RE: Thoughts on moderation

RE: Thoughts on moderation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

Thoughts on moderation

Moderation is consistently too lenient.

1% (1)

Moderation is consistently too strict.

4% (4)

Moderation is inconsistent.

26% (25)

" " (reported) personal attacks are allowed to remain.

6% (6)

The problem is they pull or leave posts for reasons besides TOS.

13% (13)

The problem is not allowing helpful or funny off topic comments.

7% (7)

The problem is that the site has a hidden agenda.

4% (4)

Administration is honest about why they pull or leave posts.

2% (2)

Administration is dishonest about why they pull or leave posts.

5% (5)

I don't have any major problems with moderation.

28% (27)

Total Votes : 94

(last vote on : 11/26/2012 4:15:14 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

LadyPact -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/8/2012 11:37:42 PM)
Pam, you know I don't think that at all. In fact, I think you are a good person who is probably trying to get to the bottom of what is perceived as discontent. It's not the first time that you've done so on the moderation subject, either, so I have to think you have good intentions. I would think it would be better if some of the posts that I've noticed that were not on this thread get transposed here so that people would have more help on the issue. One is in Pol & R. When I read it (and I just happened to stumble on it) I thought it would have been beneficial to all. Since we have threads on moderation at this time, I feel it would be helpful to get those comments made here, so more people can see them.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/8/2012 11:43:32 PM)
It's kind of tough to piss and moan about people ressurecting old threads when they are "pre-admonished" to look through old threads before posting their question. How many times do new posters get slammed for "bringing up the same old tired question" (fat thread, anyone? How about sub vs. slave?) As for the moderation, right now; there is no doubt in my mind that anyone that isn't paid for what they do is over-worked. So before I go into anything else, I want to recognize the volunteers for what it is they do. Now, the moderation for an adult site is ridiculous. We're supposed to be adults, here. If people can launch the kind of snark that some get away with and not take it, when it's returned to them, then they're not adults and should be handed a crying towel on the way out. To my mind, anything that doesn't include "the big four" TOS violations should be fair game but it should be fair game for anyone; not just a chosen few (friends of moderators, etc.) I do NOT think moderation is applied fairly or consistently but I'm not sure I know what the answer is and I'm almost positive I couldn't do any better (short of making moderator positions paid). Peace and comfort, Michael

gungadin09 -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/9/2012 12:24:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I do NOT think moderation is applied fairly or consistently but I'm not sure I know what the answer is and I'm almost positive I couldn't do any better (short of making moderator positions paid). I don't see why that should make such a difference. It ought to be fairly easy to determine what violates TOS and what doesn't. Update it IN WRITING if there are new rules, and then moderate from those rules only. Surely that can't cost that much money. Pam ETA: For example, is it allowed, or not, to necro threads from "Polls and Random Snippets"? Until today, I thought it was.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/9/2012 12:27:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I do NOT think moderation is applied fairly or consistently but I'm not sure I know what the answer is and I'm almost positive I couldn't do any better (short of making moderator positions paid). I don't see why that should make such a difference. It ought to be fairly easy to determine what violates TOS and what doesn't. Update it IN WRITING if there are new rules, and then moderate from those rules only. Surely that can't cost that much money. Pam No but getting people to be truly dedicated to something helps if you're paying them for it. I cannot think of a "job" that isn't improved when the people doing the job are held to a professional standard. That was where my thought was when I typed that. Peace and comfort, Michael

VideoAdminGamma -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/9/2012 7:25:55 AM)
This is my personal response. Alpha holds us to a pretty high professional standard. Most of the issues happen because members cannot be told certain things because of other member privacy, so they assume. Even in a professional arena, mistakes and miscommunication does happen, but where the difference would be, is how it is handled afterwards. Documentation, training and retraining happen here and all of this is Alpha's solutions to issues as they happen. Paid or not, the current moderation staff are some of the best I have seen. Again this is a personal perspective and not one that is an official CollarMe post. BTW, we have hit new records on new members, total members and registered members online. This is due to the cooperative efforts lately of staff and members and is an accomplishment for everyone. Thanks for being a part of CollarMe, Gamma quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr No but getting people to be truly dedicated to something helps if you're paying them for it. I cannot think of a "job" that isn't improved when the people doing the job are held to a professional standard. That was where my thought was when I typed that. Peace and comfort, Michael

ivone1 -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/9/2012 7:34:24 AM)
you all are still beating this dead horse... gessss... moderators do the best they can...some are fair and some are not.. thats life.. this is the internet... nobody said playing fair was part of the rules.. im new to collarme forums and already i am getting tired of the same old bitch....

