Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
(Merged) Are the moderators getting ... & Censorship
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 370257" data-attributes="member: 1"><p>I think that this statement is a little silly. I can't believe that you are under the impression that the moderators enforce continual agreement between all members. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree with that conclusion, too. That's just melodrama. It's not a binary issue.</p><p></p><p>The following is all mainly meant in a global sense, especially where I use the word "you". It's not addressed at anyone in particular (and not at Semperjase, despite the fact that it follows on after a quote of his).</p><p></p><p>One thing you should bear in mind is that the moderators don't close threads because they think they may get out of control; they close them because their experience tells them that the thread <em>will</em> get out of control. Usually, the thread has already started to do so. Maybe they make mistakes occasionally - but so what?</p><p></p><p>Every so often, something will direct the boards "off the rails". At those times, trigger fingers may be a little more itchy - especially if you're a moderator who has been under fire, been receiving emails of complaint etc. all day. At these times, the best thing people can do is have a little empathy for the position the moderators are in instead of dredging up this old, tired "You don't allow anyone to disagree with anyone!" thing. It's so ridiculous, so patently and demonstrably untrue that making the statement, drawing imaginary lines based on that principle, making drand sweeping indictments of the boards based on such ridiculousness or anything else is just plain silly. Sometimes poeple whould just try and understand the dynamics of what's going on instead of seeking the most melodramatic interpretation possible - and i can assure you you'd be only one in a long, long boring line of people to do so. You won't be saying anything clever or paving the way for change or forming a revolution or anything.</p><p></p><p>If the mods close down a thread, respect their wishes, and give the subject a break for the moment. Try and trust them to do their job and to do what they think is best. If you think they're wrong, respect them for the call they made and understand that they did what they did because they thought it best for the boards as a whole, not because they're after you. Perhaps bring it up civilly and privately with the moderator at some point, once things have calmed down.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is the ideal solution; unfortunately, it is not one that can be implemented in a practical manner. I find it interesting that you say that you have found it effective - I can assure you that, here at least, that is not an effective, efficient or practical way to handle things. Perhaps the moderators in your situation have more time, or perhaps the group as a whole is smaller?</p><p></p><p>Secondly, once a thread gets out of control, dealing with the individuals will not work. They will have already angered others, who will respond. Often the "individuals" you are referring to are a large number of defensive people. </p><p></p><p>I'm sure that you can see that, often, a time-out or coolling off period is by far the best action, rather than havng moderators get into silly little pissing matches (both on the boards and via email) with various individuals? Even when we do that, as you can see, you'll always get people trying to "challenge" a moderator (as happened to Dinkeldog); imagine what that would be like if we were picking on specific people?</p><p></p><p>Thjis, as a whole, is a very unique community, I feel. And I believe that the mderators have a very good handle on the ebb and flow of things around here; good enough that they can be trusted to do what's best. And, as I said earlier, if they make the occasional mistake - don't challenge them on it. Don't try and square off against them. Understand that they're under pressure and doing the best they can in the situation and that they aren't carrying out a personal vendetta against you (again, this is "you" in a global sense!) - they don't have the <em>time</em> to carry out a vendetta against you, for goodness sake! Things can always be worked out, but if you draw a line in the sand, you'll lose - and that'll be completely your own doing, not the moderators, because they don't want that to happen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 370257, member: 1"] I think that this statement is a little silly. I can't believe that you are under the impression that the moderators enforce continual agreement between all members. I disagree with that conclusion, too. That's just melodrama. It's not a binary issue. The following is all mainly meant in a global sense, especially where I use the word "you". It's not addressed at anyone in particular (and not at Semperjase, despite the fact that it follows on after a quote of his). One thing you should bear in mind is that the moderators don't close threads because they think they may get out of control; they close them because their experience tells them that the thread [i]will[/i] get out of control. Usually, the thread has already started to do so. Maybe they make mistakes occasionally - but so what? Every so often, something will direct the boards "off the rails". At those times, trigger fingers may be a little more itchy - especially if you're a moderator who has been under fire, been receiving emails of complaint etc. all day. At these times, the best thing people can do is have a little empathy for the position the moderators are in instead of dredging up this old, tired "You don't allow anyone to disagree with anyone!" thing. It's so ridiculous, so patently and demonstrably untrue that making the statement, drawing imaginary lines based on that principle, making drand sweeping indictments of the boards based on such ridiculousness or anything else is just plain silly. Sometimes poeple whould just try and understand the dynamics of what's going on instead of seeking the most melodramatic interpretation possible - and i can assure you you'd be only one in a long, long boring line of people to do so. You won't be saying anything clever or paving the way for change or forming a revolution or anything. If the mods close down a thread, respect their wishes, and give the subject a break for the moment. Try and trust them to do their job and to do what they think is best. If you think they're wrong, respect them for the call they made and understand that they did what they did because they thought it best for the boards as a whole, not because they're after you. Perhaps bring it up civilly and privately with the moderator at some point, once things have calmed down. That is the ideal solution; unfortunately, it is not one that can be implemented in a practical manner. I find it interesting that you say that you have found it effective - I can assure you that, here at least, that is not an effective, efficient or practical way to handle things. Perhaps the moderators in your situation have more time, or perhaps the group as a whole is smaller? Secondly, once a thread gets out of control, dealing with the individuals will not work. They will have already angered others, who will respond. Often the "individuals" you are referring to are a large number of defensive people. I'm sure that you can see that, often, a time-out or coolling off period is by far the best action, rather than havng moderators get into silly little pissing matches (both on the boards and via email) with various individuals? Even when we do that, as you can see, you'll always get people trying to "challenge" a moderator (as happened to Dinkeldog); imagine what that would be like if we were picking on specific people? Thjis, as a whole, is a very unique community, I feel. And I believe that the mderators have a very good handle on the ebb and flow of things around here; good enough that they can be trusted to do what's best. And, as I said earlier, if they make the occasional mistake - don't challenge them on it. Don't try and square off against them. Understand that they're under pressure and doing the best they can in the situation and that they aren't carrying out a personal vendetta against you (again, this is "you" in a global sense!) - they don't have the [i]time[/i] to carry out a vendetta against you, for goodness sake! Things can always be worked out, but if you draw a line in the sand, you'll lose - and that'll be completely your own doing, not the moderators, because they don't want that to happen. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
(Merged) Are the moderators getting ... & Censorship
Top