am i supposed to be able to see mod forums?

[Tweak155]

Sorry wat? Do you read the main site at all. That's basically 99.5% of the site to Anand and rightfully so. Anand's too busy writing articles and reviewing hardware, not to mention going to shows and coordinating the rest of the site, to even notice much here. It has nothing to do with turning a blind eye or wilfully ignoring ATOT, it's just not on his radar to begin with and why should it be?

Makes sense to me. Why not add sections to keep people coming back to tack on the advertisement revenue? It is exactly what a business like this should be doing. You can't monitor all aspects of a business as one person, this is why you delegate managers (aka Mods) as best you can.

 

[eits]

Possibly because they have used up their allotment of short vacations.

We try to use the vacations as a reward for bad behavior; increasing the length when the members do not seem to realize the seriousness of what they continue to do over and over again.

By increasing the harshness, it is a last desperate attempt by the Moderators to get them to be a productive member; only a few times does this actually work - most times they continually deliberating screwing up again to see if the Moderators will react.

GA, TFP are two that come to mind. Guyver has recently come back from a lengthy vacation; we will see if he changes his actions.

how many vacations has mosh been given? it's hard to imagine that she used up all her short vacations. do you believe that a really long vacation would make her change her actions any more than a short vacation? how about a stern warning?

do you have evidence to support that those avenues fail with mosh and that the only possible way she would change the actions she's accused of is to give her a really long vacation?

yeah, i can understand giving a really long vacation to repeat offenders who get short vacations... i just don't understand how that applies to mosh, though.

 

[Locut0s]

I'd like Perknose himself to state that he doesn't keep track of people who have emotionally wronged him over the years.

I believe that the mods, in their position, don't actively keep records on members (aside from the infraction system, which we're all aware of by now), especially not as a collective. But to think that no one on the staff does is laughable.

What boggles me is that anyone should care one way or the other. And remember who this is coming from. I'm the 29 year old live at home with my parents guy. If they do or don't have a record of me or the rest of the people on here doesn't bother me one way or the other. It's an internet forum and while I DO spend a shit load more time on here than I probably should I know it's not real life, which I'm not really partaking in much, and nothing that happens on here should mater really.

 

[shiner]

Not that it has anything to do with this thread, but the whole Omnipotent Overlord thing comes off a little Kim Jong-ilish.

I'm sure it is intended tongue in cheek, but honestly Forum Director should be enough.

On second thought maybe I should go to HR tomorrow and see if I can get them to append Omnipotent Geek Overlord to my management title.

 

[mrSHEiK124]

 

[Kirby]

Why should he have to?

Because he's the one that has the "dossier".

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Because he's the one that has the "dossier".

And why, again, does it matter if he does? There are probably a few members here who have reason to believe as such, but it's second-hand conspiracy stuff for 99.99% of the forum populace as to whether or not the said dossier has been used in making moderator decisions (which EagleKeeper has already stated is not so due to the process of banning here).

 

[lxskllr]

Why should he have to?

Moderators are under no obligation to respond to member questioning, but I stand by what I said earlier. Personal feeling have no place in policing actions. Any issues should be dealt with by the AT team, outside of the public eye. If anyone abuses power, it needs to be handled.

I don't know if there's an abuse of power issue here or not, but It's worth keeping track of by the AT administration.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Can I at least get a vistor pass? I promise not to steal any silverware or look in the medicine cabinet while I'm in the bathroom. ()

I trust the word of those former mods/directors. Known them for a long time and they have always been straight shooters with me.

I'm sure there isn't anything in that area. It does sound like someone is keeping a personal "shitlist", for lack of a better term, outside of the forums and using it to help shape their admin decisions.

If that is the case then I believe it is the real problem here.

Perhaps it isn't true, but as I said I place a high value on the word of those former admins and trust them without question.

As stated, a Moderator and/or any member can keep a list of grievances. They are not used in decisions that the Moderators are involved in.

