Do moderators have to delete good threads?

[Drunken Meat Fist]

It's a simple problem really that I see no solution for:

People come here, and figure the idea is simple: Have something to discuss, make post discussing it. What they don't realize is, someone, a long time ago, wrote up an entire dictionary of specifics dedicated to making this one place seem different from the rest. Arbitrary rules and guidelines that are dictated, ultimately, by nothing but the owner of this virtual property's opinions, wants and likes.

To further the madness, those enlisted to enforce these ultimately arbitrary rules, are civilians here. The only single thread they all share that separates them from everyone else, is a blue name and buttons. There was no special test like there would be for a cop or a military officer. There were no requirements beyond who they knew. Ultimately, they're all just people who came to a place to discuss something anyway.

So really, it's outdated, arbitrary bullshit enforced by posters who had the right friends. Ironically, a system of forced classes that perpetuate the kind of ignorance and hostility the mods are purportedly here to prevent. A vicious cycle really.

No but seriously who's dick do I have to kick around here to get a tinfoil belt?

I'm yer huckleberry. You're throwing a lot of shit around with minimal content. All this venom and no substance. And you seem to have close proclivty with arbitraryness. What would you like to see done.

 

[Ronwah]

Well a quick read through these 13 pages has just confirmed it's impossible to please everyone. Some people want harsher moderation, some people want less. Some people want threads moved, some people don't.

Still, it's nice to get any feedback.

 

[Ronwah]

Did Battlenuts just suggest we recruit the mods from external sources and make them sit some sort of test? Man, you place way too much importance on all of this.

edit - Like a lot of things in life, it's only the negative (or perceived negative) stuff that gets magnified. All the good work being done just kinda gets ignored or taken for granted. Which is fine by the way, none of us expect a pat on the back or medals or anything!

I know I underestimated the work that does and needs to be put in by the mods before being made one myself. The volume of traffic on here is large and with controversial incidents like Bisping recently and Sonnen etc in the past - trying to contain the madness is nigh on impossible at times.

The intention is to make the forums better - the by product of that is some decent threads can get caught in the crossfire.

 

[Last Samurai]

I think most of these cases where we have seen complaint threads being made in support (and there's been quite a few recently) are the result of mods patrolling a sub forum that they don't normally post in. most mods have one or maybe two sub forums that they frequent the most and those are the ones they know how to moderate the best, because they are regulars.


I'm not so sure that any changes need to be made, but one possibility would be to have more clearly assigned areas of responsibility and ask that any mod work outside of their 'juristiction' should only happen if it's in response to a reported post.

 

[D.R.H.]

You just described what takes regulars outside of their normal patrols.

 

[computer fogie]

What the hell?

Now you can't talk about potential match ups?

Bisping vs Maia isn't so outlandish

NOW? All fantasy matchup threads (who would win this fight?) have ALWAYS belonged in the Wasteland. You haven't been paying much attention if you think this is a new rule.

 

[Last Samurai]

You just described what takes regulars outside of their normal patrols.

true, and it's good that you think of the children... but that stuff gets reported pretty quick, so I think my point stands.

 

[Battlenuts]

You bitch a lot. I mean a LOT. Just pipe down and stop complaining. I've been here for years problem free. If your thread got deleted it sucked or was in the wrong spot. Step your game up or get smarter or just stop complaining.

One civil thread about a missing topic is "bitching a lot" with a capital 'lot'? That thread that got deleted, got magically un-deleted, so no, "stepping up my game" is not necessary. What I posted here was simply an observation on the entire mod concept and why it's destined to fail. Because this is a discussion forum, and people were discussing it.

Perhaps you need to stop watching shitty dance movies that lead to phrases like "step up your game" being in your vocabulary and start looking up the definitions of words like "complain" and "lot".

Did Battlenuts just suggest we recruit the mods from external sources and make them sit some sort of test? Man, you place way too much importance on all of this.

When a post starts off with "it's a problem I see no solution for", chances are the person who said it didn't propose any solutions in the post. I suggested nothing, I offered a little insight as to why mods are largely ineffective and could be consolidated into one mans delete button.

