Conquer Club

Hello fans, devoted stalkers, jealous haters and mullet fanciers. Another thread in this most august of CC's fora, has sadly been going off topic, branching out to a discussion on the dastardly nature of mods, their duplicitous biased ways, nonsensical rulings and general spiteful evil souls.

The most hairy, olive skinned, and olive oil lubricated of mods(am presuming doggy holds this record, anyone else want to throw their hats in the ring, dako? Lindax? DJ Teflon?) your friend and mine the hellenic canine has expressed a desire to discuss mods.

Here is a thread to do so. Are mods evil, if so some proof please. Are mods self serving, attention seeking, publicity whores(sounds like the average municipal alderman), with no backbone, no courage, no morals, who take obscene pleasure in shutting down healthy and normal discussion on this site?

Is it possible that just maybe mods are getting a poor deal, slaving away as volunteers to make this site better for us the great unwashed, ungrateful, whining plebs. Could they be doing a great job of tackling a thankless task for little reward, zero praise, and mountains of abuse. In short are all mods secretly masochists.

I'm also wondering whether it would be possible to get a community consensus as to what constitutes a mod in the communities eyes. Is it any player with a funny coloured username? Or possibly only multi hunters, and discussion/chat moderators qualify as personifications of earthly evil on the net.

Am looking forward to an out pouring of wisdom from the CC community. Please remember to try and back up your opinions as much as possible with facts. Am well aware that this is a very emotional issue for some people.

It has been brought to the forefront (again) that moderators on this website, by and large, are considered poor and have ruined the forums (specifically) for the community. Some of us may not agree with these ideas (me, for example), but I think it's worthwhile to tease this stuff out. I was asked by a concerned forum goer not to have this discussion in another GD thread, so I've moved it here. Please abide by the general rules regarding the forums, specifically please attempt to refrain from baiting, trolling, or flaming other users (whether moderators or not). Let's also not get into specific moderators please.

Here are the points that have been made about moderators generally. Let's call them developmental points.

(1) Over-moderation has chilled at least the general discussion forum; moderators should control their tendency to moderate in an abundahnce;
(2) Moderators are biased in favor of particular users or groups of users; moderators should be as unbiased as possible (or least appear to be unbiased);
(3) Moderators do not uniformly enforce the rules; moderators should enforce the rules uniformly, including with respect to other moderators;
(4) Moderators are hypocritical; moderators should refrain from hypocrisy both from a moderation perspective and with respect to their own posts and gameplay.

The effects of these characteristics are the alleged destruction of the public community (or at least the erosion of the public community) and the booting of a number of entertaining users.

Your 3rd point touches on this, think the language could be changed a bit. How about we talk about consistency. I think consistency is something that the community is looking for, and a lot of people feel that it just isn't happening.

I'm very much in the less rather than more rules please camp. As a manager I've learnt the hard way, tell someone to do something once, tell them to do that thing forever. Letting people take responsibility for their own actions is the ideal. Sadly on CC, just as in the real world this is not always possible. Some people will go to great lengths to shirk responsibility, including accepting responsibility for their own actions, and how their actions impact on others.

Would it be asking too much to have mods when making rulings in C&A, to clearly and concisely state the reasons for the ruling. Sadly on this site more so then some other sites there are a lot of "uber" nerds. Setting precedents and following them, or stating clearly why the existing precedent is not being followed whilst pandering to the legalistic soul of the true uber nerd does serve a useful function. It allows ordinary paid up(and yes unpaid) members to have clearly defined case history, so they know where they stand.

There is a perception that the rules don't apply equally to all. Which on a site which we pay to use is manifestly unfair if that is indeed the case. I would hate to see CC become a site with a tome of rules requiring 2weeks of dedicated study before taking a turn, but maybe that is what it will take to make most people happy?

