The joys of a properly moderated forum

[Pendulous]

How many here have actually been at an unmoderated forum?

I have, and I clicked on this thread to explain that very thing. It was my first foray into internet message boards, the official George Carlin website. It was a pretty cool group of people, until you got to the horrible trolls. And not trolls in the sense of people who just stirred up trouble and likely weren't even fans of the BBS's subject (in this case, Carlin). It was more they were there to see what they could get away with. And that was...everything. For people who want forums to be unmoderated, I can tell you that you DO NOT want that, no matter how much you think. I can't describe the horrors (the horror!) that took place there, so much so that the site crashed and the more adult members started their own forum.

That said, as a moderator of another, larger-than-this site, I do not support permanent bans. I honestly don't know how the infraction system works here, but for me, it's a point system that results in a temporary ban based on how many points you have. Typical trolling and flaming infractions are worth the least amount, and you can get higher-point infractions from more severe posting habits. Permanent bans can happen, but only through the decision of super moderators. Ban evasion is a problem because bans are not IP based. But because the moderator team is much larger than here, I think it's a more fitting system there because there are people to deal with it. But I don't like the idea of a permanent ban anywhere. I've seen terrible posters get their crap together and be a lot more civil.

[Bulldog Psion]

it's like a massive Bat-signal to all the people who think the mods are draconian tyrants

For some reason, the usage of "massive Bat-signal" here gave me a case of the guffaws. Maybe I'm just a little punchy after dealing with horrible people and even worse situations for six days on end, and not getting enough sleep in between. Anyway, thanks for the laugh, even if it was unintentional and is partly due to my frayed emotional and physical state.

[SiuiS]

I focused on draconian. Roland's avatar next to a lounging SMEE and Rawhide in Smaug's gold-mounded lair, glasses of wine and talons wrap't round crystal snifters as they chuckle and swirl, glistening hammers of Bhan hanging on the wall by the polished trophy armors of those lesser mortals they have slain.

[factotum]

That said, as a moderator of another, larger-than-this site, I do not support permanent bans.

I'm a moderator on another site also, and we *do* have permabans--however, we operate a "three strikes and you're out" rule, so they get two opportunities to repair their behaviour before the banhammer falls; and even then, if someone who's been banned once communicates a desire to return and says they've changed we'll usually let them back in. If they mess up a second time, though, it's ban with no possibility of return.

Of course, spambots just get flat-out banned!

[Killer Angel]

Of course, spambots just get flat-out banned!

"nonono, it was a mistake! I'm really sorry! i posted that spam in the wrong site and even so, it was intended as a joke! pleasepleaseplease let me join again..."

meh, probably it wouldn't work.

[Pendulous]

"nonono, it was a mistake! I'm really sorry! i posted that spam in the wrong site and even so, it was intended as a joke! pleasepleaseplease let me join again..."

meh, probably it wouldn't work.

Some of them get caught appealing bans though. Usually it's spam just like their posts, but every now and then you get one that sounds half-legit.

[Logic]

I like this forum and how it is moderated. I have seen this "passive aggressive" behavior, but in my experience it is mostly limited to vs threads.

[Poison_Fish]

There may be something to consider in that as a result of the topic-wide bans people who might otherwise have been banned for behaviour on those topics may still remain part of the overall community.

That about describes some of what I've encountered over the years here. I've seen roughly equivalently moderated forums without the topic wide bans, which certainly results in a greater number of individuals removed. The atmosphere is different, as there is much less of a need for evasive talking and thus as Tengu said, less passive aggression.

Jury's still out for me if I think it's improved these spaces vs. the more stasis like existence here. I'm slightly inclined towards the other spaces.

[The Giant]

I'm glad the OP and others have been enjoying our forum. I think the moderators work hard to create a civil atmosphere that allows people to have actual discussions about things without devolving into insults or diatribes.

For those who are more critical, I'd ask them to remember that this message board is, primarily, a privately-owned website whose main purpose for existing is the promotion of my comic strip. While I believe our rules help foster a great community—and that good conversations arise more easily in such a community—they are ultimately designed to prioritize smooth operation over the expression of every possible facet of human experience. I mean, we're a comic strip and roleplaying game forum, not a publicly-funded debate hall. It's not really our job to safeguard everyone's right to say whatever they want on any topic as it pops into their head. Maybe sometimes, that means that particularly deep or engaging potential conversations can't happen here due to restrictions on politics or religion. I'm OK with that. I believe that on the aggregate, more decent conversations happen over time with our rules than they would without.

