locking threads due to untenable position?

[rob_s]

http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=52763

Didn't know that it was par for the course for moderators to lock threads simply because they took an unpopular and untenable position.

[dbrowne1]

I was wondering about that as well, but I won't say any more since I have a dog in that one...except to say that it sort of proves my point.

[NCPatrolAR]

If you have an issue with a thread being locked; either PM the moderator that locked it and ask why or shoot a PM to one of the Staff members asking about the closing of the thread (please provide a link).

[Buck]

The thread was locked as the thread had run its course… All parties made their points… Was there something meaningful that you wished to add to that discussion that had not been discussed??? If so please PM me…

B

[glocktogo]

PM sent.

[Littlelebowski]

At other forums as to avoid any semblance of unfairness, if a moderator is personally arguing a point, he loses all moderation powers in that thread, and other mods moderate that thread while he argues. I believe that to be the best way of doing things.

I do not see why the thread was locked and it was not off tracks, getting personal, nor inflammatory except towards Bloomberg.

[Thomas M-4]

At other forums as to avoid any semblance of unfairness, if a moderator is personally arguing a point, he loses all moderation powers in that thread, and other mods moderate that thread while he argues. I believe that to be the best way of doing things.

I do not see why the thread was locked and it was not off tracks, getting personal, nor inflammatory except towards Bloomberg.

I have no dog in this fight. Littlelebowski recommendation sound completely fair and reasonable to me.

[SHIVAN]

If a moderator, or staff member, is involved in the dynamics of a thread, they take a more relaxed stance to moderation in that thread and rely on their other mods or staff members to make the "tough calls".

That thread was heading nowhere, fast. It was probably best to reset, and repost with a different tilt. Hoping for a different vein of discussion.

Posting threads like this don't really accomplish much though. If someone can articulate to Buck, via PM, a solid reason to re-open the original thread, I'm sure he might take it under consideration. Right now, it looks like it was probably for the best anyway, so I completely defer to his judgement on this one.

Thanks.

[dbrowne1]

The thread was locked as the thread had run its course… All parties made their points… Was there something meaningful that you wished to add to that discussion that had not been discussed??? If so please PM me…

B

No need to PM.

No, it really hadn't "run it's course", and I found it "interesting" that you locked it right after you made sure you got the last word in after the exchange right before it. So it doesn't seem that what you've said above was the whole, or real, reason you locked it. If it were, you would have just said "this has run it's course" in the final post instead of continuing to argue.

I don't have any desire at this point to go back and start the thread up again, though.

[Littlelebowski]

Exactly right, dbrowne. No one was bashing cops. Another mod (JW777) even pointed out that everybody in the thread was righteously angry over Bloomberg's hypocrisy. Buck, you locked the thread when your own factual errors over VA were called out. To maintain integrity as a moderator, you should not be getting the last word in on threads you are personally vested in. As far as the PMs go, can we not discuss things openly?

[dbrowne1]

I'm not trying to pick a fight with Buck or anyone else here and don't really need a long discussion about this. I was a mod for years on another board so I've been on the other side of the fence. For the most part I think the the mods here do a pretty good job.

[Littlelebowski]

I don't think anyone here is trying to pick a fight. I'd just like to see an excellent site become even better and more fair.

[Palmguy]

Respectfully, I don't think moderators should be closing threads in which they were actively engaged in the discussion absent a blatant need to do so. This thread is perfect evidence of the reality that doing so is not above reproach to outsiders. With respect to the thread in question, to me there was no compelling need to close it, no violations of CoC, was not anti-LE in any way, shape or form, no personal attacks, no nothing.

[Sparky5019]

While I have to make the disclaimer that I am relatively new here and I also have to say (shamelessly) that I think, despite a few flare ups, I have pretty good forum etiquette. That said, this new crowd of trolls (I label them this because they are not even reading the content and posting stupid remarks that no bearing on the discussion just to boost their post count) seems to have shifted the once helpful atmoshpere of all the highly experienced people here that were/are graciously willing to share their experience with those of us who are just beginning in this arena.

