I'll pen down a few thoughts on what I think would be good to have in moderators:
- An international aspect with regard to timezones. This probably means at least a couple of people from Europe or Africa and a couple from the Americas. I know there might be some people from around UTC+6 through UTC+11, but that might be harder to achieve. Note that I mean this primarily as a practical matter with regard to potential moderator response times, not as an attempt at cultural diversity.
- Diversity of beliefs. This is not an atheist forum. I'm not sure whether this will have to be defined more precisely, but it means e.g. Belfrager could a candidate if he were interested.
PS This is more for myself but it might be of interest:
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/findpost.pl?id=14979862
I wouldn't bother too much with the captchas, but what any forum needs is quick ways to mass delete messages. Post limits and join limits are good as well.
- Diversity in beliefs. This is not an atheist forum. I'm not sure whether this will have to be defined more precisely, but it means e.g. Belfrager could a candidate if he were interested.
Belfrager is not interested anyway.
I think
cultural diversity to be fundamental for moderation. I will defend very much that.
I also think that the ability for "fine moderation", I mean someone's capacity for moderating without people almost even notice it, to be of the most importance. That requires some specific personal characteristics.
I have to say just a word about Sgunhouse and Jax's moderation of former D&D, my conscience demands me so.
I think it was exemplar and I thank you both. Without the comprehension about cultural diversity they demonstrated to possess, I and probably others would have been banned long ago.
An international aspect with regard to timezones.
Than one is essential IMO. I'm a mod on another forum solely to deal with spam posts and there are a handful of us all in different timezones. It was desperately needed to combat the spam that plagued the place once upon a time. Still get the odd day when the bots get through but they are now dealt with swiftly regardless of the time of day.
Answering to the OP.
Also every moderator should better have her/his English at quite fluent a level - so that not causing any trouble.
I'm not about myself.
Anyway, let's see who'll come in the first place. MyOpera has currently some forumers good enough with their English (I don't mean any Scots!:D).
One difficult matter is that of legality. Nowadays one cannot slander people on the web and be sure of anonymity and invulnerability and then there is the tricky matter of copyright. Does anyone know how Opera handled this?
It becomes a moderator problem because they are the forum's first line of defence, but none will be sufficiently au fait with relevant laws in every country on the planet to cover such a thing definitively. Or how to dodge Jihads come to that.
Then there is the matter of liability for the forum itself if it does not take reasonable steps to prevent such digressions. So that is something we should have more or less straight away.
It's clear there should be an up-front general disclaimer (eg in the sense that "It's all the poster's opinion and not necessarily that of the Forum") and there should be Forum Posting Rules. A starting point for the latter could be the Opera version - Forum rules (http://my.opera.com/community/forums/rules/), although I see there are one or two things missing, for example the matters mentioned before of not using slander or infringing copyright and one or two other things.
It's dismaying how quickly one gets into rules and regulations isn't it!
I'll have a go at it if you like Frenzie; it will take a couple of weeks or so since I'm going to Nl this week. I may need to contact Opera if I'm to plagiarise their rules.
I'll have a go at it if you like Frenzie; it will take a couple of weeks or so since I'm going to Nl this week. I may need to contact Opera if I'm to plagiarise their rules.
That would be great. :)
One difficult matter is that of legality. Nowadays one cannot slander people on the web and be sure of anonymity and invulnerability and then there is the tricky matter of copyright. Does anyone know how Opera handled this?
Or which laws apply in the first place. The server is in .nl, isn't it?
About slander - I'm not sure if it would be enough to keep the forum inaccessible to anyone who isn't a registered user ( so it won't be 'legally public', for lack of a better term )
It's dismaying how quickly one gets into rules and regulations isn't it!
Indeed. You'd hope the only rule necessary is "don't be a dick", unfortunately it's never that easy :(
Looking at the rules in other forums ( and the motivation behind them ) definitely looks like a good idea.
The server is in the Netherlands, so I would imagine Dutch laws apply. Mac, you interested in being a moderator in the Americas? There's no expectation of regular activity attached; I figure an occasionally visiting mod is still a lot better than one less mod.
The server is in the Netherlands, so I would imagine Dutch laws apply. Mac, you interested in being a moderator in the Americas? There's no expectation of regular activity attached; I figure an occasionally visiting mod is still a lot better than one less mod.
Sure, why not? I guess for now at least the main task would be to watch out for spammers and get rid of them ( not that I've seen any so far, but I'm sure they'll show up once the search engines find the forum )
ׂ
That means hiding this forum section entirely too.
