State of the Board - Sept 23, 2013

[Trunk]

I just posted TheTaoBums' Three Foundations: Eclectic, Egalitarian, Civil (pinned & locked in the Office). This is some writing that I've been working on in concert with Viator and Sean. It is a background document that states the basic premises of TheTaoBums discussion forum... that provide the basic philosophical structure of TTBs as well as the basis for most of the rules.

 

- Trunk

[cheya]

Thank you for putting this down in words, Trunk. I feel a little presumptuous jumping in here with no other replies, but I assume that, by opening a thread separate from the locked document, you're inviting feedback. So here goes.

 

I see moderator burn-out as a heavy burden on the board, and this statement of the Three Founding Principles can be a big step towards easing the moderation load on the mods.

 

Moderators are generous fellow users who volunteer their services to support the board. They work really hard at it, spending a lot of time on board issues. The burden of moderation uses up their time and good will, and they resign, often not even posting much after leaving moderation. This makes me sad, as I see the relative thanklessness of a job which to me is such a critical part of the board's being the outstanding resource that it is. When mods burn out, we lose experienced moderation, and often great posting as well. And the pool of willing/able mod volunteers shrinks as more end up burnt out. If the board keeps burning out mods, who will want the job? Will we end up having to move to paid mods and a pay-to-post format? Considering all this, I think we need to find ways to ease the toll the job seems to take on these generous people.

 

I imagine that's what being addressed when you write: "The staff (admins, moderators) also deserve and have protection against uncivility and against abuse of staff resources. Staff protection is enforced at the discretion of the admin."

 

I would like to see that statement expanded to give examples of "abuse of staff resources". I think some posters get stuck in an anti-authoritarian stance, viewing moderators as police; they see rules as laws to be pushed against and resisted. That attitude hurts the board. We need to move toward a "moderators R US" attitude, an understanding that these *fellow board members* are doing all of us a HUGE favor by taking on this unpaid and often thankless role, and that they deserve our help and support in every way... which INCLUDES submitting thoughtfully worded posts that do not require moderation!

 

One way we might shift more of the load of moderation off the moderators onto users themselves is to tally the "mod hours" on users. The vast majority of users don't need moderation, but I imagine that some users get more reports on their posts and thus take up a lot of moderation hours. I know there is a system of warning points, I guess when it's determined that a user actually stepped over the line. But I wonder if there could also be a way of tallying "moderation load" on users who get reported a lot. If someone is using a lot of the moderators' TIME, even if they don't actually step over the line, maybe they need a break from posting, to ponder the Three Foundations, and adjust their posting style toward greater civility, as well as more consideration for the moderators' time and energy. (And then there may be users who constantly report others, and maybe they need a moderator load count too!)

[Basher]

"So say we all" :ph34r:

 

Basher-star Galactica

[BaguaKicksAss]

One way we might shift more of the load of moderation off the moderators onto users themselves is to tally the "mod hours" on users. The vast majority of users don't need moderation, but I imagine that some users get more reports on their posts and thus take up a lot of moderation hours. I know there is a system of warning points, I guess when it's determined that a user actually stepped over the line. But I wonder if there could also be a way of tallying "moderation load" on users who get reported a lot. If someone is using a lot of the moderators' TIME, even if they don't actually step over the line, maybe they need a break from posting, to ponder the Three Foundations, and adjust their posting style toward greater civility, as well as more consideration for the moderators' time and energy. (And then there may be users who constantly report others, and maybe they need a moderator load count too!)

 

 

I personally find the "report" function to be heavily biased by a popularity contest. That is my personal opinion on the matter. Most board members don't use the report function, only a handful, so it's more about who they like or not (IMO). End rant .

[Marblehead]

Good rant.

[cheya]

Hi BKA,

 

 

Can you guess at what percentage of reports actually require significant moderator time?

What would you say does generate the heaviest loads on moderators' time and energy?

[BaguaKicksAss]

Hi BKA, Can you guess at what percentage of reports actually require significant moderator time? What would you say does generate the heaviest loads on moderators' time and energy?

 

The trolls who create disharmony (and sometimes havoc) on the board, yet are smart enough to carefully skirt the rules.

 

Edit to add IMO, the mods and other past mods might see things differently .

[Apech]

Sometimes when there is a long bickering thread the reports just become part of the back and forth - and are mostly just spiteful. But that didn't happen very often. The thing is the report function should be used - instead of retaliating just report and let the mods make an objective assessment. So it can be a kind of safety valve if you like.

[Trunk]

by opening a thread separate from the locked document, you're inviting feedback.

 

Correct, inviting discussion. Though the nature of this document is "the non-negotiables". The basic premises are not up for a vote, but they are up for discussion, clarification, exploring permutations.

 

I see moderator burn-out as a heavy burden on the board, and this statement of the Three Founding Principles can be a big step towards easing the moderation load on the mods.

...

I imagine that's what being addressed when you write: "The staff (admins, moderators) also deserve and have protection against uncivility and against abuse of staff resources. Staff protection is enforced at the discretion of the admin."

 

I would like to see that statement expanded to give examples of "abuse of staff resources".

 

Just to state that paragraph in its entirety:

The staff (admins, moderators) also deserve and have protection against uncivility and against abuse of staff resources. Staff protection is enforced at the discretion of the admin. The admin also has broad discretion to protect the civility and resources of any aspect within TTBs e-community.

