http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum71/HTML/017701.html


We have Four Moderators on the AA forum.

These dedicated, gracious individuals are acting without signing their FT handle. Consequently , the general community of the AA board has no idea who is taking the action.

I do not recall ever seeing a thread closed on Airline forums with Mods without the respective Moderator doing so giving a short reason.

(The one occasional non-airline exception being MilesBuzz where threads very clearly in the wrong place are moved without comment and the new forum is indicated by a UBB line. Miles Buzz being a 'catch-all' forum has this problem more than airline specific Forums.)

I seldom visit the AA forum writetorich, so did not see the thread you reference or your original (moderator deleted) post in the thread you link to above. However I am surprised there appears on the surface of reading this, to be a definite reluctance among AA Mods to concede on the board who specifically closed threads, and personally do not feel that is a wise or helpful policy.

The four Delta Moderators allowed a 4 page thread to exist recently titled: "And the Moderator's Keep on Moderating!"

No-one disputes the rights of Moderators to act in accordance with Randy's guidelines and wishes, but I do think that having acted, the person concerned needs to accept visible responsibility for that action. I would ask exactly the same question if that occurred to me in say the UA forum.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ozstamps:
[B]I do not recall ever seeing a thread closed on Airline forums with Mods without the respective Moderator doing so giving a short reason.

Oz,
I sought FAR LESS. I specificly stated that I did not think that the moderator had to give a reason or rationale,even a short one.

Instead , merely posting "thread closed"
or "I'm closing this thread" was all I was seeking. We have no less than FOUR moderators acting secretly without even identifying themselves. All I respectfully asked,was that the moderator
taking the action identify himself. Apparently, this was too much for Plato as he compromised the intergrity or my post with inappropriate and vile censorship typed over my comments. I was nothing but polite, civil, and respectful in my post. However Plato TYPED OVER MY POST with his MODERATOR hat on gimmick. Why not close the thread and make his comments the last post instead of erasing mine? OR delete the thread completely.



[This message has been edited by writetorich (edited 08-10-2003).]

"ever seeing" ?? well there is always a first:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum71/HTML/017691.html

Here One of the four moderators closes a thread with out a short reason, Which I do not feel is needed as the moderators graciously donate their time to FT.

But, I do have a major problem with them acting anonymously in secrecy. Simply signing off "Thread closed" is all I ask. I think this is reasonable in forums with multiple moderators.

[This message has been edited by writetorich (edited 08-10-2003).]

If you're not seeking to second-guess moderation decisions, why do you want to know either the identity or the rationale of the moderator who acted on a particular thread?

By seeking exact knowledge of who acted, it appears to show intention for using that information in later disputes.

If you feel that moderation is not being done appropriately, this is the correct forum to post in. Expounding your views in the AA forum is not.

When in doubt, I will lock, modify, or delete personal comments which carry no interest for the majority of FT:AA participants, despite their enormous meaning to certain individuals. Your objecting to moderation decisions is noted, but please don't use the AA forum to air your personal opinions, as was discussed in this past thread.

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/009564.html

Use e-mail if you want to speak with the moderators directly, or use this forum if you'd like Randy's official decision.

[This message has been edited by Plato90s (edited 08-10-2003).]

Well, actually Joe there IS a thread on Moderation
currently going on on the AA Forum:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum.../017626-2.html


Joe, notwithstanding your comments below
, you have even posted on the thread engaging FT'er
in a discussion of moderation issues and purporting to
explain your actions . However you did not close it.
But you did see fit to delete my posts on the same
thread which was ALREADY discussing moderation.

--- [email protected] wrote:
> As I have stated already, the FT:AA forum is not
> appropriate for discussion of moderation actions.
> Your repeated insinua> tions will have no bearing on
> the topic, and the locked thread will remain in
> place as a general reminder that the topic of
> discussion is AA and the AAdvantage program.
>
> Further posts concerning your personal ideas about
> moderation philosophy should be placed either in
> Omni, the Only Randy forum you've already chosen,
> or via e-mail.
>

> -Joe


[This message has been edited by writetorich (edited 08-10-2003).]

Mr. Peterson and Plato90's Is it OK if I post the following on the AA Board?

BTW, I will not post this on the AA board Or make any posts on the AA board until I have your response.

I'd like a wider, more representative porion of FT i.e. the AA community to see the following.

Hence, I respectfully request that this issue be presented to the AA board:

Dear AA Moderators and Randy Peterson,


I have a suggestion or actually a request. We have
Four distinct individuals who graciously and
generously donate their time on behalf of FT.

Often threads are closed without the community knowing
WHO closed the thread. As I assume that these are
typically not collaborative decisions, perhaps the
individual moderator closing a thread or taking any
action of any sort could share his FT identity (
handle) with the community. I am not asking that any
of the four be required to post an explanation or
rationale. I'm only asking that the individual not act
anonymously and in secrecy.

It is reasonable to act in your discretion to close a
thread or move a post to a more appropriate forum.
However it is most unreasonable to act in secrecy and
anonymously. , I think it might be a good idea when
closing a thread to make a final post "Thread closed"
or I'm closing this thread". Similarly, if moving a
thread to Omni, a post simply "signing off" on the
action-- No explanation needed-- should be provided to
the community. i.e. " Thread Moved to Omni"

I am going to post this in the AA Forum as an "open
letter" of sorts and would ask that the moderators NOT
closed the thread, alter my post, or delete the
thread.

Instead, please allow the General AA FT community to
voice their opinions on this issue.

Thank you for your consideration.


"Writetorich"

The answer from me at least - I think it is polite and good policy. No more, no less.

And it seems moderators in other forums have no problem with doing things that way.