Honestly I'm shocked so many people took offense to that. The worst thing I said boils down to "you have friends". Unless friends aren't cool to have anymore, try being flattered and not overly defensive.

I'm yer huckleberry. You're throwing a lot of shit around with minimal content. All this venom and no substance. And you seem to have close proclivty with arbitraryness. What would you like to see done.

If big words ain't your thing don't fly from the comfort zone. You do better when it's strictly gibberish. But what would I like to see done? I'd like to see rules designed to better the experience of the posters and not to appease the flow of cash keeping this site up. Of course that's never gonna happen for smart financial reasons, so what are we left with but our observations and thoughts to share? Also, I really want that tinfoil belt.

I'm just keeping the discussion dream alive in hopes that Facebook and Twitter haven't completely ruined things. TBT isn't giving me much faith though.

 

[D.R.H.]

true, and it's good that you think of the children... but that stuff gets reported pretty quick, so I think my point stands.

I hate to beat a dead horse, but there's not enough blue to go around for this.

 

[Ronwah]

When a post starts off with "it's a problem I see no solution for", chances are the person who said it didn't propose any solutions in the post. I suggested nothing, I offered a little insight as to why mods are largely ineffective and could be consolidated into one mans delete button.

Honestly I'm shocked so many people took offense to that. The worst thing I said boils down to "you have friends". Unless friends aren't cool to have anymore, try being flattered and not overly defensive.

You said the mods being from the general population added to the madness of the whole situation. So I'm guessing you think this is a bad thing, no?

I don't know how you can offer comment on the effectiveness of the mods, since you have no concept of 95% of the moderating that actually takes place.

As for the mods being selected based on who they know - again, how would you know?

The site owners make the rules, there is no point in complaining about the mods enforcing them.

 

[Battlenuts]

You said the mods being from the general population added to the madness of the whole situation. So I'm guessing you think this is a bad thing, no?

It's a system that's flawed at it's base. Look at cops. They're trained, yet completely at the mercy of human emotions just like those they're enlisted to help and protect. Mods are the same thing without training of any kind.

I don't know how you can offer comment on the effectiveness of the mods, since you have no concept of 95% of the moderating that actually takes place.

Closing, merging, deleting. No I pretty much got it. But do the buttons outweigh the path the system sets everyone on when it's a matter of classing people? It will always perpetuate hostility when a section of the posting base is given powers over the others.

As for the mods being selected based on who they know - again, how would you know?

....eyes.

The site owners make the rules, there is no point in complaining about the mods enforcing them.

You're right, there's no point complaining about it. There's plenty of reason to discuss it in hopes of reaching a better understanding of it.

You guys are acting like I'm suggesting anarchy, I'm not, at all. Cleaning is needed. But you have to realize that cleaning comes from a flawed system that will ultimately always perpetuate the hostility and rebellion it's there to prevent.

If I had to suggest any remedy, it would be moderators who aren't connected to the subject matter or the posting base at all. People with no friends or opinions or bias who operate off of nothing but a simple set of rules designed to keep discussion flowing and nothing else.

 

[D.R.H.]

There's no such thing as what you're suggesting. It's impossible. No to sound rude, but where in the blue hell are you going to find people without any sort of opinion, bias, or interpretation to what they see and think when going over the site? These magical people don't exist.

 

[Ronwah]

It's a system that's flawed at it's base. Look at cops. They're trained, yet completely at the mercy of human emotions just like those they're enlisted to help and protect. Mods are the same thing without training of any kind.



Closing, merging, deleting. No I pretty much got it. But do the buttons outweigh the path the system sets everyone on when it's a matter of classing people? It will always perpetuate hostility when a section of the posting base is given powers over the others.



....eyes.



You're right, there's no point complaining about it. There's plenty of reason to discuss it in hopes of reaching a better understanding of it.

You guys are acting like I'm suggesting anarchy, I'm not, at all. Cleaning is needed. But you have to realize that cleaning comes from a flawed system that will ultimately always perpetuate the hostility and rebellion it's there to prevent.

If I had to suggest any remedy, it would be moderators who aren't connected to the subject matter or the posting base at all. People with no friends or opinions or bias who operate off of nothing but a simple set of rules designed to keep discussion flowing and nothing else.

