Moderator Accountability: A theoretical Question

[BigBallinStalin]

Come for the games, stay for the forums. Enjoy the discussions with players around the world in Off Topic forum. Ooops, scratch that, the forum is controlled by a band of derailers. Just come for the games (hope that's enough to increase member count).

I give this derail a 3/10.

edit: 8/10 for catching TGD. Nice baiting, UC!

[thegreekdog]

Come for the games, stay for the forums. Enjoy the discussions with players around the world in Off Topic forum. Ooops, scratch that, the forum is controlled by a band of derailers. Just come for the games (hope that's enough to increase member count).

I give this derail a 3/10.

edit: 8/10 for catching TGD. Nice baiting, UC!

Yeah, my post took too much work for the potential payoff.

[BoganGod]

Come for the games, stay for the forums. Enjoy the discussions with players around the world in Off Topic forum. Ooops, scratch that, the forum is controlled by a band of derailers. Just come for the games (hope that's enough to increase member count).

I give this derail a 3/10.

edit: 8/10 for catching TGD. Nice baiting, UC!

Yeah, my post took too much work for the potential payoff.

I've given up on the off topics forum, due in main part to UC and his/her/its constant one issue repetitive drum thumping.

Would it be possible to get a moderator code of conduct published. Including little things like
- owning your actions, lock a thread own the lock
- explaining(including referring back to the rules and moderator guidelines) your lock, post delete or other interfering.
- Clear acknowledgement that the rules also apply to mods/admin
- A clear disciplinary list for mods, including mods being stepped down for set periods of time or permanently for infractions. No more of this business as usual with cheaters, and having cheater's punitive actions against other players stand.

Don't think any of the above are inflammatory or even difficult to implement. Why has this not been done in the past?

[BigBallinStalin]

Come for the games, stay for the forums. Enjoy the discussions with players around the world in Off Topic forum. Ooops, scratch that, the forum is controlled by a band of derailers. Just come for the games (hope that's enough to increase member count).

I give this derail a 3/10.

edit: 8/10 for catching TGD. Nice baiting, UC!

Yeah, my post took too much work for the potential payoff.

I've given up on the off topics forum, due in main part to UC and his/her/its constant one issue repetitive drum thumping.

Would it be possible to get a moderator code of conduct published. Including little things like
- owning your actions, lock a thread own the lock
- explaining(including referring back to the rules and moderator guidelines) your lock, post delete or other interfering.
- Clear acknowledgement that the rules also apply to mods/admin
- A clear disciplinary list for mods, including mods being stepped down for set periods of time or permanently for infractions. No more of this business as usual with cheaters, and having cheater's punitive actions against other players stand.

Don't think any of the above are inflammatory or even difficult to implement. Why has this not been done in the past?

Why bother? You know what's easier? Encourage the mods to moderate less.

Just get outta the way!

[DoomYoshi]

That is the sexiest pic I have ever seen. Too bad my avatar spot is too small.

[Metsfanmax]

Come for the games, stay for the forums. Enjoy the discussions with players around the world in Off Topic forum. Ooops, scratch that, the forum is controlled by a band of derailers. Just come for the games (hope that's enough to increase member count).

I give this derail a 3/10.

edit: 8/10 for catching TGD. Nice baiting, UC!

Yeah, my post took too much work for the potential payoff.

I've given up on the off topics forum, due in main part to UC and his/her/its constant one issue repetitive drum thumping.

Would it be possible to get a moderator code of conduct published. Including little things like
- owning your actions, lock a thread own the lock
- explaining(including referring back to the rules and moderator guidelines) your lock, post delete or other interfering.
- Clear acknowledgement that the rules also apply to mods/admin
- A clear disciplinary list for mods, including mods being stepped down for set periods of time or permanently for infractions. No more of this business as usual with cheaters, and having cheater's punitive actions against other players stand.

Don't think any of the above are inflammatory or even difficult to implement. Why has this not been done in the past?

There is a comprehensive set of rules that moderators follow, as you are suggesting; we do not publish it, however.

[BoganGod]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

[AndyDufresne]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

I think the procedures Mets is referring to did mention that a reason should accompany a lock, etc. But maybe the procedures didn't -- I can't recall the fine details anymore.