And why would former Moderators choose to reveal some confidential information that does not accomplish anything? That should indicate some of the morals that they have.

I can count maybe a total of 5-6 Moderators that have acted as turncoats in one way or another (vendetta). Yet there have been close to 40 Moderators that are no longer, that have never opened their mouth to weaken the forum usage.s ome are active, some have retired and some just left

 

[EagleKeeper]

Moderators are under no obligation to respond to member questioning, but I stand by what I said earlier. Personal feeling have no place in policing actions. Any issues should be dealt with by the AT team, outside of the public eye. If anyone abuses power, it needs to be handled.

I don't know if there's an abuse of power issue here or not, but It's worth keeping track of by the AT administration.

Decisions are recorded for review by Anand or any Moderator that has authorized access.

Up to this point; Anand has not communicated displeasure with the direction that the forums are heading. Even though some Moderators may not like that direction all the time; we suck it up and use the playbook. When not, some have left.

 

[MotF Bane]

Up to this point; Anand has not communicated displeasure with the direction that the forums are heading. Even though some Moderators may not like that direction; we suck it up and use the playbook

Yeah, Anand doesn't care as long as his ad revenue keeps flowing. I think the last time I saw him post was the first week of the VB switch.

 

[darkxshade]

Personal feeling have no place in policing actions

C'mon, that's asking a lot, we can't even control that in our judicial system. You got prosecutors convicting innocents to further their careers, judges handing down unfair sentences due to personal bias, police arresting people on a whim and you think mods are capable of anything but imperfection? Lets be real, feelings is very much part of the decision making regardless of how much stock one has in it.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Moderators are under no obligation to respond to member questioning, but I stand by what I said earlier. Personal feeling have no place in policing actions. Any issues should be dealt with by the AT team, outside of the public eye. If anyone abuses power, it needs to be handled.

I don't know if there's an abuse of power issue here or not, but It's worth keeping track of by the AT administration.

Personal feelings are inevitable to be involved. Just remember during the anonymous era when people would complain about a certain moderating husband and wife, resulting in the "conflict of interests" clause now present in the rules. The decision making process has already been covered...

A Moderator may keep notes; just like a user can keep notes on a Moderator that they feel is out to get them.

Any evidence that a Moderator needs to justify actions IS OBTAINED via searches of posts.

IF a decision is to be made, it is based on the posts that any person can dredge up, not just a Moderator.

A Moderator may provide posts that they feel are required to justify a request for action to the rest of the Moderators.

Multiple times; requests have been denied because of the posts content is not considered to be worth the consequence and/or the required information is dated and the member seems to have shaped up and become a productive AT citizen.

You are confusing us with another forum. As I said, no dossiers.

There are notes on people but every member has the notes box. Some people who have had no infractions have zero notes. The ones who have had infractions have info based on that infraction. The more infractions, the more notes. More infractions turn to vacations.
We have to document all that we do when giving out infraction/vacations.

This way no mod can get away with just banning or vacationing people. It's all documented

How do you think we know how long to give a recidivist member a vacation without knowing the history of his notes

Just ask any former mod. He she will confirm everything I have just written

Now if that is what you call dossiers..............

...and so that argument can go no further except to either call them liars or to say that this certain administrator uses his super special vendetta powers to sneak by it, in which case evidence is needed (and not possible to get unless pictures of the moderation forum were particularly damning).

 

[MotF Bane]

C'mon, that's asking a lot, we can't even control that in our judicial system. You got prosecutors convicting innocents to further their careers, judges handing down unfair sentences due to personal bias, police arresting people on a whim and you think mods are capable of anything but imperfection? Lets be real, feelings is very much part of the decision making regardless of how much stock one has in it.

But the goal is to aspire to not let personal feelings get involved.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

But the goal is to aspire to not let personal feelings get involved.

A personal dossier does nothing to increase the chance of those feelings negatively influencing moderation, unless maybe it is composed of dramatic, emo poetry against those that have wronged him, a black spirit-sucking tome of evil, perpetually fueling the inner rage of said alleged vendetta-holder.