The members and their attitudes are what made me stay/move from discovering ARF.com. I have to relay that I had a post deleted this AM by GotM4 because a troll posted a redundant comment that showed he had obviously not read the thread at all; Robb deleted his as well. My post was politely explaining to him that he was being redundant and needed to read the stickies about posting. I got a nice PM from Robb explaining what he had done...I was not upset at all by Robb's action and explained to him that, if that troll was going to post an argumentative response, that I was going to ask that the thread be closed at MY request.

My point is...that I think our mods do a great job for the large area that they have to cover (I mean gosh, it's not like they have day jobs or anything;) ). My personal coping strategy has been to correct them as politely as I can and ignore them for the most part. I really appreciated getting that PM letting me know that someone recognized that this guy was a troll and was happy to deal with it!

My closing thought is that, in Cowboy Action Shooting, there is a very simple rule book and an expectation that you play with a sense of honor and the "Cowboy Way". While that whole "world" is not part of this "world"...there is one part that applies...

You can't shame the shameless!

Those who will skirt the rules and be underhanded in their dealings and discussions have no place in either "world". From what I have been able to tell from those here prior to troll-dom, they are good, stand-up people. If the trolls won't be shamed and educated, then the mods here are reduced to using the means that they have available to try to uphold the standards that we have come to love and respect about M4C.

I intend to give the staff and mods here my full support and even ask them to closed one of my threads if the trolls get to slobbering on it too much!

Great job guys...keep up the good work!

Sparky

P.S. - Sorry for the long post and I hope it wasn't too much of a hijack (as that was the opposite of my intention).:)

[graffex]

I too agree with littlelebowski, and was upset once I realized that Buck decided to close the thread because he didn't agree with what was being said, although there was nothing to get bent out of shape over (this isn't the first time I've noticed this either).

[austinN4]

And I too agree with littlelebowski.

I recall a thread where a mod posted what was to me obviously incorrect information so I asked him to prove up his statement. He got his back up and threatened me in the open thread with banishment, which totally shocked me.

I posted proof of my position anyway. To his credit he did not banish me (didn't admit his error either) but it seemed to me at the time to be very wrong for a mod to throw his weight around in a thread he was posting in.

Edited to add: I do think that overall the mods here do an outstanding job in a tough environment.

[EzGoingKev]

I think the moderators do a good job of keeping the BS level down on the site here compared to some other sites but with that being said, I do think that some posts have gotten locked and/or deleted just because a moderator didn't agree with something in the thread.

[Army Chief]

I was so disgusted with what played out in the mentor thread on Monday evening, that I have spent more time than I would care to admit just weighing whether or not I even want to continue my involvement on this site; that said, I've got enough staff time on enough forums to know that the work of a moderator is never done, often contentious, and usually thankless. I'm inclined to give them a pretty significant margin of error, as even the best mods will inevitably step on the wrong toes from time to time.

I will, however, repeat my comments from the other night, which were inexplicably expunged along with two-thirds of what I considered to be a pretty instructive and proactive thread that was playing out in near real-time: when a good member chafes against moderation, he is generally not taking issue with what has been done, nearly so much as the manner in which it was carried out. The complaint that goes forward to the staff may be one of over-moderation, but I don't think that is really the core issue, as a member in good standing who is following the rules and striving to uphold the culture of the site has absolutely nothing to fear from moderation; in fact, I welcome effective moderation, as it is the difference between a good site and a truly great one.

On the other hand, no one likes to be treated poorly, and too many members can point to times when a tired or exasperated staffer wielded the blade in a curt, contentious or confrontational manner. Sometimes that is warranted and even necessary. Most often, it is the sign of an overworked moderator who has simply lost his patience for being questioned or for dealing with foolishness. This is admittedly a hard balance to strike, but I think we have to go back to People Skills 101 here and remember that relatively few of us actually know each other well, and when we alienate each other (whether through carelessness or intent), everybody loses.

