Musings of a new moderator

by onacruse 49 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  onacruse

  Inquiry, your comments cut right to the quick of what constitutes "fair" moderating. I'll repeat (in my own words) some of what you said:

  Every social group has it's own ethic, and ethics always change. What's permitted in one generation may very well be condemned in the next. It's not a matter of "right" or "wrong"; it's simply the way it is.

  For example, there are db's where the rule (read ethic) is "Screw up once, just once, and you're gone, period." Is that "wrong"? No. Other db's let everything go. Is that "wrong"? No.

  Each group has the prerogative to set its own standards.

  And each group has the right to expect that those standards will be equitably applied.

  Isn't that one of the things that just gripes the hell out of us, to see some people "get away" with things simply because they're rich, or are a "superstar," or are part of the "good old boys" club, or are perceived as "respected posters"? Grrrrrrrr

  Inquiry, excellent post!

  Craig

  edit to add: LOL @ Euph
• 

  ESTEE

  (((((onacruse)))))

  It is nice to see that Simon has enlisted help by way of the Forum Assistants. Delegation is a natural process as a result of the massive proportions JWD has grown to...IMHO.

  I for one VALUE the effort and responsibility that it takes to keep this forum a SAFE and RESPECTFUL environment for its members to heal from the ravages of the JW cult.

  You and all the Forum Assistants....and of course Simon & Angharad...deserve a big round of applause for your work and commitment!! You are soooooo appreciated here!!!

  (((((Hugs)))))

  ESTEE
• 

  Inquiry

  Very nicely put... thank you... I can only add that those who are "leaders" have quite a responsibility... and I think that you will fulfill that mandate quite well... I like your objectivity... it's much appreciated...

  Inq
• 

  Simon

  Isn't that one of the things that just gripes the hell out of us, to see some people "get away" with things simply because they're rich, or are a "superstar," or are part of the "good old boys" club, or are perceived as "respected posters"?

  I take issue with this - just think about what people are saying:

  Suppose some new poster joins and says something aggressive or insulting straight off or develops a pattern of saying such things. Are people genuinely sugesting that if they were edited or removed that a single occurence of the same thing by someone who has otherwise been a long-term respected poster should be treated in the same way? ... that people would be happy about this? Wouldn't there be an outcry if we did and accusations of being harsh?!

  We try to look at the big picture when making decisions and that includes someones track record. I can't believe that people think we should not do this !

  So yes, some people will get away with slightly more things because of their track record as that is the nature of relationships and interactions. However, over time they will of course find themselves being shown less tollerance if they decided to make a habit out of it or think they could take advantage and get away with things indefinitely.

  A real life analogy I would give is in court where someone's previous good character or criminal history is taken into consideration when passing sentance and there are variations accordingly. (note, I'm not claiming we are like a court, it's just an example of how we have to be practical)
• 

  onacruse

  Simon; Naturally, we all have our "favorites" in terms of "I always like this person's posts," or "that poster is always so respectful." But that kind of personal preference wouldn't prevent me from taking a moderator's exception if, for some reason (e.g. provoked by another poster, or perhaps just a bad hair day ) that poster goes uncharacteristically "out-of-bounds."

  But, if I get your drift, how I deal with it will be different from case to case. A real example (with a few detail changes), from just this last week: Poster A has been here almost since the beginning, has made 5000 posts, and is always respectful. Then comes along a topic that really really touches a nerve. A responds very emotionally and uses an offensive term. Instead of just editing it out myself, I p/m A and request that they reconsider their phrasing. Because of A's long-standing good spirit, I have every good reason to expect that A will quickly take that action. And that's exactly what happened. In other cases, for various reasons, I made the edit and p/m-ed afterwards.

  But the same standard is being applied, regardless of that poster's "status."

  Craig
• 

  obiwan

  Well ona we've talked in chat and I do believe if you try to make everyone happy, you'll end up pulling out you hair. This monitoring situation will be a constant learning curve for anyone involved. Your experience with the borg more than qualifies you as a monitor, no matter how long you have been "out" compared to others. All of us must follow certain rules in our daily lives outside this forum, why should it be any different here? Just because we all used jw's doesn't give us the right to run amuck without regard for our fellow poster. If anything, there should be more compassion shown to our fellow posters with this in mind, but since we are all imperfect that doesn't always happen, and that's you and others come, and if you or anyone else makes an error, then we are back to being imperfect again.....Your doing just fine.
• 

  minimus

  As I said before, the key is REASONABLENESS. If a moderator is unreasonable or a poster is, havoc can be created on the board. it's nice to see that you are reasonable, Craig.
• 

  Simon

  It has absolutely nothing to do with having favourites or 'likeing' someone's posts. I am simply saying that someones track record has an impact on how they are treated and I see nothing wrong with this.

  I would be a lot quicker to clamp down on someone who is being insulting if they have a long history of being aggressive, insulting or abusive than someone who does not and yes, I would probably treat them differently.

  Anyone here ever been a waiter / waitress? Do the obnoxious customers get quite the same treatment as the nice, polite people? Would we, as customers, be happy if we only go treated the same as someone being like that?. If we went to the same restaurant every week and complained once, would we expect to be taken a little more seriously than someone who complained every week?

  People are looking for hard, rigid rules and black and white scenarios which I think are hangovers from Witness days. The fact is, many things are gray and things sometimes come down to judgement and when they do, track record or posting history comes into it. If you are a constant pain in the ass, don't be surprised if you are treated like one !
• 

  minimus

  Simon, you REALLY do need a vacation. What's wrong with you lately? You know what? If it wasn't for you, this great place wouldn't be here. You've accomplished something wonderful here. But you are the person being black and white lately. Maybe you're the one going through an old JW hangover. Look at yourself for a change. You need to or else you will become so discouraged by this place that you'll lose your joy. And no one wants that.
• 

  kgfreeperson

  (or maybe he's feeling a tad unjustly accused and unappreciated?)