 

That paragraph was deliberately left broad and undefined. Partly because this is a "bare bones" document (more detailed rules are elsewhere) but more importantly in that paragraph, the fact that we can't anticipate everything. As a mod / admin, it's sort of a seasonal exclamation to say to yourself, "wow, I never saw that coming, never imagined this". Trouble comes in unexpected shapes, weights and angles. That paragraph means that the admin has broad power to deal with whatever comes up, to protect the board, the staff, to some extent the members .. within the parameters of this e-community. That paragraph is intended to deal with relatively extreme and unusual situations; the mods & stewards have plenty of position (and more detailed guidelines) to work with the usual ruckous.

 

But I wonder if there could also be a way of tallying "moderation load" on users who get reported a lot. ... (And then there may be users who constantly report others, and maybe they need a moderator load count too!)

 

Both of those angles have been considered and are possible causes for action. Unlikely that there will be an on-going tally beyond the conversations that we already have in the mod dungeon, where we already keep track of things.

 

Thank you for sparking conversation in this thread.

 

- Trunk

[gatito]

It seemed to me that there was nothing wrong with the previous (i.e. the current) system and rules and therefore I'm very happy to see that the founding principles have been reiterated so clearly and that the edit timer and the combining of posts made less than 31 minutes apart have now been disgarded.

 

It also occurs to me that the Valve Handbook might be useful reading......

[dawei]

The combining of posts thing.. would it be possible to give members a choice wether to use it or not?

 

 

Sometimes one is answering several discrete points from different posters, and lumping them in together obscures clarity, and is hard for members to reply to, also: one has to edit the lump in order to extract the part relevant to one, to reply to.

 

 

 

One also has to read the whole lump in order to see if one has been replied to , or not.

 

What Cat said... that seems very unconventional... and unintuitive as a poster/reader/replier...

[Trunk]

I'm very happy to see that the founding principles have been reiterated so clearly ..

Thanks!

It also occurs to me that the Valve Handbook might be useful reading......

Not sure if that's an intended metaphor, but it's a good one. Various things get experimented with, often there's room for incremental adjustments depending on how things go. Other things need to be clarified in stone and that document was some chisel work.

The combining of posts thing..

I'm not sure where things currently are with that implementation.. ? I think it's an issue worth discussing.

 

Right now I am temp-admining, while Viator is on vacation. The way we'd talked, we made a casual assumption that things were steady, and that probably I'd need to do nothing (which was fine by me). (TTBs' 3F rules were pre-agreed upon.) It's been somewhat more active than that (things happen, change happens, y' can't stop it, lol), but I'm basically just maintaining a steady ship right now. My plan is: No changes to staff, rules, structure while Viator is away, unless his vacation goes considerably longer than we'd originally thought.

.. of course we here are continuing to talk about and explore ideas, continuing to interact and evolve as a community, and that is welcome, progressive and helpful.

[Apech]

For what its worth I think the combining posts thing is a bit confusing ... before it was clear who you were speaking to in each post but now your replies get grouped. I think it was introduced to combat the effect of certain posters who were in the habit of posting one post after another with stream of consciousness one liners. I don't see any one doing anything like that now (not even in combined form). I think perhaps its worth thinking about whether it is effective to make global rule changes to deal with the behaviour of one or two people. Only worth doing if it benefits the majority and if unpopular in terms of the user experience then it should be reverted to previous situation.

[ralis]

I would like to see combining posts to cease. Feels like censorship.

[cheya]

For me, strings of separate one liners and/or hee-hees really dilutes the sense and flow of a thread, and I'm fine with combining posts. Combined posts would be easier to read if posters would use quote and @ to indicate who and what they are responding to on each post, especially if they know they're multi-posting.

 

However, I've found that just putting members who habitually multipost one-liners and hee-hees on ignore has made it less of an issue for me. So... whatever. :-)

[Trunk]

For me, strings of separate one liners and/or hee-hees really dilutes the sense and flow of a thread, ..

However, I've found that just putting members who habitually multipost one-liners and hee-hees on ignore has made it less of an issue for me.

As I always say, and it's worth repeating imo, the "ignore" feature is *really* helpful for diminishing static between members and tends to be under-utilized, imo.

 

Thanks, everyone, for your input. It helps.

[Brian]

Too bad there's not an obvious way to see who has you set on "ignore." I think that would be informative. (For me anyhow -- I guess not everyone would appreciate it...)

[ralis]

The fascism thread goes into the pit with no mod action against blatant bigotry. Down the 'Orwellian memory hole' again!

[gatito]

My bad. I thought that the combining of posts had been dropped.

 

I'd just point out that you don't actually have control of your own contribution, as was Sean's intent, if separate posts are automatically combined by the forum software.

 

It also makes the record inaccurate. For example:- I make a post, someone responds and then I make a counterpoint, which is added to my original post - making me appear much wiser than I actually am

 

Furthermore, it destroys the flow and sense of a fast-moving, real-time conversation.

 

It was (and is) a sledgehammer to crack a nut (or perhaps a few nuts )

Edited October 14, 2013 by gatito

[gatito]

It also strikes me, quite forcefully, that Trunk is a natural for the co-admin role and that, since he took over, the board has a much nicer vibe.

 

I very much hope that he'll stay put in this post.

[Apech]

[Flolfolil]

since he took over, the board has a much nicer vibe.

"nicer vibe"?

 

nicer than what?

 

[Basher]

Kudos to all that have in the past, or are currently "giving" money, effort and/or their free time, to make the Tao Bums a better place to be, for all.