Watch for title changes

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: Skacer

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Does it really matter? I know it doesn't, to me. At the end of the day mods are mods. They are there, watching us. Does it really matter if you know who they are or not?

I kind of assumed this would mean accountability to some degree. If I'm having an argument with Frank about cardboard boxes and Bob bans me, it kind of sucks when the reality is that Bob was Frank's alternate moderator account. As opposed to Frank manning up and banning me in the middle of our argument. Which would look clearly odd since he was partaking in the argument.

exactly.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Geekbabe
I wish we could post a list of vacations/bans and which mod issued them,a lot of folks would be apologizing now.

let it be now known,I am not the menopausal angry because I'm too old and too fugly to fsck mod hanging on your every word just waiting to make your emo life complete by banning you.

:Q

LOL!!!

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Skacer

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The original identities are not being used for Moderation.

Why would it matter whether you moderate with your original identity? You can still post with it. Which puts you in the same situation every moderator was in previously w/ the Anandtech Moderator account. Given that, why have any of the moderators made public if some are still hiding behind the same exact situation that existed previously.

Professional reasons why you would need 2 identities on a tech forum.... Your first identity ties you to Tom from Tom's Hardware? Or the guys from H? Or you work for a company that makes a very specific product, one you might feel bias towards, which would make you a poor moderator candidate in that specific forum anyways. You wouldn't want guys from nVidia moderating the Video forum for clearly obvious reasons.

In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.



As for the decision of other Moderators to remain cloaked, that was their choice.

We all chose to create an identity that would be used as a Moderator and to also participate in the forums like other members and Moderators do.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Does it really matter? I know it doesn't, to me. At the end of the day mods are mods. They are there, watching us. Does it really matter if you know who they are or not?

In a way it does. Mods in the past could pass out a vacation to one person and turn around and behave the same way without punishment. This way if Ufwald (since he started this) bans someone for nesting quotes but then turns around and does it, he could get called out for it.

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: JujuFish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The original identities are not being used for Moderation.

But are the original identities being used at all? If so, they're in direct violation of the 1-account-only rule.

it's their forum, they can do whatever they want

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Safeway
I thought the point of revealing the identities of the moderators was to force some accountability. If that is true, why are certain mods still cloaking their identity?

RossMAN? Mosh?

I agree...either the mods should go public or should have resigned. Creating an alternate account IMO is hypocrtical.

Does it really matter? I know it doesn't, to me. At the end of the day mods are mods. They are there, watching us. Does it really matter if you know who they are or not?

it only matters because of the big deal made about revealing their identities To reveal all but a select few is hypocritical IMHO.

Who made a big deal out of it?

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: Geekbabe
I wish we could post a list of vacations/bans and which mod issued them,a lot of folks would be apologizing now.

let it be now known,I am not the menopausal angry because I'm too old and too fugly to fsck mod hanging on your every word just waiting to make your emo life complete by banning you.

no, but you're the stick,commas,between,words,without,putting,spaces,after,them mod, which gives away a lot of your taglines.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.

Then I think it would be in your best interest to step down from being a mod.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
One thing I have to say about the mod list...

GIRL POWER!!! RAAAWWWRRRR!!!

No kidding. Look what will happen to the next guy who makes a sexist joke.:shocked:

Now that's what you call buns of steel!
Anandtech Moderator
hzl

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919

Originally posted by: JujuFish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The original identities are not being used for Moderation.

But are the original identities being used at all? If so, they're in direct violation of the 1-account-only rule.

it's their forum, they can do whatever they want

ahh so the mods can do whatever they want? nice to know.


i see nothing is going to change with this heh.

 

[sixone]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: Kev
First of all I don't care either way if I know who the mods are. However if the purpose of making the mods names known was to fix the rift or mistrust between members and mods, as it says in the forum issues post, then creating new mod accounts to hide behind completely defeats this purpose.

There is no join between the past and the future unless a specific mod wishes to reveal it. In future state, everyone will know that Common Courtesy gave a vacation to a member. There is absolutely no reason that Common Courtesy needs to state that Common Courtesy banned so and so on a certain date for a certain infraction if it was in the past before we rolled out the new guidelines. That would serve no useful purpose.

