|
Originally Posted by Jenbel
(Post 17667294)
With apologies to ZenFlyer (if it helps, this stuff was 'only' 4 years ago! :D)... but I really cannot let this assertion go unchallenged. You had a guaranteed seconder in me. All you had to do was make the motion, and it would have gone to a vote. But as we know from the history of motions made, for some reason, you chose not to and so you chose not to admit publicly what you had been saying on the private forum about a member behind their back.
And that, I think, is that. With a tip of the hat to Zenflyer, I think it's fair to say that the private forums of both mods and TB have not always been what they should. They are used by humans afterall, and we are all human. Let's concentrate on how we can make the thing work better in the future, rather than pick over old scrawny bones. "Let me get my punches in and then let's move on." |
Originally Posted by RichMSN
(Post 17668035)
We're trying. The first step is banning the use of the word "purview."
|
Originally Posted by attorney28
(Post 17668122)
This post is funny.
"Let me get my punches in and then let's move on." |
Originally Posted by kipper
(Post 17667899)
Huh? What isn't open about allowing all users read-only access to the private TB discussion forum?
Originally Posted by the_horvaths
(Post 17667926)
Would you want the private moderator forum opened? Openness for everyone?
Originally Posted by RichMSN
(Post 17667938)
I don't get this. I've read through the entire private TB forum and it's mainly a cure for insomnia and I'd personally have no problem opening it up for all to see. I don't suppose you'd feel the same about the mod forum, or do you?
|
Originally Posted by essxjay
(Post 17668151)
It's especially not fair to subject members who've already been disciplined to public scrutiny and possible humiliation after the fact.
The "humiliation" is there (at least for the member). The secrecy only protects a moderator who has given a suspension for invalid or questionable reasons. (A moderator who gives a warranted suspension has absolutely no reason to be embarrassed.) |
Originally Posted by RichMSN
(Post 17668082)
My first suggestion is that the next Mod DO/Training session include a joint session with the TB -- a chance for the two groups to collaborate about the future of FT.
Call it whatever you like, but bringing the two groups together for some constructive dialogue seems to be a great first step in working together to make FT an even better place. And I'll even get the first round at the bar! |
{Non core subject section snipped by the moderator}
Originally Posted by RichMSN
(Post 17668082)
My first suggestion is that the next Mod DO/Training session include a joint session with the TB -- a chance for the two groups to collaborate about the future of FT.
Call it whatever you like, but bringing the two groups together for some constructive dialogue seems to be a great first step in working together to make FT an even better place. |
Originally Posted by Jenbel
(Post 17668085)
I think there are many people who think it would be great to demarginalise TB. But you've identified the problem - for some on here, and the only thing some people seem willing to discuss, is how TB should take more control of moderation. Given how many times TB (and not just the current one) has been told this is not going to happen, to have some continually harken on about it does get sad and frustrating.
So until some on TB can get beyond demarginlising TB=controlling moderation, then I don't see much of a change in approach. If some on/around TB are unable to change, why are you expecting anyone else to? ;) As for TB/mod relations, I am all for doing anything to de-marginalize TB without affecting mods. |
Originally Posted by Dovster
(Post 17668195)
When a member is disciplined it is publicly announced. For 7 days, 30 days, or permanently there is an announcement that he is suspended on every post he has ever made.
The "humiliation" is there (at least for the member). The secrecy only protects a moderator who has given a suspension for invalid or questionable reasons. (A moderator who gives a warranted suspension has absolutely no reason to be embarrassed.) There will be other methods of discipline which is not publicly visible - this might include requiring members to edit posts or other tools open to moderators to manage problems which may occur. Some of those tools we may not want to discuss openly as we would then lose their efficacy. Some of the problems we deal with are thorny and difficult enough without losing some of the tools in our arsenal :( |
Originally Posted by essxjay
(Post 17668201)
Gotta hand it to you, Dov. Nobody but nobody poisons the well better than you do. ;)
I'm all for a joint session! ^ But instead of TB inviting themselves to a ModDo, how 'bout the TB set up their own meeting and invite the mods? |
Originally Posted by the_horvaths
(Post 17668216)
The history of FT seems to be fixated around how Randy ran the site. Is he still here? Do we still need to operate under his rules/guidelines? They worked well for awhile, but that does not mean they were perfect. I would love to see TB (voted by posters) try to tweak how the old establishment worked to make it better. One reason I am for change is that most of the TB/moderators come from those days. SanDiego1K is in charge, that is clear. I would like to see TB put together suggestions/proposals to her (let's face it, that is all they can do) and see her response. If she thinks things are working, so be it and status quo exists. Without a push for change, nothing will. Some clearly feel a change would benefit FT.
And been ignored by many. So yes, we are beyond Randy's era. However, the policy remains unchanged. It's just that some don't really seem to believe Carol. I guess they don't know her as well as I do :eek: |
Originally Posted by essxjay
(Post 17668151)
Actually, I think a lot of the mod forum content is pretty snooze-inducing. However, a number of topics, as pro forma as they are, are really none of anyone's business outside of IB, the CD and volunteer mod corp. It's especially not fair to subject members who've already been disciplined to public scrutiny and possible humiliation after the fact. (This is especially so when it comes to ongoing member-on-member vendettas.) It's simply not right to open up these records knowing full well they could be re-purposed to carry out further character assaults. Opening up the mod forum is just a bad idea for other reasons, too. As it ain't happening, it's time to drop the subject and move on. You keep discipline on the down-low so that it does not create a lot of acrimony or navel-gazing or questions about disciplinary actions. And that may be a good reason to do it that way. There may be others. Certainly worth figuring out if it is indeed a best practice or not. |
Originally Posted by Dovster
(Post 17668195)
When a member is disciplined it is publicly announced. For 7 days, 30 days, or permanently there is an announcement that he is suspended on every post he has ever made.
The "humiliation" is there (at least for the member). The secrecy only protects a moderator who has given a suspension for invalid or questionable reasons. (A moderator who gives a warranted suspension has absolutely no reason to be embarrassed.) |
Please review the Community Director's message regarding the TalkBoard and Moderation. As a consequence of her positive and clear statements, I'm closing this thread due to the many twist and turns it has taken away from Koko's original posting. I encourage Koko to start a new thread on the marginalization subject if he so desires. I'd rather not redact any further posts in this one, so I'll just retire it.
Link: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...talkboard.html http://www.janeausten.co.uk/wp-conte...ics/eggnog.jpg |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:56 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.