should we moderate/censor more strictly or stay as 'fluid' as we can

[stog]

following on from a thread elsewhere i thought i would take a straw poll to see if fibsboarders think we should  as moderators, moderate/censor more strictly, or stay as 'fluid' as we can, as we are trying at present to achieve. Remember moderators interpret any guidelines given individualistically, depending on the situation and scale, and dependant on the time they have available to consider and act.

we are also different on different days, dependant on our own lives and how we are feeling at the time -- hence the advice given in the thread elsewhere requesting we ' count to 10' and allow where possible.

[dorbel]

Shouldn't there be a third alternative?

[Leudwulf]

A good moderator should be neutral, tolerant and wise.  I am a great admirer of Stog for the way he runs this site.  He doesn't take sides, he takes principles.  He looks beyond the words to get to the spirit of what is being written.  

He seems to understand that communication is so much more than words, and without body language, intonations, and facial expressions words can be unintentionally loaded, depending upon who's eyes they land upon.

Misunderstandings arise, tempers flare, feuds and personal dislikes colour the words further.  From what I've observed, Stog doesn't get caught up in petty personal vendettas, and he does not state or reveal any personal dislike to members of this community.  He seems to have everyone's respect.

While I consider some of the other moderators friends, I think they could do more to follow Stog's example.

[Leudwulf]

One more essential requirement... perhaps the most essential...

A good moderator can keep his/her ego in check.

[diane]

Fluid and open is best, as long as it is consistent.

There might be some merit in saying if you know you have strong negative feelings about a particular person, you leave moderation of their words to someone else. Someone less likely to be swayed by history and poor filters. That tends to be my approach when moderating..I dont touch posts by those players I have history with..unless they are out and out ...dare I say it...'flames'..with no contribution to make to the topic.  I also think that humour is a great way to diffuse some of the more negative things that get written here..so in the case of the gammonbot post..the subsequent humerous posts actually lightened up the topic. I am also lead to believe that the person who was most 'protected' in that thread, actually laughed at the post too, which suggests it was more good humoured than ill-willed.

A sense of humour is pretty much critical in all of this..try not to take this, and it all, too seriously!

Having said that, the gammonbot post was not new, it was not humerous, it was not thought out - it was an 'in the moment reaction' to a bad game or three maybe. Really - rather than deleting it..my feeling is still that it should have been cross referred and locked.  We have not heard from the poster again..which may be because they are sitting back laughing at what they started, or because they just needed a vent in the moment. The sad thing about that thread, is that it became something it wasnt, and shouldn't ever have been.

Several posters in that thread were given specific instructions to 'depersonalise their posts', whilst others, who repeatedly mention people by name in a non constructive way, were not. Whilst I like to think that is because I am known for my tolerant, neutral, wise and non over reaction to such things... ..I don't think that - I think it looks like some are above the 'rules' they so happily throw around.  If it is about 'expected reactions', I know 60 would not be bothered by 'that' post at all..having had email exchanged with him about some of his similar posts and actions in the past..he reads the stuff without reacting, but critically, and looks to see your point of view. In my opinion, that is what makes 60 a very special person, and I let him get away with quite a lot 

[socksey]

Diane, wouldn't it be a wonderful world if everyone were as perfect as you and I?! 



Seeing the way the voting is going, I am happy that I may be given the opportunity to say it like it is more freely as many of you are, but on the other hand, I see that as a carte blanche for the abusers who will be abusers.  To my mind that makes this site open for a brawl.  Although I enjoy slumming occasionally, it would not be something I would like in constant doses.    

Careful what you wish for, you might get it.......comes to mind.   

socksey

[stog]

Seeing the way the voting is going, I am happy that I may be given the opportunity to say it like it is more freely as many of you are, but on the other hand, I see that as a carte blanche for the abusers who will be abusers.  To my mind that makes this site open for a brawl.

No. this isn't a vote for more - it is a vote for 'as is', and "as is" is censoring moderation only when there is an overt personalised attack or combined attack, a bullying  stance for example, where the victim or victims may not be able or willing or strong enough  to respond. i deliberately did not include a third option, because i will not allow a free for all, that which occassionally used to take place in FIBS shouts. i expect moderation to reflect this where possible, and the other guidelines which have been repeated these last few days.

[moonshadow123]

.  .  . but on the other hand, I see that as a carte blanche for the abusers who will be abusers.  To my mind that makes this site open for a brawl. .  .

The forum will be fine 'as is' and I don't see it as "open for a brawl".

Since the beginning of the year, FIBs open shouts have greatly improved. Many that I have considered to engage in bullying or obnoxious behavior in the past have stopped or toned down their language.

So no, abusers will not always be abusers. I believe people can actually change.