--Andy

[owenshooter]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

I think the procedures Mets is referring to did mention that a reason should accompany a lock, etc. But maybe the procedures didn't -- I can't recall the fine details anymore.

--Andy

come on andy... you know the details don't matter when it comes down to CC vs. any member... HOWEVER, i will concede that during my time on CC while you were running about the jungle, you did become a much better overall moderator in a very odd way... you were no TWILL, but without a doubt you changed in an overall positive manner... that's it, i have complimented the monkey, this thread is over... lock 'er down!! the black jesus has spoken...-el Jesus negro

[Metsfanmax]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

[BoganGod]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

So based on the above statement. A lot of you kiddies have gone rogue on occasion.

[Jdsizzleslice]

The thread on forum PC got me wondering - we all know that moderators need to be accountable for their actions, but how is this balance best served.
There are a few main groups that mods need to be accountable to: the admins, the users, the other mods and the monkeys.

How is the balance struck?
If the mods were only accountable to the admins, it wouldn't really be "community-managed". If the mods were only accountable to the users, there could be a problem of 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner.

Mods being accountable to each other is important. At the end of the day, Night Strike and dako (random names) need to be able to both say: "I'm on Team CC, and proud of it".

All mods have to be ordained ministers to the word of the monkey god.

Being accountable to the admins is probably the easiest check - if blakebowling thinks I don't represent Team CC, I'm gone, simple as that.
Being accountable to other mods is also pretty easy. We have well-defined responsibilities, and where they do overlap, we are able to discuss any differences. This accountability goes on behind the scenes.

How do you think accountability to users a)has been previously established b)should be established?

Or do you think it doesn't matter that much?

Great this is being discussed here now, wasn't a few months ago. It's apparently ok for the current admins to remove a moderator without telling them they have been removed.

[BoganGod]

@jdsiz - me thinks is probably one of the upsides for admin of using a volunteer workforce. Whilst would be super to imagine that the niceties and pleasantries are observed. Based on personal experience I imagine that is not the case.
Would theorise that mods as volunteers are not in a position to sue for unfair dismissal. A bit like casual/or seasonal labour, mods may find themselves being told their services are no longer required. If they aren't told, and are just dropped that would be pretty cold and gutless on the part of the person/persons doing the dropping. Know being a mod is a thankless task, but literally being dropped with no reason or thanks. Who does that?

[rhp 1]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

So based on the above statement. A lot of you kiddies have gone rogue on occasion.

I understand the tenor of ur remarks Bogey, but I think in this case its clear that what hes saying is... when its obvious that people are actin up and knowingly doing things that are against the rules, an explanation isnt needed... I wouldnt give one if I were a mod and it was obvious to anyone people were actin a fool...im not sure ud takenthe time either... I would see you often saying...

LOCKED... OBVIOUSLY LOCKED

[BoganGod]

let me see rhp. Obvious locks, yes they exist. There have also on more than a few occasions been anonymous locks for no immediately obvious reason. Knowing that your deliberately obtuse stance on some things is just to send the rather literal kiddies with OCD crazy I won't explain the obvious..... I know, that you know, that I know you know what I was talking about. Calling unprofessional/sloppy moderating going rogue is my way of maintaining my reputation for exaggeration.

Do you know that doom yoshi locked a thread where I called him gullible

[rhp 1]

let me see rhp. Obvious locks, yes they exist. There have also on more than a few occasions been anonymous locks for no immediately obvious reason. Knowing that your deliberately obtuse stance on some things is just to send the rather literal kiddies with OCD crazy I won't explain the obvious..... I know, that you know, that I know you know what I was talking about. Calling unprofessional/sloppy moderating going rogue is my way of maintaining my reputation for exaggeration.

Do you know that doom yoshi locked a thread where I called him gullible

LOL... I did not know that...

and btw, I wasn't going after you @ all.. I (though, admittedly not caring much) agree with much of your (yes, often times exaggerated to varying degrees) diatribes on various topics in here... I just thought that criticizing more obvious and distasteful forms of mod misc
conduct would more forcefully and purposefully advance your agenda.. I could be wrong

quoting what Mets said (which seems a reasonable thing to say on is part) and then breaking down that quote to support your position, at first glance (and every glance thereafter) seemed at best, counterproductive to your macroscopic goal... (If I may even so bold as to imply you have a goal in the first place)

[DoomYoshi]

LOL @ rhp... I have never locked a thread, you got tricked by BG!

