Fun vs. Fair ... the debate between trolling and proper use.

[burgun824]

I moved this here from another thread in the interest of being fair. I would like to hear the debates from both sides if everyone is agreeable without getting nasty with each other.

Actually, I want to address the point more constructively. There is a habit here on TFF of derailing every sensible thread with 'trolling' or what could perhaps be better described as blunt non-constructive points that kill the conversation. Lots of people are guilty of this, myself included. That isn't a dig at just the admins or mods. But you are repeat offenders. Thads, your post here, and Darkson's follow up, are a prime example of that. It just invites argument. And the problem with this is that the job of moderators is to enable free-flowing discussion, not strangle it at birth.

Just look at what TFF used to be like. 30 pages threads that were generally constructive. They might have become heated, but they were about something (e.g. +2 DP or whatever). Now we have no discussion, just bickering. And that is primarly because the culture is for people to make snide remarks and kill off conversation all the time.

In my opinion the mods should be trying to guide us away from that, not lead it. You guys decide upon the culture here.

I'm sure that I've never done this.......more than 1,000 times.

Seriously though, I would argue that it's the topic that invites argument. It's so hard to not troll certain threads when they deal with touchy subject matter. I even completely agree THAT I AM THE ONE IN THE WRONG BY DOING IT! However, if you start cracking down on the ability of the users to make snarky comments at sensitive material then you're heading this forum down the road to becoming a Draconian Society. I for one enjoy the laid back nature of TFF.

However, I do realize that you can't let it get out of control because that's not fair to other folks using the forums "properly" either. Perhaps we should all live on the high road and just let it be for the better of the community. But some individuals just seem to know (probably quite unintentionally) how to get the rabble rousers wound up with their subject matter. And yes, I realize I am often in the later category.

Ultimately, there needs to be discretion. There are a lot of different personalities on this forum, just as there are in life. Some are going to be sensitive, others are going to be serious, and a few are going to be a magnanimous pain in the @$$ because they simply enjoy it. "Official Forum Rules" obviously govern, but if you rigidly abide by those then I believe that the beauty of TFF's laid back nature would start to feel robotic and cold.

What are your opinions on where the line should be drawn?

[Joemanji]

We are all nerds here, and we all behave in a certain way (trying to prove how clever we are by making snarky comments). The main thrust of the quoted posted is that whilst this will always happen, the moderators should a) be better than this and b) try to softly guide discussions through such comments. At the moment on TFF we have a situation where we are being undermoderated (only Thadrin and Darkson of the ten or so named mods are genuinely active) and the moderation that is happening is based entirely upon the personal interests of those moderators rather than furthering the interests of the forum (for example hard censorship of the use of the word 'Gaspez').

My opinion is that we need new moderators. This place is too big to be run by a couple of guys, as it has been for the past 5 years, and has massively suffered as a result. Time for some new blood.

[burgun824]

I have noticed a fair amount of the "old school" crew have wandered off in my time here. I haven't been around long enough to understand what the exodus was about though.

I don't personally have any issues with Thads or Darkson and their chosen moderation techniques. They don't strike me to be unreasonable people. They are no more or less opinionated than the rest of us. However, I can see that this could cause an imbalance in power if their personal opinions are allowed to dictate the majority of moderation decisions made here.

Anyone else? Don't be afraid folks. We're all adults here...at least physically.

[robsoma]

Completely agree with joe on this one

[Shteve0]

FWIW, I think the mods on here do an excellent, if basically thankless, job. Sure, they're not all active any more, but off the top of my head I can think of at least five who are regularly or semi-regularly on here, not including doubleskulls. I haven't seen any real evidence that the board is undermoderated (that's not to say that there is no evidence, merely that I haven't seen it), but rather an effort is made to step in only as a last resort. The logical alternative, I would suggest, is far worse.

To be honest, I'm particularly wary that demands for more moderation - as absolutely evidenced with the storm around, and resultant banning (if only temporarily) of VoodooMike - are all too frequently a mask for basic intolerance (though I'm quite sure that's not the case here). As he pointed out at the time, just because you disagree with someone, it doesn't mean you have the right to shut (or shout) them down. I think the mods here do a fine job of walking that line.

