P&N has done nothing for Anandtech

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Basically you do have the ability to warn. You can PM a mod. Both of those would be events that would trigger a mod response.

Yes, but PM'ing a mod puts it into a black hole. Nobody knows what goes in or comes out. Nobody knows if it is applied fairly or not, since there are no (minimal) rules.


Before any of you get your hopes up let me inform you that the Moderators are not the ones who write up the rules. All we can do is present these suggestions to our superiors.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Basically you do have the ability to warn. You can PM a mod. Both of those would be events that would trigger a mod response.

Yes, but PM'ing a mod puts it into a black hole. Nobody knows what goes in or comes out. Nobody knows if it is applied fairly or not, since there are no (minimal) rules.

How does the bi-partisan commission help with the black box problem? The mods still have the final say. I don't think you can have a governing body unless there are some fundamental rules laid down (like my suggested ad hominem rule) by AT officials. I don't think that will ever happen though...

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Basically you do have the ability to warn. You can PM a mod. Both of those would be events that would trigger a mod response.

Yes, but PM'ing a mod puts it into a black hole. Nobody knows what goes in or comes out. Nobody knows if it is applied fairly or not, since there are no (minimal) rules.

How does the bi-partisan commission help with the black box problem? The mods still have the final say. I don't think you can have a governing body unless there are some fundamental rules laid down (like my suggested ad hominem rule) by AT officials. I don't think that will ever happen though...

Not if the committee doesn't have a tie. You're assuming they'd all end in ties - I think 4 reasonble members of both sides of the spectrum could very fairly apply the rules.

but yes, you need some fundamental rules laid down for the committee, and the mods, to follow.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard, the "esteemed" new semi-Mod

I like it. Do I get a badge or something?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Do we really need MORE moderation? I think if you have to choose between too little and too much moderation I'd go with too little.

P&N is ten times better than chaotic hell holes like yahoo news or usenet.

Oh and I think I could moderate fairly if there were more written guidelines. Laugh if you must...

Another with an agenda

But yah, guidelines would definitely help. Writing those guidelines would be a pisser...

I would ask some of you to draw up the guidelines but then I would feel extremely guilty if they weren't used as I would hate to waste anybodies valuable time.

I do believe they were discussed in one of our previous thread about this. Maybe not though, I can't seem to find the thread I was looking for. However If I can find my old PMs I suggested a few things to the MODs along the way but it has been decided(I guess) that unwritten rules were the way to go.
IMO with well written and posted rules, the consistency of dealing with such issues would be greatly increased. Sure, there will always be questionable things but I think the overall level of discussion would not only improve but so would the level of respect.

Again, just my opinion.
<- still looking for the previous "guideline" discussions.

CsG

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard, the "esteemed" new semi-Mod

I like it. Do I get a badge or something?

Of course you do!! The brown color represents nature. The five points of darker brown represent the 5 elements, earth, air, fire, water and wind:

 

[Gaard]

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard, the "esteemed" new semi-Mod

I like it. Do I get a badge or something?

Of course you do!! The brown color represents nature. The five points of darker brown represent the 5 elements, earth, air, fire, water and wind:

The only thing I've seen to make this thread worth posting in....buwhahahahah! :laugh:

ROTFLMAO! :laugh:

 

[Infohawk]

Is there any evidence that the mods would even accept our guidelines if we could agree on it?

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Basically you do have the ability to warn. You can PM a mod. Both of those would be events that would trigger a mod response.

Yes, but PM'ing a mod puts it into a black hole. Nobody knows what goes in or comes out. Nobody knows if it is applied fairly or not, since there are no (minimal) rules.


Before any of you get your hopes up let me inform you that the Moderators are not the ones who write up the rules. All we can do is present these suggestions to our superiors.

Regardless of who writes the rules, I think having something concrete is the crux of the solution. All of the cries of "unfair!" seem to revolve around an ambiguous set of rules that are not perceived to be enforced fairly.