Could there possibly be a mod "code of conduct" published somewhere. How hard would it be for mods to clearly state why they are locking a thread, high lighting relevant quotes to support their case. If a thread is locked for flaming, please show the flaming. Don't lock threads because of the "potential" for flaming/trolling/baiting etc. Give people enough rope for fucks sake. The attitude that "I'll lock this because you are all stupid naughty children that can't be trusted to have an adult conversation" is so fucking patronizing almost makes me vomit in my mouth. So that is my gripe with mods.

If your going to take action. Say why, prove why, take ownership of your action, have the humility to admit if you f*ck up, and be approachable.

ACT ON WHAT IS, NOT WHAT MAY BE. If you can see the future why are you wasting time being a mod on this site, there is a fortune predicting lottery numbers going begging.

discuss ")

man,what to say abouth mods(not all mods ofcourse.)
Well lets start with ...**** ******* *** **** **** **** ***** and ofcourse **** ********** *** ***** **** *** ****!!!! ***** ****. also *** ******** ****** ****** **** **** **!!!! ***** ** *** ** *** ********* **** , almost forget ******** *** ** ***** ****** ***** ** **** *** *** **** ***, and to conclude ******** *** ** ****** *** !! ***** ** **** *** **** **** ***** **** *** ***** ****.
I think that you now get clear picture. I hope that these will help you.

I would like to offer my humble opinion, as a former member of the community, mod, and now a member of the community again. The moderators have it tough, there's no question about that. No matter what any authority does, whether online or in the real world, they will always upset/anger somebody. That's just the way the world goes round. It's how you as a mod deal with your position that determines whether or not the position is more difficult, or in fact easier.

As a mod, you have to control yourself, being careful as to what you say and do, as you are under constant scrutiny from the critical members of the community (I should know, I found out the hard way). With power, comes responsibility. But then this creates a problem for the moderator, because they have to be careful what they say and do, which can be very frustrating. I for one found this tough.

Communication, I believe, is the biggest weapon that the mods (and community I guess) possess. Communicating clearly with the community on a personal level, not just in a general level. I personally believe that the admin should have more interaction with the community. I mean, have you tried having a proper conversation with lackattack? Now, I guess this is unreasonable, as the admin already have enough to do, but it's a nice thought. Oh, AndyDufresne is the best person on Team CC by the way.

I know there is a lot of debate about what is and is not acceptable, and also about consistency from the mods regarding their decisions. I would like to point out at this point that every moderator is different. Different ages, different genders, different religions, different morals, different standards, different time zones, different lives and different educations. This could make communication and cohesion very difficult, no?

I could type a hell of lot more, but my conclusion is that the mods have a difficult job under the spotlight, and they have the power to make the job easier or more difficult for themselves. Thanks for listening.

Mods aren't ruining the forums, it's the elitists who think they're somebody because they have a certain rank or are in a certain clan.

Well thought out post joshy. Seem to remember that you got caught up in some nastyness with someone(clearly delusional and in need of mental health first aid, and our pity) stating that you were his tame mod and you were going to site ban an entire clan for him. Can imagine wouldn't have been the best time in your life. I've found most mods to be approachable. Though I do get frustrated with the length of time it takes for mods to reach decisions. Why did you become a mod? Why did you stop being a mod? Understand if its all to soon, to raw, to personal and private to share with the community. Would be cool though to get one mans story, "How I became part of big brothers police network, and how I regained my soul". Flippancy aside, would be interesting me thinks.

BoganGod wrote:Though I do get frustrated with the length of time it takes for mods to reach decisions.

A few words on this:

Since becoming a moderator, there has been an increase in the amount of discussion on some issues. For example, if there is a post that is arguably trolling, we may spend a significant amount of time (days or a week) discussing the issue amongst ourselves (the global moderators and discussion moderatores) before reaching a decision. The results of this have been, I think, twofold: (1) More even-handed decisions with less one-person dictatorship and (2) More time from the moment a report has been generated or an issue has been identified to the time a decision is determined.

