Join TSR now and chat with students like youSign up now

Should threads discussing moderation be allowed Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RightSaidJames)
    This isn't a thread for mod-bashing or comparing us to totalitarian regimes, it's a thread asking for genuine opinions on how moderation issues should be dealt with.
    So far the mods who've contributed on this thread have: screamed at the member (not even given a warning), being patronizing to the members, throwing terms they hardly know, etc.

    The last resort? Submit your complain to the AAM or admin.

    The members are giving their opinions but the replies are hardly satisfactory.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    They probably receive hundreds of emails each day; so can't reply to every one.
    I hardly think the Admins are that popular.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kka25)
    I hardly think the Admins are that popular.
    You are aware about the size of this forum, aren't you?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sugar-n-spice)
    Provided no names of moderators are mentioned?


    Do. Not. Say. Anything. Against. The. Rules.
    Yes, it should. And any moderators abusing their power should be named. And shamed. Outmoddded.


    Spoiler:
    Show
    And banned.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    You are aware about the size of this forum, aren't you?
    Given any day, how many emails do you think they will receive? You're assuming that a forum like this will have all (a lot of) their members that are "that concern" with the admins; hardly true since most them are (a) probably not a part of TSR anymore (b) too young to even bother, (c) probably aren't bothered (anymore) because of how they have been treated by the (lower level) mods, (d) don't care.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by kka25)
    So far the mods who've contributed on this thread have: screamed at the member (not even given a warning), being patronizing to the members, throwing terms they hardly know, etc.

    The last resort? Submit your complain to the AAM or admin.

    The members are giving their opinions but the replies are hardly satisfactory.
    I have noticed the opposite trend, particularly over the last 2 pages. There have been some very detailed replies given to the very small minority of dissatisfied users (notably yourself and danny), and those replies have frustratingly been ignored in favour of the same recycled post being spouted again and again.

    Perhaps that can be taken as a representation of how things go in AAM: where a small number of people say they experience 'mock trials' and 'totalitarian regimes' and essentially rubber-stamping of decisions. In reality, they become fixated on their own position to such an extent that they cannot reconcile with the fact that they broke a rule and got warned for it, even when they get detailed and fair replies why the position is so. And so they resort to hyperboles and dramatic comparisons of the cruelty and unfairness they have experienced.

    (Original post by danny111)
    Many totalitarian regimes had mock trials, too. It's a common tactic.
    So you're saying you do have a right of appeal after all. Okay so it seems your dissatisfaction is more with the quality of appeal. Well, as for 'mock trials', was it a common tactic to overturn decisions if they went too far and were excessively unfair? Because the analogue to that: overturning warnings in AAM or downgrading warnings, has happened. I have seen that happen.

    I think your problem is more with the rules. Whilst, technically, you will have individual moderators warn you, in principle, you are being warned by The Moderation Team. We have rules to enforce, and we enforce them and whilst there is some amount of discretion with some offences, in most cases, it is clear cut. You avoid the swear filter, you get warned. You post adult content, you get warned. These are the rules you agreed to and rules which are always being reviewed (see: the recent site-wide survey). The problem is that users think they can dispute most of these things when they have clearly happened. Then they blame us for enforcing the rules.

    We don't have the power, for example, to accept a user's point in AAM that swear filter avoidance is justified or calling someone a '****ing idiot' is justified and we should therefore reverse your warning because we have rules saying the opposite, and even beyond that, we have to be consistent. That's fairness. But do we welcome opinions for a change in the rules here or AAM or in some survey.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    I have noticed the opposite trend, particularly over the last 2 pages. There have been some very detailed replies given to the very small minority of dissatisfied users mods (notably yourself and danny), and those replies have frustratingly been ignored in favour of the same recycled post being spouted again and again.

    Perhaps that can be taken as a representation of how things go in AAM: where a small number of people say they experience 'mock trials' and 'totalitarian regimes' and essentially rubber-stamping of decisions. In reality, the mods become fixated on their own position to such an extent that they cannot reconcile with the fact that they broke a rule and got warned for it and did something wrong and never have the decency to apologize, even when they get detailed and fair replies why the position is so. And so they resort to hyperboles and dramatic comparisons of the cruelty and unfairness they have experienced.
    Yes.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by kka25)
    Yes.
    Well, that's patently false. I have seen many apologies made for wrong and mistaken actions. Whilst I can't be specific because I am bound by the same rules as everyone else, I saw a moderator retract his position and an apology being made just yesterday in AAM.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kka25)
    Yes.
    Well I know this isn't the case as I have reversed warnings in my time (changing some of them to alerts).