Well since what you want doesn't exist, you have the next best thing with current setup. So why complain?

I don't think there is much point in me making a counter argument to your other points, since you seem to have it all worked out based one what your eyes can see....

 

[Battlenuts]

There's no such thing as what you're suggesting. It's impossible. No to sound rude, but where in the blue hell are you going to find people without any sort of opinion, bias, or interpretation to what they see and think when going over the site? These magical people don't exist.

I'm confused here, are you suggesting every human alive is on sherdog or that no posters limit themselves to specific forums or topics? If a sports guy never goes in mayberry, he won't have an opinion or a standing bias when asked to moderate that forum. You could do that in every instance, rather than have a handful of mods who hold a bias for every situation. Conservative Red Sox fans who think Inception sucked will at some point naturally reach a point of conflict with people in the War Room, Sports Bar and Mayberry. The conflict will only then be decided by who's name is blue and who's isn't. It becomes a matter of classing.

Well since what you want doesn't exist, you have the next best thing with current setup. So why complain?

I'm sorry, but is every post that's not glowing praise of the system "complaining"? What ever happened to good old "discussing"? I don't seem to recall me saying "you guys suck and it's not fair!!" 30 times, I'm just sharing my thoughts on why it is and will be a flawed system.

Do I think abandoning it would work? Of course not, that would be like the US abandoning the dollar in favor of imaginary coins at this point. But going back to basics and discussing the pros and cons of a barter system shouldn't be off the table.

 

[D.R.H.]

I'm confused here, are you suggesting every human alive is on sherdog or that no posters limit themselves to specific forums or topics? If a sports guy never goes in mayberry, he won't have an opinion or a standing bias when asked to moderate that forum. You could do that in every instance, rather than have a handful of mods who hold a bias for every situation. Conservative Red Sox fans who think Inception sucked will at some point naturally reach a point of conflict with people in the War Room, Sports Bar and Mayberry. The conflict will only then be decided by who's name is blue and who's isn't. It becomes a matter of classing.
.

What I'm saying is everyone is in some way biased. If you take two Sports Bar guys in your example and give them a Mayberry thread to moderate, those two guys will probably see things in the thread a little differently. They will probably have different interpretations of what does and does not fall under specific categories of the rules. Without getting into a giant philosophical debate it seems like you're basically asking for mods to be 100% objective, and that's not humanly possible

 

[Battlenuts]

What I'm saying is everyone is in some way biased. If you take two Sports Bar guys in your example and give them a Mayberry thread to moderate, those two guys will probably see things in the thread a little differently. They will probably have different interpretations of what does and does not fall under specific categories of the rules. Without getting into a giant philosophical debate it seems like you're basically asking for mods to be 100% objective, and that's not humanly possible

Oh of course that's not possible, but personally I feel as objective as possible is way better than giving mod spots based on a lack of objectivity. As it is right now, most mods are pretty specific to the areas of discussion they partake in the most. This is what creates the gap between the posters and the mods.

For the record, you guys do a wonderful job with what you have. The fact that the heavies isn't constantly flooded with the topic of the day is really kind of amazing. I've been in there when it gets bad, like last night with Sanchez/Kampmann, and you guys are always quick to clean it up. I just think ultimately it's a flawed system that will lead to certain problems time and time again.

The real ideal would be a community of civil posters fully aware of the group consensus on what's right and wrong. But that's as plausible as those imaginary coins.

 

[D.R.H.]

I almost spit my coffee on the computer reading that last sentence. It's funny to read that part about the heavies since I'm getting bitched at right now for cleaning it up.

 

[Battlenuts]

Well if you were going to pander to the Heavies we might as well rename it the "BROCK SUKS AND WERE R THE BEWBS" forum.

Ideals may be far from our reality but the second we stop considering them is the second we give up on ever reaching them. Regardless, you guys do a good job and I don't want you to think I'm calling you all incompetent assholes because I felt like discussing the concept in it's entirety.

 

[D.R.H.]

If we can make the name "Brock rulez and we r teh bewbs!" I think we should change it.

 

[TheEvilDead]

Most of the newer mods do a better job than the older ones, I'll say that.