Here's What's Wrong With The Moderator System

[Duane Hinton]

I'm a lurker

I admit: I'm a lurker on this forum. I check it out every day for useful pool related posts, but rarely post. Doesn't seem necessary for me to post since there are so many multi-thousand post members that know more than I. But since classes are out for semester break I have had more time on my hands to follow this drama. I finally decided to weigh in with my opinion. This poll is meaningless since there is only one person whose vote counts ( way to go Mike. I love this forum). Secondly, Jimbo was in the wrong and got what he deserved.
I believe that anytime a pool related forum topic becomes non pool related, that posters comment should be deleted and he/she be reminded to keep it pool related. I never go to the non pool related section simply because it doesn't interest me. This poll and all the other non pool related topics should be removed from this section of the forum.

 

[George]

I didn't know if perhaps some newer members were unaware that when viewing the Poll at the beginning of this thread, that you can click on ANY 'blue number' on the right hand side of the Poll and see exactly who voted for what....
Doug
(just being helpful)

IMO I believe that this poll will no longer be a fair representation of what people think. Since this post the voting trends have swayed considerably. I think now that people realize their votes can be seen that some will choose not to cast a dissenting vote while those that support status quo will now be more likely vote.
For the record I believe Dave's doing the best he can but I also believe that this forum is to large for any one person to moderate. Do I agree with all his decisions? No, but I don't think I would agree with ALL of anyone's decisions.
I do have to say that I've been posting here since 2000 and I think more people have been banned here in the past year than were banned in the previous 6 years combined. I find that trend a little alarming.

George
(just being helpful)

 

[JAM]

IMO I believe that this poll will no longer be a fair representation of what people think. Since this post the voting trends have swayed considerably. I think now that people realize their votes can be seen that some will choose not to cast a dissenting vote while those that support status quo will now be more likely vote.
For the record I believe Dave's doing the best he can but I also believe that this forum is to large for any one person to moderate. Do I agree with all his decisions? No, but I don't think I would agree with ALL of anyone's decisions.
I do have to say that I've been posting here since 2000 and I think more people have been banned here in the past year than were banned in the previous 6 years combined. I find that trend a little alarming.

George
(just being helpful)

Very nice post, George, but if I may ask you a question, it would be this.

Did you notice an increase in the banning here at AzBilliards at the same time that RSB NG was infiltrated with vulgar and filthy posts? I sure did.

JAM

 

[travis trotter]

i am sure that dave would not give up his job too easy because i think he is the best moderator around here

thanks

 

[George]

Very nice post, George, but if I may ask you a question, it would be this.

Did you notice an increase in the banning here at AzBilliards at the same time that RSB NG was infiltrated with vulgar and filthy posts? I sure did.

JAM

Yes I did and I have chosen to pretty much stay away from there. I do believe that the root of 95% of RSB's problems are FL and his minions.

George

 

[JAM]

Yes I did and I have chosen to pretty much stay away from there. I do believe that the root of 95% of RSB's problems are FL and his minions.

Aside from the minions (LOL), do you think it is appropriate to post on AzBilliards Discussion Forum, a forum which is moderated and has rules, in the same manner what is the norm on RSB NG?

Fortunately or unfortunately, my VERY FIRST experience posting on any Internet website was RSB NG. Though it did give me an understanding of forum culture, I eventually decided that RSB NG was an uncomfortable environment for me personally. That is not to say that it does not bring joy to others, i.e., the Gang of 10.

My point, George, is that the EXACT same terms have appeared on this forum -- "idiot," "hypocrite," "reading comprehension problem" -- by some posters who used to and/or still do frequent RSB NG. I do not think that it is acceptable to post on AzBilliards Discussion Forum with vulgarity, filth, and name-calling, the same vulgarity, filth, and name-calling that happens from time to time on RSB NG.

Yes, there are some great gems and words of wisdom on RSB NG if you can wade through the rough waters. I do feel sorry for the RSB-ers who have been posting on Usernet for a long time and had to abandon ship because of the vulgarity, filth, and name-calling. However, it does not mean that the vulgarity, filth, and name-calling that exists and/or existed on RSB NG should be acceptable on AzBilliards Discussion Forum.

This is, in fact, a moderated forum with RULES, rules which are to be followed. If an AzBilliards member breaks the rules not once, but twice, I think the moderator needs to take action promptly to prevent AzBilliards Discussion Forum from becoming a war zone.

JMHO, FWIW!

JAM

 

[George]

Aside from the minions (LOL), do you think it is appropriate to post on AzBilliards Discussion Forum, a forum which is moderated and has rules, in the same manner what is the norm on RSB NG?