JoshyBoy wrote:Communication, I believe, is the biggest weapon that the mods (and community I guess) possess. Communicating clearly with the community on a personal level, not just in a general level. I personally believe that the admin should have more interaction with the community. I mean, have you tried having a proper conversation with lackattack? Now, I guess this is unreasonable, as the admin already have enough to do, but it's a nice thought. Oh, AndyDufresne is the best person on Team CC by the way.

This I agree with 100%. Lackattack is a busy man, sure, but if he would make a bigger appearance on the site, show that he really cares and listens to the concerns of players, I'm sure that would go a long way towards appeasing the complaints of lots of people. Currently he seems sort of distant. He's this guy we never see unless there's an announcement to be made. The newsletter had this issue where they did an interview with lack, which was really nice... it would be cool if this was a thing that would be done every 2-3 months or so.

BoganGod wrote:Well thought out post joshy. Seem to remember that you got caught up in some nastyness with someone(clearly delusional and in need of mental health first aid, and our pity) stating that you were his tame mod and you were going to site ban an entire clan for him. Can imagine wouldn't have been the best time in your life. I've found most mods to be approachable. Though I do get frustrated with the length of time it takes for mods to reach decisions. Why did you become a mod? Why did you stop being a mod? Understand if its all to soon, to raw, to personal and private to share with the community. Would be cool though to get one mans story, "How I became part of big brothers police network, and how I regained my soul". Flippancy aside, would be interesting me thinks.

First of all, thanks Bogan, I think this is one of the most mature posts I have ever made. I guess I can act like a responsible adult. The whole thing with eddie2 was a storm in a teacup, and it's in the past.

I became a mod for several reasons, but predominantly because I genuinely wanted to help out with the running of the forums (especially the Suggestions). This was the main reason, and I take offense to anyone who suggests otherwise. The other two reasons were a coloured name (soo much better than the boring old grey!), and the fact I felt like I had some power, which I did (moving threads, locking threads, editing posts). Yes, that's right, we all like a good power trip (it's hard not to go on one!).

The reasons I left were multitudinous (is that even a word? ). However the main reason that I left was due to the fact that I was caught up in the "theherkman scandal", or my own personal "HerkGate". I made some bad choices, and it would have looked bad for me to remain on the team. In all honesty, I hated making the Team look bad and actually cared about my fellow mods. The other reasons I left were the fact that I know some moderators didn't (maybe still don't) like me, moderating Suggestions was very very time consuming and frustrating, and I could not speak my mind and behave how I wanted.

It can be tough being a mod!

There's no form of moderation that will be acceptable to everyone. No matter where you draw the line, there will be someone on one side saying you weren't strict enough and someone on the other side saying you were too strict.

The mods on this site seem to do an above-average job of keeping real abuses under control, while not cracking a whip over every triviality. That's all anyone can ask.

Good job, guys.

BoganGod wrote:Would be cool though to get one mans story, "How I became part of big brothers police network, and how I regained my soul".

You know he's not the only person to retire his mod position...

BoganGod wrote:Are mods evil, if so some proof please. Are mods self serving, attention seeking, publicity whores (sounds like the average municipal alderman), with no backbone, no courage, no morals, who take obscene pleasure in shutting down healthy and normal discussion on this site?

While finding some threads locked a bit quickly that are no big deal, I have no problem with the moderators here and think they do an excellent job. This forum functions well and superfluous frictions are dealt with in a reasonable fashion and timely enough manner. In this age of instant gratification I appreciate the time spent ironing out problems and the rare instance of of what some perceive as snap judgements in the time I've spent on this site.

jakewilliams wrote:

BoganGod wrote:Would be cool though to get one mans story, "How I became part of big brothers police network, and how I regained my soul".

You know he's not the only person to retire his mod position...

I was a way more controversial mod.

No-one cares for your story.

I like moderating. So far, I haven't gotten many complaints, unless from my beginner days. I think the biggest part of making things consistent is remembering any and all precedents from even the smallest of cases, and ones from before the current team. That, and the size of the whole team (all CC volunteers total over 60 now) make things a bit hard to keep track of. Also, as JoshyBoy stated, each moderator is different. We're a pretty diverse bunch I'd say, and keeping up can sometimes be a challenge.

