Moderation vs. reading comprehension vs. forum rules

[bakeneko]

Initial post referred to:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/?p=503883

 

My comment:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/page-7#entry506587

 

Moderation threat:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/?p=506593

 

My comment on moderation threat:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/page-8#entry506848

 

Forum rules:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/19575-forum-terms-rules/

 

So where in the rules does it say, I could not write any general comment or "general criticism"? If i did...

My so called "criticism" obviously referred directly to the sentence written before in the very same post. So as I take it, this moderator lacks reading comprehension and knowledge of the subject matter to be qualified to issue any such threats as above. Also I see such demands as harassment and a threat as it is aimed to get me into writing my posts in a specific way, which is not necessary as by the forum rules and not wanted by myself. This is a breach of the rules themself.

If any poster would have seen my comment as too general, a simple question would and will solve the "problem".

 

 

[bakeneko]

More threats:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/page-8#entry506851

 

No reason given so far..

Edited December 19, 2013 by bakeneko

[bakeneko]

Indication of rules, but no direct reason:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/page-8#entry506856

 

All referred to before by quote was the post by Jetsun.

[Mal]

I had hoped you might have used this opportunity to apologize for your original post here http://thetaobums.com/topic/32886-daily-timetable-of-the-quanzhen-retreat/page-8#entry506848 rather than start a thread like this.

 

The reason was

I read the whole comment and took it in the context of the whole thread which has had numerous reports of repeated harassment of the op. There is no reason why the moderators have to put up with attacks from your original post or sarcasm from your edited post, so you get a suspension.

[soaring crane]

I have to agree with you here. Seems to me like there was a booby trap with a hair trigger and you walked into it.

[bakeneko]

[edited again]

 

You wonder why? Because I do not have the intention for any further escalation.

I stand by and take the responsibility for my above posts though.

 

Questions and criticism are welcome.

Edited December 19, 2013 by bakeneko

[gatito]

<snip>

 

Questions and criticism are welcome.

 

FWIW I was extremely suprised about this decision and I also fail to spot the rationale.

 

I think that this is probablty the best explanation for what happened: -

 

I have to agree with you here. Seems to me like there was a booby trap with a hair trigger and you walked into it.

 

Hopefully, all those concerned (particularly Vitalli, Mods and you) have learned something about this forum environment and will move on.

[Jetsun]

The situation is that we have a thread which is receiving multiple reports every day from a number of different members about harassment of the op. We had already warned and suspended a number of posters for harassment and you come in with another criticism about a trifling issue which was perceived as a continuation of the group harassment, and somebody reported your post. That is the context of moderator action in that thread.

[gatito]

The situation is that we have a thread which is receiving multiple reports every day from a number of different members about harassment of the op. We had already warned and suspended a number of posters for harassment and you come in with another criticism about a trifling issue which was perceived as a continuation of the group harassment, and somebody reported your post. That is the context of moderator action in that thread.

 

It is a very, very difficult and complex situation.

 

Thank you for clarifying.

[BaguaKicksAss]

This happens a lot, long-term issue with a flame war (or mini flame war) against a couple of parties.... then suddenly some "new" member comes and joins in!!!

 

While sometimes said "new" members, really *are* new members, it is always wondered (at least by me) whether they are not just a sock puppet, or friends of the dissenters, or from the same school, or whatever. Why would a member new to the board even care?

 

Even worse is when it's their 2nd post...

 

I'm (obviously) talking about far more than just this instance, but it is possible that this sort of thing has a bearing on this situation as well.

[bakeneko]

Hopefully, all those concerned (particularly Vitalli, Mods and you) have learned something about this forum environment and will move on.

 

For myself I have. Thanks.

[bakeneko]

This happens a lot, long-term issue with a flame war (or mini flame war) against a couple of parties.... then suddenly some "new" member comes and joins in!!!

 

While sometimes said "new" members, really *are* new members, it is always wondered (at least by me) whether they are not just a sock puppet, or friends of the dissenters, or from the same school, or whatever. Why would a member new to the board even care?

 

Even worse is when it's their 2nd post...

 

I'm (obviously) talking about far more than just this instance, but it is possible that this sort of thing has a bearing on this situation as well.

 

Not sure about how much this applies actually to me, but my posts in the pasts should be traceable. I am not new, just do not post often and usually ignore the arguments here (except if they have some entertainment value such as Mo Pai threads which I read for the often funny posts).

 

Anyway, I hope my suspension will be intact soon, I wanted to do some contributions over the holidays.

[gatito]

As I've said many times in the past, I'm glad that I'm not a Mod and kudos to those who take on the job.

 

I think it's worth adding that we shouldn't expect them to be perfect either

 

Furthermore, sometimes (often/usually perhaps) there's no solution with which all parties will accept.

