OT Moderating content doesn’t have to be so traumatic

[SlyPokerDog]

Fair enough. I just think you make it harder on yourself than it should be Did you see my comment about flagging posts? Id really like you yo at least consider it. I think it would make your job easier and make the forum less bitchy about mods. Just about each other. And I think the bitching about each other will minimize because there is no doubt or question as to what happened.. like there is in the Cippy instance.

Evidence is evidence and when its destroyed, so is the validity of the case.

People already do flag posts. We have a flagging feature built into the software. It's used almost daily. The staff responds to it quietly and professionally. People also send PMs to staff about problems and concerns. I would say that the vast majority of moderation of this community happens quietly in the background.

And that's how it should be.

 

[riverman]

If negative thoughts start building up in your brain...immediately start whistling Sweet Georgia Brown.....this is a riverman university teaser

 

[H.C.]

Seemed to get Cippy banned. But we will never know for sure now will we?

Cippy was his own worst enemy.
He even admitted to this on multiple occasions.

You don't state your opinion then get upitty and play the victim/lash out if people disagree with you.
He might not've meant to play the victim/lash out. But it's 100% on him for allowing his posts to be perceived in such a way.
If he would've took a step back and figured out a better way to present his opinions. Some people might be inclined in some ways to agree with him.
Which would've led to less people blocking him, which would've led to a more enjoyable time on the forum and less interactions with the worst posters on this forum.
Similar to how @Portland2014 comes in and does what he does when the team isn't doing so well.
If Portland2014 would take a step back, he'd realize that these same people he calls 'homers, or okay with mediocrity'. Say the same things he does, but present it in a way that is not hostile.

 

[Orion Bailey]

People already do flag posts. We have a flagging feature built into the software. It's used almost daily. The staff responds to it quietly and professionally. People also send PMs to staff about problems and concerns. I would say that the vast majority of moderation of this community happens quietly in the background.

And that's how it should be.

So why not take that a step further and put a percent mark on it? Some posters may have it out for other posters and flag everything. I think it should be a min. amount flagged required ( 5? 10?)before an edit or deletion should even be considered. Doesn't need to be on the fore front, but if the members know what the percent line is, then it might aid to more people understanding the decisions made by the mods. Until things are transparent, mods will always be under scrutiny.

Maybe you want to keep it that way and that's fine, but then no more bitching about having to do work?

As long as things are hidden and decisions are privately made without a set guideline as to when the decision is made, you will always have people complaining about the decisions. Don't expect it to ever change unless the system is willing to change.

I think there are enough people complaining about the current system of opinion based editing, that it should not be dismissed so easily. I think we are in double digits of people who don't care for the current ways.

And again, We don't need drastic changes, just a better set of guidelines and lines to not cross, based on the forum members opinion of the post. Not the mods.

So with the flagging system, what makes the decision to edit or delete based on the flags? How many before action is taken? 1? 10? 100? is it based on the mod who is viewing at the time and his opinion?

Lots of factors not being divulged that, again, put the mods in suspect.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I replied to 16 different PM's last night. It's not a complaint. I'm just saying that at times there can be a lot to do. I talked to staff, I talked to members about staff, I talked about forum events, I talked about insults, I talked about concerns, ideas, and suggestions. I missed the 2nd half of the game and was busy up until I went to bed last night. These are not complaints. Just telling you that sometimes it's hard to give everyone the attention and respect that they deserve.

I'm jealous. Nobody PMs me.

Probably 'cause they know that I don't actually do anything.

 

[riverman]

Probably 'cause they know that I don't actually do anything.

This alone qualifies you for riverman university

 

[Orion Bailey]

Cippy was his own worst enemy.
He even admitted to this on multiple occasions.

You don't state your opinion then get upitty and play the victim/lash out if people disagree with you.
He might not've meant to play the victim/lash out. But it's 100% on him for allowing his posts to be perceived in such a way.
If he would've took a step back and figured out a better way to present his opinions. Some people might be inclined in some ways to agree with him.
Which would've led to less people blocking him, which would've led to a more enjoyable time on the forum and less interactions with the worst posters on this forum.
Similar to how @Portland2014 comes in and does what he does when the team isn't doing so well.
If Portland2014 would take a step back, he'd realize that these same people he calls 'homers, or okay with mediocrity'. Say the same things he does, but present it in a way that is not hostile.

Apples to oranges. (To @SlyPokerDog also.)

Fist portland 2014 is tunchi. Not sure if you know that.