Fortunately or unfortunately, my VERY FIRST experience posting on any Internet website was RSB NG. Though it did give me an understanding of forum culture, I eventually decided that RSB NG was an uncomfortable environment for me personally. That is not to say that it does not bring joy to others, i.e., the Gang of 10.

My point, George, is that the EXACT same terms have appeared on this forum -- "idiot," "hypocrite," "reading comprehension problem" -- by some posters who used to and/or still do frequent RSB NG. I do not think that it is acceptable to post on AzBilliards Discussion Forum with vulgarity, filth, and name-calling, the same vulgarity, filth, and name-calling that happens from time to time on RSB NG.

Yes, there are some great gems and words of wisdom on RSB NG if you can wade through the rough waters. I do feel sorry for the RSB-ers who have been posting on Usernet for a long time and had to abandon ship because of the vulgarity, filth, and name-calling. However, it does not mean that the vulgarity, filth, and name-calling that exists and/or existed on RSB NG should be acceptable on AzBilliards Discussion Forum.

This is, in fact, a moderated forum with RULES, rules which are to be followed. If an AzBilliards member breaks the rules not once, but twice, I think the moderator needs to take action promptly to prevent AzBilliards Discussion Forum from becoming a war zone.

JMHO, FWIW!

JAM

I don't know where you're going with this but I think I post in a manner consistant with what I deem acceptable for AZBilliards. In 7 years of posting here I have never been bannned
I am not going to discuss happenings at RSB here at AZ because I don't feel it's appropriate for this forum but the fact that I still post here and no longer post there should give you a small clue as to how I feel.
Happy New Year JAM

George

 

[JAM]

I don't know where you're going with this but I think I post in a manner consistant with what I deem acceptable for AZBilliards. In 7 years of posting here I have never been bannned
I am not going to discuss happenings at RSB here at AZ because I don't feel it's appropriate for this forum but the fact that I still post here and no longer post there should give you a small clue as to how I feel.
Happy New Year JAM

Of course, you post in an acceptable manner here at AzBilliards, as you did on RSB NG, IMHO.

My point is that what is considered an acceptable posting style on RSB NG, which is anything and everything goes, may not be considered an acceptable posting style here on AzBilliards NG. The words "idiot," "you have no clue," "you have a reading comprehension problem," and "hypocrite" that I so often read on RSB NG appeared here on AzBilliards Discussion Forum on a frequent basis.

I do not think it is appropriate on a moderated discussion forum with rules for a poster to continue to call people "idiots" and "hypocrites" and respond to their posts as "you have no clue" or "you have a reading comprehension problem" when a poster is stating their opinion in a dignified manner.

After a person is called "idiot," "hypocrite," and other names on a repetitive basis, it establishes a pattern of posting. If the offending party gets banned once, is given a second chance, and gets banned again, I think it speaks volumes about the acceptability of an offending party's posts on a moderated forum with rules.

I happen to think a person who has been banned twice should stay banned. However, I am not the moderator. I do, however, follow the rules of this moderated forum, unlike some of the banned offending parties.

JAM

 

[TATE]

I admit: I'm a lurker on this forum. I check it out every day for useful pool related posts, but rarely post. Doesn't seem necessary for me to post since there are so many multi-thousand post members that know more than I. But since classes are out for semester break I have had more time on my hands to follow this drama. I finally decided to weigh in with my opinion. This poll is meaningless since there is only one person whose vote counts ( way to go Mike. I love this forum). Secondly, Jimbo was in the wrong and got what he deserved.
I believe that anytime a pool related forum topic becomes non pool related, that posters comment should be deleted and he/she be reminded to keep it pool related. I never go to the non pool related section simply because it doesn't interest me. This poll and all the other non pool related topics should be removed from this section of the forum.

Duane,

Thanks for the post. Don't be shy, you should post more often.

Technically, it should be in the NPR section, but I posted this here so that it would be seen by everybody to get a more accurate poll. The other sections are only frequented by small groups.

Chris

 

[JAM]

Happy New Year JAM

In my haste to respond to your post, in an effort to let you know that I was not referring to your posting style, I forgot to say it:

HAPPY NEW YEAR, GEORGE!

JAM

 

[TATE]

IMO I believe that this poll will no longer be a fair representation of what people think. Since this post the voting trends have swayed considerably. I think now that people realize their votes can be seen that some will choose not to cast a dissenting vote while those that support status quo will now be more likely vote.
George
(just being helpful)

George,

I just want to point out that for all I know, Mr. Wilson wants help too. I have no clue what he wants or needs. I've not discussed that with anybody. He knows better than anyone else what needs to be done. Maybe he wants a team, input, whatever, and maybe he doesn't.