 

Fortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case here.

[Trunk]

~~~ admin statement ~~~

 

staff & community context: We (the staff, the mod team) are dealing with a large complex changing community; it's become more difficult to manage as it's grown. We have more nebulous problems (of varying degrees of friction) that don't fit neatly into our rule model and I've explicitly given my moderators a lot of latitude to "take the initiative, handle that area as you see fit" within the larger goal that we can bring more peace to board in general; it's been rather chaotic lately. We are experimenting some with how to moderate in order to deal with the new level of chaos that we experience at a community level. Each of us (moderators and admin) have our hands full with various issues. I have confidence in the basic intent and character of my staff members and want to support them in this process. Also, each of us is learning.

 

Jetsun handled the original comment within the context of the whole thread and our general situation and did what he felt would help bring order to the thread generally, as well as the specific situation. I gave him latitude to do that, generally and in this specific case; this is partly my responsibility. Also I had a hint in my mind that this might turn into a conflict but I've been busy with other issues and need to hand over that initiative and if we make mistakes we'll live & learn. That's the process. We're livin' n' learnin'.

 

So, please, with all of the above in mind...

 

In retrospect, from my perspective, in the interest of diminishing the stress of the general milieu (and the context of wild times in general) I think we stepped too hard on this one instance. Bakeneko's original comment can be seen as simple disagreement, not harassment (etc) and specifically is well within TTBs standards of lively debate. Bakeneko's responses have been that of taking responsibility, apologizing where he felt he could, and addressing to resolve the situation with the intent of clarification, imo. All really appreciated.

 

Suspension lifted.

 

Thank you for your patience.

Matter closed.

 

- Trunk

 

p.s.

General comment to the community, not pointedly towards any specific in this instance...

Even when any of the staff make mistakes, me included, please be civil when attempting to address, clarify, and resolve the situation. We used to give way too much latitude to the level of abuse that we'd allow towards staff. It's a rough job and we go through a lot of staff. Civility towards staff is now enforced as a matter of policy. That doesn't mean that you can't disagree with us and it does not mean that you can't work to clarify issues that you feel are unjust (I'm not surprised that this thread occurred) ... just please apply patience and civility, we're all doing our best. Thanks again.

 

later...

p.p.s.

This incident will not count against Bakeneko at all in terms of historical warning, etc.

 

~~~ /admin out ~~~

[Trunk]

Oh, one other thing, house-keeping item:

The moderation logs section is really meant for staff recording of completed moderation actions at a level that require public record (and whatever community replies might follow in those staff-created threads). As such, I've made the moderation log section so that members cannot start threads on that section, but can still reply to threads there.

 

The Office is a good enough place to post threads such as this one, so this thread has been moved into the Office.

[BaguaKicksAss]

The mods and admin are not ascended masters? What?!

[Brian]

The mods and admin are not ascended masters? What?!

The mods and admin are not necessarily ascended masters...

 

[dawei]

p.s.

General comment to the community, not pointedly towards any specific in this instance...

Even when any of the staff make mistakes, me included, please be civil when attempting to address, clarify, and resolve the situation. We used to give way too much latitude to the level of abuse that we'd allow towards staff. It's a rough job and we go through a lot of staff. Civility towards staff is now enforced as a matter of policy. That doesn't mean that you can't disagree with us and it does not mean that you can't work to clarify issues that you feel are unjust (I'm not surprised that this thread occurred) ... just please apply patience and civility, we're all doing our best. Thanks again.

 

 

I think one issue which needs to be remembered is that a person's comments may *appear* to not criticize or harass but once a bandwagon of opposition has started then if people don't have the common sense to stay out of the fray they are going to get caught up in potential action.

 

The purpose of the thread in question was about a retreat. If people have no plans or interest in the retreat, then there is almost no reason to post in the thread. Even if they disagree with the schedule, it IS disrespectful to make claims over how useless or uninteresting it appears.

 

So I saw a few issues in the mod's favor here for stepping in:

1. Posts were irrelevant and meant to derail, put down and otherwise 'disagree' on a post which is not even intended for them.

2. Common sense is hard to come by sometimes and it was clear it was left at the door many a morning. If people want to debate, there are plenty of threads; or start your own debate but don't claim your 'disagreement' within a retreat thread with information for the potential attendees is harmless.

3. Disagreeing with a mod in a thread is derailing it further. It is off-topic and to continue it is simply irresponsible. IMO, once a mod starts telling a member to settle down, the member should use common sense to PM the mod if they really want some answers or in a separate thread like this.

 

I personally am not sure the mods stepped too hard but maybe too late. It was very clear from almost the beginning that there was opposition to the OP and it has followed him around the board. The 'intent' of counter-posts in a thread like this one in question was simply uncalled for. If your not going to the retreat and you have no questions then there was no need to post.

