17 Aug 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitPhlabibit,
Should any mod be able to put it back?
??
P-
[b]Edit! Incase you did not know, this can be done.[/b]
As I did not know this, it raises the following questions: What are the political and/or social ramifications of overturning a colleague's hiding of a post? How often does it happen? Does one moderator either overturn or have hidden posts overturned more often than another?
Nemesio
P.S. I seem to recall playing the game your avatar signifies, but I can't remember what it's called!!!
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by nemesioif you look at russ' forum (again) thread,
Are you in favor of this idea, at least in concept if not precisely how described it? Or are you comfortable with the way that it is now, where a single moderator attends to threads and the only appeal process is to Russ (who expressed dismay at how many he has to deal with). I am just trying to devise an appellate tier in between the District (Mods) and Supreme (Russ) Courts.
if you look at his comment in Toe's thread,
if you look at his appeal to the community a couple of weeks ago,
you will clearly see that the problem is not that the mods are overstepping their bounds.
the problem is that there are a few bullies who treat this place like an outhouse.
as russ said quite clearly, the complaints come from these same few people.
the moderation system isn't where the problem lies.
nor is there a real fear that our precious rights will be taken away.
the real problem is that we need to provide a civilized place for the participants on this site.
the mods have been given the power to do just that.
russ will have very little trouble, if we spend more energy supporting our mods efforts to create a civilized place here, rather than constantly upholding the rights of the individual clause which really doesn't contribute to what should be our primary goal here.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
3 edits
Originally posted by pradtfSorry, my post was stupid.
if you look at russ' forum (again) thread,
if you look at his comment in Toe's thread,
if you look at his appeal to the community a couple of weeks ago,
you will clearly see that the problem is not that the mods are overstepping their ...[text shortened]... e to what should be our primary goal here.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by bekiekeexactly! what is being fought for anyway? the right to have a place where we can hurl trash at each other?
This isn't Utopia Pawn, this is Red Hot Pawn, a site provided for our use and enjoyment by Russ Inc..
Fight the battles that are worth fighting.
if mods become a problem - which they haven't ever, it can be dealt with by russ.
the real problem has been that certain users have been a problem for the mods.
you are right that this may not be Utopia Pawn, but based on what many, many people have said in comparison to other places - it is about as close as you can get.
this is a direct result of
1) the excellence of the site owners
2) the diligence and dedication of the mods (who have often worked under unpleasant circumstances in which they have had to endure sarcasm, ridicule and other personal attacks)
3) the quality of people who are attracted here largely thanks to 1) & 2)
this place is the best that i've seen - and i would certainly like to keep it that way.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
1 edit
Originally posted by royalchickenhuh???
Sorry, my post was stupid.
which post?
i don't know what you are talking about.
anyway, i hope you understand that i am not trying to say that your ideas are bad - checks and balances are definitely a good thing in many situations.
but let's start with some trust here because that has been a pretty good idea here all these years and believe that our mods do maintain their own accounting.
and if there is a problem, let's deal with it through suitable and civilized channels.
anyway, nice talking with everyone again - but i think i shall be headed to snoozeland shortly.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by pradtfPrad, you've missed the point. People with whom I sympathize don't want to hurl trash. They want to have serious discussions and they want to be able to use the rhetorical techniques of humor and irony without being censured because someone else finds their posts offensive. Surely, if they obviously intend to offend, I think they should be silenced, but I think the degree of moderation is inversely proportional to the average cleverness of posts as measured by the variety of presentation.
exactly! what is being fought for anyway? the right to have a place where we can hurl trash at each other?
if mods become a problem - which they haven't ever, it can be dealt with by russ.
the real problem has been that certain users have been a problem for the mods.
you are right that this may not be Utopia Pawn, but based on what many, many people h ...[text shortened]... e best that i've seen - and i would certainly like to keep it that way.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by pradtfSigh.
if you look at russ' forum (again) thread,
if you look at his comment in Toe's thread,
if you look at his appeal to the community a couple of weeks ago...&c &c &c
I will repeat my question. Are you or are you not in favor of the idea of revising the system of moderation in order to limit the possible erroneous or unjust hiding of posts?
I will repeat my position. I am not in favor of mod bashing. I am not in favor of having 'trash' posted.
I am also not in favor of hiding posts that have the possibility of challenging people. This is what my system potentially addresses.
Are you or are you not in favor?
Nemesio
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by royalchickeni haven't missed your point at all!
Prad, you've missed the point. People with whom I sympathize don't want to hurl trash. They want to have serious discussions and they want to be able to use the rhetorical techniques of humor and irony without being censured because someone else finds their posts offensive. Surely, if they obviously intend to offend, I think they should be silenced ...[text shortened]... sely proportional to the average cleverness of posts as measured by the variety of presentation.
what i have missed is an opportunity to go to bed.
i see nothing wrong with using "rhetorical techniques of humor and irony" as long as they lie within the limits of the TOS.
look rc, just trust our mods and stop thinking trust is a silly concept for a while.
our mods aren't dumb - the degree of moderation may be more suitable than you think.
give them a chance instead of leading this crusade to protect us from the dangers of censorship.
use suitable channels if you really do have problems - they exist.
work on your assignment - perhaps something quite valuable will come of it.
this is an age old problem - but this is also RHP and part of the solutions have been found here.
your assignment may contribute another part.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
Prad,
We seem to have an idea on the table here that would serve to protect the mods from us, and protect us from the mods. It would go a long way toward ending threads like this. I understand what you say about moderating ourselves, this idea is not in lieu of that, but in addition to. Does that help?