Whatever the case, any choice made in the poll does not reflect on Dave whatsoever as far as I'm concerned. This is not an attempt to upend him. I would hope that's not the perception. Mike may be the owner but Mr. Wilson is the moderator. The area of responsibility falls directly on his shoulders.

This poll was an opinion poll, simple as that, on how the boards should be moderated. It is to elicit creative ideas and opinions. It's to learn, not tell.

Chris

 

[xidica]

I do not like people insulting each other by name calling, but it is also my opinion things have gotten too restrictive and imposing on A-Z, to the point where censorship is inhibiting many posters. This hurts the entertainment value. Polite society is mind numbingly boring.

I believe Mr. Wilson is overloaded and alone. A-Z has grown and needs a better system.

I propose:

- There should be more than 1 moderator, maybe a tribunal.

- The moderators should remain anonymous. Why should Dave be vilified for doing a job? That sucks!

- They should vote for banning.

- There also should be guidelines for permanent bans.

- The mods can issue warnings and pull threads, all the same powers as now.

- There should be a constitution defining both freedom of speech and posters rights to be protected from slanderous attacks.


I would appreciate your ideas and a vote.

Chris

I think this would work out pretty well if done right. Take a lot of stress of Dave too

 

[George]

George,

I just want to point out that for all I know, Mr. Wilson wants help too. I have no clue what he wants or needs. I've not discussed that with anybody. He knows better than anyone else what needs to be done. Maybe he wants a team, input, whatever, and maybe he doesn't.

Whatever the case, any choice made in the poll does not reflect on Dave whatsoever as far as I'm concerned. This is not an attempt to upend him. I would hope that's not the perception. Mike may be the owner but Mr. Wilson is the moderator. The area of responsibility falls directly on his shoulders.

This poll was an opinion poll, simple as that, on how the boards should be moderated. It is to elicit creative ideas and opinions. It's to learn, not tell.

Chris

Chris,
My post was in no way directed at Dave(I don't see how you got that out of it) and I believe as I have otherwise stated that I think he's doing the best he can. Moderating this forum has to be a full time job and I can appreciate that. My post was just an observation I made about the voting in this poll. I, as well as many others have been following this thread.

George

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

Well, Shut My Mouth (and pass the gravy)

Originally Posted by Smorgass Bored
I didn't know if perhaps some newer members were unaware that when viewing the Poll at the beginning of this thread, that you can click on ANY 'blue number' on the right hand side of the Poll and see exactly who voted for what....
Doug
(just being helpful)

IMO I believe that this poll will no longer be a fair representation of what people think. Since this post the voting trends have swayed considerably. I think now that people realize their votes can be seen that some will choose not to cast a dissenting vote while those that support status quo will now be more likely vote.
For the record I believe Dave's doing the best he can but I also believe that this forum is to large for any one person to moderate. Do I agree with all his decisions? No, but I don't think I would agree with ALL of anyone's decisions.
I do have to say that I've been posting here since 2000 and I think more people have been banned here in the past year than were banned in the previous 6 years combined. I find that trend a little alarming.

George
(just being helpful)

I hate to think that I skewed the Poll by posting that the results may be viewed. Most regular posters were aware of this function. It's just entirely possible that people are voting in Mr. Wilson's favor and don't care who knows it (I know I did).......
Doug
( is it possible that someone would vote a different way because their vote is visible to the other members here...... I'm aghast ! )

 

[George]

I hate to think that I skewed the Poll by posting that the results may be viewed. Most regular posters were aware of this function. It's just entirely possible that people are voting in Mr. Wilson's favor and don't care who knows it (I know I did).......
Doug
( is it possible that someone would vote a different way because their vote is visible to the other members here...... I'm aghast ! )

The poll's not about Mr. Wilson.
You're no stranger to forums or usenet Doug and I think you knew exactly what you were doing otherwise why would you mention it. I've been posting here a long time and I only found out recently that some polls results could be viewed so assuming that most know might be a stretch.
I wasn't inferring that this would change peoples votes. What I meant was, and I think that I stated it quite clearly is that some who would have voted against the status quo may choose not to cast a vote for fear of being singled out because their vote would be known. I voted without worry because I don't feel that to be the case but from reading many posts there are those here that believe the contrary.

George

 

[watchez]

Idiot is a demeaning term. So is crackpot. So is any curse word. So is any inclination that you are attempting to show childish behavior towards someone sexual standing, true or false. Hypocrite I don't have a problem with, especially if there is proof to show the hypocrisy. I think many a politician has called each other a hypocrite---an idiot, no.

