Quoting Gerri Cole:

Quote:
Ken and I will also try to stay on top of some of the contribution questions that come up. We definitely value the opinion of the community, so we don't like to make a quick rash judgement without hearing the opinions of the community.

But in a lot of cases a "quick rash judgement" would have saved us from completely derailed discussions.
The same goes for a quicker response time to (necessary) rule enhancements.

The question is: What is the purpose of forum moderation?

From the opinions voiced here and in similar threads, some users seem to expect that the moderators deal out some kind of publicly visible "justice". Deletion of posts should remain visible to mark the bad guy, etc.

Personally, I don't think that's the purpose of moderation at all. Moderation is indented to make this forum an enjoyable experience for the majority of users. To that effect, moderation has to be impartial, not publicly taking sides. Keep in mind that this is not a chat room, it is a web forum. Threads are visited and continued after a particular heated battle is over. While a few users may hang out here the entire day, most users do not. Keeping the "scorch marks" in those threads is of no benefit to them.

That doesn't mean, there shouldn't been consequences for repeatedly offensive behavior, but I agree with Gerri Cole's stance on this - they should take place between Invelos and the offending user. However, I do hope Invelos will act more thoroughly in the future as it currently seems to be the case.

That leaves the other area of moderation - keeping threads on topic. Moderation should accomodate the scope of the thread. Recreational threads or threads with a broader scope require less intervention, off-topic posts are not really an issue here.

However, goal-oriented threads that aim towards finding a solution for a particular problem should be moderated very strictly. Any off-topic or redundant  (same user repeatedly stating nothing more than the same opinion) posts should be deleted to keep the discussion on track. And these deletions should occur without leaving stubs of the deleted posts.

Again, this is not only for the benefit of the initial participants, but for those who want to review or join the discussion at a later time. In fact, for most goal-oriented threads, heated real-time discussions are counterproductive. A prolonged and strictly moderated discussion is of far more value.

Lastly, while an official statement from Invelos to settle certain problems is desirable, we have to realize that this just is not always possible. For once, there is the danger of making a rushed and ill-informed decision. But in some cases there also is no easy answer to a problem, and Invelos will intentionally keep their position ambigous to avoid creating a precedence that can be abused by the hardliners in this forum.

+1 - Great post goodguy

Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
The question is: What is the purpose of forum moderation?

From the opinions voiced here and in similar threads, some users seem to expect that the moderators deal out some kind of publicly visible "justice". Deletion of posts should remain visible to mark the bad guy, etc.

Personally, I don't think that's the purpose of moderation at all. Moderation is indented to make this forum an enjoyable experience for the majority of users. To that effect, moderation has to be impartial, not publicly taking sides. Keep in mind that this is not a chat room, it is a web forum. Threads are visited and continued after a particular heated battle is over. While a few users may hang out here the entire day, most users do not. Keeping the "scorch marks" in those threads is of no benefit to them.

I agree and disagree. I see what you are saying, but if someone is making a personal attack and the post is edited, it should be noted that a personal attack was made. If you (the general you) don't want that scorch mark, then don't make the attack. Plus it shows others why a thread was edited.

Quote:
That doesn't mean, there shouldn't been consequences for repeatedly offensive behavior, but I agree with Gerri Cole's stance on this - they should take place between Invelos and the offending user. However, I do hope Invelos will act more thoroughly in the future as it currently seems to be the case.

I 100% agree here. The offensive behavior punishment should be private (or via PM), but the offending posts should stay. It's not a bad thing for people to see why someone got banned.

Quote:
However, goal-oriented threads that aim towards finding a solution for a particular problem should be moderated very strictly. Any off-topic or redundant  (same user repeatedly stating nothing more than the same opinion) posts should be deleted to keep the discussion on track. And these deletions should occur without leaving stubs of the deleted posts.

Again, this is not only for the benefit of the initial participants, but for those who want to review or join the discussion at a later time. In fact, for most goal-oriented threads, heated real-time discussions are counterproductive. A prolonged and strictly moderated discussion is of far more value.

100% agree.

Quote:
Lastly, while an official statement from Invelos to settle certain problems is desirable, we have to realize that this just is not always possible. For once, there is the danger of making a rushed and ill-informed decision. But in some cases there also is no easy answer to a problem, and Invelos will intentionally keep their position ambigous to avoid creating a precedence that can be abused by the hardliners in this forum.

Again, something I agree and disagree with.

It's imperative that Invelos at least acknowledge that they are aware of a problem. I don't need to know what they plan on doing about it, I don't need to know the plan of implementation (although while it shouldn't be rushed, something should be in the mix. Yet, the users should know at the very least, so the frustration doesn't go any higher than it already is. Sure, Invelos isn't required to do squat, but when you have six threads discussing the same thing, there's obviously some frustrated people. Acknowledging the frustration is helpful.

Green arrow, btw. While I didn't agree with some of your post, it was nicely put.


Quote Gerri Cole

Quote:
We are evaluating the moderation on a daily basis. The moderators will try more often to not delete the entire post, but some will continue to get deleted. If they edit the post, they will try to leave a short reason as to why.

Any action taken on a specific user is between Invelos and that user, and that will remain so.

In addition to Ken's original post, you should also be aware that any posting on actions that moderators take (outside of threads specifically discussing moderation) will be deleted or editted.

The most common things that require moderation - stay on topic in threads and don't personally attack anyone (even if they strike first).

Ken and I will also try to stay on top of some of the contribution questions that come up. We definitely value the opinion of the community, so we don't like to make a quick rash judgement without hearing the opinions of the community.

-Gerri

Thanks Gerri!

Agreed.

I thought we had turned a corner and wholesale deletion of threads, without some kind of note, was behind us.  Can't threads be removed with a note indicating what was done?

Quoting pdf256:

Quote:
See if you can find Skip's latest rant about mixing of father and son in the crew credits. I gave out six green arrows in that thread that don't list on my rep page!

pdf

That is the thread that prompted my post.  I gave out more red than green and, since the thread is gone, maybe other people did as well.  It still would have been nice had there been an explanation...even if it was just, "thread started out bad and went down hill from there, so we deleted the whole thing." 

On another forum I frequent, they have "The Abyss" where deleted posts go to die. Only paid site supporters have access to view these deleted and locked threads, but at least they are not completely gone. They do sometimes remove posts within an ongoing thread, and most times that results in an infraction given to the offending poster. With enough infractions in a short enough period of time, the user is temporarily banned.