[nazgob]

My view would be that as online communities go, ours iS pretty friendly.

Meanwhile, the mods do an excellent job when they need to. As someone who used to be here a lot and is now a more casual user, I'm perfectly happy as we are.

The guys who run this site don't get much gratitude, but they definitely deserve it.

[lunchmoney]

My opinion is that we need new moderators. This place is too big to be run by a couple of guys, as it has been for the past 5 years, and has massively suffered as a result. Time for some new blood.

Putting yourself forward for a greensuit?

[Digger Goreman]

I think the mods here do a fine job of walking that line.

I have no problem with you, Shteve0.... However, the thought police definitely run an ham-fisted hypocrisy here....

[voyagers_uk]

maybe the under-moderation comment is fair, but then again for those that have grown older here (Joe) you should need less moderation.

I log in at least every other day, more at weekends, but don't think a lot of threads need commentary or moderation. which to be fair is how this site should be operating.

We do get bugger all thanks, and to be fair we knew that when we signed up. Dave and Simon have opinions like all members and that should not be discouraged. however they are very positive when it is based on the official game/LRB6.0 (maybe 4.0 in Simons' case).

it is only breakaway nonsense that sometimes gets more abuse than required.

if members have a problem they can still bring it to us and we will take action, sort of like a favourite uncle (without the inappropriate touching)

soo whilst some of you are fed up with trolling, ask yourselves is it just the Admins or is it just that it is easier to blame them

[Waldorf28]

it is only breakaway nonsense that sometimes gets more abuse than required.

Bingo. I play table top, Fumbbl and Cyanide, but I know full well that I'll get sneered at for admitting the latter. Certain mods here are outright hostile to that platform and make for a very unwelcoming environment. Fortunately I can cope because I don't give toss what they think and can filter out/be righteously amused by their bias, but new arrivals who land here because of they discovered Blood Bowl through the PC version are unlikely to stay for long. And I guess that's the point. You don't want them to.

[VoodooMike]

I've been part of various forms of online communities for almost 30 years at this point, and there are certain things that have been true in every form and format. One of those things is that volunteer moderation is always a nightmare, and I don't mean a nightmare for those poor, oft-malign volunteer moderators. Yes, its a thankless job, but usually because they don't deserve any thanks for it as they do the job poorly and quite often at the expense of others. Good moderation is like good driving - if they're doing it well you shouldn't even notice it's happening.

The problem may be in the term "moderation" which suggests policing - it absolutely should not be that. People come here (or anywhere) of their own free will, and to take part in voluntary interaction with other people with similar interests. People are perfectly capable of choosing to stay or to go depending on how they're enjoying things, and as technology has gotten better and smarter there have been additional methods of self-governing introduced like block lists. The one thing moderators seem to do the most in online communities is the thing they are absolutely not needed for.

What should moderators be doing? They should promote discussion and help users to get involved in discussions. Examples of this are:

- When someone posts a new thread and nobody seems to be responding, a moderator should go out of their way to do so to get the ball rolling.
- When a thread veers off on a tangent, they can split the thread into two and encourage people to take part in both.
- Teach newer users how to use the existing tools to handle their disputes themselves.
- When there has been a lull in new threads, moderators should try to create some new ones that people will respond to.
- Deleting genuine spam as quickly as possible.

The best policy I've run into thus far was to have a mandatory separation between someone's moderating account and their general use account... in the same way police officers aren't supposed to wear their uniform when they're off-duty, since that can lead to people mistaking that person's opinion for official policy, and can lead to people blaming the system for the actions and opinions of a single individual. It really doesn't help a ton to have stupid disclaimers like they've tried on Cyanide's forums about the colour of text being used; its a bit like a uniformed police officer saying that he's only being official during your conversation when he unholsters his gun, and then continuing the conversation with his hand resting on it.

Some people seem to imagine that heavy moderation leads to a happy group of people... and it will, but only in the same way that allowing the Hutus to completely finish off the Tutsi with machetes would have led to a single, happy group, too. If you systematically enforce one type of personality, one type of interaction, you'll certainly end up with exactly that, but at the expense of diversity and vibrancy. The online BB community and the associated websites are a mess of this sort of thinking.