I'd like to propose (1.) That a brief set of rules along with the associated punishment for breaking those rules be posted in a "sticky" thread @ the top of P&amp;N, and (2.) That a mod recruitment thread could be posted and stickied along with it wherein prospective mods could be either nominated by others or perhaps any volunteers could write up a brief paragraph or two as to why they would be a 'fair &amp; balanced' mod if selected.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Is there any evidence that the mods would even accept our guidelines if we could agree on it?

I could be wrong but I doubt that the mods would allow the P&amp;N folks to construct their own constitution! :Q

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I have a humble suggestion: Since the mods that end up policing P&amp;N only do it because they lost a bet with the other mods and owe them all $50 and hate every second of it, why don't they recruit some sensible volunteers from the current P&amp;N crowd? I'm sure there are people around here who feel like they could do a 'fair and balanced' job.

Names some names because we have actually thought of that and those whom we came up with wouldn't want anything to do with this forum.

I nominate...

Shinerburke!

I nominate Dave

But seriously though...i find Kibbos posts quite unbiased...dunno if he frequents enough though.

I've seen CAD's sig about Un-Ban "Ultraquiet" and recently added "Burke".

I don't know anything about either other than I saw a locked thread in OT last night briefly and it dissapeared while I was checking it out.

Has anyone ever see me personally att-ack anyone??? There has been a countless number of those that attempt to "personally" att-ack me. As my ex-wife would say, just slides off like Teflon.

I've said many times, it's brutal what some folks do to the board, each other and put the Mod-s through.

That aside despite the garbage posted by Burke offsite, it's free speech. If we are to truly uphold the principles of the Founding Fathers we have to be able to endure "words".

There used to be a saying "Sticks and Stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me".

This recent permanent "Ban-ning" has obviously flared a lot of tempers.

From day one of P&amp;N I offered to help keep "Order". I don't think anyone would ever be "perma-banned". Sometimes when some (usually repeat offenders) get carried away on personally going after an individual.

These flagrant misgivings obviously deserve "editing" and "va-cations". Perma for P&amp;N infractions??? Nah

Anyway the Anonymous Mod-s do a great job. I hate to see the controversy currently happening with this "Burke" incident. Sound like folks are asking for a at least a trial period of deviating from the Anonymous Mod format for P&amp;N to like other Forums where the Mod-s are Forum members intrusted to the Forum itself.

Obviously it's up to the Mod-s and A-nand and support whatever they decide.

I would certainly be willing to help or augment the burden the Mod-s have been having to deal with.

Good luck everyone.

Dave

Edit: This is odd, when I try to post, it say I have (censored) words in my post, I have no clus as to what words that may be. I'll keep trying to figure out what words that may be.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
'fair &amp; balanced' mod if selected.

Please don't say that Faux News slogan, eewwwwww

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Is there any evidence that the mods would even accept our guidelines if we could agree on it?

No.

CsG

 

[alchemize]

edit

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Is there any evidence that the mods would even accept our guidelines if we could agree on it?

No.

CsG

I guess this makes this another pipe-dream P&amp;N reform thread.

For all its problems P&amp;N has a nice balance going. Sure there are more libs but you get a lot of conservative posts too--- enough to make things interesting. From the other forums I've seen they are either more chaotic and unregulated or they are plain old boring because nobody can say anything or everyone is of the same opinion. Most of the injustice done by the mods is fairly small and the ones who get screwed are people that can't control themselves anyway.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I have a humble suggestion: Since the mods that end up policing P&amp;N only do it because they lost a bet with the other mods and owe them all $50 and hate every second of it, why don't they recruit some sensible volunteers from the current P&amp;N crowd? I'm sure there are people around here who feel like they could do a 'fair and balanced' job.

Names some names because we have actually thought of that and those whom we came up with wouldn't want anything to do with this forum.