As you may or may not have known, many Dept. Teams are also now appointing a 'co-leader' or 'deputy' to assist the Dept. Leader in things, because as more and more things happen on the site, they can get harder to keep track of. I think this is a step in the right direction as far as organizational structure goes to ensure that there is proper coverage and not too much burden on one person.

-rd

thegreekdog wrote:(1) Over-moderation has chilled at least the general discussion forum; moderators should control their tendency to moderate in an abundahnce

Based on the interactions between pimpdave and myself, I would state that more moderation needs to occur, or perhaps more quickly in situations like that one. Frankly, it took an embarrassing amount of time for action to be taken on that situation.

thegreekdog wrote:(2) Moderators are biased in favor of particular users or groups of users; moderators should be as unbiased as possible (or least appear to be unbiased);

Well of course they SHOULD be. Human nature is human nature, of course. Of the moderators that I've dealt with the most, I would say that thegreekdog, MeDeFe, and rdsrds2120 have been very successful at this.

thegreekdog wrote:(3) Moderators do not uniformly enforce the rules; moderators should enforce the rules uniformly, including with respect to other moderators;

I haven't really seen any situations regarding moderators that I thought REQUIRED moderation particularly (unless you count the Admin in this, in which trolling seemed to have been blatantly overlooked). I will say that I don't at all believe the rules are enforced uniformly on this site, and I think that's one of the biggest failings of the site.

thegreekdog wrote:(4) Moderators are hypocritical; moderators should refrain from hypocrisy both from a moderation perspective and with respect to their own posts and gameplay.

I haven't really seen much of an issue here, to be honest.

thegreekdog wrote:The effects of these characteristics are the alleged destruction of the public community (or at least the erosion of the public community) and the booting of a number of entertaining users.

I have tended to appreciate "the booting off a number of entertaining users", so maybe I'm not the right one to ask. In almost all of those cases, I thought it was deserved, including my own various "vacations".

Woodruff wrote:Based on the interactions between pimpdave and myself, I would state that more moderation needs to occur, or perhaps more quickly in situations like that one. Frankly, it took an embarrassing amount of time for action to be taken on that situation.

If by action you mean bannings, then it took a long time. If by action you mean moderation that did not involve bannings, it did not take a long time. Private messages were sent almost immediately.

Woodruff wrote:I will say that I don't at all believe the rules are enforced uniformly on this site, and I think that's one of the biggest failings of the site.

Could you expand on this? Ideally, please do not provide names, just situations.

I take it this discussion is about Moderator mods and not all the other kinds of folks with colored names. Being an SoC instructor is great - we help other players learn the ropes of Escalating and team play, and I get a lot of satisfaction out of my job. Plus, OldRisky44 always brings in doughnuts and coffee to work, so that's a cool perk. The extent of moderation we actually do is very small compared to our duties in the classrooms.

macbone wrote:I take it this discussion is about Moderator mods and not all the other kinds of folks with colored names. Being an SoC instructor is great - we help other players learn the ropes of Escalating and team play, and I get a lot of satisfaction out of my job. Plus, OldRisky44 always brings in doughnuts and coffee to work, so that's a cool perk. The extent of moderation we actually do is very small compared to our duties in the classrooms.

It can be about all moderators if the people want. However, it appears the discussion has been going in the direction of discussion moderators (light green names), global moderators (dark green names), and admis (red names).

jakewilliams wrote:

BoganGod wrote:Would be cool though to get one mans story, "How I became part of big brothers police network, and how I regained my soul".

You know he's not the only person to retire his mod position...

You never had a soul jakey. Meat substitutes don't have souls, only a chalky/milky off white gloop where the immortality should be.


Joshy, thanks for your input so far mate. I don't care what Leehar says about you, your ok in my books.

