

Public moderation is good. The drama is better.

Absolutely..

But did you notice since Frogboy said a cussy word..seems he took the fun out of it.

Ok..seriously..I like the current system..I think it works just fine.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think that public moderation is the best way to go. By letting the entire community see what is bad and what is being moderated, people know what not to do and how they should behave. However, i do believe that sometimes, the 'cops' on this site are too polite. Instead of putting up with them all the time, repeat offenders should get banned, or at least punished more harshly... perhaps some sort of warning system would work, where every time a user does something offensive, a moderator will raise his warning level, and when that warning level reaches a certain point, the user is banned from the site; while good conduct will lead to decrease in that warning level.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Island Dog

Join Date 06/2003

+1048

I would have to go with public moderation. People seeing that someone is in control of the forum is a good thing.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Public moderation is very beneficial, most of the way anyway. However, there are times when a little discretion is required especially when we want to "keep the dirty laundry out of public's eyes". both have their pros and cons. It is just up to those who implement the rules which of the two option is substantially better.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Public is best. It enforces the rules and shows the users they are being monitored.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm going to go against the general trend here. Polite and private takes the sting out of the reprimand as I don't believe anyone wishes to be publicly told to behave. As far as showing the community that the offender has been dealt with - I don't believe that to be necessary, as long as the offence stops.

We've seen here (although not lately, thank goodness) trolls coming to fire up a controversy. Usually not regulars though. When necessary, the thread is locked and the perpetrator banned. I don't need to see it happening - just the fact that the situation is fixed and usually quite quickly is good enough for me.

That this rarely needs to happen speaks highly of the work of the moderators.

Successfully updated karma reason!

ill go with public just tell the person how you feel if they out of line just tell them

Successfully updated karma reason!

I would prefer public moderation as well, but the question is; do the moderators? Jafo already said that he was willing to stick out his head, but I have the feeling that whenever something nasty happens it is usually the same two moderators who step in publicly. I therefore assume that not all of the moderators are comfortable to openly act as the behaviour police (and I can understand why).

Really I believe that you should discuss this topic on the moderator board (if you didn't already).

Successfully updated karma reason!

Public, definitely. Most forum problems are about respect. People need to see that disrespect is dealt with here-- in a respectful way, of course...

Otherwise, forum users will be scared to be themselves.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think the moderators should have the leeway to make a judgement call on whether a comment calls for private or public attention.
The public comment shows that there is a line, and where it has been crossed. Other times, removal of an offending post, and a note from an Admin that the matter is being dealt with privately could save lots of flaming.

Successfully updated karma reason!