 

JMO...

[BaguaKicksAss]

It's been nearly a year, not just this one thread...

[gatito]

 

 

<snip>

 

The purpose of the thread in question was about a retreat. If people have no plans or interest in the retreat, then there is almost no reason to post in the thread. Even if they disagree with the schedule, it IS disrespectful to make claims over how useless or uninteresting it appears.

 

<snip>

 

I'd fundamentally disagree with that premise.

 

The OP's purpose is not the issue and s/he doesn't own the thread.

 

In this particular case, some people thought that there was a problem regarding sleep-deprivation and chose to comment, as is their right (and perhaps their duty - as they saw it).

 

How they chose to voice that particular concern may or may not be a problem - that is ultimately for the Mods to decide

 

If someone wants to own a thread, it's easy enough to start one in their Personal Practice Forum, otherwise, they need to be prepared to deal with feedback - unless there's a fundamental shift in the Founding Principles, which are the USP of TTBs.

[dawei]

It's been nearly a year, not just this one thread...

 

not sure I follow as the retreat thread in question here was started in Dec. 2013.

[Trunk]

Dawei,

 

While I know that this forum gets chaotic at times, and we are trying to reign that in where we can... and we do what we can to discern between hostile trolling and genuine disagreement

 

This is a spiritual (internal arts) open internet forum. In the general population there is (obviously) *lots* of disagreement (even in genuine non-hostile inquiry) about the efficacy of various practices, schools, even the existence of spirituality itself! We allow that full range here. Obviously spirituality is a sensitive area and often people react too strongly (reference world history of "holy" wars, lol). We try and be not-too-uptight here.

 

Within a school / classroom environment, it *is* disrespectful to perpetuate any disagrees with the speaker, or to outright largely disagree. Within the classroom format people have gathered (and often paid $) with the intent to gain everything they can from the speaker in the front of the room. Within that context it's totally appropriate to have that exclusive focus. Necessary even. Super important. This was the case in every classroom situation I've ever been in, academic and spiritual. It's super important that classroom formats exist, that those in charge there (teachers and their supporting staff) have really good control over their environment, and manage conversation to absolutely maximize what students can get from a single speaker. However, that is not TTBs venue; TTBs is more open than that.

 

If a member at TTBs *really* wants full control over their thread within the TTBs format, post it in your Personal Practice Section. There you have full control.

 

While we are in a period of flux as to how tightly we moderate within the intent of the original poster, TTBs will always be more diverse than a classroom format. That's the nature and basic intent of this venue.

 

If people want more extensive discussion with more control, there are free blogs and free forum services all over the internet. Anyone can set up their own discussion site in an afternoon, for nearly any purpose they wish... and there should be different venues, with different basic premises. TTBs can't be everything nor does it intend to.

 

- Trunk

[dawei]

I'd fundamentally disagree with that premise.

 

The OP's purpose is not the issue and s/he doesn't own the thread.

 

In this particular case, some people thought that there was a problem regarding sleep-deprivation and chose to comment, as is their right (and perhaps their duty - as they saw it).

 

How they chose to voice that particular concern may or may not be a problem - that is ultimately for the Mods to decide

 

If someone wants to own a thread, it's easy enough to start one in their Personal Practice Forum, otherwise, they need to be prepared to deal with feedback - unless there's a fundamental shift in the Founding Principles, which are the USP of TTBs.

 

If your going to be sleep deprived in a daoist retreat, then the problems are not just the retreat... The retreat is not for the weak hearted... I think one has their answer already about whether it is for them or not... but maybe TTB should be where people worry about whether they are sleep depriving themselves by hanging out here day and night.

 

Last time I looked, TTB was not the fight club but it seems more and more people seem to view it that way... Different strokes I guess.

[gatito]

If your going to be sleep deprived in a daoist retreat, then the problems are not just the retreat... The retreat is not for the weak hearted... I think one has their answer already about whether it is for them or not... but maybe TTB should be where people worry about whether they are sleep depriving themselves by hanging out here day and night.

 

Last time I looked, TTB was not the fight club but it seems more and more people seem to view it that way... Different strokes I guess.

 

Yes. Completely different issue.

[dawei]

If a member at TTBs *really* wants full control over their thread within the TTBs format, post it in your Personal Practice Section. There you have full control.

 

I don't disagree with this idea... but it's not always realistic... most members don't look at the PPS and there is no easy way to see what exactly is new there.

 

That's the appeal of the general areas... And for a retreat information, the general area makes 'sense'...

 

But I've said it before.. if people are getting pushed more and more to just stick it in their PPS then there are bigger problems to solve, IMO.