|
LaTigresse -> RE: why isn't there a rants & raves section? (10/22/2012 6:20:24 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance
quote:
ORIGINAL: absolutchocolat
i appreciate your thoughts on my question.
as for the right kind of moderation? i think naming names should be prohibited, but other than that, the section should have the same rules as any other the others here. i guess we'd have to judge by the types of posts that come up. other sites have done it rather successfully, so i was a bit puzzled about this site's lack of one. i think it would make for interesting reading. but that's my opinion.
(I apologize if the font is obnoxious. I enlarged it for emphasis but have no idea how huge it might be)
Here is where the problem exists. I may not be the best person to discuss this, as I've never really had a problem with moderation, in that other than posts removed for quoting pulled posts I haven't really been mod-smacked. Not in years, or that I recall.
Anyway, I do agree that each post needs to be judged in context, on its own merit and even keeping in mind the original posters general style and history. This, however, is a VERY subjective (hope that is the correct word) way of moderating and tends to appear as biased moderation. Which, by definition it is. Biased moderation, where the moderator uses their BEST judgement on how to address a post in context keeping in mind the literal intent and spirit of any particular rule. It isn't easy.
Now, you take a medium that is void of tone, inflection, body language or facial expressions - and toss in the moderators best attempt at trying to distinguish whether something was (for example) snark or condescending: you will always have differing opinions and perspectives. Moderators are no different. No moderator (or few moderators) are going to agree completely on what is appropriate and what isn't.
Ok, now we have a forum that by its very design, is intended to compile a bunch of negative experiences - and factor in all the above, while including the base nature of humanity in general and you have ...(coughs) well, a less diverse P&R (kidding).
All that to say, there really is no one true way of moderating a forum. Just differing perspectives and best attempts at doing so.
Winnie has said, ever so much more nicely than I, what I feel.
99%, give or take a few points, of what I post is not intended to be taken as nasty. I have a very dry, obnoxious, sense of humour. Everyone that spends any time at all around me, gets it. They also get to see all of the facial expressions and body language that goes with it. That makes a HUMONGOUS difference. Huge, monstrous, gigantic. They also know that my humour applies equally to myself. They give me just as much shit as I give them. It's never mean spirited or done in a negative way.
However, people that haven't got a good sense of humour, or have a fragile sense of self.........do, on occasion, get their undies bunched. They don't GET IT. I am not everyone's cuppa and I get that. But yanno, it's who I am. I've been a smarmy twit my whole life.
So, that being said......what one bleeding heart mod reads as mean and nasty, another, with a similar sense of humour is going to 'get it', and let it roll. Some of my shit disappears and some of it stays. Some people that tend to be newish, might not 'get me' and either assume that being cuntish is cool, and then take it to another level. Another might simply get their undies bunched and toss a hissy fit.
Then, add the scary cherry on top, of me being a sadistic bitch.........."Maybe she really is being a cunt, but maybe she is just laughing and fucking around...........hmmmm? How do I know?"
It's all a big fat grey area of perception. The more the mods let fly, the more there is a potential for the thin skinned wussies to get their noses bent out of shape. But, the more the mods babysit, the more fecking boring this place gets.
It's a catch 22 that they gotta constantly balance.
I can't imagine creating a new forum, with that kinda balancing act (OP topic), is any sort of good idea for the mods.
|
|
|
|
