Why is an explanation needed? I just don't get it. It strikes me as insecurity. Why don't we just try it for a week or something, because I don't see the point in practically begging people to post in this thread and then jumping on them when they do. Just the fact that we have to remind people to "Please voice their opinions in the Mod Performance thread" day in and day out tells me something.

Why is an explanation necessarily deemed to be the same thing as 'jumping on people.' It has nothing to do with insecurity to explain why something happens, quite the opposite.

Again, I will ask what the POINT of posting in Mod Performance is if you don't receive any feedback. It's an insult to the intelligence of the people who post here to tell them just to assume it is being dealt with Backstage, and I think that presents a far more damaging image than it does for a Mod to disagree with someone's assesment of the staff.

Okay, let's continue it this way. We might as well label this thread "Moderator Performance V. 1 part 2" because Mod Performance V1 was just a big argument with not very much critique. If THAT'S the purpose of this thread, then pardon me. I can faintly see what you are saying by "discussion", but I don't think the community (mods included) has proven that they can handle it.

It is still jumping on people because obviously none of the mods seriously think they suck or they'd quit without someone telling them that. If someone posted in here that you sucked for one reason or another, you're going to say you don't, because it's you and you think they're wrong. OF COURSE you think they're wrong. They already know that. They're trying to tell you why they think YOU'RE wrong. Telling them that they're wrong about what they say about you every time they say something is pretty pointless too.

if there's no chance of change, then there's no point of saying anything or jumping to someone's defense other than just to start a petty argument.

So what happens when a mod is wrong?

If that were the case then there be no need for this thread at all.

SO... because we are all too immature for discussion, the soluton is to patronize us and tell us that it isn't allowed? Interesting.

Perhaps if we just go on with things, instead of trying to prevent every discussion from happening, we could move past the inane bickering and actually moved forward to the discussion itself, they may prove more productive.


Well, then let's delete the thread, if it's purposeless without responses, and purposeless with. Clearly, we're all wasting our time.




Who said there was no chance of change? All I said was, or all I meant was, people shouldn't be forced to changed because of every critique they are given, because it comes from the perspective of one member, based perhaps on just one instance. Instead, it's better for there to be dialogue, and a mutual understanding.


Well, what happens when the member is wrong?

Or, instead of being irritating, I could perhaps answer. Really, it's unlikely that anyone side is going to be completely wrong, which is why it is important to have dialogue/ If no one talks, NOTHING gets done. It's possible that we might not reach a conclusion which satisfies everyone at all, but at least we wil have tried.

I'm interested in hearing what the members have to say about this. I mean they are the ones that post in this thread, so I guess instead of guessing how they feel...we should just ask? If they haven't already been scared away.

I just thought I'd restate this from the original topic post.

This thread was never intended for full-scale discussion. I'm not saying that you CANNOT respond here, I'm saying that you shouldn't be so quick to jump to someone's defense. Let the person getting the feedback do that if he or she so wishes. That way folks won't feel like they're being ganged up on. That isn't too much to ask for.

This doesn't have to be black and white (NO DISCUSSION ALLOWED or DISCUSS EVERYTHING TO A BLOODY PULP) but it shouldn't deter people from posting feedback because they are afraid to or don't want to deal with someone jumping on their back because they posted what they feel is necessary to convey their concerns regarding staff.

Like Suzzette, I'm interested to see what the Community feels about this. I think it's fairly obvious where particular moderators are on this subject.

As long as the complaints are acted upon, I really don't care. I don't want to write a complaint and then be told "Ok thank you. Now shut up and take your medicine, citizen."

Why would anyone post something here if they didn't want Feedback on it? Surely, that defeats the whole point of their complaint.

And I agree that individuals should deal with the complaitnsbrought up to them, but if something deas with the mods more generally, people ought to be talking about it.

I would also like to observe that just because the members who post in this thread are a very small percentage of the cB population, and even of the active population, it doesn't follow that everyone else is 'scared.' Perhaps, God forbid, they're HAPPY. No intelligent, open-minded person with a valid point to make is seriously going to be scared away by being asked questions about the nature of their complaint.

You know..you've said this a couple times, and I still don't get it. Why would they want feedback on it? This is a thread to report moderator performance, not to comment on reports. I don't think a Moderator Performance Report Comment thread is need either.



Maybe that's your opinion. But how does that explain time and time again in this very thread, and the past thread...a number of members have said, "And this is why I don't post here. Because someone always jumps down my throat!"

So... you would be content to post something here, and never here anything about it again? That is just... very strange.

Well, for a start, if they posted to say they were too scared to post, then clearly they weren't that scared, but that's just nit-picking. I suppose some people won't post. But I think it's better to actually deal with the problems which do get posted, rather than have a lot of things posted that never get resolved, so that people kepp having the same complaints. Maybe a discussion will scare someone away, but if in the process, we've resolved their futurecomplaint, then all will be well.

^ WEll, that kind of comment is one thing. For instance, it could be dealt with just by someone saying 'he's on vacation, back soon,' or whatever, and would have clearly tangible results.

I'm talking about things like 'OMG ALL THE MODS ARE CRAPPY NAZIS,' which are clearly more deep rooted.

Obviously, not all posts will merit the sane level of discussion. But the posts that do should receive said discussion.

^^ Well, the vague types of questions can't be eliminated, and they are the ones which require discussion.

Straight-forward ones get a straight-forward answer, like if you asked why someone's activty was so low. It ought to be evident when discussion is needed, because it will happen.

Considering this thread is really for members to voice their opinions about the mods, I say that the members should be able to decide what they want to have happen to this thread. If they want it so that moderators can't reply in this topic, sure. Anyway, if any mod would happen to really have a problem with it, they could just PM the member. That still might be the "backlash" that members were avoiding in the first place, but I'm sure that they'd rather have the backlash in private rather than in public.

Though, I do like where Rebecca is going as well. I'm thinking that moderators would only be able to reply to someone in-thread if the member calls for it in his/her post. That way, if they really did want to have a discussion, they could.

And if a member was so worried about something getting done, then they could always PM an admin.

the fact of the matter is, the mod performance thread is out in the open. we critique you for everyone, including yourself, to see. getting on the topic of backstage...if we as members do something wrong, it is brought up backstage and we have no chance of defending ourselves or giving our side of the story/what happened, therefore leaving it to your judgment. of course it's different, but it works the same way.

And if a point raised is relevant to the whole of the staff team?

Use your imagination. =P It's not like there can't be any exceptions or anything.

Though, I figure that most cases won't call for "emergency discussion."

Well, obviously not. Like I said, most hings here are straightforward.

It is just a poor concept to describe discssion as an 'emergency' measure, or as something out of the ordinary.

The thing is, it's not called "discussion" around here, it's called "backlash." People find it annoying when mods try to defend themselves each time they're critiqued. I agree with Sammi's logic.

It's like Steven Spielberg filming a movie about how Ebert & Roeper are wrong each time they critiqued his movies.

I think digitalfragrance and brownsugar doing a good job and very nice

I would like the design staff to take note that the graphics, scripts or tutorials queues haven't been gone through for days. However, they are doing a good job on accepting/rejecting layouts.

AGAIN, I would like to point out that if people want to call it 'backlash' and abandon anything constructive which would come out of it, that's really their own fault. AGAIN, I would like to point out that defending yourself by denying the problem and discussing the problem are not the same thing.

Honestly, it's as if people WANT to be afraid to post, so they're desperately scrabbling to find something remotely scary.