I can see how it would be tough to find the right people in P&amp;N. The ideal criteria are somewhat self-contradictory. First, they need to take the responsibility seriously, to be committed to being as fair and impartial as possible. They must also be interested enough in politics to wade into this maelstrom for hours every day, yet not so passionate they are compelled to inject their personal beliefs. Indeed, they would have to bend over backwards to ensure their own political biases don't color their official actions. They will not appear impartial if they are regularly taking sides. Pragmatically, they would have to sacrifice most participation in P&amp;N.

Once you find people who appear to meet these criteria, one must then ensure their motivations are "pure". An obvious problem would be unrepentant partisans who want the job only to further their agenda. A less obvious problem would be control freaks who thrive on abusing power. They might not have a partisan bias, but fair, yet heavy-handed moderation can be as bad as no moderation at all. P&amp;N won't work if rules are too rigidly enforced.

Anyway, that's one of the reasons I don't try to tell the mods what to do. I figure their job is difficult enough without a bunch of back seat mod-wannabes second-guessing their every move. I'm sure the job has a few perks, but overall, I suspect it's a real pain in the butt, especially in P&amp;N.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I have a humble suggestion: Since the mods that end up policing P&amp;N only do it because they lost a bet with the other mods and owe them all $50 and hate every second of it, why don't they recruit some sensible volunteers from the current P&amp;N crowd? I'm sure there are people around here who feel like they could do a 'fair and balanced' job.

Names some names because we have actually thought of that and those whom we came up with wouldn't want anything to do with this forum.

I can see how it would be tough to find the right people in P&amp;N. The ideal criteria are somewhat self-contradictory. First, they need to take the responsibility seriously, to be committed to being as fair and impartial as possible. They must also be interested enough in politics to wade into this maelstrom for hours every day, yet not so passionate they are compelled to inject their personal beliefs. Indeed, they would have to bend over backwards to ensure their own political biases don't color their official actions. They will not appear impartial if they are regularly taking sides. Pragmatically, they would have to sacrifice most participation in P&amp;N.

Once you find people who appear to meet these criteria, one must then ensure their motivations are "pure". An obvious problem would be unrepentant partisans who want the job only to further their agenda. A less obvious problem would be control freaks who thrive on abusing power. They might not have a partisan bias, but fair, yet heavy-handed moderation can be as bad as no moderation at all. P&amp;N won't work if rules are too rigidly enforced.

Anyway, that's one of the reasons I don't try to tell the mods what to do. I figure their job is difficult enough without a bunch of back seat mod-wannabes second-guessing their every move. I'm sure the job has a few perks, but overall, I suspect it's a real pain in the butt, especially in P&amp;N.

that's exactly what I'm thinking :thumbsup:

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Is there any evidence that the mods would even accept our guidelines if we could agree on it?

No.

CsG

I guess this makes this another pipe-dream P&amp;N reform thread.

For all its problems P&amp;N has a nice balance going. Sure there are more libs but you get a lot of conservative posts too--- enough to make things interesting. From the other forums I've seen they are either more chaotic and unregulated or they are plain old boring because nobody can say anything or everyone is of the same opinion. Most of the injustice done by the mods is fairly small and the ones who get screwed are people that can't control themselves anyway.

Well, I'm sure we could debate the aspect of who can/can't control themselves without end but it doesn't really get at the heart of the matter. The reason things got and have stayed "out of control" is because there don't seem to be any ground rules that are consistently enforced. Now yes, the consistency of enforcement becomes tough when there are no public guidelines for all to follow so this is not totally a jab at those who remain nameless If I were a MOD(and I'm not -obviously) there would be a visible line for all to see(guidelines) and those who cross it know they have and would be dealt with in the manner laid forth by the guidelines. That way, if there ever was a question as to why an action was taken - it'd be right there in plain sight for all to see. ...but that's just me.

CsG

 

[dmcowen674]

What would really be cool is a P&amp;N Election.

However not just one at the top like a "President" but Co-Forum Anti-Personal attack Mod-s with an assistant for each that can only E-mail the respective guys (To orevent too many Chefs spoiling the soup)

Speaking of E-mail, the voting would have to be by E-mail and not one of the Forum Polls.

