Rate Sciforums Moderation.!!!

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by cluelusshusbund, Jun 1, 2014.

?

Rate Sciforums Moderation.!!!

  1. 1.

    5 vote(s)
    17.2%
  2. 2.

    1 vote(s)
    3.4%
  3. 3.

    2 vote(s)
    6.9%
  4. 4.

    2 vote(s)
    6.9%
  5. 5.

    4 vote(s)
    13.8%
  6. 6.

    3 vote(s)
    10.3%
  7. 7.

    2 vote(s)
    6.9%
  8. 8.

    5 vote(s)
    17.2%
  9. 9.

    3 vote(s)
    10.3%
  10. 10.

    2 vote(s)
    6.9%
  1. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,903
    1 thru 10... 1 bein "this will likely be my last post here"... an 10 bein... "Perfect... no changes needed"

    The poll is set for private so no one will know how you voated.!!!

    This thred is for the purpose of ratin moderation in general... NOT to name particular mods to ridicule them.!!!

    I give Sciforums moderation a solid "8".!!!

    It ant perfect... but prolly perty close to satisfyin the most people possible.!!!

    Wit a tweek or 2... i thank Sciforums coud easily rate a "9".!!!
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,275
    Moderation is OK, until I get banned.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    It's OK and I have been banned, three times.

    I'm certainly not going to whinge, cry, bemoan, and wring my hands in anguish about any banning like some do.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    Best bunch of science forum moderators ever (and the only ones that still allow me to post on their site.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    8 is a good number, but science forums are a tough crowd, so I give 'em a 9.

    James R. for Pres!!
     
  8. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,275
    I'm complaining.

    I still don't know exactly why I was suspended. Unless there was a policy change.
     
  9. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    there was.
    you can't drink beer through a straw anymore.
    and stop looking at me like that.
     
  10. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,903
    Well.. throw out the high an low votes an you get a respectable 6.8 out of 10... yep... not bad for a secerete voat.!!!
     
  11. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,912
    I voted a '3'. Not bad anough to drive me off the board, but a negative influence all in all.

    (Where '5' is neutral, a lower score means that moderators are making things worse, a higher score means that moderators are valuable discussion facilitators making discussions better than they would otherwise be.)

    My biggest interest here is the overall 'Philosophy' section. (That's where my own academic background is concentrated, broadly speaking.)

    I think that while the 'General Philosophy' sub-forum has some problems, they aren't the result of its moderation. So my opinion would be '5' for that one. Perhaps part of the reason for that is that moderation on that sub-forum is almost invisible. There isn't a whole lot of value-added, but the moderators aren't making things worse either.

    The 'Ethics and Justice' sub-forum is a bit of a disaster area in my opinion. It shares many of the same faults as the Politics forum and seems to be dominated by the same people. Moderators seem to take an inordinate interest in it and seven of the ten most recent threads there were started by moderators. It's all about their takes on divisive hot-button social issues and appears self-indulgent to a fault. I would give that one a '1'. I have absolutely no desire to post there, and the behavior of the moderators is a big part of why I don't.

    The 'Religion' sub-form used to be one of my favorite places on Sciforums. It was very lightly moderated (earning it a '5') and often hosted very interesting and stimulating conversations, amidst the inevitable drivel. It seemed to be kind of dominated by atheist/theist battling, which annoyed some people I guess. But I thought that was a good hook to snag laypeople's attention and the arguments stimulated interesting discussions about all aspects of the philosophy of religion. All in all, I thought that it was great fun.

    But somebody called for more moderation there, a series of missteps ensued, and the forum seems to be kind of brain-dead these days. Many of the most interesting people (like Wynn) seem to have left. Other conversational stalwarts (like LG) have been summarily banned for no credible reason. The most active threads once again are political social-issue threads and the usual-suspect moderators seem very active in pushing the new emphasis. I'd now rate the Religion forum a '3' and falling like a stone. I expect things to only get worse. That's why I've been posting more up in the Science fora (the philosophy of science is a long-standing interest of mine) becoming a new headache for Trippy. The thing to note that the 'Religion' forum's headlong plummet from '5' to '3' has been entirely the work of Sciforums' moderators, since they set about "improving" the place.

    I do need to say that isn't really the fault of Kittamaru. He seems like a good guy with good instincts. He isn't causing the problems but he isn't doing much of anything to make them better. (There may not be much that he can do seeing as how other moderators are involved.)