OTOH, Common Courtesy isn't fully and openly accountable for his/her actions, in the same way that the other mods are. We all know that some mods have personal beefs with some members, and that, under the new rules, any appearance of a conflict of interest will be readily apparent. Not true for those mods who are using a separate account for moderation.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.

Then I think it would be in your best interest to step down from being a mod.

agreed.

seems like it could cause conflict. but ohwell.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
One thing I have to say about the mod list...

GIRL POWER!!! RAAAWWWRRRR!!!

No kidding. Look what will happen to the next guy who makes a sexist joke.:shocked:

some here would pay for that!

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Skacer

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The original identities are not being used for Moderation.

Why would it matter whether you moderate with your original identity? You can still post with it. Which puts you in the same situation every moderator was in previously w/ the Anandtech Moderator account. Given that, why have any of the moderators made public if some are still hiding behind the same exact situation that existed previously.

Professional reasons why you would need 2 identities on a tech forum.... Your first identity ties you to Tom from Tom's Hardware? Or the guys from H? Or you work for a company that makes a very specific product, one you might feel bias towards, which would make you a poor moderator candidate in that specific forum anyways. You wouldn't want guys from nVidia moderating the Video forum for clearly obvious reasons.

In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.



As for the decision of other Moderators to remain cloaked, that was their choice.

We all chose to create an identity that would be used as a Moderator and to also participate in the forums like other members and Moderators do.

if you have something to hide you shouldn't be a moderator. if this is being allowed there is still going to be mistrust, and this whole outing was pointless.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

The secret mod stuff gave us an actively hallucinating dennilfloss as a mod.

Sorry, dennil, but it's true.

Hey! I believe I was a good mod, maybe the Fun Mod a bit too often but a little humour generally helped diffuse situations.

 

[Skacer]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.

If your business relies on AT at all, then you probably shouldn't be moderating (conflict of interests). If your business growth from AT is due to a link in your sig, then I hardly think that matters. AT members not respecting your business, don't see how that comes into play. As long as them being banned from your store (online or otherwise) doesn't affect your judgment of their actions here. And if you choose to moderate then that should be weighed against you not hidden from the populace.

Although, if your business is an online store whose website is not equipped to handle someone angry about their banning on AT, then I can understand that being a problem and a reason why you might choose not to moderate as opposed to getting a second identity.

In other words, your reasons make sense, but I still do not agree with your solution.

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Safeway
I thought the point of revealing the identities of the moderators was to force some accountability. If that is true, why are certain mods still cloaking their identity?

RossMAN? Mosh?

I agree...either the mods should go public or should have resigned. Creating an alternate account IMO is hypocrtical.

Does it really matter? I know it doesn't, to me. At the end of the day mods are mods. They are there, watching us. Does it really matter if you know who they are or not?

it only matters because of the big deal made about revealing their identities To reveal all but a select few is hypocritical IMHO.

Who made a big deal out of it?

posting it as news and trying to build trust among members who have lost it made a big deal out of it. this whole thing was done to restore the trust that was lost by rogue moderators running around out of control. it's been well documented that the moderator account was abused to enforce personal opinion in forums like P&N, and that caused a large falling out between the forums and members who have been here longer than some of the mods.

at least now people will get to see perknose banning people to enforce his political agenda in P&N.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: Kev
First of all I don't care either way if I know who the mods are. However if the purpose of making the mods names known was to fix the rift or mistrust between members and mods, as it says in the forum issues post, then creating new mod accounts to hide behind completely defeats this purpose.

There is no join between the past and the future unless a specific mod wishes to reveal it. In future state, everyone will know that Common Courtesy gave a vacation to a member. There is absolutely no reason that Common Courtesy needs to state that Common Courtesy banned so and so on a certain date for a certain infraction if it was in the past before we rolled out the new guidelines. That would serve no useful purpose.

OTOH, Common Courtesy isn't fully and openly accountable for his/her actions, in the same way that the other mods are. We all know that some mods have personal beefs with some members, and that, under the new rules, any appearance of a conflict of interest will be readily apparent. Not true for those mods who are using a separate account for moderation.

In the past, the Moderators knew who did what and why.
They apparently policed themselves with reasonable success.

Now the members will know who did what and why from this point on.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: Safeway

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Geekbabe
I don't even believe you're really female.