 

[raildogg]

the problem I see is that majority of the people who post here are pacifist libbies here who always criticize Bush no matter what he does. the other thing is that we have only a few right wingers, but they are very vocal. thats the main problem here

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

I agree it would be preferable to have ground rules-- heck I suggested one. But given this is not going to happen I'm still happy with P&amp;N. And it may be hard to know where the line is but you CAN stay safe by going nowhere near it. Most posters seem to skirt near the line and sometimes over it but I place final responsibility on those who get banned on their inability to stay a mile away from the line when they've ben warned.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I have a humble suggestion: Since the mods that end up policing P&amp;N only do it because they lost a bet with the other mods and owe them all $50 and hate every second of it, why don't they recruit some sensible volunteers from the current P&amp;N crowd? I'm sure there are people around here who feel like they could do a 'fair and balanced' job.

Names some names because we have actually thought of that and those whom we came up with wouldn't want anything to do with this forum.

I can see how it would be tough to find the right people in P&amp;N. The ideal criteria are somewhat self-contradictory. First, they need to take the responsibility seriously, to be committed to being as fair and impartial as possible. They must also be interested enough in politics to wade into this maelstrom for hours every day, yet not so passionate they are compelled to inject their personal beliefs. Indeed, they would have to bend over backwards to ensure their own political biases don't color their official actions. They will not appear impartial if they are regularly taking sides. Pragmatically, they would have to sacrifice most participation in P&amp;N.

Once you find people who appear to meet these criteria, one must then ensure their motivations are "pure". An obvious problem would be unrepentant partisans who want the job only to further their agenda. A less obvious problem would be control freaks who thrive on abusing power. They might not have a partisan bias, but fair, yet heavy-handed moderation can be as bad as no moderation at all. P&amp;N won't work if rules are too rigidly enforced.

Anyway, that's one of the reasons I don't try to tell the mods what to do. I figure their job is difficult enough without a bunch of back seat mod-wannabes second-guessing their every move. I'm sure the job has a few perks, but overall, I suspect it's a real pain in the butt, especially in P&amp;N.

The first paragraph would be mostly solved by having public guidelines and enforcement. Sure, there will always be certain issues that will be questionable - but you will never have thing 100%.

Second, I disagree a bit. Enforcing the guidelines is a must as inconsistency just leads to calls of bias and the like. Sure, you may have some that watch certain people like hawks - but would that be a change from today? Again, I think those entrusted to do such a job would hold themselves accountable or else they themselves will be shown the door. On that note - having a way to identify these "mini-mods" would be the best. mod1, mod2 etc so you could see a pattern if one presented itself. That's half the problem we have today IMO, but I understand their desire to stay hidden.

Third, That's fine, and I don't think it is anything but a pain in the butt to do that job, but I think they could make it easier on themselves if certain things were changed in how things operated. Ideally the existing mods should be able to take care of things and not need mini-mods. So I guess what I'm saying, is that I really don't think there should be a need for the mini-mods but would support the idea if the real mods wanted them(not that I'd have a choice ) I just think that well defined and written guidelines would be the best way to address most of the issues we seem to have today. It would keep everyone in check. If a violation occurs - everyone knows it will be handled in the same way it would be for anyone else.

CsG

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: raildogg
the problem I see is that there are too many pacifist libbies here who always criticize Bush no matter what he does. the other thing is that we have only a few right wingers, but they are very vocal. thats the main problem here

:roll:

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I have a humble suggestion: Since the mods that end up policing P&amp;N only do it because they lost a bet with the other mods and owe them all $50 and hate every second of it, why don't they recruit some sensible volunteers from the current P&amp;N crowd? I'm sure there are people around here who feel like they could do a 'fair and balanced' job.

Names some names because we have actually thought of that and those whom we came up with wouldn't want anything to do with this forum.

I'm very rational and hold no grudges. I'm also a non US citizien (Although that might be to liberal )