For now I think hiding it from prying guest eyes is enough. Every My Opera member's input is welcome, especially since we presumably all have some experience with different communities.
Are moderators expected to be online and active on preset hours?
No.
For what it's worth, from one who has pushed the envelope a bit testing the grit of the moderators, I think the moderators in MyOpera were superb (in the last 4-5 years).
Now, I'm not suggesting that they be recruited to moderate here, but one never knows if one doesn't ask, after all come March 2014 they might just realize what boredom really is.
At the very least, I think they (whoever they are) should be 'invited' here to guest post their views on Moderating, pros--cons, the ins & outs.
Most important of all, to hear & listen to their suggestions.
After all, they did what they did successfully -- right?
Simply handing a badge to a warm body doesn't always make for the ideal deputy sheriff.
Sure you satisfy the need to have 'somebody' doing it, but is that going to reap the best results long-run, especially during this fledgling forum's most formative weeks/months/years? (https://www.smileyfaze.tk/slides/hmm.gif)
I'll have a go at it if you like Frenzie; it will take a couple of weeks or so since I'm going to Nl this week. I may need to contact Opera if I'm to plagiarise their rules.
That would be great. :)
I've had an initial look at these things Forum objectives, cautions and rules etc) and found, of course, that there are many different versions, even a forum which forbade discussion would you believe (it is on saving money)! As I've said, I'm away for a week but when I get back I'll make a draft and send it to you so we can maybe polish it so we're both reasonably happy and then post it here for all to see and comment. I suspect it will remain a work in progress for a little while until things settle.
I'll recruit the former D&D poster known as johnogaziechi to this site.
If he's interested in carrying on putting up with us all, perhaps he'd consider a modship?
That would mean diversity in having mods in different continents, as you requested Frenzie, and would also bring on board a religious moderator as well, and Catholic to boot, @Belfrager. Additionally, he would probably recruit Nigerans, and other Africans as well.
But one thing is assured; before our time is up, we simply must recruit Mr. Howie to this site; not to moderate, mind you, but to post, as I've always enjoyed his senile ramblings and ravings, and I'm sure Belfrager would go into withdrawals not having the old Orange v Green debates. :trollface:
I'll recruit the former D&D poster known as johnogaziechi to this site.
If he's interested in carrying on putting up with us all, perhaps he'd consider a modship?
He'd get my vote ( wait, who said there's going to be voting? )
That would mean diversity in having mods in different continents, as you requested Frenzie, and would also bring on board a religious moderator as well, and Catholic to boot, @Belfrager. Additionally, he would probably recruit Nigerans, and other Africans as well.
I'd be more concerned with having mods all over the different time zones so there's always a decent chance that someone's awake enough to deal with crap. Maybe I'm naive but I think most moderating here will be cleaning up after spam bots.
But one thing is assured; before our time is up, we simply must recruit Mr. Howie to this site; not to moderate, mind you, but to post, as I've always enjoyed his senile ramblings and ravings, and I'm sure Belfrager would go into withdrawals not having the old Orange v Green debates. :trollface:
You weren't supposed to say that in public >:(
I'm sure he'll show up eventually. He's been in on The Old Place since before the previous ice age, I doubt he could stop if he wanted to ;)
Maybe I'm naive but I think most moderating here will be cleaning up after spam bots.
Same here. At least in our main sections, the moderation policy is extremely liberal.
Here is a policy I find interesting: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/rules/ Not necessarily to emulate, but it certainly has some relevant aspects.
Maybe I'm naive but I think most moderating here will be cleaning up after spam bots.
Same here. At least in our main sections, the moderation policy is extremely liberal.
Yeah, I kinda like the no personal attacks rule from The Old Place. I don't think we need to censor swearing but that may just be me.
Here is a policy I find interesting: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/rules/ Not necessarily to emulate, but it certainly has some relevant aspects.
I'd think 'bigoted slurs' would fall under personal attacks most of the time. I don't think we need to care about people being on or off topic, it's not like this is the official support forum of anything. Same with derailing threads - if posters respond to trolls instead of blocking them they're taking part in the derailing.
Posting personal info on any other member without said member's consent should be insta-ban in my opinion. Maybe call that the GOM rule.
Rules against First Post and the like would mess up most Lounge games.
Flooding outside such game threads, even if it's not outright spam is a different story though.
I'm not so sure about sockpuppets either - nothing wrong with banned users coming back as long as they behave. Perma-bans should probably be the absolute exception ( well, except for spam bots ) - SMF has options like just keeping someone from posting in a certain section for a period of time.
