mercy doesn't seem like someone who should be on staff. she acts too much like a member. if you say something to her, instead of handling it calmly, she acts like she can do her own thing. her responses are more childish than most people around and i'm beginning to question why she was promoted.

'Mod' and 'Member' are not mutually exclusive terms, you know. In fact, very much the opposite. In the same way that not every action taken by a 'member' merits Moderator action, not every situation requires a mod to act like a 'Mod.'

In fact, if we do, we seem to be accused of being either uptight, Nazis, or both.

so it's a vicious cycle of doom?

this is exactly why no one posts in here; someone says an observation and then has a mod jump on their back because they don't see it the same way. this is here to give our opinion about a mods performance, not for you to come in and try to defend everyone's good name.

well, i think most people hold mods up to a higher standard than they do regular members. that being said, i expect moderators to be more mature, friendly, helpful, etc than (most) members.

example, i like being a regular member because i can make subtle snarky comments. i would prefer if a mod didn't. not saying that they can't at all, they just really shouldn't do it often. double standard? not really. they're supposed to be leading the community so i expect them to set a good example.

The problem is when a mod reads something about them that they don't like and they abuse their powers, which is something a regular member can't do.

First off, plenty of people post here. Second of all, if you think the purpose of the thread is just to post observations with no expectation of a response, you've missed the point.

The purpose isn't for someone to say 'I don't like this, fix it,' and the mods just jump to it. If someone gives an opinion I agree with, I'll agree. If someone says something which I think is misguided, I'll 'defend their good name.' That is the purpose ofthis thread. Dialogue. Yes, you give your opinions, but you cannot expect just to criticse with no response whatsoever, that would be a complete waste of all our time.


Yes, but the thing is, mods want to enjoy the community too. I mean, I see what you're saying in that no mod ought to be violating the guidelines, or being snarky or sarcastic or whatever to the point where anyone's feelings are hurt, but if that is part of their personality, they shouldn't shut it off, nor should they be expected too.

For one thing, it makes cB dull for the mod, and for another, it increases the isolation between 'mods' and 'members,' because the mods feel like they ought to be on best behaviour, and tip-toe around other people to set 'an example.' Because the exampl eI want to set isn't one of mild-mannered timidity (God knows, I would SUCK at that), bit rather one of a jokey, fun community.

I mean yes, the mods d have certain physcial (you know what I mean, insert a better word) 'powers' around the forums, in terms of tidying up, closing, moving, and whatever. And yes, a degree of maturity and level-headedness would certainly be helpful when dealing with problems or discussions, bu treally, there oughtn't to be half as many 'problems' as there are, and I think a lot of the needless conflict we see stems from both sides wanting to see too much distinction between teh two groups.

It comes down to what kryo, Elba, and a few others have said recently, mods have to loosen up. That's fair enough, and I totally see where that point of view comes from. But at the same time, 'members' have to be willing to let the mods loosen up, and chill a little.



Well, yes, and that's fine. But, assuming a mod is doing his/her job right (which I accept that you see as not having been the case in several instances, but I'm talking more generally here, so roll with it for a minute), it's not just a mod reading something about them which provokes a reaction, or se of power, or however you want to see it. It's when it is addressed to anyone, and violates the guidelines that action is taken. If it is addressed personally to the mod, it'sno different than if it were addressed towards Jimminybillybob. Steps get taken.

However, I do see why, if mod is taking action against something which does involve them, then I can see why it could be perceived as 'abuse' of powers, because there is an element of personal stuff in there, and it limits objectivity. However, mods are 'protected,' if you like, by the CGs the same as anyone else is, and the way things work from a technical perpective makes it inevitable that it will be a mod who deals with a mod's issue, which can make it seem like we're 'rallying round' each other, and just crush people under our iron-heels, but realy, it's not what that is about.

Again, though, I do tend to agree with the idea that a mod PERSONALLY dealing with a remark or whatever made against them may be unwise, because like I said, it's personal, and it tends to be somewhat of an immediate decision. Would you perhaps be supportive of a rule which said that mods cannot warn or verbally warn over a matter which directly involves them (being bashed, etc.), but rather must wait for another mod to do so?

