Moderating in Moderation.

[xigbar]

I understand that it must take up one's time to be a moderator here, but it seems to me as if the Moderators are only ever bearers of bad news, and it might be nice if they did something to help the people who make threads once in a while, instead of only commenting in posts where things get out of hand. I am, for example, more cooperative with a police officer who has a sense of humor than one who gets offended because making a joke makes him feel his authority is being undermined. But maybe I don't get around the boards enough.

 

[Piratecat]

It's an interesting point. Speaking only for myself, I've been tied up in work projects and find myself doing more moderation than simple noodling. I appreciate the reality check.

 

[Umbran]

.... it seems to me as if the Moderators are only ever bearers of bad news, and it might be nice if they did something to help the people who make threads once in a while, instead of only commenting in posts where things get out of hand.

What sort of things do you think we should do that would qualify as, "something to help the people who make threads"? Could you give some examples of what you'd prefer to see?

 

[JamesonCourage]

Just thought I'd throw in my two cents... while I tend to agree with Xigbar about the police (or security guards, or really anyone in a position of authority that takes it too seriously [which also leaves room for times when they need to take their authority very seriously]), I'd just like to add that I see moderators making posts without the orange or red text often enough that I don't feel like they're only bearers of bad news.

I do think that there's been a minor flareup of D&D edition arguments in General for the past couple months, but nothing that's significantly bigger since I joined up in January. During this time, I've seen moderators try to bring people in line with forum policies, more often with warnings than without.

The other times I see them, though, is them just using white text to voice their opinions or experiences. And it's not uncommon. I just read something from Plane Sailing before checking into Meta. I do think I see Plane Sailing and Umbran post most often, but I do see the other moderators occasionally kick in their two cents.

At any rate, I feel like I'm rambling. Piratecat mentioned perspective, and I thought I'd give him my perspective on moderators here on EN World (to be honest, I stay on EN World for the comparatively polite discussion had, and the moderation definitely assists with this).

As always, play what you like

 

[xigbar]

What sort of things do you think we should do that would qualify as, "something to help the people who make threads"? Could you give some examples of what you'd prefer to see?

Well, the point of the forums is to answer queries a member may have about a game. While this would require a moderator to assist with people more interested with making an arguement, it seems contradictory to make an account to only moderate, instead of the point of the forum, asking and answering questions about RPGs. But I have no way of knowing how much time you spend moderating, which might cut short the time you have for partaking in the more casual aspects of membership. I also only browse 2-3 forums here, out of what seems like over a dozen. More on that below.

I do think that there's been a minor flareup of D&D edition arguments in General for the past couple months, but nothing that's significantly bigger since I joined up in January. During this time, I've seen moderators try to bring people in line with forum policies, more often with warnings than without.

The forum which has been subjected to the most moderator intervention, to my knowledge, is D&D Legacy Discussion, the one I browse the most, and also the produced the post responsible for the new policy change regarding controvertial topic material. This may be why I haven't seen many posts other than "strictly business" by the moderators during my (admittedly short) time here.

 

[JamesonCourage]

The forum which has been subjected to the most moderator intervention, to my knowledge, is D&D Legacy Discussion, the one I browse the most, and also the produced the post responsible for the new policy change regarding controvertial topic material. This may be why I haven't seen many posts other than "strictly business" by the moderators during my (admittedly short) time here.

If it makes a difference, I visit the D&D Legacy forum the second most of the forums I check out. I check out General the most, then D&D Legacy. I think that D&D Legacy is more committed to the older editions of D&D (obviously), and less open to even talk about changing something. I saw this a lot of the time when, say, Water Bob would open a discussion talking about mechanics (while admitting that he wasn't planning on changing his game, but that he wanted to know why the mechanics worked a certain way). Certain posters in the Legacy forum react pretty... condescendingly... to that type of post. I have one poster in mind in particular here, but he has a few other backers, and others who also respond rather... dismissively.

I think that General has its "problem posters" too, and they're usually involved in D&D edition wars (both sides... one poster even has "professional edition warrior" as his status). I think there's a less of a moderation to moderator input ratio in General when compared to Legacy for a couple of reasons: first, I think the moderators might be generally less interested in rehashing old game mechanics, and thus they don't contribute as much to the Legacy forum (where a few might be found in the 4e forum, or in General talking about entirely different systems); secondly, I think that while both forums have problem posters, the fact that General gets more traffic "waters down" the problem posters. Legacy has a few posters who are dismissive or condescending, though they tend to dominate thread after thread. In General, the big threads are dominated by the problem posters often enough, yes, but there is generally a plethora of smaller threads that aren't "infected" by the edition wars. In Legacy, you see the same problem posters popping into most of the threads that gain any traction (which in Legacy is a 2 or so pages, as compared to General's 20 to 40-page threads), egging people on.

At least, that's my perception. I'm sure that the moderators have more insight into this issue. I can only tell you what I see from keeping tabs on the pulse of both forums, and inform the moderators of my personal perceptions and assumptions. At any rate, just my two cents. As always, play what you like

 

[Umbran]

The forum which has been subjected to the most moderator intervention, to my knowledge, is D&D Legacy Discussion, the one I browse the most, and also the produced the post responsible for the new policy change regarding controvertial topic material. This may be why I haven't seen many posts other than "strictly business" by the moderators during my (admittedly short) time here.

Ah. I'm most active in discussing things in the General and Media Lounge & Misc. forums. I'm not personally so much interested in topics specific to one rule-set or another.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Xigbar, I suspect it's just a matter of time. Over the years I've been here, I've had numerous discussions in threads with many mods- Umbran, HyperSmurf, Piratecat, Morrus and Henry (not currently a mod)- as well as others I've probably forgotten or don't recall being mods. When they're not actively modding, they DO start their own threads or drop some knowledge in others'. And occasionally, show they're just as clueless as everyone else on a given subject.

It's just that they're most visible, and thus most memorable, when they break out the orange or red text.

The forum which has been subjected to the most moderator intervention, to my knowledge, is D&D Legacy Discussion,

I'd bet General is where they do most of their unpleasant duties, but Legacy has had a rash of some ugly threads of late. Veeeeery ugly.

 

[Pentius]

I understand that it must take up one's time to be a moderator here, but it seems to me as if the Moderators are only ever bearers of bad news, and it might be nice if they did something to help the people who make threads once in a while, instead of only commenting in posts where things get out of hand. I am, for example, more cooperative with a police officer who has a sense of humor than one who gets offended because making a joke makes him feel his authority is being undermined. But maybe I don't get around the boards enough.

I agree in principle, but when I see a moderator discussing in a topic(as opposed to moderating it) I consider it a form of "help", in that it is positive, helpful discussion. Really, what else does a good thread need?

 

[Dice4Hire]

I certainly feel mods are contributing members of the site as well as mods.