[sarah]

What is a moderator's job? What is the problem with #### written instead of ****? What is the problem with interpersonal anything in a forum? Censor means what it means and smells badly like brown jackets, in any situation. If u start censoring a forum, then u better do a private club and not throw your site on the web like this one is.

[Zorba]

I'm not sure I understand the argumentation here, fibsboard is not a public service paid for by tax money, so it's more or less a private club isn't it? If the owner doesn't want any person in, that person doesn't get in.

That said, my personal opinion on moderation or censorship is that I don't see any real value in censoring certain words that some consider to be offensive, however, I think it's good not to allow all sorts of abuse in here, for the simple reason that I think the time, energy and money stog and others invest in fibsboard can be put to better use than that. There's plenty of other websites, fora, USENET or even youtube comment pages where you can throw sh** at each other for free, 24/7.

[socksey]

No. this isn't a vote for more - it is a vote for 'as is', and "as is" is censoring moderation only when there is an overt personalised attack or combined attack, a bullying  stance for example, where the victim or victims may not be able or willing or strong enough  to respond. i deliberately did not include a third option, because i will not allow a free for all, that which occassionally used to take place in FIBS shouts. i expect moderation to reflect this where possible, and the other guidelines which have been repeated these last few days.

The comment I have about this stance is that we really don't know how others take what we may say in jest at the moment or out of viciousness.  The "victim" may be strong one day and weak on another day which is sometimes the case with myself.  Some days I feel like responding and some days I don't.  I know I'm not in the minority in feeling this way.  We all have our ups and our downs.  Noone is exempt.  So who is to say how a lasting post will effect anyone?  Are any of us qualified to know that for certain?  I'm normally pretty strong, but I've been brought to tears many times by things that were hurled in my direction on Fibs as well as on Fibsboard. 

Ask yourself "What is Fibsboard?"  Is this a place where you expect backgammon discussion?  Is this a place where you want adults behaving in adult-like behavior where all participants can feel comfortable and welcome?  Is this a place where you want to see profanity displayed forever?  Is this a place where you expect to have your feelings trampled, whether real or imagined?  These are but some of the questions you need to answer for yourself.  Then you need to decide how you want to vote. 

socksey



The question is not what a man can scorn, or disparage, or find fault with, but what he can love, and value, and appreciate. - John Ruskin (yeaaaaaaaaaaaa!  got my quote log back yesterday! ))

[dorbel]

We aren't voting whether or not to moderate, only how. The quality of the moderation depends on the moderators. If a moderator censors a humourous post in a misguided and unneccessary attempt to protect a friend, as happened to kickstart this debate in the first place, then that is clearly not objective moderation. What we need is objectivity and balance, which to be frank, we haven't had in this most recent case.
This is not "socksey bashing". I sympathise with much that she has to say, not least the effect that unkind words repeated on a daily basis in shouts can have. However, shout bullying is now being strongly addressed with one notable offender removed from that forum. Nobody wants to see it here, nor is anybody arguing for it. Perhaps in future a moderator in doubt as to the propriety of a post can temporarily screen it while getting a second opinion. Perhaps too, moderators should not post in a thread that they are moderating! It's obvious that objectivity is impossible in those circumstances.
One other point.

i deliberately did not include a third option, because i will not allow a free for all

If you are canvassing opinions, then it isn't a good idea to say, as this effectively does, "You may think that but I don't want to hear it". You aren't obliged to act on the vote anyway, so those in favour of less moderation should at least be allowed to vote for it!

[sixty_something]

i quickly voted early on for "as is" .. to me it meant, "stay as 'fluid' as we can"

the whole thing about any form of censorship rules and enforcement is far too easy to over complicate and abuse .. IMO, we're seeing that demonstrated in living color at FIBS with "new" rules and punishments for shout abuse

for me, i'd much rather we continue to err on the side of allowing folks to say what they need to say when they need to say it .. some will make fools of themselves, some will offend others, some will have something valuable to say, maybe even wise, some will have their feeling hurt, some will find another persons attempt at humor personally offensive, some readers will be driven away, some will be attracted, some folks will become enemies, some will become friends -- c'est la vie

no one ever said life as social animals would be easy .. in our own small way we are but a reflection of life itself, which i think we all might agree is a mess .. regardless, we are, despite occasional exceptions, reasonably intelligent and articulate adults .. sometimes we even demonstrate signs of empathy and caring, even love, that is quite remarkable .. of course, being mere mortals, all the vile and nasty stuff we do to one another surfaces too

so, i still vote to go with the flow, to "stay as 'fluid' as we can both here and at FIBS

[moonshadow]

.. you're also most welcome to harass us,

A magnanimous gesture.

point out the folly of our thinking,

I try.

