[quote author="Nude" date=1252114824][quote author="IrvineRenter" date=1252103160]
When we started a social network, I had no idea what we were getting in to. We have had endless debates about where to draw the line. Zovall and I draw the lines in different places. I am more permissive, and Zovall is more restrictive.
The "be nice" policy was put in place because a frat-house mentality had taken over. New pledges would come in here seeking information, and they find themselves going through an initiation process. Many of those people left and never came back. Driving away newbies is a certain death to social networks, so this had to stop.
Personally, I find Newport Skipper irritating at times, but that is why the software has an ignore button.</blockquote>
Actually, I openly warned about this when it began occurring. People form protective cliques and post a flurry of attack posts ("dogpiling") on whomever has dared to insult one of the clique members. In that particular case, it was Trooper leading the charge and I was trying to prevent it from occuring. Despite my years of experience on internet forums, I was hoping I could help nip it in the bud but what I have come to accept is that once a community gets large enough, certain dynamics inevitably come into play.
<blockquote><blockquote>
What are you thinking is going to be accomplished by calling me out?</blockquote>
I am calling out the fact that you were a part of the problem we used to have with frat-house initiation. We are not bringing that back. Zovall and I agree on this. You are welcome, but some of your antics are not.
To be honest, I miss you, and I wish you were around more often. Your keen intellect and insight has been missed. When I look back on some of the more interesting debates I have had in the forums, many of them have been with you.</blockquote>
I'm not going to apologize for my posts on <b>this</b> thread, but I will admit taking a bit too much pleasure in tangling with people in the past... which led to some extra-venomous posts. I appreciate your candor and your willingness to admit I added something to the forums.
<blockquote>When I look at this whole situation, I see the place the frat-house mob has in social networks. When people aggressively skirt the lines of propriety, the bullying effect can be very disruptive to the social order. When there is a local mob to keep order, new individuals with aggressive tendencies are pushed back by the mob. The collective sets powerful rules for individual behavior.
The question becomes, what do you do when the mob is unruly? You guys were driving people away. If there isn't someone in charge who can restore order, chaos can ensue with the mob. Moderators are the ones who restore order -- or at least we are supposed to be.
(I just realized that Zovall is the Emperor, I am Darth Vader, and Graphrix and Nude are the Jedi. Hmmm....)
I am too permissive. I can simply ignore information that is not important to me, so as long as I don't see people name calling or making strongly negative characterizations, I don't say much. Zovall wants a more orderly level of civil discourse. Both Zovall and I agree on the need to prevent the mob from driving away newbies -- good newbies that is.
The real problem here is that there are some newbies that <em>should </em>be driven away. I am not the judge of who those people should be, but there needs to be a mechanism where a group of people can drive away newcomers who do not fit into the community.
Perhaps people can email me or any moderator, and as moderators we can open a poll in the forum on what should we do about a certain newbie's behavior. The post awgee did where he clilpped together dozens of comments by Newport Skipper is a great example of the type of new entry a moderator could do. As moderators we can do this without being perceived as being aggressive because maintaining order is part of the job.
I am not a good moderator. I am the first to admit that. I will be more diligent in my duties and try to find better solutions to problems like the blow-up this thread has become. (BTW, the thread has been the most interesting in ages on the forums.) I don't have all the answers when it comes to being a forum moderator. If someone has a constructive criticism or advice to offer, I will be happy to hear what you have to say.</blockquote>
I don't think anyone, not even Skipper Dan, is intentionally trying to be evil. However, you are correct in that there is a place for people like no_vas, graphrix, and myself to be ourselves within this community. And it is admirable that you are willing to admit that there is room for improvement. I wasn't asked to be a moderator and I wasn't going to volunteer, I wasn't asked for my input on the rules here either, even though I was pretty vocal to zovall about laying down some boundaries when things really got out of hand. However, having been a mod in a few other forums over the last 12 years, and having experience in several new, blooming virtual communities, if I had been asked for input I would have suggested a few things:
<blockquote>Open forums are like high school. You cannot change that and still allow open posting. We all wish we could have elevated, thoughtful discussion but there will always be bomb throwers, trolls, and grammar nazis... there is even a <a href="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm">funny list of all the types</a> of people that you will find populating any sizable forum. Rather than try and fight human nature, or dictate rules every two minute while banning posters and deleting screeds, it's better to compartmentalize the forums. Have a section that is dedicated to friendly banter, a section that covers factual info and data sources, and a zone that is open condoned to be a free-for-all so that people can go at it as they will. Every forum is different, but if I were designing the rules from scratch: the blog comments should be heavily moderated because it is the public face, the real estate section would be split into "Q&A" and "Discussions & Debate" so that newbies can get answers and trolls can get served, which means no dirty name calling but ridicule and derision for those drinking/serving kool-aid without supporting facts and data. The Life style section would also be split into two sections so people can trade recipes and funny videos in one area and the other could be the free-for-all zone with plenty of warnings. That way no one feels they cannot join the forums and participate without being called an ignorant tool.
However, moderation plays a key role in this plan staying stable. Moderators have to have the authority to delete posts AND threads AND user accounts as they see fit. If you don't trust them to act in the best interests of the community and show some tolerance and restraint, they shouldn't be moderators. Giving them a title and no power just invites abuse and mockery. The incident that sparked the formation of the rules was a great example of things escalating because no one was there to end it. However, the rules were not designed for this specific community and the power given to moderators was not even enough to end this particular thread. Had I been a moderator (hypothetical!!!) I would have PM'd Newport Skipper and warned him to focus on facts and sources and lighten up on the challenges or take it to another section of the forums. Had he ignored that, I would have either shut the thread down or deleted his offending posts. I also would have told Graph to chill and stick to presenting facts. If things escalated to nasty personal attacks, thread deletion and temp bans are the next step. But in a free-for-all section, I would have been eating popcorn along with everyone else.
Lastly, I would remind everyone who is responsible for this site that people are people; you cannot demand that everyone adhere to your vision of utopia without draconian controls and pre-approval of comments and posts. Either accept that you are big enough to require traffic cops to maintain order while allowing people to express themselves as they see fit, or close the forums. Otherwise, you will have self-appointed vigilantes like me who come tear into someone because the site owners aren't enforcing the rules they expect everyone to follow. Sectioning off the forums into "Garden Party/Cross Fire/Mortal Combat" zones allows people to pick and choose which parts they want to visit and which they don't, which makes enforcing the rules easier and makes everyone else's experience better.</blockquote>
IR, I apologize if I ran anyone off. It's never been my intention to do so and I tried to keep my issues with others contained within the threads where the conflict began while I was here. I'm not saying I agree with everything you've done in the last few months, but I do recognize that your missteps were made out of noobness and not malevolence. I hope you take my suggestions in the spirit they were offered and I hope you have good day
</blockquote>
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. It is sad that you did not realize how much all of us valued your contributions to the forums.
Zovall is out of town right now, and he has limited time to watch over the forums. When he gets back, we need to have an open discussion of how to properly maintain this community and an appropriate degree of civil discourse. Your input will be appreciated -- everyone's input will be appreciated.
BTW, that <a href="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm">Flame Warriors</a> link is great.