Yeah, I kinda like the no personal attacks rule from The Old Place. I don't think we need to censor swearing but that may just be me.
I'm inclined to agree.
Rules against First Post and the like would mess up most Lounge games.
Naturally there would have to be (somewhat) different rules for different sections.
I'm not so sure about sockpuppets either - nothing wrong with banned users coming back as long as they behave.
I think it's talking about "real" sockpuppetry (i.e. making it seem like people agree with you when it's all just you), not about a new 'nym.
I'm not so sure about sockpuppets either - nothing wrong with banned users coming back as long as they behave.
I think it's talking about "real" sockpuppetry (i.e. making it seem like people agree with you when it's all just you), not about a new 'nym.
I haven't seen many of those and most were one post wonders attempting 'clever' spam. Usually of the "<obscure book of bullshit> changed my life!!!one!", "mine too" variety.
I've seen it at least once. I was debating animal rights with someone and then another poster came around, saying something like "I think Someone may have a point there." He didn't keep up the charade very well and it was more pathetic than anything else, hardly banworthy, but it does happen.
I didn't say it didn't happen, just that the instances I saw were mostly covered by other rules and what's left probably doesn't warrant special treatment. As you said, hardly banworthy. Or rather, the entertainment value far outweighs the damage ( if any ).
Fair enough.
Maybe I'm naive but I think most moderating here will be cleaning up after spam bots.
I'm not sure of that. Most posters that comes from D&D have a certain experience and things don't usually goes too far in terms of friction but new ones can be a different matter. People needs a cold warn when too hot...
If anyone is feeling bored (I'm not), here's a big collection of forum rules.
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=174062.0
Did you notice all the don't-even-think-of-PMing-me signatures? ;D
I noticed the Simpsons one but didn't really look much besides that. Now that you mention it, whoa! Haha.
I'll have a go at it if you like Frenzie...
I do. Why?
I suggest the following:
Section 1. There's Boss.
Section 2. If Boss is wrong, there's 'Section 1'.
;)
ׂ
If anyone is feeling bored (I'm not), here's a big collection of forum rules.
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=174062.0
Wow! There are a lot of dos and don'ts there! I shall try to keep it a lot simpler.
Maybe I'm naive but I think most moderating here will be cleaning up after spam bots.
I'm not sure of that. Most posters that comes from D&D have a certain experience and things don't usually goes too far in terms of friction but new ones can be a different matter. People needs a cold warn when too hot...
Depends what exactly 'too hot' is and who's going to decide that. If a thread turns into nothing but name calling it should probably just be closed, with an explanation at the end ("try again, this time without screaming" or somesuch).
I like that. Long rules serve the purpose of convincing everyone that the Boss has a legitimate authority even if the end he's right anyway. Like with the government.
I think "my house, my rules" applies, since this is practically an extension to Frenzie's living room. No need whatsoever to legitimize any authority here. The rules are whatever the host is willing to put up with.
Jax showed up. I wonder if he wants to play moderator again ;)
I like that. Long rules serve the purpose of convincing everyone that the Boss has a legitimate authority.......
I think "my house, my rules" applies, since this is practically an extension to Frenzie's living room. No need whatsoever to legitimize any authority here. The rules are whatever the host is willing to put up with.
I agree, but I do not envy his huge task, to always display the
'Judgment of Solomon' when faced with his own personal likes & dislikes, weighed against the greater well-being of the Forum.............a form of fairness, that if not seen by all as mostly always fair can undo a lot of hard work in making this Forum all happen.
I like that. Long rules serve the purpose of convincing everyone that the Boss has a legitimate authority.......
I think "my house, my rules" applies, since this is practically an extension to Frenzie's living room. No need whatsoever to legitimize any authority here. The rules are whatever the host is willing to put up with.
I agree, but I do not envy his huge task, to always display the 'Judgment of Solomon' when faced with his own personal likes & dislikes, weighed against the greater well-being of the Forum.............a form of fairness, that if not seen by all as mostly always fair can undo a lot of hard work in making this Forum all happen.
Maybe there should be a rule that moderators who take part in a thread shouldn't do any moderation there ( other than purely janitorial tasks like cleaning up spam )
An interesting discussion, and useful.
My feeling on this is that attempting to define rules that cover everything precisely is not a good strategy since there are always borderline cases and it's important that Moderators retain flexibilty and not get mired down by precedents that do not really fit the case.
