Suggestion: moderators should have 2 accounts

I was admin and mod at a science forum for a few years, and it was my impression that online moderation is not really like moderation at public debates, academic colloquies, tv round tables, etc. As James noted, we serve voluntarily and for free, and the primary carrot is getting to participate in a chat that we might help keep civil and on-topic. The firewall between participating and enforcing rules of discourse is really one of taking a vow to switch hats only when it serves to remedy an objectively identifiable problem of flaming, trolling, bad faith argument, misinformation, etc. Given that mods are humans who can enter into discussions where their own personal buttons are pushed, it is good to have a backup, i.e. another mod who can be called in to sort things out. Simply changing logins would not be sufficient in such a situation - a different pair of eyes are needed.
At another science forum we had a situation where there were two mods and one of them went awol whilst the other was locked out.(Harold and Kalster)

At the first opportunity Kalster banned Harold and nominated Markus Hanke and Dywyddr as admin and mod if memory serves me.

The owner pulled the plug sometime later.
 
No. I'm talking about them recusing themself from moderating specific interactions that they are involved in, not threads when they have nothing to do with the behaviour that requires moderating.
E.g. if a moderator thinks a member is lying about them, or stalking them, they should not moderate that action but instead refer it to someone that has no conflict of interest. It's simples, really.
That's an informal rule we have at another forum I moderate. The most contentious forum on the site (Speaker's Corner) has two moderators, and both of us have thick enough skins that, if someone is insulting US, we just let it go until the other one sees it. Personally I don't really care what people say about me; I'm much more sensitive to what people say about other posters.

It usually works. The worst posters claim that we are just "using the other" i.e. I tell Wendy to give this guy a warning and she does. Not how it works, of course, but I don't have much interest in proving it to them. Lesson there is probably "people will be pissed no matter how you do it."
 
I was admin and mod at a science forum for a few years, and it was my impression that online moderation is not really like moderation at public debates, academic colloquies, tv round tables, etc. As James noted, we serve voluntarily and for free, and the primary carrot is getting to participate in a chat that we might help keep civil and on-topic.
Agreed. Asking someone to moderate for free then telling them "oh and you can't participate if you feel strongly" is not the way to attract engaged moderators.
 
I don't think there's enough traffic currently, that it's a problem. But, if the traffic here picks up, it could be harder to contain. If JoeScience gets into a heated debate, and another member in the same debate crosses the boundaries of forum etiquette / breaks the rules, JoeScience shouldn't be able to change hats and issue an infraction to said other member. If that's being considered, we should all have two accounts then, and ''self-govern'' the forum.

I'm getting Lord of the Flies vibes, just thinking about that, though. Might not be a good idea. :rolleyes:
 
I don't think there's enough traffic currently, that it's a problem. But, if the traffic here picks up, it could be harder to contain. If JoeScience gets into a heated debate, and another member in the same debate crosses the boundaries of forum etiquette / breaks the rules, JoeScience shouldn't be able to change hats and issue an infraction to said other member. If that's being considered, we should all have two accounts then, and ''self-govern'' the forum.

I'm getting Lord of the Flies vibes, just thinking about that, though. Might not be a good idea. :rolleyes:
We need more Wegs! Too much testosterone in some discussions
 
Back
Top