    Finally, the 'Asian Philosophy' sub-forum. That subject is of interest to me, but seemingly to nobody else, so nothing happens there. The sub-forum's moderator is a slightly bizarre but seemingly harmless and likeable believer in ancient-astronaut theories. It gets a '3' perhaps.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2014
  12. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,936
    I have been rather Laissez-faire with the Religion sub-forums because it seemed that was what people wanted. Then, those same people started getting treated the same way they were treating others, and then they started calling for moderation...

    *shrugs* I'm of the opinion that if you can't take it, don't dish it out.
     
  13. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    Unless you can ban people. In that case, you totally can dish it out even when you can't take it.
     
  14. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,578
    I think the moderation is very good. The only problem I have is that sometimes the moderators dissapear for extended periods of time.

    I noticed 3 of the votes were for #1. Too bad that the people voted for the #1 are lying. #1 was defined as "this will probably be my last post"; right, we should be so lucky. If the whinners actually left the forum, it would be much better in my opinion.
     
  15. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,936
    *devilish grin* Well, in that case I would say those dishing out the mierda should duck and cover before said mierda hits the ventilador, hm?
     
  16. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,353
    The worst 'moderator' is Trippy. Let's begin with his avatar a skull-shaped spider dripping venom. That certainly sets the tone for fair-mindedness. It's accurate enough though as he is certainly poisonous , by which I mean heavy-handed, self-righteous and rude. Plus he totally seems to not get that science is about changing one's mind if the facts lead to it, not being blinded by ones own egocentric certainty. I really wish he would step down, better no moderation than the sort he fumbles at.
     
  17. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    yzarc right

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    are you serious ?
    (shrugs)
     
  19. cornel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    137
    I rate sciforums-moderation as entertaining, threads like these are my main interest when i visit this forum.
    Quality-wise they're a 2, possibly 3, it's hard finding a thread on here where nobody got banned *waves at balerion*
    and the reasoning behind banishment is usually highly subjective which is a large reason i don't visit this forum too often.
     
  20. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,275
    Although, Trippy, suspended me (I think.) I did loose my temper.

    There are some posters I have um... very little affection for. And I appreciate some moderator action in the physics and math section. Otherwise, I wouldn't even visit this site.
     
  21. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,903
    Insted of a place for all... sometimes it seems as if Sciforums is a personal blog for some mods... an follerin you'r example of avoidin those situations is a very sinsable thang to do.!!!

    I like a wide varity of posters an i hope Wynn comes back... an LG bein railroaded is also a loss for Sciforums.!!!

    O well... 51%(?) of the mods agreed to get rid of LG... an the insult to injury was him bein perma-baned for bogus reasons.!!!

    As a member of my mod club... i thank i will take action on the LG issue in my mod club thred:::

    "WalK in a Mods Shoes"
     
  22. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,639
    There's a solution for that.

    We need many more members to come in and post a whole lot of content, so that the mods' contributions will be minor in comparison to the overall content on the site.

    Interesting content drives discussion, no matter who posts it. It will be a sad day if we ever get to the stage where members only feel like they want to reply to posts made by the moderators.
     
  23. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,912
    I don't really have any complaints about how you've been moderating the Religion forum. When I said that the forum is a '3' and falling, due almost entirely to the behavior of moderators, my complaints were more about the influence that Tiassa and Bells were having there. I was concerned at the time that the only active thread on the Religion forum was Tiassa's idiotic anti-atheist rant-thread, diverted by Bells into a very heated and angry feminist abortion thread.

    I was one of those who suggested that a laissez-faire policy is probably best and I still believe that. Of course, I think that that the Religion forum was perfectly fine before Balerion asked for more moderation and the moderation crew started talking about what a problem the religion forum was. (Nobody ever identified what the problem supposedly was.)

    You probably should maintain the laissez-faire approach, provided that other moderators don't move in on your turf and try to change the nature of the forum. (I'm not sure what you could do about that, since moderators apparently lack the ability to moderate moderators.)

    Again, I don't think that the real problem on the Religion forum is rank and file participants being rude to each other. You probably should work discreetly to dial it in when it's especially egregious, perhaps even closing threads when they devolve into nothing but flames. But you don't really have to do very much. It's mostly self-correcting. If somebody writes something objectionable, another participant will almost certainly be along in no time to object. We saw that happening in MR's exceedingly trollish 'stupid things Christians say' thread. Most of the responses he got, even from atheists, were critical. The thread staggered around for a while, then lurched off in more productive directions.
     

Share This Page