I think this thread would have been a bit more busy if it had been called something else when it was merged. I was hoping for something along the lines of "Mods are evil biased haters, discuss nicely please".

Thanks to all the other posters. macbone I don't know how you can bear to be in SoC with bruceswar, having someone so studly and shapely around 24/7 must be very distracting.

No one aside from woody(only touched a little.....) has really touched on/gone into specifics of what exactly is wrong if any thing is wrong with the ways mods handle things. Am wondering whether it is very much a case of baseless grizzling on the part of grumpy old twats like myself.

BoganGod wrote:Joshy, thanks for your input so far mate. I don't care what Leehar says about you, your ok in my books

Suck on that Leehar!!!!!!!!!!!!

JoshyBoy wrote:

BoganGod wrote:Joshy, thanks for your input so far mate. I don't care what Leehar says about you, your ok in my books

Suck on that Leehar!!!!!!!!!!!!

Remember that hoary old chestnut - be careful what you wish for, as you may just get it.......


What does the community think. Leehar works on the newspaper, does that make him a mod?

Expressing an opinion and getting your point across here has never been difficult and neither has co-existing on this forum with the mods and administrators. There will always be people who feel the need to "push it" and being rebellious is one side of human nature. It's not easy for some people to contain themselves when they realize they now possess certain freedoms and that includes openly posting anonymously on the web forums.

Those "entertaining posters" who received early retirements without benefits could have reeled themselves in a bit and backed of the BS. Choices are made knowing full well what the consequences might be and the results of those decisions are what they are. If you enjoy this site? Never gamble more than you can afford to lose.

Some privileges are appreciated more after they're gone.

BoganGod wrote:What does the community think. Leehar works on the newspaper, does that make him a mod?

You know you like me 'modding' you

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:I will say that I don't at all believe the rules are enforced uniformly on this site, and I think that's one of the biggest failings of the site.

Could you expand on this? Ideally, please do not provide names, just situations.

First of all, I should say that I believe I get along with all of the moderators on this site very well, and I respect all of them as honestly trying to do the best job they can...with the exception of the admin personnel...who I don't particularly hold in very high regard at all.

Quite honestly, I see favoritism of mods toward individual users. I've never noticed any sort of a clan-relationship involved in any of them, but then again...I don't pay any attention at all to clans anyway. But lets take the case regarding Blitzaholic (I'm using names here because the situation is so well-known)...in my view, it was painfully clear that he was given a pass on his misconduct that would have absolutely resulted in a much different treatment were it...for instance...owenshooter (again, someone whose past actions are fairly well-known) who were to take those actions. There's no question in my mind of this. Could it be perception? I suppose so...but I think I tend to be able to avoid that trap for the most part...yet even if it IS just perception, then that's a problem in itself. When it comes to leadership, the perception of misconduct is just as damaging as actual misconduct.

A second situation, and there are a few that fall under the same umbrella as this next example, but I can provide one name...mine. Frankly, I feel as though I am treated pretty well on this site from a moderation-perspective. I presume that is because GENERALLY SPEAKING (yes, I'm well aware of the variances, no need to call them out <smile>), I am not an extremist and I tend to be pretty rational in the statements I make and the arguments I use. Despite complaints from some quarters to the contrary, I don't make a habit of being a forum-rule-busting ass. I think that people who fall under that umbrella, such as I, are given much more leeway than someone who perhaps doesn't do so as well. Perhaps that's reasonable, benefit of the doubt and all, perhaps not.

A third situation, that somewhat ties in with mine, is the one I mentioned previously regarding pimpdave and I. The moderators are well aware of how I view that situation as POTENTIALLY a case of the rules not being applied uniformly (particularly the rule regarding trolling)...a case in which the lack of action in being applied uniformly led to the situation going far more out of control than it should have.

And finally, a more general situation...the use of the word "retard" has apparently now been sanctioned as acceptable. By contrast, the terms "nigger" and "faggot" are not. This seems highly inconsistent and non-uniform, in my view, as all three words are equally offensive.