    I have also noticed other moderators, who often understandably misread the situation, have given warnings and, after a user makes an appeal in AAM, have listened to that appeal and rescinded the warning. I can't go into detail, but there have been two notable examples in recent weeks that I can recall.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This has never happened to me, the most used excuse being "it is up to our interpretation". Great.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    They probably receive hundreds of emails each day; so can't reply to every one.
    They never replied. As in still not by today.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    Well, that's patently false. I have seen many apologies made for wrong and mistaken actions. Whilst I can't be specific because I am bound by the same rules as everyone else, I saw a moderator retract his position and an apology being made just yesterday in AAM.
    Owh, so that explains why threads like these are being created by the TSR users; right.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danny111)
    This has never happened to me, the most used excuse being "it is up to our interpretation". Great.
    Just because you have never been apologised to or had a warning reduced or overturned doesn't mean it hasn't happened. It just means that the mods felt you were in the wrong. And just because you were in the wrong in their opinion doesn't make them dictators or trying to censor you.

    This thread isn't going to go anywhere if people are just going to use it as an excuse to air their grievances and try to one up the mod team. This is why they tend to get shut down, because people just go "well, this happened to me, so I am right and the mods are evil!" It helps no one and just turns into a cesspit with the few mods who do answer being drowned out or just ignored.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danny111)
    You basically just said "no, threads discussing moderation should not be allowed".
    I said that it was my personal opinion that threads discussing specific moderator actions or specific moderators shouldn't be allowed in order to protect our volunteers from abuse. I agree that we should continue to discuss this topic but I feel that comparisons to North Korea (or likewise our explanations of why we're not like North Korea) are not going to get us anywhere.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by kka25)
    Owh, so that explains why threads like these are being created by the TSR users; right.
    Well yes, evidently, because certain users' situations can't be remedied for the reasons I have very clearly outlined above (the paragraph directed at danny111 which you omitted in your reply to me). Therefore these users come away dissatisfied. There's always going to be dissatisfied individuals wherever you look. You cannot create a perfect system even if we strive for one.

    There have been over 9,300 AAM threads and that's not counting the other AAMs to which I have no access to. This thread reflects a very, very small minority and, as for the grievances of those individuals, well, they have been a lot of detailed replies. You need only look above.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kka25)
    So far the mods who've contributed on this thread have: screamed at the member (not even given a warning), being patronizing to the members, throwing terms they hardly know, etc.
    That is your opinion. My personal opinion is that we've, overall, been constructive in explaining our reasons for the current situation and respectful of your views.

    The last resort? Submit your complain to the AAM or admin.
    If you feel that this is necessary you're perfectly welcome to do so.

    The members are giving their opinions but the replies are hardly satisfactory.
    Again, this is a matter of opinion.

    As I said, can we please move on from the mod-bashing and reductio ad absurdum because it's clearly not getting us anywhere.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kka25)
    Owh, so that explains why threads like these are being created by the TSR users; right.
    We aren't lying kka, if this is what you're suggesting.

    Of course there are users who are dissatisfied with the responses they get in AAM, some of these might then air their grievances in the public forum. But it doesn't mean that they were warned unjustly, does it? Or that their appeal wasn't given a fair hearing. Some members can be completely unreasonable and expect that they be allowed to, say, call another user a "piece of ****" and not be warned, despite agreeing to follow these basic rules when they became a member of the site.

    You don't hear from most of the people who are satisfied with moderation, or do have warnings overturned, as these people are perfectly satisfied with the response they get and therefore don't feel the need to take part in discussions such as this, enjoying themselves in other threads which to them are more constructive and helpful. Threads like this tend to get dominated by the same small very small number of users (whether these concerns are legitimate or not).

    Also, people who do get warnings overturned cannot mention this on the public site. Certainly not in any great detail.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Would it be helpful if we were to submit some example replies (names and details removed of course) that demonstrate that we do in fact reverse warnings on a fairly regular basis? I would be happy to submit some of my own, but this obviously depends if admin can give us permission to do so.

    In any case, just to give you an example, here's a fictional reply that I might give to someone who (politely) complains about a minor spam warning in H&R:
    Hi [name],

    Thanks for coming to AAH&RM. I've had a second look at your post and, having taken into account the reasons you stated above for making the post and your mostly clean warning history, I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt and reverse the warning on this occasion.

    Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help or if you need any clarifications about our rules
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kka25)
    Owh, so that explains why threads like these are being created by the TSR users; right.
    With a handful of people complaining from over 1 million members..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hylean)
    Just because you have never been apologised to or had a warning reduced or overturned doesn't mean it hasn't happened. It just means that the mods felt you were in the wrong. And just because you were in the wrong in their opinion doesn't make them dictators or trying to censor you.

    This thread isn't going to go anywhere if people are just going to use it as an excuse to air their grievances and try to one up the mod team. This is why they tend to get shut down, because people just go "well, this happened to me, so I am right and the mods are evil!" It helps no one and just turns into a cesspit with the few mods who do answer being drowned out or just ignored.
    I've seen this happen to many people, and I've seen threads closed down over nothing. I have found to be nothing but unhelpful.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.