The Right Hand of Doom
- Apr 24, 2017
- Reaction score
I'm still an advocate for Modbot.
let me assist (I also am finding memes to be superior to text, picture is worth a thousand words and all). Strangely, it also sort of fits some of the original conflict, being long and thinIt seems like the sort of statement that a meme would be the appropriate response, but I don't have one that fits, and I'm scared to google for one...
Holy shit, I just leaned into the screen to see your avatar for the first time. I legit thought it was Tuxedo Mask from Sailor Moon, which wouldn't even be the 100th weirdest thing I've seen on an RPG message board, so I never questioned it.I might start modding entirely in Latin and Greek. If I'm going to play into the stereotype implied by my avatar I might as well commit.
Also funny story from the place where I run. We always used a specific color text to indicate when a mod was taking action as a mod versus just talking as a general user on the forum.
Originally, we used red. So any time a mod was talking as a mod, we would bold and use red text to do it.
As dumb as this sounds though, we found that lots of people took it as very aggressive, even when it wasn't meant to. For instance, just moving a thread that was posted in the wrong place, people would start getting offended.
Eventually after a lot of "wow this is dumb, why are people like this" we changed the standard mod text to blue. Suddenly less complaints.
I think it is silly but it worked.
(We still use red in addition to the general blue, but now red mod text means "you are on thin ice and we are about to take serious action" so if it is interpreted as aggressive... good).
Eh, while I wasn't suggesting the use here, and was more just talking about how "perception of mods is often just as important as being right as mods", just cause RPGnet moderation sucks doesn't mean they are wrong about everything.Red text reminds me of RPGnet. No thanks.
Except I'm not talking about how TBP moderates. I'm talking about it from the perspective of someone who has been the head admin of a forum that regularly has like 1k people on it at any time that has used the method for nearly a decade.Some of us use blue text from time to time, including Tristram. I actually just think it makes it easier to spot when you are skimming posts. I don’t think that using text is going to stop people from separating their problems with folks who are mods. The reason this doesn’t get traction, let’s say at RPGnet, is that any feedback is unwanted. You are likely to get banned for speaking up. Here, we let people criticize us.
I mean, no one likes being modded.From my own modding experience, some people just don't like being modded.
Any challenge to their posting or posting style is met by way more challenge and vitriol than the original "offence" merited.
Yep, exactly. Sometimes the shit someone is saying is so objectively, provably false that “But This Is What Really Happened” followed by the actual quotes, in order and not edited is the only recourse.I don’t see anything bad about a well-researched takedown of anyone. I wouldn’t do it because I’m too lazy to look through a bunch of posts, but if Tristram or anyone else has that memory and talent and time, great. People usually don’t like those because they aren’t going to look good on the other end.
So you’d prefer the liars put forth their version unanswered? What is the point of even being on a forum then?For myself, it's not "don't do this ever" and more "do this when there's actually important stuff to refute". It feels a bit first response at times and at worst feels too close to "we must factcheck internet posts".
There ARE examples of me stating I made a mis-step as a mod. But they don't involve threadbans, which is what seems to really anger some folks. We moderate so lightly here that I don't think anyone's copped a threadban that was unwarranted.
I think most of our mistakes are actually from not stepping in as mods in certain circumstances, or waiting longer than we need to.
In this case, everyone already agreed Lessa was in the wrong.So you’d prefer the liars put forth their version unanswered? What is the point of even being on a forum then?
Eh, fair point. But, when you’re getting the timeline of your version of events off by months, it’s hard not to think it’s simply a case of “I’m never wrong on the Internet”.In this case, everyone already agreed Lessa was in the wrong.
Though to be honest, I don't think he is "lying". I think that he is wrong, but I think he believes what he says.
It matters when people, frankly like yourself, jump in and “Me Too” the conflict because they don’t like the person who is right, or think they have their own beef.The truth matters but like, we already kind of came to a conclusion on it. Like I said, I think it makes more sense to do those kind of posts when a significant number of people are supporting both sides, or the majority is supporting the side that is factual incorrect. At that point there is a purpose to the post. It is there to inform people.
When everyone already agreed that Lessa was just throwing a fit for no reason, it just serves no constructive purpose to post it.
So you’d prefer the liars put forth their version unanswered?
What is the point of even being on a forum then?
If Silva comes back whenever and starts babbling about this time Tristram persecuted him, Tristram can point to that post and say “Anyone interested can see what happened here, laid all out.” Does it make a difference? Not to you, but it would to me.As Norton points out, very few people in this situation think they're actively lying. So I'm generally inclined to put it down to the subjectivity of the human perspective and move on. Honestly, if it matters to you enough at all, PMs are always an option. (Although I accept relations are too bad for that to have worked here).
But if you feel the need to respond to it, two paragraphs is plenty. There are very very few situations that need that kind of repeated hammering. Especially, having actually read Tristram's post, it's not merely an list of facts mercifully free of subjectivity. It's full of editorialising. (I can go through highlighting every bit of that if people would really find that helpful, although I don't personally see the point for very similar reasons).
Talk about games rather than each other? That would be the Platonic idea.
But "the point" is what I'm questioning here. Tristram can obviously judge for himself what's worthwhile. I'm just not personally seeing what the actual goal of that kind of post is or what it's supposed to have achieved after it's made.
(And I get this may be as much about me. I really don't care what other people say about me in most cases. And if people are stupid enough to believe outright lies about me what significance does that have other than to my opinion of them? So I don't really grok needing to do an essay to refute shit someone says about you.)
Ironically, that's also an example of disagreement, which Norton was asking about.I’ve made mistakes as a mod and I’ve apologized to people when I felt it was necessary. Krueger comes to mind as one example a few months back.
Because the internet is no place for reasonable discourse.So it's not that there's not different views among the mods/admin, including openly. It's just that people seem not to notice it because we're not shouting at each other about it.