Originally Posted by
Punki
Kanebear writes:
You are absolutely right,
Kanebear, that those are the rules, and rules with which I wholeheartedly agree. We should be allowed to discuss concepts and abstracts of moderation openly and honestly, without discussing specific moderator actions.
In practice, however, the FlyerTalk moderators have effectively rewritten the rule to shut down any discussion of moderation, no matter how abstract,
as is clearly pointed out in this recent post by
Dovster. Just as an exercise, go to the ORP forum and search the word "moderator" for the past three years and you will see that the vast majority of discussions are simply shut down, period.
This is unhealthy for a several reasons: First, the sheriff should never be in a position to rewrite the laws. That type of system is doomed to corruption. Second, the membership feels frustration at being given no forum in which to express its veiws. Third, the moderators suffer from lack of member input.
This is untrue. Moderators did not rewrite anything. ORP is Randy Petersen's forum. It is run as he wishes and directs. He directed that such threads be closed. As
Dovster so aptly notes, such threads get contentious. I disagree with him that such contention is healthy. Instead, I believe it is unhealthy as it almost always results in heated discussions boiling over into unmitigated flaming and personal attacks.
Moderators receive quite a lot of member input. It simply isn't subject to public review and criticism. That's as it should be. If I have an issue with a police officer giving me a speeding ticket, I'll take it up with the officer and on up the line to the police chief if necessary. I absolutely don't need nor do I want Joe-Blow-Don't-Know halfway across town being able to put his two cents into the matter on how I deserved the ticket as driving is evil and we should all ride bicycles and sing Kumbayah. Were moderation such a problem for a majority of FT users, they'd be complaining to Flyertalk staff and Randy. Have you ever asked how many complaints have been received from unique members (as opposed to those merely creating duplicate user names to prove a point)?
Originally Posted by Punki
Yes, I know that the moderators have their own forum where they talk to one another, and yes, I know that the moderators have meetings where they sit around and talk to one another, but that is not enough. They really need input from the general membership, and we have no vehicle to allows for that stream of input. Sometimes it seems like the moderators actively avoid input. Let me give you an example.
While attending a FlyerTalk dinner, another member came over to our table and sat down. There was a moderator at the table, but the other member had no idea she was a moderator. When he asked question, "What do you think about moderation on the XXX forum?" the moderator jumped, said, "I just don't have to sit hear and listen to this garbage," and stomped out of the restaurant. This would have been a golden opportunity for her to get input, but she refused to even listen.
Again, moderators currently get quite a lot of input from the general membership. It's simply not made public. If moderators do not act upon member concerns, I would hope the members would raise the issue with FlyerTalk staff and admins. I know that Randy is very accessible and approachable. He is also very even-handed and fair. If he declines to address an issue and other members don't have a problem, why should that necessitate a change to how FlyerTalk works? Simply because you do not know whether or not other FTers take issue as the information is not public does not make it so. Were FT so problematic, most would not complain. They'd simply leave. That, obviously, has not been the case. I suggest FT and TalkBoard have far more contentious issues to consider than moderation.
Originally Posted by Punki
I think that each of us in a leadership role, whether it be as a TalkBoard member, or as a moderator, has a responsibility to seek out the opinions of the general membership and do everything in our power to assure that we are acting in their best interests.
We all need to carefully listen to one another, try to really understand one another's positions, and then work together to build the best possible community that we can.
See above. This already occurs on a daily basis. It seems that you mostly take issue with the information not being made public. Yet many decisions that are made in government and business aren't transparent and the supporting information isn't made public. It's a fact of daily life. Indeed, Talkboard does not have this level of transparency. As a member of FT, I don't
want moderation actions and sanctions made public whether they involve me or not.