I mean, clearly that won't erradicate the problem of 'abuse' altogether, largely because a great deal of that is entirely based on personal perception, but it would at least help with the whole concept of mods 'taking it out' on members when they are personally under stress. It's a start, is what I'm saying.

MAIN PURPOSE: members to evaluate moderator performance, not mods come in and say that what we are saying is wrong. i understand that you'd like to resolve it, but i was voicing my opinion like the topic asks me to do. i'm going to end this here, though, because i'd rather not fight about it. i do, however think that this is the reason most people don't post their opinion because it's always blindsided by defense.

a) Main =/= exclusive.
b) What is the point of posting your opinion if you don't want any Feedback on it? You say 'I' want to resolve it, but surely you must do to. Or were you just trying to cause some kind of scene?
c) Maybe people don't constantly post criticism because a large number of people don't have any, not because they're scared, or whatever.

I'm sorry to disagree, but I think Mercy is a good mod. :T Well, I can see where you're saying that she is more like a member, but I find that to be what I actually like about her. Most of the other mods rarely interact with the members as much as Mercy and a few select others, and Mercy still does her job. ^_^

Okay, that's all I have to say.

I'm going to agree with Michelle.

And to satisfy those who think moderator's should be "on their best behavior," I'll agree somewhat that there's a time and a place for "acting like a member."

Well I personally don't think there is any situation in which it is OK for a moderator to aggravate an argument with a member. And I think that's what Spencer was referring too. Of course you would want members and moderators to interact.

People are making it sound like we're too different species, and I never noticed it being that bad.

Oh, well in that case, you just gotta watch who you "aggravate," I guess. =P

(As in, just screwing around with friends.)

I third that.

It's not a bad idea, but it feels like killing communication.

I guess, but if a member wants to discuss/argue with a staff member something that is going on, they can do it through PMs.

Oh. I never saw that. shrugs*

Yeah, you're right. I supposed that could go vice versa as well.

I also vote that the mods shouldn't lie and try to dodge questions.

And I also vote that mods should be held accountable for their mistakes.

The issue with that is not every person will want to solve their issues by PM.
but i too second the idea of

Then what's the purpose of this thread? For the purpose of transparency, I post here.




AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.


Yep, and sex offenders shouldn't be registered and people with young children shouldn't know that their neighbor is a child molester.

Wow, dude. Just wow.

ROFL at you breaking your own proposed rule.

^flawed metaphor, because that law is ineffective, but whatever.


Yea, well, the fact that people are constantly drawing lines between 'mods' and 'members' and bitching about how crap all the mods are is not at all an indication of that at allllllll. OBVIOUSLY that's true,








With all due respect, that makes the entire point of the thread COMPLETELY useless. IF we're jus tsupposed to accept whatever 'judgement' people make about us with no Feedback as to why that is the case, it is not in anyway helpful. WE might as well bring backa 'who do you hate from cb' thread, where people say 'i hate hljgrytgiur because he/she is a bad mod.

Sorry, but that renders all your posts pointless, becuase you never get any feedback. Because as much as you guys think the mods may be wrong in our actions, we can think your wrong in your perceptions thereof. And neither is more or less valid than the other.

...

Wow. Just wow.

^ No you aren't, that's just silly.

TO be honest, I don't think anyone who is scared of someone answering their concerns to the point where there afraid to post is concerned enough.

I think Suzzette was conveying the idea that members do not feel comfortable posting Feedback here because they know someone will come along and jump to their (the mod receiving the feedback) defense. The last comment I took to be tongue-in-cheek. XD

I don't think that discussion should be absolutely removed from or prevented in this thread, but I think that the counter posts (the responses to the feedback) should probably be more exclusive to the person receiving the feedback. Let them speak for themselves if they so choose. Even then, there's no need to be defensive. No one will 100% like what you do, like how you mod, how you post, etc. But that's ok. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and this thread was made for the Community in general, not for Staff (other than taking criticisms and feedback and learning from it one way or another). It's their platform, not ours. Let them have the mic. That's just how I see it.

I am very sorry if that comes off preachy and patronizing.

Yes, it's all very well to provide a platform for people to voice their complaints, but the fact is that what some people complain or have doubts about won't always be something that we can (or should) change.

It's not a question of jumping to anyone's defense, but rather of offering explanations.