. . . and blame it all on me,

Only if you are either partly or completely responsible. No need to be a victim.

. .  . Neville Chamberlain,

Yes, I did blame Neville for appeasement, which is why Neville eventually got the boot and a man named Winston came on the scene. 

.  .  .  or whomever is handy,

No, I didn't blame President Bush.

.  .  .  but then little encouragement is necessary for that to happen anyway

I needed more than a little encouragement to take you to task. You didn't see me making any "comments" in the thread when as the self-proclaimed Czar you appointed the new Sheriff in town.

The appointment was so flattering and over-enthusiastic, that when you mentioned you were temporarily abdicating the Bloody Mary for other out-of-town "business", I was tempted to post asking if your services as an image consultant or press secretary were now being required by the currently beleaguered leader of a North African nation, who also has a long history of having fun.

You don't give a box of matches to a pyromaniac and then encourage them to have fun.

This is especially true if the pyromaniac doesn't understand why burning down houses is wrong in the first place and always claims people are picking on him after he has been arrested for arson.

And yes, my forbearance did reach its limit (and hence my impassioned post) when later all of us were collectively blamed for actions of said newly appointed sheriff:

when mother Patti has to step in and permagag or ban a player for behavior in shouts, maybe it is time for us all to just STFU, count to ten.  .  .

No, I did not burn the house down.

[sixty_something]

come on, moonshadow .. i guess i deserved that for attempting to humorously refer to being compared to Neville Chamberlain in this thread .. but the entire spirit of your post, moonshadow, as well as your closing quote stems from another thread and another topic entirely (as did my frustrated attempt to make light of it) .. i am tempted to move your post to the relevant thread and remove my cited comments, but i would prefer you to either move it or remove it yourself

i am much more interested in you, moonshadow along with others, critiquing the TPR concept which is the topic of this thread .. this thread has nothing whatsoever to do with vegas_vic as Bloody Mary TD or me as your Neville Chamberlain boogie man .. IMO, there is no purpose whatsoever served in crossing threads with whatever the hot topic of the day is

regardless, i hope you, moonshadow as well as others,  enjoy the numbers and interesting FIBS tournament factoids you're beginning to see .. these are not available without considerable effort .. aviator and i (and others) continue to invest a lot of time on this little project .. there will be more to come

all opinoins are welcome, but please stick to the topic at hand .. otherwise i will split off topic posts from this thread

[moonshadow]

sixtysomething, yes my post was off topic and leading in an off topic direction.

Using your super mod powers, go ahead and put it in the relevant thread with all those other pearls of wisdom.

I am well aware of what you are interested in and where you wish to direct my focus, as I'm fairly perceptive and moderately intelligent, so there is no need to put it in bold face type.

Leave your off topic aside as it is here-- most will miss the significance that you were actually referring to something in another thread.

And zap this post too

[sixty_something]

no problemo, moonshadow .. i'll do it when i can get around to it .. frankly, it is a pain in the arse to do .. i'll also remove my Neville Chamberlain reference in an earlier post which was also way off topic .. as i recall, i was just frustrated that day .. however, i must admit to enjoying it and getting a lot of mileage out of it in shouts and elsewhere

IMHO, if we can't laugh at each other as well as express ourselves strongly what is the fucking point?

who said that?

[diane]

no problemo, moonshadow .. i'll do it when i can get around to it

i'll also remove my Neville Chamberlain reference

however, i must admit to enjoying it and getting a lot of mileage out of it in shouts and elsewhere

IMHO, if we can't laugh at each other as well as express ourselves strongly what is the fucking point?

who said that?

moved for you...not so hard as it looked..cant find anything badly broken yet 

Good

Yeah - you do like a good drama..dont you..

Just you as far as I can ascertain. Why do expressions have to be 'strong'..in an ideal world..no one would have to get worked up or express anything other than calmly - how nice would that be?

[sixty_something]

thanks, diane .. i hate moving stuff around .. i never seem to know what is moving or where and by then i forget why

but this seems as off topic here as it was at the TPR thread .. regardless, i am a most happy camper .. feel free to move me anytime .. just remember to invite me for supper as well -- shrimp on the barbie sounds delightful 

civility in our conversations is the ultimate for our expression, i think .. however, too much civility can get boring, just as too much drama can .. as soon as i figure it all out, i'll make another run at Prime Minister on the beer and pizza ticket

[socksey]

I'm just thrilled moonshadow used someone else's name in his last 2 posts!  

sixtie, you always know the right thing to say!   

socksey



One reason a dog can be such a comfort when you're feeling blue is that he doesn't try to find out why. ~ Author Unknown