They would make a post and then leave. Stirring the pot much like a troll.

Cippy expressed his opinions in, yes, abrasive ways, but then people can ignore him right?

Cippy was targeted by a forum bully this time around and that bully is a forum favorite and gets special treatment and thus Cippy was banned.

If it was not a biased event, he would have been banned. or warned the first time he violated said agreement.

To not warn of the violations previously, but then just up and ban him now, leave a very vague feeling. He should have been warned this time around before just banning, that he was in violation.

But here in lies the foundation of the problem so many people have with deleting. Now there is no record of what exactly happened, and I personally think that's BS. That is corrupt type of behavior.

Again. Destroy the evidence and you have negated your argument.

There have been reasons presented for why deletions happen, or edits, but have been debunked.

Maybe we need an election so there cant be one "all time dictator" doing it one way forever?

Also, those who show bias, are rarely aware of such actions and have no clue they are being biased.

I'm telling you now, there are favorites played here and many people know it. You can deny it all you want but there are conversations about said bias you aren't aware of.

 

[riverman]

Apples to oranges. (To @SlyPokerDog also.)

Fist portland 2014 is tunchi. Not sure if you know that.

They would make a post and then leave. Stirring the pot much like a troll.

Cippy expressed his opinions in, yes, abrasive ways, but then people can ignore him right?

Cippy was targeted by a forum bully this time around and that bully is a forum favorite and gets special treatment and thus Cippy was banned.

If it was not a biased event, he would have been banned. or warned the first time he violated said agreement.

To not warn of the violations previously, but then just up and ban him now, leave a very vague feeling. He should have been warned this time around before just banning, that he was in violation.

But here in lies the foundation of the problem so many people have with deleting. Now there is no record of what exactly happened, and I personally think that's BS. That is corrupt type of behavior.

Again. Destroy the evidence and you have negated your argument.

There have been reasons presented for why deletions happen, or edits, but have been debunked.

Maybe we need an election so there cant be one "all time dictator" doing it one way forever?

Also, those who show bias, are rarely aware of such actions and have no clue they are being biased.

I'm telling you now, there are favorites played here and many people know it. You can deny it all you want but there are conversations about said bias you aren't aware of.

Why don't you just start a forum and set it up the way you want it set up?..This forum came into being because of a mass exodus from another dysfunctional forum..this one works just fine if you keep a sense of humor...it's this over thinking the game that has lost us a lot of our funnier posters which I miss. I think OB that you're sweating small stuff here. I would have banned Cippy long ago for insulting folks and not letting up..move on man....

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Also, those who show bias, are rarely aware of such actions and have no clue they are being biased.

Surely your bias against the other party in the Cippy altercation has no bearing on your interpretation of the situation...

I've been Cippy's biggest advocate. I was the reason he was brought back after his first banning.

He repeatedly violated the personal attack rules. I think it's ridiculous to criticize Sly for being too patient with him.

I understand that you're not happy with the post deletion, and I see your point. However, I've seen the deleted posts. I can vouch for their content.

It's reasonable for you to complain about the deletions. But to dispute the banning itself is borne of ignorance, and I think you're better than that.

 

[H.C.]

They would make a post and then leave. Stirring the pot much like a troll.
Cippy expressed his opinions in, yes, abrasive ways, but then people can ignore him right?

I'm not going to comment on the rest of the post because frankly I know a lot of it already and found it less-than positive.
I've even expressed some of these things LAST NIGHT in the public and dm's.

People did ignore Cippy, I know of at least 8 posters which had him on ignore at the time of his banning.
I was one of those posters.
That's 8 posters who while might not be the best the forum has to offer, they're certainly not the worst.
When you present your posts in a way which has certain posters put you on ignore it leaves the worst of the forum to respond to it.
That's 100% on Cippy for not understanding that if you act toxic, people who are too old for that shit refuse to even read your posts. Leaving only toxic people to read your posts.
Is it unfair it works that way? Perhaps, but at the end of the day life is too short for negative people. Especially on a fan forum where many would rather escape reality than deal with their daily lives.

Toxic people will never ignore toxic posts.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Surely your bias against the other party in the Cippy altercation has no bearing on your interpretation of the situation...

I've been Cippy's biggest advocate. I was the reason he was brought back after his first banning.

He repeatedly violated the personal attack rules. I think it's ridiculous to criticize Sly for being too patient with him.

I understand that you're not happy with the post deletion, and I see your point. However, I've seen the deleted posts. I can vouch for their content.