 

[darkxshade]

But the goal is to aspire to not let personal feelings get involved.

And a respectable goal it is, but this is not the presidency, nor is it congress and even they can't even get along, what hope do we have for a lowly moderator selected by a closed process and not voted in by any of us?

 

[Kirby]

A personal dossier does nothing to increase the chance of those feelings negatively influencing moderation, unless maybe it is composed of dramatic, emo poetry against those that have wronged him, a black spirit-sucking tome of evil, perpetually fueling the inner rage of said alleged vendetta-holder.

bahahaha!!!

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

But the goal is to aspire to not let personal feelings get involved.

Naw, I'd rather deal with an intelligent person with a well known bias than a bureaucrat applying an "impartial" policy.

 

[esquared]

Personal feelings are inevitable to be involved. Just remember during the anonymous era when people would complain about a certain moderating husband and wife, resulting in the "conflict of interests" clause now present in the rules. The decision making process has already been covered...




...and so that argument can go no further except to either call them liars or to say that this certain administrator uses his super special vendetta powers to sneak by it, in which case evidence is needed (and not possible to get unless pictures of the moderation forum were particularly damning).

I am not sure i understand your comment.

Sneak by what, are you referring to?

 

[brianmanahan]

i think hes implying alt accounts?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

i think hes implying alt accounts?

How do you have an alt mod account that everyone doesn't know?

 

[lxskllr]

C'mon, that's asking a lot, we can't even control that in our judicial system. You got prosecutors convicting innocents to further their careers, judges handing down unfair sentences due to personal bias, police arresting people on a whim and you think mods are capable of anything but imperfection?

That's exactly right, and why I was on my freedom rant earlier in the thread. A small community is easy to police from the top down. I can't do a damned thing about corruption in most of the world, but I can do my best to give people more freedom in the forum I police than they'd have in the outside world.

Corruption should never be tolerated, and people shouldn't say "Well, that's just the way it is..." If it's normal to accept it in the small parts of our lives, we won't notice when it really matters. When the government shuts down communication because it's advantageous for them to do so. When we can't record public officials doing their jobs in a public arena, when the government seizes property without due process...

People generally do a good job of policing themselves. Sometimes they need some nudging to go in the right direction, sometimes a bitch slap, and sometimes they're just incompatible with the community, and have to be removed, but it should never be a personal matter. As soon as "feelings" get involved, fairness goes down the toilet.

 

[zinfamous]

How do you have an alt mod account that everyone doesn't know?

Isn't "Common Courtesy" supposed to be some kind of alt mod...or rather, anonymous and linked to all mods, in general?

or something like that.

 

[Alone]

Isn't "Common Courtesy" supposed to be some kind of alt mod...or rather, anonymous and linked to all mods, in general?

or something like that.

Not anymore.

 

[shiner]

As stated, a Moderator and/or any member can keep a list of grievances. They are not used in decisions that the Moderators are involved in.

And why would former Moderators choose to reveal some confidential information that does not accomplish anything? That should indicate some of the morals that they have.

I can count maybe a total of 5-6 Moderators that have acted as turncoats in one way or another (vendetta). Yet there have been close to 40 Moderators that are no longer, that have never opened their mouth to weaken the forum usage.s ome are active, some have retired and some just left

I don't believe that to be true. I'm sure it is for you and the other mods with ethics, however there are those here who I don't believe to be so ethical.

In fact there is a screenshot from the mod forum floating around where someone in power was attempting to sanction another person in power and brought up things that would not be kept track of in the course of normal moderation. During his attempt to make a case against this other mod it is even mentioned he has screenshots to "prove" his case. That is not part of the notes system as described here. Therefore it comes from outside the forums in a personal dossier, or whatever you want to call it, and was brought into the discussion to make the case for sanctions. Furthermore those items that were brought up have nothing to do with forum posts and were accusations of wrongdoing outside of the normal forum rules.

That is an abuse of power.