Too much of the "faceless secret police" odour or perception if things are deliberately being locked with no identity as to whom is doing it. That's just my personal 2�. I understood Moderation on Flyertalk - when needed - was to be open and transparent?

We have a Talkboard election right now with no less than 10 Moderators in the field. Some are superb Moderators and IMO some are quite unsuited and often lacking in judgement. FT'ers deserve to know who is closing threads in order to make informed votes in such cases, seeing Moderators have been allowed to stand. Some have indicated the individual good/bad track record of personal moderation will influence their vote.

writetorich says his post that was written over and deleted was: "polite, civil and respectful". I do not know - I did not see it, but Plato90s does not dispute or quibble with that description, so one assumes that is a fair summation? It does seem clear it was not a post dripping with obscenity, or personal abuse etc, which is where a fast edit or closure would probably surprise or bother no-one.

Again, I am am not criticising the Moderator concept here - just agreeing that it seems fair and reasonable - indeed universal policy except in AA Forum, that where threads are locked and posts removed, there ordinarily be a fingerprint left by the person doing it so all others can be aware of whose hand was at work. All four are accountable for their own decisions that way.

Plato90s seems to be saying that the AA Moderators do not adhere to that policy?

I would be interested to hear what Randy's thoughts are on this.

-------------------------------------------------------------


[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 08-10-2003).]

Not that anyone asked me, but

* When I close or move a thread, I generally give an explanation because I want other posters who see my reason to modify their future behavior.

* When I close or move a thread, I do so with a message first so that anyone who wants to better understand why can contact me (that is, they know which moderator to contact).

* But I do this so that they can email me AND NOT POST ISSUES HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH MILES AND POINTS to the forum. If you want Randy's attention, post to Only Randy Petersen (or email him). If you want the moderators' attention, email them all. But even if moderation is being done anonymously, don't make moderation the issue in an airline forum. I do believe that harms the forum.

* There's a history of anonymous moderation here on Flyertalk. Folks may recall that the original moderators were given moderator account names to use in place of their FT handles, and only chose later to reveal who they were.

My personal preference is for a short explanation of actions, and I choose to identify myself. The way to handle objections or discussions of the matter is here, in this forum (as is being done now!) rather than in the airline forum itself.

I consistently stick with the practice of

a) posting on a thread I lock
b) making clear when I am speaking as a moderator or as another poster

writetorich's criticism about secrecy is absolutely NOT applicable to me, because I am quite open about when I edit, lock, and/or delete. Thus my question of why he seems so determined to locate the identity of the moderator who locked a thread without comment.

While there are indeed threads which are closed without comment, they are rare. After going through the last 3 months worth of locked threads, I'd say only 1 out of 10 is locked without it being fairly obvious who and why.

Having said that, I still find it inappropriate for questions about who locked a thread to be posted in that fashion. His "polite, civil, and respectful" thread was edited out for being off-topic. He had been advised that questions like that are best asked via e-mail, and the person who actually locked the thread without comment will either answer or not.

Involving the rest of the community in a fruitless discussion is just a distraction.

So let me re-iterate. Personally, I am not hiding anything. One of the other 3 moderators closed a thread without comment. He will explain it to writetorich at a time of his choosing. Until then, that does not give anyone carte blanche to post comments on FT:AA in order to rouse up a response.

[This message has been edited by Plato90s (edited 08-10-2003).]

Thanks for detailed response Plato90s.

I see more of the story now. Still do not understand how (or why) approx 10% of the threads (by your own figuring) on AA in recent months are being locked "anonymously" and also without explanation.

And you seem to be saying nicely asking the 4 Moderators by email: 'who dun it' may or may not get a response?? You folks will not allow an answer to be obtained via the Forum, and possibly not via email either? That does not sound open and transparent or ideal to me at least. Bit like asking the FBI for your file details. They may or may not respond.

I accept it is not you doing this and do feel your stated policy like gleff's outlined about is open and transparent and VERY preferable.

Be interested what Randy thinks about the apparent determined secrecy among one or all of the other 3 Mods on AA - or indeed for them to post their thought processes/rationale here for this cloak and dagger stuff. I am confused at why anyone needs to hide behind what they Moderate.

My personal opinion is that it's just a matter of convenience. It takes 2 clicks to lock a thread, but a lot more typing and clicking to post a comment and lock.

Since I didn't lock the thread in question, nor can I speak for the other moderators, I can't provide writetorich with the closure he wants.

What I can (and will continue to do) is to prevent his personal quest for an answer from cluttering up the normal traffic of the AA forum, which is why his comments on this issue which get posted to the AA forum will continue to be deleted and/or locked.

I'm confused. If there's a 1 in 10 chance that the moderator has not identified themself when locking a thread, just exactly who are you supposed to e-mail (every moderator on the board then, perhaps, hoping to get an answer from the responsible party)?

To me it seems only fair that a moderator closing a thread should identify themself 100% of the time, so that if a poster wants to follow up, they have that opportunity via e-mail with the specific moderator.

Seems logical to me, but given that I am neither the person who did it, nor am I in a position to identify who did it - there's really nothing more I can do.

If the issue was the poster thinks the thread should be open - that can be discussed and acted upon. That's not the case though.

If the poster really wants to know which moderator closed the thread, e-mail is the most appropriate way to discover that information. When Dan, the WebFlyer tech, wants to know which moderator deleted a particular post or thread, he asks via e-mail. He doesn't start threads on the forum in question.

So writetorich should feel free to pursue the inquiry to whatever extent he wants, but he should do it within defined channels - not via broadcast on the FT:AA forum.

Wow, Your editing within my post ( altering my post)and "another moderator" anonymously locking the thread took place within 15 seconds of each other real time. Its very impressive that you and your fellow moderator are that much in synch and on the same page.