It's reasonable for you to complain about the deletions. But to dispute the banning itself is borne of ignorance, and I think you're better than that.

I'm not saying Cippy didn't deserve to be banned. im saying I will never know for sure and the fact that it happened while getting into it with the forum bully, I question the situation. I've gone rounds with the bully too. Many people have.
But without knowing what was said, I tend to believe there was favoritism to the bully, and i'm not the only one.

Im trying to help you mods out. But you guys seem set in your ways that private actions without transparency is the way to go. I'm saying it is not, and these conversations will always be the result. If not by me, by someone else because many feel the same as I do.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'm not saying Cippy didn't deserve to be banned. im saying I will never know for sure and the fact that it happened while getting into it with the forum bully, I question the situation. I've gone rounds with the bully too. Many people have.
But without knowing what was said, I tend to believe there was favoritism to the bully, and i'm not the only one.

Im trying to help you mods out. But you guys seem set in your ways that private actions without transparency is the way to go. I'm saying it is not, and these conversations will always be the result. If not by me, by someone else because many feel the same as I do.

And if everything was left alone, there would be likely different conversations with other posters who believe certain content should be deleted rather than left to stand.

It's impossible to please everyone.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Why don't you just start a forum and set it up the way you want it set up?..This forum came into being because of a mass exodus from another dysfunctional forum..this one works just fine if you keep a sense of humor...it's this over thinking the game that has lost us a lot of our funnier posters which I miss. I think OB that you're sweating small stuff here. I would have banned Cippy long ago for insulting folks and not letting up..move on man....

Perfect response of an inner circle.. Dont like us? leave.

Got it.

This is a public Blazers forum. Not some clique to be maintained, so the cool kids can keep feeling cool.
Sorry your safe space is being compromised. Maybe look at some of the cool kids attitudes towards others and develop a bit more of an impartial view?

 

[Orion Bailey]

And if everything was left alone, there would be likely different conversations with other posters who believe certain content should be deleted rather than left to stand.

It's impossible to please everyone.

But at least the statements would all be there for anyone and everyone to develop thier own opinion rather than have blind faith the mods are on the up and up.


You are right. You cant please everyone but what can be done is provide the truth for all to see.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I now feel like banning someone.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I now feel like banning someone.

I'm absolutely bannable. I told you guys to long ago. My opinion wont change and many share my opinion. The mods stubborness to acknowledge this and not see how the current ways leave much to be scrutinized is actually proving my point.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'm absolutely bannable. I told you guys to long ago. My opinion wont change and many share my opinion. The mods stubborness to acknowledge this and not see how the current ways leave much to be scrutinized is actually proving my point.

Isn't it possible that we acknowledge your point, but just disagree about the significance thereof?

 

[Orion Bailey]

Isn't it possible that we acknowledge your point, but just disagree about the significance thereof?

It is.. until mods get annoyed at the complaints about mods actions. Then we are back to square one.

I call it like I see it man.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

So why not take that a step further and put a percent mark on it? Some posters may have it out for other posters and flag everything. I think it should be a min. amount flagged required ( 5? 10?)before an edit or deletion should even be considered. Doesn't need to be on the fore front, but if the members know what the percent line is, then it might aid to more people understanding the decisions made by the mods. Until things are transparent, mods will always be under scrutiny.

Maybe you want to keep it that way and that's fine, but then no more bitching about having to do work?

As long as things are hidden and decisions are privately made without a set guideline as to when the decision is made, you will always have people complaining about the decisions. Don't expect it to ever change unless the system is willing to change.

I think there are enough people complaining about the current system of opinion based editing, that it should not be dismissed so easily. I think we are in double digits of people who don't care for the current ways.

And again, We don't need drastic changes, just a better set of guidelines and lines to not cross, based on the forum members opinion of the post. Not the mods.

So with the flagging system, what makes the decision to edit or delete based on the flags? How many before action is taken? 1? 10? 100? is it based on the mod who is viewing at the time and his opinion?

Lots of factors not being divulged that, again, put the mods in suspect.

Again, there is a lot of work that goes on in this forum that has nothing to do with moderating insults.

I am sorry that I have ever complained in seriousness or in jest about it. I will try not to do that anymore since I didn't know it was upsetting you.

There is not, and IMO there should not be, a black and white way to moderate this community. We do try and monitor for personal insults as black and white as possible but there are some very intelligent and creative people here who will go out of their ways to push the limits when it comes to insulting people.

I have edited 3 posts today for personal insults. I doubt that 2 of the people are even aware their post was edited.