LadyHibiscus -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/9/2012 7:56:52 AM)
Get used to it, hon. SSDD. [&o]

LadyPact -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 2:03:19 AM)
Numbers of new members don't have shit to do with staff. Let's be honest about it.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 2:59:32 AM)
I think the implication is that the new posters are not getting scared off by us long term meanie members, and so numbers have increased. Which I agree is horseshit. The newbies are pretty much given full rein to say and do whatever they want, and the long term members are supposed to sit back and take it w/o a hint of snark. And the reason we don't like that is b/c we've come to look on it as our forum. Yeah, yeah, it's a privately owned site, and thus the message board forum is owned by that person, I understand that concept perfectly well, as I believe most others do. What I mean to say by using "our" is that (for many of us) once you become a long term member, you acquire a proprietary feel for what goes on here. So we don't like it when people start threads just for the wank fodder, or begin the fifty-billionith thread whining about fin-doms, or ask for advice and then turn into twatwaffles and douchcanoes when they get answers they didn't expect. Frankly, I think we're perfectly capable of moderating ourselves most of the time. Which means I'm all for very minimal moderation, except when TOS has been violated.

DeviantlyD -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 3:04:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus Get used to it, hon. SSDD. [&o] I always thought it was ssdp. Either or though. :D

pyschosubmission -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 3:41:12 AM)
quote: So we don't like it when people start threads just for the wank fodder, or begin the fifty-billionith thread whining about fin-doms, or ask for advice and then turn into twatwaffles and douchcanoes when they get answers they didn't expect. Frankly, I think we're perfectly capable of moderating ourselves most of the time. I'm fairly sure some of my first posts were pretty douchey, they must have been, surely... The difference being I didn't get all butthurt trying to argue I wasn't being a douchecanoe and instead, you know, reexamined at what I actually thought. Sometimes ye need a wee bit of a bitch slap to keep you in line

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 4:57:02 AM)
You know, I think that is a perfectly valid part of the process. You come in, you join some threads, you see how others reply. If you get smacked around a bit, and most newbies do, how you respond is critical. If you can't take some basic initiation ritual, you won't do well in any public forum. You know, I was smacked around at first, too. Of course I was. I came in, starting spouting opinions, and people who didn't know me from Mrs Jesus began calling me on my shit. And I either answered their concerns, or realized they just wanted someone to argue with and backed off, since I'm not here to engage anyone in a pissing contest. Let me rephrase, I so will engage in a pissing contest, if it's for my own entertainment. So I think you make a very excellent point. Anyone with half a brain with approach a public forum by sticking their toesies into the water, testing the temperature, and seeing if they can handle it. You learn over time what the baseline temp of the place is likely to be, and moderate your own self accordingly. I think this is what everyone does that is here to actually discuss, and not to troll or advertise, or pull traffic to their profile, or get wank fodder, or whine about why the females here don't answer all their mail. I supposed there could and should be a place for them, but why can't the moderators stick them in their own section with all the other like threads no one wants to read? B/c it's my strong opinion that it's all that crap that makes this side look bad, not us bashing the occasional clueless newb.

DeviantlyD -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:01:58 AM)
Personally I think psychosubmission wants to get bitch slapped. :D

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:06:05 AM)
Would you hold him down for me? <makes sure WW is not looking>

DeviantlyD -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:09:24 AM)
I don't think he'd put up much of a struggle. ;)

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:16:30 AM)
I just want to see what's under the kilt. It's for educational purposes !!

pyschosubmission -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:17:39 AM)
I... uh... WW? Help? [:D]

GreedyTop -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 5:47:47 AM)
~FR~ PS, I don't recall your first posts as being douchey. In fact, I seem to recall laughing my ass off about them, because you DO have a fab sense of humour :) But yeah, I agree with the call for a kilt check.... waves at WW

gungadin09 -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 6:40:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VideoAdminGamma Alpha holds us to a pretty high professional standard. Most of the issues happen because members cannot be told certain things because of other member privacy, so they assume. There are a number of people, on and off this thread, who claim that personal attacks made against them were allowed to remain. DeviantlyD and the "cunt" comment is just one example. How do you explain the fact that that comment was let stand for so long, and then quietly removed? VAA's explanation that the site only now became aware of it is hard to believe. Why doesn't administration update TOS to reflect all the rules that are currently in use? Pam

GreedyTop -> RE: Thoughts on moderation (10/10/2012 6:51:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 quote: ORIGINAL: VideoAdminGamma Alpha holds us to a pretty high professional standard. Most of the issues happen because members cannot be told certain things because of other member privacy, so they assume. There are a number of people, on and off this thread, who claim that personal attacks made against them were allowed to remain. DeviantlyD and the "cunt" comment is just one example. How do you explain the fact that that comment was let stand for so long, and then quietly removed? VAA's explanation that the site only now became aware of it is hard to believe. Why doesn't administration update TOS to reflect all the rules that are currently in use? Pam Despite the apparent misconception, the Mods are VOLUNTEERS, who also have lives away from this site. I think that, given the amount of shit that the are expected to deal with, they usually do a pretty damned good job. Does soem of that shit slip through the cracks? yes. Do they deal with it WHEN REMINDED ABOUT IT? yes. That is not always going to be as fast as we, as posters, would like. But hey, I know that I personally, am not always able to get back to something I plan to as quickly as I had planned to because something (LIFE) gets in the way. grrr hit send too soon* Why can't we allow for the same with Mods? They are NOT superhumans.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.0625