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

I Only Voted ONCE (even though I live in Florida)

The poll's not about Mr. Wilson.
You're no stranger to forums or usenet Doug and I think you knew exactly what you were doing otherwise why would you mention it. I've been posting here a long time and I only found out recently that some polls results could be viewed so assuming that most know might be a stretch.
I wasn't inferring that this would change peoples votes. What I meant was, and I think that I stated it quite clearly is that some who would have voted against the status quo may choose not to cast a vote for fear of being singled out because their vote would be known. I voted without worry because I don't feel that to be the case but from reading many posts there are those here that believe the contrary.

George

I reply:
You're right George, the Poll isn't about Mr. Wilson, it's about whether a change is/was needed.

Tate wrote:
The polling seems to be pretty balanced. 46 are in favor of a change of some sort and 28 would like to see the system stay as is.
I wonder what Mike and Dave think is needed?


I further reply:
Since the post about being able to view the Poll results, the current numbers (adding up two options for change against one for staying the course) are 70 in favor of change and 61 for leaving the current system in place.
What do you mean by 'singled out' ? Do you mean to imply that anyone voting for a change would face repercussions or be put on a' list' ? I don't think anyone here is afraid to have their vote seen by anyone else. I may be wrong, but I hope that I am not.

Doug
( I think that when you create a Poll, you have the option of showing the votes or not showing who voted. I wonder why Tate/Chris chose making who voted for what available. Maybe he didn't know the choices. )

 

[TATE]

Doug
( I think that when you create a Poll, you have the option of showing the votes or not showing who voted. I wonder why Tate/Chris chose making who voted for what available. Maybe he didn't know the choices. )

I did the polling openly because I just like seeing what people's opinions are. I don't thing Doug's statement would have mattered to most of us. I don't think there is really a lot of controversy in this poll. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see Mr. Wilson's opinion in any of the three columns. I didn't think he signed on to be an army of one.

If anything, the results are skewed in favor of "change" because my post presents a one sided argument and then says "vote". Well, naturally there is going to be influence. If I didn't give the argument and had a real poll, with unbiased questions, the results would likely be stronger for keeping the status quo.

I mentioned I was quite surprised there was as much support for keeping the status quo as there was. It's a pretty good showing that, despite the above, there was a lot of support for the current system.

The other issue is the poll was done during a time of emotional upheaval. If I had done it before the bannings of Jimbo, Marissa, and some others (I notice Dave Barenbrugge is banned too?) I'm certain the results would have been quite a bit different.

Chris

 

[George]

I reply:
You're right George, the Poll isn't about Mr. Wilson, it's about whether a change is/was needed.

Tate wrote:
The polling seems to be pretty balanced. 46 are in favor of a change of some sort and 28 would like to see the system stay as is.
I wonder what Mike and Dave think is needed?


I further reply:
Since the post about being able to view the Poll results, the current numbers (adding up two options for change against one for staying the course) are 70 in favor of change and 61 for leaving the current system in place.

Using the numbers you provided voting prior to your post was (46)62.1% in favor of a change (28)37.9% status quo. Since then, (24)42.1% in favor (33)57.9% status quo. Did it affect it? I think so but I could be wrong.

What do you mean by 'singled out' ? Do you mean to imply that anyone voting for a change would face repercussions or be put on a' list' ? I don't think anyone here is afraid to have their vote seen by anyone else. I may be wrong, but I hope that I am not.

Did you read all of my post Doug? I specifically said and I'll quote it:
"some who would have voted against the status quo may choose not to cast a vote for fear of being singled out because their vote would be known. I voted without worry because I don't feel that to be the case"
Don't try to make it seem like I'm implying anything when I clearly stated the opposite. If you think that there aren't posters here who aren't voting specifically because their votes can be seen then you're naive and I've been reading your posts for years so I know you're not that naive.

Doug
( I think that when you create a Poll, you have the option of showing the votes or not showing who voted. I wonder why Tate/Chris chose making who voted for what available. Maybe he didn't know the choices. )

Perhaps a poll not showing who people actually voted for would have been the way to go with this.This is a controversial topic and I am sure that a lot of people are not willing to take a public stance on it but may have voted in an anonymous poll. You don't agree?

George

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

and....... A Little Bit Rock & Roll

Perhaps a poll not showing who people actually voted for would have been the way to go with this.This is a controversial topic and I am sure that a lot of people are not willing to take a public stance on it but may have voted in an anonymous poll. You don't agree?
George


I agree with that assesment and I think that it's too late for a 'do over'. It's been an interesting discussion and I think that I have nothing further to add, so I'll bow out now.
regards, Doug
( I'd like to think that I'm still a little naive )