In "principle" those with strong feelings could let those feelings sway their judgement but I don't see that being a problem; after all this forum (I include the Opera D&D in that) has always tolerated the right of people to express their opinion on anything (apart from some obvious pornographic exceptions). It's really just the two areas of being civil to those inside the forum and legal to those outside which need real moderating effort.
On Jax - I'm sure we all have great respect for Jax's contributions over the years, but let's not assume too much from someone who may want to relax for a bit.
exactly
There's no
exactly in moderation.
One idea, at least for the beginning, would be a Moderation Council. Three elected posters decides, no written rules.
If it works fine, we keep it, if not - we think about it again.
Maybe there should be a rule that moderators who take part in a thread shouldn't do any moderation there ( other than purely janitorial tasks like cleaning up spam )
I'm not convinced that should be a rule, but it should do as a guideline. If you're personally invested in the thread, exercise restraint. Always try to differentiate between what you find annoying and what is not permissible. There's overlap, but they're not the same thing.
As a matter of practical interest, Frans, does this forum software all for moderators to
o Delete posts
o Move posts ?
Maybe there should be a rule that moderators who take part in a thread shouldn't do any moderation there ( other than purely janitorial tasks like cleaning up spam )
I'm not convinced that should be a rule, but it should do as a guideline. If you're personally invested in the thread, exercise restraint. Always try to differentiate between what you find annoying and what is not permissible. There's overlap, but they're not the same thing.
Sounds like the right thing to do either way ;)
As a matter of practical interest, Frans, does this forum software all for moderators to
o Delete posts
o Move posts ?
Delete yes, move I have to investigate the specifics. I made Luxor a moderator on the Lounge, not global, so perhaps he can't move topics.
I have the option to move topics and for a test I moved a topic to this forum.
I can't move it from here though so someone else will have to delete it.
(https://dndsanctuary.eu/imagecache.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fts4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DH.4725543262684079&hash=78131ab2b4771fa66d2891f027d1e092" rel="cached" data-hash="78131ab2b4771fa66d2891f027d1e092" data-warn="External image, click here to view original" data-url="http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4725543262684079):lol: ;)
I'm not sure of that. Most posters that comes from D&D have a certain experience and things don't usually goes too far in terms of friction but new ones can be a different matter. People needs a cold warn when too hot...
New users aren't that much of a challenge. You are nice to new users, show them the ropes, and that there is enough for them to hang themselves with. Then you ban them. Sometimes they then reincarnate into a troll, then you show them the sun, exerminate their messages and ban them. There was this particularly tenacious guy who did this about a dozen times, flooding the forums with porn or worse, but each time his creations were gone within minutes, and he gave up after a month or so. He, Grumpy Old Man, and ultimately Bantay were the only ban on sights, the rest got a chance to break the rules at least once before a ban.
You have those that generally behave sensibly unless provoked for some (often trivial) reason, then they break as many rules in as short a time span as humanly possible. Ultimately they all ended up banned, we didn't do anger management classes.
You have those that generally behave sensibly unless in the same thread as someone else who also generally behave sensibly, but together they celebrate the critical mass. Most of these eventually ended up banned.
Trolls and internet warriors can be a serious pain. We spent incredible effort in trying to reform the irreformable and Grumpy, until and actually after the ban from the land policy.
All that notwithstanding hell hath no fury like a spam storm. Spam is the real concern.
Bantay is the only one I recall having used sock-puppets to form a group that all agreed with his statements. Besides using sock-puppets to keep resurrecting himself, of course. He went to great lengths to try to hide that they were all him, but in the end it failed.
I note that I am supposed to be a "global moderator" and I wonder just what "powers" I do have. Deleting spam goes without saying, and it appears I have powers to close threads if things get out of hand, but-- who controls the mighty "Ban Hammer" and how does that tool of the trade get deployed when necessary?
Besides using sock-puppets to keep resurrecting himself, of course.
I'd call that getting a fresh start, or trying to. The thing is, on this system we can ban a user for e.g. a week, so it's not an all or nothing proposition.
I note that I am supposed to be a "global moderator" and I wonder just what "powers" I do have.
I should probably take a closer look at those settings.
The thing is, on this system we can ban a user for e.g. a week, so it's not an all or nothing proposition.
Ah... that's interesting.
I'm GMT -4 (Atlantic Standard Time) if that would help? I am not hugely techie but have good common sense and a level head. If you would like any help modding, let me know :)
I think we're probably okay for now but thanks for the offer. :)