Um, I surfed some of Mosh's photos once upon a time before she made them private, she's actually a very attractive young woman.

If she's a he, then he's pulled off the deception pretty well for 6 years???

She's 100% legitimate female, I've seen :camera:s.

I have seen pics of HER too. And she is 100% female!

 

[iRONic]

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
In my case, I have a business that is growing - some of the growth comes from AT.

I have also had trouble from AT members w/ respect to the business.

I do not want the issue of being a Moderator to come into play for those business decisions as a for/against with respect to the members.

Then I think it would be in your best interest to step down from being a mod.

Agreed.

 

[sixone]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
In the past, the Moderators knew who did what and why.
They apparently policed themselves with reasonable success.

Now the members will know who did what and why from this point on.

If they were "reasonably successful", then why does the trust need to be "rebuilt", as stated in the new guidelines?

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
In the past, the Moderators knew who did what and why.
They apparently policed themselves with reasonable success.

Now the members will know who did what and why from this point on.

If they were "reasonably successful", then why does the trust need to be "rebuilt", as stated in the new guidelines?

it really does not matter. this sham is not going to rebuild trust. i feel it will do more to hurt it.

you have mods that came out to face the music (great! much respect to those even if i have had problems with some heheh). others hide behind a new name.

some seem to have business that use ATOT (bad idea) etc.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

The secret mod stuff gave us an actively hallucinating dennilfloss as a mod.

Sorry, dennil, but it's true.

Hey! I believe I was a good mod, maybe the Fun Mod a bit too often but a little humour generally helped diffuse situations.

Let's not forget those alien abduction posts and the icy road story

Seriously though dennil, I think you're a great guy and enjoy your posts on multiple forums

Although that nude pic of Eunice Kennedy Shriver was over the top...

But back on topic, I applaud the business acumen of the secret mod, but come on, let's make this a real effort folks... In my working life, this kind of behavior simply isn't allowed (the conflict of interest).

Moderator Guidelines

From our pool of regular members, we will invite a number to participate on the forums as moderators. These will be upstanding members of the community willing to help us make the forums the most hospitable environment for everyone. Moderators will help assist AnandTech in enforcing our member and posting guidelines, and are expected to use their abilities to manage threads and users with rationality and responsibility.

It is important to remember that moderator discretion is necessary. We cannot rigidly define all moderator actions with a set of rules that could just as easily run as a script. Every situation is different and every member deserves the fairest treatment under the circumstances. As it stands, we need a human touch to treat each situation as fairly as possible.

While flexibility and discretion are important in moderation, we must also have guidelines in place that help promote moderator consistency, fairness, and appropriate treatment of forum members. In addition to helping support and enforce moderator actions, these guidelines will serve to let our members know what they can expect from their moderators.

Moderators have a title listing the forums they moderate. They are able to moderate in other forums, but are encouraged to do so only in extreme and obvious cases of a violation or when a thread needs to be moved. Moderators are expected to remain in good standing with the community and uphold all of our member and posting guidelines.

Senior Moderators, who will also be noted by title, have jurisdiction over all forums. In addition to normal moderation, Senior Moderators are responsible for making decisions concerning permanent bans, advising moderators on actions, reviewing member complaints about moderator activity, and generally making sure moderation at AnandTech is run fairly and efficiently.

All moderators will take various actions to enforce our Member and Posting Guidelines. The type of action moderators take will depend on the type and severity of the violation and moderator discretion will apply. The types, indications and procedures of the actions moderators can take are as follows:

 

[olds]

You all are acting like the Mod accounts are the only thing that has changed here.
Does anyone remember when Evadman was fired form his job because of what he posted here and someone sent a link to his employer?
The Mods take on an increased responsibility that the regular members don't have. The Mods are open to attack because of their actions here. If they feel they need another layer between the forums and their personal lives because of that increased responsibility, we as a group have decided that is fine. That is our job and we take it seriously.
If there are complaints against Mod, they will be handled by us as a group. We fully expect to be attacked and harassed by the members here. Personally, I voted to stay clocked but HQ wanted the identities revealed. We are not going to throw away a good Mod because they needed the separation for whatever reason they saw fit.
This hasn't even had a chance to set in, it will be fine. If not, we will deal with it.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: waggy


some seem to have business that use ATOT (bad idea) etc.

Why?