I feel that moderator actions should be done to promote fun and healthy conversations and debates about the Blazers and NBA.

We have a very clear basic rule, don't insult people.

I very much appreciate the suggestions. I truly truly do, and if you recall I did try a 3 strikes and you're out (temporarily) system during Christmas. I will say it worked fantastically. Personal insults dropped to almost nothing and after it ended personal insults stayed way down. Now there has been a noticeable upturn recently. It's a very real and serious debate I have with myself over having more rules or just trying to enforce the rules that we do have as fairly as possible.

I will say this, we have very very few bannings for the size and activity of this forum. That is a testament to how well this forum is run. We have a staff that focuses on promoting healthy and fun discussion and debate instead of being forum cops. Yes, they do "police" things in the forum but they do it not looking for trouble but in response to problems.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

It is.. until mods get annoyed at the complaints about mods actions. Then we are back to square one.

I call it like I see it man.

Being annoyed with your long-winded redundant complaints equates to "stubbornness to acknowledge" that some people agree with your opinion?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I'm absolutely bannable. I told you guys to long ago. My opinion wont change and many share my opinion. The mods stubborness to acknowledge this and not see how the current ways leave much to be scrutinized is actually proving my point.

I'm trying to acknowledge your concerns.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Again, there is a lot of work that goes on in this forum that has nothing to do with moderating insults.

I am sorry that I have ever complained in seriousness or in jest about it. I will try not to do that anymore since I didn't know it was upsetting you.

There is not, and IMO there should not be, a black and white way to moderate this community. We do try and monitor for personal insults as black and white as possible but there are some very intelligent and creative people here who will go out of their ways to push the limits when it comes to insulting people.

I have edited 3 posts today for personal insults. I doubt that 2 of the people are even aware their post was edited.

I feel that moderator actions should be done to promote fun and healthy conversations and debates about the Blazers and NBA.

We have a very clear basic rule, don't insult people.

I very much appreciate the suggestions. I truly truly do, and if you recall I did try a 3 strikes and you're out (temporarily) system during Christmas. I will say it worked fantastically. Personal insults dropped to almost nothing and after it ended personal insults stayed way down. Now there has been a noticeable upturn recently. It's a very real and serious debate I have with myself over having more rules or just trying to enforce the rules that we do have as fairly as possible.

I will say this, we have very very few bannings for the size and activity of this forum. That is a testament to how well this forum is run. We have a staff that focuses on promoting healthy and fun discussion and debate instead of being forum cops. Yes, they do "police" things in the forum but they do it not looking for trouble but in response to problems.

Nothing upsetting me. Just pointing out the hypocrisies.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Fist portland 2014 is tunchi. Not sure if you know that.

If you have proof that Portland2014 is indeed Tunchi please share it with me and I will remove him.

I have checked the IP addresses and they do not share one.

Yes, I know that there are ways around this.

But I need concrete evidence that they are one in the same.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Nothing upsetting me. Just pointing out the hypocrisies.

It's hypocritical of me when I ask people to submit names for Adidas Emp Store instead of just using the names people submitted last time, or to not send me multiple PMs asking me when they can go, that I will let everyone know as soon as I find out? And that I can joke or complain about people making that a shit ton more work for me than just following the instructions I posted?

If that makes me a hypocrite then fine, I'll own it, I'm a hypocrite.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Being annoyed with your long-winded redundant complaints equates to "stubbornness to acknowledge" that some people agree with your opinion?

right. Its just me.,

 

[Orion Bailey]

It's hypocritical of me when I ask people to submit names for Adidas Emp Store instead of just using the names people submitted last time, or to not send me multiple PMs asking me when they can go, that I will let everyone know as soon as I find out? And that I can joke or complain about people making that a shit ton more work for me than just following the instructions I posted?

If that makes me a hypocrite then fine, I'll own it, I'm a hypocrite.

How did addidas get tossed into this?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

How did addidas get tossed into this?

It's something that I've complained about.

 

[Orion Bailey]

If you have proof that Portland2014 is indeed Tunchi please share it with me and I will remove him.

I have checked the IP addresses and they do not share one.

Yes, I know that there are ways around this.

But I need concrete evidence that they are one in the same.

I thought I had sent it to you once already in jest. Ill see what I can find again.

 

[Orion Bailey]

It's something that I've complained about.

sigh...

 

[Orion Bailey]

I thought I had sent it to you once already in jest. Ill see what I can find again.

Sorry. NM. It was Grand Jury before he changed to Portland2014.