So, in short... I don't think TFF needs more moderators, it just needs a different moderation philosophy that focuses on inclusion and promoting activity. Moderators should be considered (especially by themselves) as public relations not policing, and their implementation strategy should be in line with modern online PR practices. The second you pull out the club to deal with things people are saying, you've proven yourself unqualified to wield it.

[Digger Goreman]

I've been part of various forms of online communities for almost 30 years at this point, and there are certain things that have been true in every form and format. One of those things is that volunteer moderation is always a nightmare, and I don't mean a nightmare for those poor, oft-malign volunteer moderators. Yes, its a thankless job, but usually because they don't deserve any thanks for it as they do the job poorly and quite often at the expense of others. Good moderation is like good driving - if they're doing it well you shouldn't even notice it's happening.

The problem may be in the term "moderation" which suggests policing - it absolutely should not be that. People come here (or anywhere) of their own free will, and to take part in voluntary interaction with other people with similar interests. People are perfectly capable of choosing to stay or to go depending on how they're enjoying things, and as technology has gotten better and smarter there have been additional methods of self-governing introduced like block lists. The one thing moderators seem to do the most in online communities is the thing they are absolutely not needed for.

What should moderators be doing? They should promote discussion and help users to get involved in discussions. Examples of this are:

- When someone posts a new thread and nobody seems to be responding, a moderator should go out of their way to do so to get the ball rolling.
- When a thread veers off on a tangent, they can split the thread into two and encourage people to take part in both.
- Teach newer users how to use the existing tools to handle their disputes themselves.
- When there has been a lull in new threads, moderators should try to create some new ones that people will respond to.
- Deleting genuine spam as quickly as possible.

The best policy I've run into thus far was to have a mandatory separation between someone's moderating account and their general use account... in the same way police officers aren't supposed to wear their uniform when they're off-duty, since that can lead to people mistaking that person's opinion for official policy, and can lead to people blaming the system for the actions and opinions of a single individual. It really doesn't help a ton to have stupid disclaimers like they've tried on Cyanide's forums about the colour of text being used; its a bit like a uniformed police officer saying that he's only being official during your conversation when he unholsters his gun, and then continuing the conversation with his hand resting on it.

Some people seem to imagine that heavy moderation leads to a happy group of people... and it will, but only in the same way that allowing the Hutus to completely finish off the Tutsi with machetes would have led to a single, happy group, too. If you systematically enforce one type of personality, one type of interaction, you'll certainly end up with exactly that, but at the expense of diversity and vibrancy. The online BB community and the associated websites are a mess of this sort of thinking.

So, in short... I don't think TFF needs more moderators, it just needs a different moderation philosophy that focuses on inclusion and promoting activity. Moderators should be considered (especially by themselves) as public relations not policing, and their implementation strategy should be in line with modern online PR practices. The second you pull out the club to deal with things people are saying, you've proven yourself unqualified to wield it.

A superb and elegant post.... That last line should be engraved in stone and displayed prominently in the entrance hall to all forums....

[voyagers_uk]

Hello Mike, I have missed you too... it almost sounded as if we were in agreement on the need for moderation, maybe, just a bit.

the separate account argument is interesting, I would kind of like to discuss that with the admins to see if they would consider it.

I suppose censure (which you regard as wielding the club) is a last resort when faced with breaches of site rules. if a user/member reaches that point on their own then they have no recourse if censure occurs. I would hope that we are all adult enough to never need that again. I hate it when I cannot get on here for whatever reason and I am sure most members feel the same.

Waldorf, I really like Cyanide however it doesn't like my PC and the techy's answer to my problems is that I have to buy a new pc to play their game.

sounds kind of like 40k to me.

I am about to buy a new pc and will try again. fingers crossed.

[Lychanthrope]

I would hesitate to quote Voodoo Mike. I took his advice and he is the only person I have ever blocked and I had to do so at several BB forum sites.

EDIT He was the ultimate troller. He took great delight in trolling, and would never move on.

[GalakStarscraper]

Joe for the record .... I do quite a bit of moderation to help Thads and Darkson ... so it is not just those 2.

Things like moving threads to new locations and such that do not need a Mod to post ... yup took care of that ... I do regularly. Like Thads I'm hear every day.

Tom