[rhp 1]

LOL @ rhp... I have never locked a thread, you got tricked by BG!

tricked? I'm not sure how.. if it was something he made up to make me look foolish, the joke would be on him as I pride myself on not really being aware of what transpires in the forums to begin with... so it would only be amusing to people who take an entirely different approach to forum posting than the one I take....

[Metsfanmax]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

So based on the above statement. A lot of you kiddies have gone rogue on occasion.

I've seen instances where protocol was not followed, but I think they are the exception and not the rule. If you catch such an instance, please feel free to contact a mod and ask them to post a reason why. We have access to the logs so we know who locked what.

[The Voice]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

So based on the above statement. A lot of you kiddies have gone rogue on occasion.

I've seen instances where protocol was not followed, but I think they are the exception and not the rule. If you catch such an instance, please feel free to contact a mod and ask them to post a reason why. We have access to the logs so we know who locked what.

Better yet, why don't they just post the question in the thread?

[Metsfanmax]

So we have no way of knowing whether the rudeness and/or lack of accountability is within the guidelines or the actions of disgruntled arseholes who have been driven mad by this community. Mets, in your role of dropping hints/vague utterances. Does the illusive and secret mod responsibilities list include - Own/sign each thread lock and/or edit you make.

Yes, it is a general rule that moderators are supposed to post with a reason when they lock a thread. However, in some cases where it is patently obvious why a thread is being locked (like an account spammer, etc.) then we may not bother.

So based on the above statement. A lot of you kiddies have gone rogue on occasion.

I've seen instances where protocol was not followed, but I think they are the exception and not the rule. If you catch such an instance, please feel free to contact a mod and ask them to post a reason why. We have access to the logs so we know who locked what.

Better yet, why don't they just post the question in the thread?

Well now, if they could actually post in the thread then we wouldn't have this problem would we?

[kentington]

Mods are supposed to post their reason for the locks and who did the locking. I don't know about other forums, but in OT if this happened there would be a thread about the locked thread in minutes. OT protests, shoot OT makes a thread about a locked thread, or the thread locker, even when the reason is posted. People don't like their threads locked, which is understandable. It is like telling a joke and just before the punch line someone puts duct tape on your mouth.
But I don't see a reason to punish a mod for forgetting to post a reason for the lock. I think it should eventually be done, but definitely be done.

[jefjef]

Now c'mon - Lets be honest. It's almost always obvious why threads get locked and rarely requires an explanation.

[owenshooter]

Would it be possible to get a moderator code of conduct published. Including little things like
- owning your actions, lock a thread own the lock
- explaining(including referring back to the rules and moderator guidelines) your lock, post delete or other interfering.
- Clear acknowledgement that the rules also apply to mods/admin
- A clear disciplinary list for mods, including mods being stepped down for set periods of time or permanently for infractions. No more of this business as usual with cheaters, and having cheater's punitive actions against other players stand.

Don't think any of the above are inflammatory or even difficult to implement. Why has this not been done in the past?

i still think this is a good idea and i don't know why it isn't posted in the teams section, so people can know what to expect from their mods or what to expect if they pursue becoming a mod. i for one am no longer shocked when i see a mod openly abusing their power within the forums, it has become pretty common. the instances of them using their position to gain points, etc, just seem "meh" now, in context with all the shit mods have done on this site in the past... i was just openly flamed in the forums by a team member, filed a formal complaint and am yet to hear back... i am pretty sure that if i called someone a "venereal disease" in the forums, i would be on that same ol' owen ban that they used to hand out like conquer stars (before there were conquer stars). i think Bogan has a great idea and team CC should consider doing this...-Jésus noir

p.s.-team cc, keeping it classy:

GD has no traffic because of venereal diseases like you. It's here because that's where it belongs.

[Army of GOD]

What happened to tgd?