A regrettable milestone was passed today - I've issued my first ban that wasn't just a random spammer. So I made it 75 days...I guess that's pretty good for a forum as large and as populated as this one. But since we're here, a bit of musing on what it's like to be a moderator now that I've done it for a while and how it's changed things from being just a plain old member (albeit a very active and involved one). But first, we need an obligatory...
DISCLAIMER: I'm speaking only for myself in this post, and not for Gord, Jeff and Pin Wiz, nor am I speaking on FarSight's behalf.
Indeed. So what changes when you become a mod? Well, you get a bunch of new powers when that happens, mostly concerning post/thread management and the infraction/banning system. You get to see some stuff about who's read what and you can see deleted posts (a very mixed blessing - there were a lot of posts I was better off not knowing about). But that's about it. More significantly, none of these abilities come with much in the way of an instruction manual on how to use them, and there's no guidance at all about when to use them. Hence you get initial errors of judgment, like when I edited that post in the PS3-vs.-PS4 thread instead of just taking an axe to it like I should have, which in turn led to a minor brouhaha.
Then you start getting into the "how in hell am I supposed to do this fairly?" problems. This forum is actually quite large - there are nearly 77,000 posts in it, which works out to something like 175 posts a day on average. The vast majority of posts each day - let's say 160 - are harmless. The other 15 are questionable. Some of these are from regular members who like to stir the pot a bit but who don't mean any real trouble. Some are personal attacks, of which more later. Some are expressions of frustration at FarSight's and TPA's shortcomings that have crossed the line into abuse. And some are just good old-fashioned griefing and trolling. Then after identifying such questionable posts, then you have to decide what to do about them. Can they be allowed to stand? Should they be deleted? Should the member be warned? Should I give them an infraction? (Fun fact: the button that controls the infraction functions looks like a pair of penalty cards.) Am I finding this post problematic because I just got yelled at by a customer at work unhappy that his material didn't ship and so I'm pissed at the world right now, and there's really nothing that wrong with it? If I warn the member, is he likely to quietly behave himself afterwards or get into a public argument with me over my moderation? (By the way, in the event you ever do have a problem with the moderation, PM us instead of posting publicly. We're quite amenable to reason, but not nearly so responsive to public ranting.)
There is not a policy to guide such decisions, although since we can read any post, including the deleted ones, we do have access to a lot of precedent. So that's generally how I've been doing things: looking back at the past to see what was done then, and then applying that to the present situation. It's an imperfect art (and nowhere near a science), but it's all we've got to go on. I'm not sure a formal policy would be a good idea anyway; we're already accused regularly of running a police state here, although mainly by those who have been banned. At any rate, decisions that may appear arbitrary - why did my thread get deleted when thread X only got a warning post in it but was allowed to continue? - actually involve considerable thought, usually at the expense of whatever I was doing at the time. What is getting faster, because our patience with it is running out, is action against personal attacks, especially those directed at FarSight employees. They are here voluntarily; please at least respect the time they take out of their day to spend here with us, regardless of what you think of their work.
Next up: The accusation that we mods are shills (paid or not) for FarSight. First of all let me state that if I'm supposed to be getting regular checks, they've screwed up and sent them to the wrong address, because I haven't seen any. More seriously, all four of us have at times criticized FarSight and TPA in terms ranging from mildly tickling to severely lacerating. I expect we will continue to do so in the future as warranted. I maintain a public litany of FarSight's "sins", as it were, in TPA in the form of the 31 master issues lists. As useful as this might be to the developers, I can't imagine marketing/PR cares for it much. (And no, I did not ask for permission first.)
Yes, each of the four mods do have somewhat more access to FarSight than the average member. Gord and Pin Wiz have been coordinating announcements and special features here since the beginning, and Jeff - despite his unwillingness to say so - has conducted the most insightful interviews of FarSight to be found on the web, even when our voting has yielded thorny questions for him to pose to Bobby. I actually don't talk to FarSight directly all that much myself beyond my participation in the iOS beta - they have a tester who traverses the master issues lists every so often, but pretty much all that needs to be said is in the posts for him and everyone else to see.
Moving on, the issue of moderator neutrality. I am - obviously - a very opinionated person, in terms of what makes a good table, about how difficulty should be adjusted, and more. I've mixed it up - mostly civilly - with various members here, both those who I'd consider generally sympathetic to my views (except for the point we're arguing, obviously!) and those who do not share my views at all. But now that I find myself in a position of responsibility, am I free to argue at will? Or do I need to maintain a "professional" neutrality? This one I'm not so sure about, so I've been kind of holding back the last few months (except on this blog, which is clearly a platform for opinion). If anyone has views on this, please comment below.
One instance where I have not held back, and very deliberately so, is my repeated use of the term "invaders" to describe those of the Facebook mentality who show up at our door. Let it be said at once that not every person that posts on FarSight's wall falls into this category: there is a tiny minority that tilts at windmills against the noise storm, and a few more who seem genuinely pleased with the game (as opposed to being sarcastic). But in general, the Facebook page has fallen into ruin, a digital wasteland inhabited mainly by people who to put it bluntly like to hear themselves b*tch, led by five or six people who seem to have dedicated their lives to making FarSight's lives hell.
These are the invaders, and they occasionally cross over into our world either on their own volition or when something happens (like that unofficial poll Gord put up that has now become quasi-official) that attracts them here. Again, not everyone who came here from Facebook is an invader; hopefully there are some refugees who will see that it is possible to have civilized and intelligent discussion here and will decide to stay and enjoy this thing of ours. But to the extent the others do not - to the extent that people come here to cause trouble - they will be branded invaders, and repulsed. And I do not particularly care what they have to say on the Facebook page about it or us.