TheSkipper
17 Aug 04
2 edits
Originally posted by nemesioi don't know what the sigh is for. you haven't asked me a question in the first place.
Sigh.
I will repeat my question. Are you or are you not in favor of the idea of revising the system of moderation in order to limit the possible erroneous or unjust hiding of posts?
I will repeat my position. I am not in favor of mo ...[text shortened]... entially addresses.
Are you or are you not in favor?
Nemesio
your post is below, so correct me if i have misread or misinterpreted it.
unless it was in another post that i have lost track of.
i am not in favour of revising the system unless
1) there is a problem - which i don't think there is
rather there is possibly a problem with not hiding posts. it seems that many people feel enough aren't hidden.
2) i know you are not in favor of mod bashing and trash
3) i am not in favor of using the 'challenging' people excuse to get by the TOS
in friendship,
prad
here is you post:
Suspicion is one of those words that can have either a negative (unfair distrust) or neutral (skepticism) connotation. Since there is the possibility that this word can be misinterpreted as an insult, I suggest the latter meaning and use the synonym "questionable."
And, I don't think anyone is suggesting that we treat the moderators as "questionable." However, because they are human and prone to imperfections, as we all are (therefore, no insult), for a person to "question" a decision they made is not necessarily a negative thing.
If the moderator should make a "questionable" judgment call, no one is clammoring for (or justifying) their castigation either. What I think this discussion is about (or should head toward) is a system where the moderators do not have exclusive singular power, but one where their judgment call is subjuct to peer review.
Because it would become unwieldy to have a system where every peer would be able to argue for or against a post's appropriateness, I suggested that this peer review take place as a "behind-the-scenes" forum that only moderators can read. Given that moderators should be representative of a variety of views, any "questionable" decision would be discussed and voted upon. The "consensus of common opinion" will uphold whether or not a post is reasonably offensive.
This would eliminate the perspective that they are "the enemy," that we are "suspicious" of them, and they would not be "put on trial." Their peers, in private, would review their collective decisions and the collaborative effort would be the result.
17 Aug 04
Originally posted by nemesioI don't oppose a peer review system, but I have no legitimate voice in this matter. I am a consumer purchasing a product. If I'm not satisfied with the product, the only option I have is to take my business to another outlet.
I'm sorry that I find your statement problematic, that, because it exists in the 'real world,' it's somehow justified or permissible, or even defensible.
Those with power get to execute it? You oppose, then, the opportunity to moderate power with a simple peer review system? See above: A poster can throw a red flag, the refs get together, they com ...[text shortened]... estion: Why do you find such an idea bad? If I have misunderstood you, I apologize.
Nemesio
I do not own stock in RHP, I'm not an employee of RHP, I don't sit on the board of RHP, all I do is purchase what they sell. RHP does not violate any laws(as far as I can see), so if I don't agree with the policies of the company I'm dealing with I go elsewhere. RHP's only obligation to it's consumers is to provide a product that will attract them in the first place and get them to keep coming back.
It has been noted many times in these threads that the majority of RHPsters have no major complaint with how this site is run, as a matter of fact they consider it to be a much better chess site than others out there. It is only the bickering of a small minority who cause the stink. As far as Russ is concerned, and I don't presume to speak for him, I would imagine that even as tight a budget as he has, he would prefer those who were not satisfied to go elsewhere. Especially when you take into account, some of the worst abusers of the forums are not even paying customers.
I hope this clarifies my position on the matter.
17 Aug 04
1 edit
Originally posted by nemesioYes, some posts were put back here or there, but that is rare.
Phlabibit,
As I did not know this, it raises the following questions: What are the political and/or social ramifications of overturning a colleague's hiding of a post? How often does it happen? Does one moderator either overturn o ...[text shortened]... your avatar signifies, but I can't remember what it's called!!!
The worst is when an old thread starts turning back up... or a post went on for hours and everyone quoted another curse.
Mods try to talk about why a post might need to go, or the whole thread. We have even talked about threads to come... We smell them sometimes.
Most mods have overturned another mod, but it happens once every 5 weeks? Who knows. Not often.
I remember one not long ago, and I was not even a mod at the time! This post was quite famed! Russ took final say, and it was removed... Some joke about a woman. I would not have posted it.
Yet the mods still talked about it. Mods try to agree. We do for the most part. If the mods can't really decide.... tie does not go to the poster I would guess!?
Mods are not here to erase what we don't like. If we were... You would see a lot more of this and lots less of that. No Mod controls RHP. Russ does.
P-
17 Aug 04
1 edit
Originally posted by TheSkipperthanks andrew (i think i remembered it correctly)
Prad,
We seem to have an idea on the table here that would serve to protect the mods from us, and protect us from the mods. It would go a long way toward ending threads like this. I understand what you say about moderating ourselves, ...[text shortened]... in lieu of that, but in addition to. Does that help?
TheSkipper
i know you are trying to help - and i don't mean to be stubborn
but i guess i am 😀 😀
i am fine with the idea provided the conditions i mentioned earlier (4 above this one) are met.
in friendship,
prad
17 Aug 04
1 edit
Originally posted by nemesiogotcha!
I'm sorry you missed it. It was at the bottom of the penultimate post on the previous page.
here is that question:
Are you in favor of this idea, at least in concept if not precisely how described it?
right?
and i have answered it i believe (5 above this one)
in friendship,
prad