Return of the Edition War

[Rel]

I just wanted to say a couple things about a couple things mentioned in this thread.

First of all, the moderators here are some damned fine individuals. I think they do a great job overall and I'm proud to be among them. I also think that (to use a trite cliche) "our strength is our diversity". We have a wide range of personalities in all respects but this extends to our tastes in gaming and games of choice. Some really like 4e. Some really like 3e. Some don't care for 4e at all. Some are lukewarm to it. Some prefer different systems altogether. I think this really helps cover all the bases and lets us keep an eye on each other as well. We're all friendly with each other but we DO call each other on our screwups.

The second is on the nature of moderator warnings. When you see one of us bust out the ominously colored text, read it. If it is directed at a specific individual who is being a problem in the thread, and if that individual is not you, then move right along. If it is a general warning that the thread is getting out of hand then be very careful about what you post next. We are NOT drawing a line at where the current hostilities are and say, "Ok guys, don't get any nastier than you are already." What we're doing is placing a sizable "demilitarized zone" in the middle of the argument that has gotten too heated. If you violate that zone, at all, then you're going to get smacked down.

And don't ask us where the edge of the zone is. That's part of the effectiveness of this technique. If we tell you then everybody will be back to the edge of that zone as soon as possible, taking pot shots hoping they'll hit a target on the other side. If you're unsure whether something would be acceptable then don't post it. This is your chance to be extra polite to your fellow posters and get your points across in the nicest way you know how. Exercise that opportunity.

 

[Mark]

One thing we are imlpementing now is that in the "Reasons for ban" field, the mod in question will be leaving their email addess in addition to the reason. That way you have the ability to actually talk to the mod privately about it; that often resolves things very quickly.

I think this is a good step that will probably clear up some of the backlash and misconceptions. I think increasing the severity toward the repeat offenders who are regularly banned only to return when their sentence is up and they feel their bowels stirring would be something to consider.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I think this is a good step that will probably clear up some of the backlash and misconceptions. I think increasing the severity toward the repeat offenders who are regularly banned only to return when their sentence is up and they feel their bowels stirring would be something to consider.

Reason For Ban: rampant diarrhoea. Please e-mail piratecat@enworld.org to discuss.

 

[S'mon]

Thanks Morrus for your explanation, that was helpful.

The second is on the nature of moderator warnings. When you see one of us bust out the ominously colored text, read it. If it is directed at a specific individual who is being a problem in the thread, and if that individual is not you, then move right along. If it is a general warning that the thread is getting out of hand then be very careful about what you post next. We are NOT drawing a line at where the current hostilities are and say, "Ok guys, don't get any nastier than you are already." What we're doing is placing a sizable "demilitarized zone" in the middle of the argument that has gotten too heated. If you violate that zone, at all, then you're going to get smacked down.

I think I missed this, or at least its significance, in the thread where I got banned. I didn't think my comment was skirting any lines - I had decided I wasn't going to take the bait and thus come close to any line - so I wasn't worried about any prior mod warnings. So I was pretty gobsmacked to log on later and find I'd been banned, later finding out it was along with several other people - some who seemed to deserve it, others not, even on the basis of a hyper-sensitive demilitarised zone.

I think being able to contact the mod directly will be very helpful. I was kept in the dark several days, until Piratecat posted on therpgsite - where I had gone to complain about being banned - and put things in some perspective.

I'm not entirely sure what I think about all this. I like the strong moderation on ENW, I prefer it to the lopsided modding on rpgnet or the invective-filled free-for-all on therpgsite. I appreciate the even-handedness and lack of bias of most of the mods, most of the time. For guys who presumably don't get paid, you do a great job. OTOH in this particular case the post-general-warning tripwire was set at a different place than I could possibly have imagined, and I think I wasn't the only one. I think that lack of predictability makes it less helpful as a deterrent, and I can't concur with its use in this particular case.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not entirely sure what I think about all this. I like the strong moderation on ENW, I prefer it to the lopsided modding on rpgnet or the invective-filled free-for-all on therpgsite. I appreciate the even-handedness and lack of bias of most of the mods, most of the time. For guys who presumably don't get paid, you do a great job. OTOH in this particular case the post-general-warning tripwire was set at a different place than I could possibly have imagined, and I think I wasn't the only one. I think that lack of predictability makes it less helpful as a deterrent, and I can't concur with its use in this particular case.

Yes, well, that's the tradeoff. If we are gentle, and there is a "false positive" or borderline case, you aren't apt to really mind it overmuch. If we are rather more harsh, then those same edge cases are going to be less pleasant.

So, is that tradeoff worth it? Folks, ask yourself, are you willing to take one for the team?

 

[S'mon]

Just to say that Xath has replied by email with clarification on her actions, and in conjunction with what Piratecat said on therpgsite about the sad personal event in his life that weekend, I think I understand what happened: Piratecat was understandably upset, while Xath was following PC's instruction that there would be bans without further explanation for 'the slightest hint of rudeness'. On that basis I can understand why I received the suspension. Thanks to the various mods for your patience.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Hey, I think I'm an edge case a lot and I wouldn't mind harsher mods.

Has the army of people registered in the last two months posting major edition war crap been noticed? The problem is getting worse.

 

[jdrakeh]

Has the army of people registered in the last two months posting major edition war crap been noticed?

I've noticed several people with very low post counts posting deliberately inflammatory threads (i.e., trolling), yes. I didn't realize that any of them had registered so recently, though.

 

[Windjammer]

While I think the ratio of thread closure seems a bit high recently, and I can't always see the reasoning behind the closures (particularly when someone says he/she hasn't even read the thread before closing), I don't perceive moderators' actions to be the dominant problem.

I perceive the dominant problem to arise from the sort of peer moderation non-moderator posters exert on one another in most forums, this forum included. Peer moderation, of itself, is wonderful because it shows a community's desire and effort to take care of itself. At the same time, peer moderation is problematic because, given that anyone can participate, it will wildly fluctuate in quality.

For that reason I'd appreciate if Enworld communicated to its posters to be more conscientious when peer moderating. For instance, just reading this thread on this page, and reading some other recent threads, blanket accusations of trolling abound. Trolling is a serious issue, but so are unfounded accusations thereof. It should be an issue of honesty and responsibility to only issue negative characterizations of other people's posts by

1. clearly saying which post you mean, avoiding generic elusive references like "they", "some", "people", or "we all know who I mean",

2. clearly saying why one thinks the accusation is warranted i.e. the reason on which one declares a post to be indicative of trolling.

I observe how some posters are very conscientious about observing 1. and 2., and I value their integrity for doing so. It's just I wish that their practice was more widespread.

Thanks for listening.

 

[Eridanis]

I perceive the dominant problem to arise from the sort of peer moderation non-moderator posters exert on one another in most forums, this forum included. Peer moderation, of itself, is wonderful because it shows a community's desire and effort to take care of itself. At the same time, peer moderation is problematic because, given that anyone can participate, it will wildly fluctuate in quality.

For that reason I'd appreciate if Enworld communicated to its posters to be more conscientious when peer moderating...

I get a little queasy thinking about posters moderating (i.e., explicitly commenting on) other posters; that's crossing the line into rudeness. I think the best way to get to what you're saying is to follow a model we've practiced for years: posters setting the tone of the discussion, being an example of good citizenship. I agree that we could use more of that again.