Moderators are our first line of defense in upholding the culture of the site, and the role they play as coaches and mentors is every bit as important as their role as enforcers and post-herders. Members need to be reminded of this fact. Conversely, staffers probably need to review that we don't want to acquire a reputation as a site where the management is a law unto themselves, justice is swift and indiscriminate, and pruning is often done without warning or explanation. When these perceptions arise, I think some learning points are being lost.

If we need more moderators to deal with the growth, then appoint them. If we need to adjust our site policies to contain some of the banality that has crept in with some of our newer members, adjust them. If we need to modify, remove or change the ROE on certain boards, then do whatever is necessary.

The culture of the site is undergoing a change, and notwithstanding Jay's incomprehensible "you have just lost your license to bitch" proclamation the other night, the important thing to keep in mind here is that with change comes opportunity. I would like to see the site capitalize on that opportunity, and manage growth in such as way as to preserve the professional culture of the site and protect the contributions of those who have invested many years in helping to build it. It will take a conscious effort, but more importantly, it will take cooperation. That must begin, I believe, with an attitude change -- from all of us -- that strips away the we/they mentality that has been emerging of late.

Whether passenger or crew, if the ship sinks, we will all get wet.

Or worse.

AC

[Artos]

the important thing to keep in mind here is that with change comes opportunity. I would like to see the site capitalize on that opportunity, and manage growth in such as way as to preserve the professional culture of the site and protect the contributions of those who have invested many years in helping to build it. It will take a conscious effort, but more importantly, it will take cooperation. That must begin, I believe, with an attitude change -- from all of us -- that strips away the we/they mentality that has been emerging of late.

Whether passenger or crew, if the ship sinks, we will all get wet.

Or worse.

AC

I couldn't agree more and this is worth repeating...i was somewhat disheartened to read your comment on your 6.8 thread and am tickled to see you chime in here. Well stated amigo.

[tb-av]

I hope this doesn't come across the wrong way but these rules of needing 200 posts and such seem like a technical problem to me rather than a social problem.

Has anyone considered having a forum area specifically for new members. In that area they can ask any question they like. A mentor or mentors would over see that section and based on the question make a few decisions.

1. If the question is valid for the tech areas the mentor can recommend to the staff the user be given write permissions in the full forum while at the same time assuring that the new member has read the rules and is basically "with the program".

2. Point out more reading material in some key threads.

3. Communicate with the individual and possibly determine they are going to be disruptive and recommend their removal.


Along with that, regular members accounts can be set so as not to even see any of this going on. It won't show up in "unread posts".

In addition, if there are enough regular members that truly don't even want to see the general discussion threads, just make a member group.. perhaps "Tech Only" that only sees the technical forums.

All this can be done with a minimum of work on behalf of the staff and with respect to the "New Guy Forum", the only people that even know it exists will be the new guy and the mentors that have the personality to deal with it.

It just seems like to me you guys are gearing up to socially moderate yourselves to death. All you need is a clear cut and concise set of rules and a few forum tweaks. Let the software technically moderate as much as possible.

[Sparky5019]

While overall, I think Littlelebowski has an excellent point and a good working solution to this specific problem!;)

The above sounds like a reasonable idea to cut down on the "trolls" but might prove to be labor intensive. It rings to me like a good way to keep those who are here to learn and contribute on the right track and those here to be malicious and cause trouble a place to be quarantined until they /if they get their heads screwed on straight!

I also think it is ALL of our responsibility to set a good example for the newEST members...as those veterans here have done for us!

Sparky

[lalakai]

best advice to you Rob_S..................avoid the general forums and adjust your expectations. The tech sections still have good info, but in my short time here I'm already seeing the changes. Now i mostly lurk and rarely give input. I remember a phrase from a book: "humblest of the proud, proudest of the humble". Always thought that was a good way to be, and always liked to see that in others. Meh, kasta ti biag.