In lieu of round tabling something interesting like UFO stuff or ai Data Center theories it seems we are going to discuss my moderation.
Thanks u/americanjerky
Quoting americanjerky:
"this place has not improved ever since the introduction of active moderators"
Link to submission thread: https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/1ASsLC9DuK/round-table-discussion-submissio/c
Link to public mod logs for investigation
Previous relevant discussions
Understanding The Rules In This Community
⭐ If it pleases the Community, I would like to request this round table be shortened from the standard 3-4 weeks so we can get on to more exciting topics.
Everyone has his style of doing things. If it comes to me I would prefer the old clemaneuverers style of moderation. Basically let everyone do their thing and keep actions to a minimum. Only intervene when someone posts spam adverts, porn or senseless gore. And only delete comments which are really over the top, death threats or which are really, really mean. Hard to qualify I suppose but we all have thick skins over here and it did feel to me that in certain instances you didn't let some people steam it out a bit.
Not sure if others will agree on this one but perhaps you can use an alt for your comments or posts. To make the mod account just a mod and not give the feeling that this is your forum of a sort.
Don't take it personally but I assume everyone on the internet could potentially be "one of them" pretending to be a normal dude. If you are just a fella who does this for a hobby of a sort and have good intentions at heart then I wish you all the best and huge thanks. Keep in mind though that everyone in this forum will always consider the possibility that you may be one of them trying to throttle the forum even if you do everything right.
Clem himself said he was derelict in his duties and it had resulted in people leaving, namely DrLeaks. I think most people on the site as a whole are lurkers and I also think there are many lurkers in this forum specifically. It seems we have a reputation here of being somewhat intimidating (with thinkings) and I see it as a moderator's duty to care for both types of people around, meaning those that don't want to be personally attacked (versus their arguments) and those that see the need for a moderate amount of personal attack, hence the 'free for all' compromise. I know of one user specifically that has asked that all their posts be considered 'free for all', but mostly it is being underutilized.
The default of this community is not a 'free for all' but rather free thinking with an understanding of honoring a very simple 3 rule set standard.
I will continue to think on this idea of using my alts more but some things, like my live invite posts, rely on people being able to gauge my reputation and changing that would be counter-productive.
I very much appreciate your wisdom in this and many other things and am grateful you replied to this post, thanks dude.
If I have to wager money I would wager that DrLeaks was not a real person but a Jewish forum slider of the highest caliber. His posts were the run of the mill forum sliding type never offering anything new and quite large in quantity. Not sure how he played it with Clem to make him feel guilty somehow.
But is the paragraph I just wrote against the rules? This is precisely why heavy moderation makes this another Reddit.
I could say that about people active now probably too, the problem becomes proving shills vs people you don't like or get along with and it's a slippy slope before we're all turned against eachother, I think.
As you mentioned earlier about mistrust, I also tend to lean toward the suspicious side of things and am trying to be better about it, otherwise I'll end up locked in a room, probably.
I posted my comment before I read yours and they are pretty much identical in ideas. I mentioned how when I had a very popular sub on Reddit I made it clear I set the rules but didn’t handle any moderation or appeals, that sort of thing. I had others do it that didn’t post, maybe they did in alts, but I never knew. I considered myself the founder and community manager and was able to be really involved the the community and not do it with a badge and a gun visible. I never banned one person the entire time or flexed on someone that was close to breaking the rules in comments or ever at all. That’s what the mods were for it wasn’t my job. I did however make sure the mods were doing their job checking what they removed or banned or whatever but that’s it.
I’ve seen OP insert themselves into conversation like a regular user would many times but then eventually give warnings visible to everyone if it went a certain way they didn’t like. I don’t like how someone could think they are arguing or debating with a regular user then all of a sudden they flex with be careful what you say and making it obvious they are a mod. The times I have seen that happen really didn’t even think a warning was necessary at all, but how can you even make that call with such a huge conflict of interest being part of the debate yourself. If all the other users are fine with the way the debate or discussion is going and even if it’s heated as long as it’s not completely crazy breaking rules and everyone seems fine about it except for the OP who is also part of the debate seems like it’s hard to tell sometimes if they are just annoyed at someone or they really think it’s breaking the rules. Also I never had my mods call out people in public for bad behavior I had them send a PM and talk about it without escalating it by calling them out publicly, especially for trivial things.
So yeah if I see OP commenting in a thread with a debate I don’t even bother commenting because it seems saying the wrong thing even if not abusive just being annoying to them might get their attention in a way I don’t want to happen.
I mean even this entire thread itself to me is widely Inappropriate for a mod. Either be a user or a mod, not both at the same time.
But I am a user here.. The fact that I am a frequent user and know the community is why Admin made me the mod.
The post is here because it was voted highest in the submission thread.
See you have this post asking a question and then the two people that give input you are not just accepting the ideas people present that were asked for you feel the need to defend yourself. It’s a trap.
It's a discussion, not a trap. Why shouldn't I defend my position? I have thoughts too.
Nigger
Kike
Testing 1 , 2, 3 impale zio-Faggots testing testing