In a similar vein, as a business, we also maintain the right to remove disruptive customers from the premises at any time. It'd be nice if everyone was on the same page with how to conduct themselves in a conversation, but that's an unrealistic expectation. If a given poster must substantially alter their poor behavior in order to participate in these forums without breaking our rules of civility? Then the system is working as designed. If they're unable or unwilling to alter their behavior, then we don't want them here. Whether that leads to them voluntarily ceasing participation or leads to them getting banned, the effect is the same. I'd rather serve the customers who like how I do business than chase those who don't, because the latter is a futile exercise in diminishing returns.

Bottom line: Thousands of people express themselves here every day, on-topic and within our rules. And it's awesome! We're happy to have them. If you are one of the ones who can't, that's OK too, because there are plenty of other websites out there for you. I won't hold it against you if our version of moderation is not your cup of tea, as long as you don't try to drink your brand of tea in my tea-selling establishment.

(And for the record, passive-aggressive insults are still against the rules, and are even spelled out as being so in the Rules of Posting. It's just that they are far less frequently reported and thus less likely to be acted upon by the moderators. But if you see a passive-aggressive insult, report it.)

[enderlord99]

So, does this place mostly serve green tea or black tea? What about oolong tea? White tea? Earl Grey? Herbal? Chai? Is it usually iced or hot? Do you add honey? Milk? Turbinado sugar? Was "Tea" actually a metaphor? Why am I asking all these questions?

[Asta Kask]

"But, Giant, 't is thine alone, with awful sway,
To rule forumkind, and make the Internet obey,
Disposing peace and war by thy own majestic way;
To tame the proud, the fetter'd slave to free:
These are imperial arts, and worthy thee."

[Areswargod139]

I'm glad the OP and others have been enjoying our forum. I think the moderators work hard to create a civil atmosphere that allows people to have actual discussions about things without devolving into insults or diatribes.

For those who are more critical, I'd ask them to remember that this message board is, primarily, a privately-owned website whose main purpose for existing is the promotion of my comic strip. While I believe our rules help foster a great community—and that good conversations arise more easily in such a community—they are ultimately designed to prioritize smooth operation over the expression of every possible facet of human experience. I mean, we're a comic strip and roleplaying game forum, not a publicly-funded debate hall. It's not really our job to safeguard everyone's right to say whatever they want on any topic as it pops into their head. Maybe sometimes, that means that particularly deep or engaging potential conversations can't happen here due to restrictions on politics or religion. I'm OK with that. I believe that on the aggregate, more decent conversations happen over time with our rules than they would without.

In a similar vein, as a business, we also maintain the right to remove disruptive customers from the premises at any time. It'd be nice if everyone was on the same page with how to conduct themselves in a conversation, but that's an unrealistic expectation. If a given poster must substantially alter their poor behavior in order to participate in these forums without breaking our rules of civility? Then the system is working as designed. If they're unable or unwilling to alter their behavior, then we don't want them here. Whether that leads to them voluntarily ceasing participation or leads to them getting banned, the effect is the same. I'd rather serve the customers who like how I do business than chase those who don't, because the latter is a futile exercise in diminishing returns.

Bottom line: Thousands of people express themselves here every day, on-topic and within our rules. And it's awesome! We're happy to have them. If you are one of the ones who can't, that's OK too, because there are plenty of other websites out there for you. I won't hold it against you if our version of moderation is not your cup of tea, as long as you don't try to drink your brand of tea in my tea-selling establishment.

(And for the record, passive-aggressive insults are still against the rules, and are even spelled out as being so in the Rules of Posting. It's just that they are far less frequently reported and thus less likely to be acted upon by the moderators. But if you see a passive-aggressive insult, report it.)

Well put. Ya' know I've been on here forever and this is the first time I've run into one of your posts? Heh, s'funny.

[AtlanteanTroll]

Let's skip all the hobnobbing and ask the Giant the burning question all of us really want him to answer right now: Do yo, or do you not, know where Alabama is?

[BannedInSchool]

Let's skip all the hobnobbing and ask the Giant the burning question all of us really want him to answer right now: Do yo, or do you not, know where Alabama is?

I believe mentioning real world states and countries is now an infraction-worthy offense.

[Gwynfrid]

Let's skip all the hobnobbing and ask the Giant the burning question all of us really want him to answer right now: Do yo, or do you not, know where Alabama is?

For what it's worth, I think that thread was locked just about at the moment it needed to be: When it crossed the border from civil, not-quite-political debate right into naked identity politics aggressiveness. As such, it is indeed a fine example of a well moderated forum.

I'm one of the thousands the Giant mentioned in his post, and I'm fine with the limitations as they are, even if, in an ideal world, they wouldn't be necessary. We just need to accept that 100% of people can't be 100% happy 100% of the time.

[Roland St. Jude]

For what it's worth, I think that thread was locked just about at the moment it needed to be...

Sheriff: Hopefully, you feel the same about this one. While we appreciate the praise, threads like this invite public criticism of the Forum Rules and Moderators, neither of which is productive or permitted.