Use of "Professional Language" in Moderator Actions

[Morrus]

If you want to say "We don't wear the moderator hat impartially" that's fine. I don't think its a good look, but its also not my house so I can't complain about it.

I think you are incorrectly attributing the term "anti-inclusive" to the kinds of comments I am referring to. Having the opinion "All orcs being evil isn't a problem" is NOT anti-inclusive. Despite this I have seen many posters (and possibly some mods) equate having that opinion with being anti-inclusive, thus labeling the poster saying so as against something they aren't at all against. This supports what @Maxperson is saying, and its happened to me multiple times over the past few months in the heated discussions.

I’m confused. Have you or have you not been moderated for saying”all orcs being evil isn’t a problem”? If not, what does that have to do with this discussion about the use of professional language in moderation?

 

[Eric V]

If you want to say "We don't wear the moderator hat impartially" that's fine. I don't think its a good look, but its also not my house so I can't complain about it.

I think you are incorrectly attributing the term "anti-inclusive" to the kinds of comments I am referring to. Having the opinion "All orcs being evil isn't a problem" is NOT anti-inclusive. Despite this I have seen many posters (and possibly some mods) equate having that opinion with being anti-inclusive, thus labeling the poster saying so as against something they aren't at all against. This supports what @Maxperson is saying, and its happened to me multiple times over the past few months in the heated discussions.

Haven't people explained (patiently and in great detail) how it is, though? So, if after that, one still takes the position, then...

 

[Morrus]

(I’ve answered the initial question in this thread, incidentally, and the prospect of an endless Gish-gallop on every imaginable moderation topic isn’t appealing, so I’ll be dropping out now; if you have other mod questions than the one in the OP, feel free to start a thread about them).

 

[FrogReaver]

Yeah, so, years ago, I used to use professional language in moderation.

People hated it. They gave more resistance to moderation, tried harder to find loopholes*, were generally more argumentative.

A more conversational, informal tone just works better.



*Professional language sounds like strict rules. And among rules-lawyers, that doesn't work out well.

an example of your conversational tone:

Mod Note:

Next time, read the moderator notes before posting. This nonsense is not constructive, and you're done in the thread.

You believe this “Conversational tone” juSt works better?

 

[Maxperson]

Haven't people explained (patiently and in great detail) how it is, though? So, if after that, one still takes the position, then...

No. Use this analogy. Some people want to help the poor by giving them money. Other people want to help the poor not by giving them money, but by educating them in something that pays well and is in demand. Different ways to want to help the poor. Similarly, some of you want to be inclusive by changing everything that might possibly maybe harm someone. Others of us want to have hard proof of harm before we will support change. Both sides support inclusivity, just in different ways. Your side, though, likes to accuse those of us who want inclusivity in a different manner, of being non-inclusive. That's the problem.

 

[cmad1977]

I’m sensing high levels of pout from some folks in this thread.

 

[Maxperson]

I’m sensing high levels of pout from some folks in this thread.

You're misreading things I think.

 

[Eltab]

(I’ve answered the initial question in this thread, incidentally, and the prospect of an endless Gish-gallop on every imaginable moderation topic isn’t appealing, so I’ll be dropping out now; if you have other mod questions than the one in the OP, feel free to start a thread about them).

The moderators - especially you, Morrus, when you fulfill that task - speak with the Voice of EnWorld. They set the tone that posters will emulate. If they are rude, snarky, dismissive, snobbish ... then they are telling everybody who reads their posts what EnWorld expects and will tolerate. They define Be Polite in practice on a day-by-day basis.

A forum full of rude, snarky, dismissive, and/or snobbish threads is neither Be Polite nor Be Inclusive. In practice, it functions as a KEEP OUT sign to would-be new players.

A few months ago there was a thread themed "What I Like About EnWorld". I know you saw it because you red-ink commented "I don't want to become the forum that complains about other websites." The strongest sentiments expressed about 'EnWorld is good because...' were the rules No Politics and Be Polite.
Why are you trying to give yourself (and staff) a 'personal except clause' to the strengths of your website?

 

[Morrus]

The moderators - especially you, Morrus, when you fulfill that task - speak with the Voice of EnWorld. They set the tone that posters will emulate. If they are rude, snarky, dismissive, snobbish ... then they are telling everybody who reads their posts what EnWorld expects and will tolerate. They define Be Polite in practice on a day-by-day basis.

A forum full of rude, snarky, dismissive, and/or snobbish threads is neither Be Polite nor Be Inclusive. In practice, it functions as a KEEP OUT sign to would-be new players.

A few months ago there was a thread themed "What I Like About EnWorld". I know you saw it because you red-ink commented "I don't want to become the forum that complains about other websites." The strongest sentiments expressed about 'EnWorld is good because...' were the rules No Politics and Be Polite.
Why are you trying to give yourself (and staff) a 'personal except clause' to the strengths of your website?

You’d make a good politician.