Moderation statistics :)

My man, money is king, and if a different direction is more lucrative, backtracking can occur

What would be the point of making these things public anyway? They were removed for a reason. We don't go around removing stuff willy nilly.

And do you really think CT really have the time to do things like this?

Not likely.

That decision was made to make the forum more accessible. It has been, according to the CT, an unqualified success and one they won't contemplate changing.

I feel you're barking up the wrong tree entirely there.

you haven't explained why that's your belief or why it's beneficial to the forum.

Go back to the first post. The basic idea would take minutes.

Go back to the first post. The basic idea would take minutes.

One issue is always going to be subjectivity. If you say word X is offensive, and I say it's not because Y (group of people say) use it freely, who is right? With moderation being subjective, not turning cards over shows a problem that moderators are mistaking opinion as fact.

I think one of the main problems with the moderation of the forum is the end goal. The goal is to make sure no one is offended. It shouldn't be. The main goal surely should be to make sure it's a healthy environment for interesting discussion.

The issue with offense based moderation is that something will always offend someone. It's a flawed idea from the start that will only stifle discussion and debate. Considering the forum is filled with academics, this isn't going to be a good rule to have in place. The system would be a lot better if it was done more akin to a presidential debate. Keep it on topic, and as long as what is said is relevant, then if someone is offended, well the truth can be tough at times. This would allow for a much more mature forum with healthier more engaging topics, and arguably would increase user retention. At the moment chat is the prominent forum and nobody is really going to stick around to talk about the weather. However if you let people argue the many points of something like feminism without fear of hurting someone's delicate sensibilities, one thread alone would keep users more engaged than a weeks worth of chat posts.

A post that has been edited by a moderator does make me curious, that's true . Only for a split-second, though, and I can't say that I remember any names of people that's happened to.

Considering reddit has a reputation system with up and downvotes and dwarfs TSR, I feel that the CT are using rather specious reasoning.

If I end up having to edit someone's post in my section then I leave them a note either at the bottom of the post or in the edit note.

Working as a web dev (sounds more like front end than back end) you should know making a db query doesn't involve tickets or test environments as it's a read-only operation.

True the time at which it is ran would have to be something like 4 a.m. but that's not really a problem as it can be automated. An SQL dump may not be useful, or it may be useful if it was turned into CSV format, depending on the output. Again I really do believe that a half competent DB operator could do this in a morning if they had knowledge of the DB structure

Let's say this ridiculous notion was actually going somewhere. You'd end up with a bunch of essentially meaningless stats released presumably into a thread. One side will use those figures to back up their argument that mods are ****. The other side will use the exact same figures to back up their argument that the mods are splendid. What you end up with is a waffling discussion where both sides are stubborn as anything where nothing ever really gets solved - much like this thread, I'd say.

This thread is just becoming hilarious and pathetic.
Someone asks for some basic numbers and stats which most other forums present. The result? Mods try to deny basic facts and desperately scrounge for a reason not to. Because that doesn't make the moderation look terrible at all

This thread is just becoming hilarious and pathetic.
Someone asks for some basic numbers and stats which most other forums present. The result? Mods try to deny basic facts and desperately scrounge for a reason not to. Because that doesn't make the moderation look terrible at all

This thread is just becoming hilarious and pathetic.
Someone asks for some basic numbers and stats which most other forums present. The result? Mods try to deny basic facts and desperately scrounge for a reason not to. Because that doesn't make the moderation look terrible at all




Why is it so ridiculous? You just sound like some dictatorship trying to defend not giving out election results "This is ridiculous! USA has everything to do with our problems!"
The stats would only cause a problem if they were biased. The fact that you all claim it would make a problem if released clearly shows that you know that something isn't right, hence why you won't release them. Well doesn't that mean you should maybe evaluate how you moderate?!

Why is it so ridiculous?

Well doesn't that mean you should maybe evaluate how you moderate?!

Asking for the benefit of releasing them != scrounging for a reason not to.

Well, if you feel that the moderation system can be improved (which is fair enough), why don't you apply to become a moderator? That goes for the OP as well . That way, you can actively help improve the system whilst being aware of all the processes etc.

Sometimes, if you want something to happen, you've got to step up to the plate.

I'd say the mods have come out of this looking pretty damn good.

Agree about the hilarity of this thread though.

I'd say the rest of my post covers my views.

I'm not a moderator.