DISCLAIMER: I'm speaking only for myself in this post, and not for Gord, Jeff and Pin Wiz, nor am I speaking on FarSight's behalf.
Indeed. So what changes when you become a mod? Well, you get a bunch of new powers when that happens, mostly concerning post/thread management and the infraction/banning system. You get to see some stuff about who's read what and you can see deleted posts (a very mixed blessing - there were a lot of posts I was better off not knowing about). But that's about it. More significantly, none of these abilities come with much in the way of an instruction manual on how to use them, and there's no guidance at all about when to use them. Hence you get initial errors of judgment, like when I edited that post in the PS3-vs.-PS4 thread instead of just taking an axe to it like I should have, which in turn led to a minor brouhaha.
Then you start getting into the "how in hell am I supposed to do this fairly?" problems. This forum is actually quite large - there are nearly 77,000 posts in it, which works out to something like 175 posts a day on average. The vast majority of posts each day - let's say 160 - are harmless. The other 15 are questionable. Some of these are from regular members who like to stir the pot a bit but who don't mean any real trouble. Some are personal attacks, of which more later. Some are expressions of frustration at FarSight's and TPA's shortcomings that have crossed the line into abuse. And some are just good old-fashioned griefing and trolling. Then after identifying such questionable posts, then you have to decide what to do about them. Can they be allowed to stand? Should they be deleted? Should the member be warned? Should I give them an infraction? (Fun fact: the button that controls the infraction functions looks like a pair of penalty cards.) Am I finding this post problematic because I just got yelled at by a customer at work unhappy that his material didn't ship and so I'm pissed at the world right now, and there's really nothing that wrong with it? If I warn the member, is he likely to quietly behave himself afterwards or get into a public argument with me over my moderation? (By the way, in the event you ever do have a problem with the moderation, PM us instead of posting publicly. We're quite amenable to reason, but not nearly so responsive to public ranting.)
There is not a policy to guide such decisions, although since we can read any post, including the deleted ones, we do have access to a lot of precedent. So that's generally how I've been doing things: looking back at the past to see what was done then, and then applying that to the present situation. It's an imperfect art (and nowhere near a science), but it's all we've got to go on. I'm not sure a formal policy would be a good idea anyway; we're already accused regularly of running a police state here, although mainly by those who have been banned. At any rate, decisions that may appear arbitrary - why did my thread get deleted when thread X only got a warning post in it but was allowed to continue? - actually involve considerable thought, usually at the expense of whatever I was doing at the time. What is getting faster, because our patience with it is running out, is action against personal attacks, especially those directed at FarSight employees. They are here voluntarily; please at least respect the time they take out of their day to spend here with us, regardless of what you think of their work.
Next up: The accusation that we mods are shills (paid or not) for FarSight. First of all let me state that if I'm supposed to be getting regular checks, they've screwed up and sent them to the wrong address, because I haven't seen any. More seriously, all four of us have at times criticized FarSight and TPA in terms ranging from mildly tickling to severely lacerating. I expect we will continue to do so in the future as warranted. I maintain a public litany of FarSight's "sins", as it were, in TPA in the form of the 31 master issues lists. As useful as this might be to the developers, I can't imagine marketing/PR cares for it much. (And no, I did not ask for permission first.)
Yes, each of the four mods do have somewhat more access to FarSight than the average member. Gord and Pin Wiz have been coordinating announcements and special features here since the beginning, and Jeff - despite his unwillingness to say so - has conducted the most insightful interviews of FarSight to be found on the web, even when our voting has yielded thorny questions for him to pose to Bobby. I actually don't talk to FarSight directly all that much myself beyond my participation in the iOS beta - they have a tester who traverses the master issues lists every so often, but pretty much all that needs to be said is in the posts for him and everyone else to see.
Moving on, the issue of moderator neutrality. I am - obviously - a very opinionated person, in terms of what makes a good table, about how difficulty should be adjusted, and more. I've mixed it up - mostly civilly - with various members here, both those who I'd consider generally sympathetic to my views (except for the point we're arguing, obviously!) and those who do not share my views at all. But now that I find myself in a position of responsibility, am I free to argue at will? Or do I need to maintain a "professional" neutrality? This one I'm not so sure about, so I've been kind of holding back the last few months (except on this blog, which is clearly a platform for opinion). If anyone has views on this, please comment below.
One instance where I have not held back, and very deliberately so, is my repeated use of the term "invaders" to describe those of the Facebook mentality who show up at our door. Let it be said at once that not every person that posts on FarSight's wall falls into this category: there is a tiny minority that tilts at windmills against the noise storm, and a few more who seem genuinely pleased with the game (as opposed to being sarcastic). But in general, the Facebook page has fallen into ruin, a digital wasteland inhabited mainly by people who to put it bluntly like to hear themselves b*tch, led by five or six people who seem to have dedicated their lives to making FarSight's lives hell.
These are the invaders, and they occasionally cross over into our world either on their own volition or when something happens (like that unofficial poll Gord put up that has now become quasi-official) that attracts them here. Again, not everyone who came here from Facebook is an invader; hopefully there are some refugees who will see that it is possible to have civilized and intelligent discussion here and will decide to stay and enjoy this thing of ours. But to the extent the others do not - to the extent that people come here to cause trouble - they will be branded invaders, and repulsed. And I do not particularly care what they have to say on the Facebook page about it or us.
well said sir.
