Ask a mod

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

What are you complaining about? The threads are unpinned, nothing else. If you want them to stay up, contribute properly to them and they will stay up.

[Placebo 29]

Are we talking about the same forums?   As I said, OT is one of the least moderated forums.

It's not about the amount of moderation required, it's about the severity of the rule breaches in question, I would take 20 threads that need moving to the correct forum over 1 offence of flaming/flame baiting or whatever, any day of the week.

[Koolkid101 0]

Can mods win VIP awards?

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

Can mods win VIP awards?

Yes, probably only in the "The best Mod" category though    

[hellfish6 7]

I'm nominating myself for everything. And so help you all if I don't win them!!!!

kidding...

[Placebo 29]

kidding...

He's really not, you'd better all vote for him              

[Acecombat 0]

Aw the mideast and iraq threads got unpinned?

Denoir and bn880 ar right though the Iraq war thread went a long way in xplaining and bringing forth the true picture of the war and views expressed by both pro-war and antiwar sides , it was IMO one of the best moderated and well cleaned and flame free Iraq war thread on th net. I have seen many especially at opflash.org and other ofp sites dgenerate in to pissing competitions rather then intelligent debate.

Just my 2 cents.

[denoir 0]

Can mods win VIP awards?

*caugh*http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....0&st=90*caugh*

It's not about the amount of moderation required, it's about the severity of the rule breaches in question, I would take 20 threads that need moving to the correct forum over 1 offence of flaming/flame baiting or whatever, any day of the week.

Ok, here are the hard numbers. This is based on two things

1) amount of posts in the Iraq threads up until June 19th

2) the ban list up until June 19th.

The total amount of posts in the Iraq Thread 1/1 and Iraq thread 1/2 are 519 + 215 = 734 pages  

734 pages * 15 posts/page =  11,010 posts.

From the ban list, there have been a total of 14 post restrictions/bans in those threads. (Five of those were actually not Iraq related, but banned members coming back and being caught, but never mind, we'll count them in too)

That means 786 good post for each punished one.

That means 52 good pages for each punished post.

So, we have somebody misbehaving every 52 page of the threads on average.

From the board statistics that I was keeping (which you can find in the stats thread in teh mod forum), the average post/moderation is at 24 good posts for each punished one.

That means that the Iraq threads are stunning 32 times better than the board average.

Instead of being threatened, the Iraq and the Mid East threads should serve as poster boys for exemplary behaviour!

As for the severity of the rule breaches in question the Iraq thread has 9 PRs/bans for flaming out of a jolly bunch of 187 PRs/bans for at least equally severe rule breaches (flaming, piracy etc). That's less than 5% while the Iraq threads were responsible for amazing 16% of the total number of board posts (from when the first was made, until june 19th). That means that you on average in another thread were at least three times more likely to get flamed than in the Iraq threads.

Those are the hard facts. The Iraq thread requires 32 times less moderation than the average thread and people are more than three times more civil in the discussions.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

I'm not exactly a poster-child for good behavior in the Iraq Thread, but at the same time I can't help noticing that behavior in these threads has improved drastically in the past months. I'm not saying everyone has sprouted wings and halos or anything like that, but it's puzzling that this kind of action is being taken now, as opposed to times in the past when mods were being forced to issue warnings two to three times daily. What changed?

[Balschoiw 0]

I already posted in the thread about it. Still don´t see the imminent reason. Ok if you want us to dig it out every time there is something new in Iraq we will do. But I´m sure the thread will get locked pretty soon. I don´t know why but that´s my feeling.

Flaming has been a bigger issue in this thread when it got big and fat but now there´s a lot of controversity but we always try to keep this in a civiliced manner.

Ok the mods decide, I hope this was a common mod decision and no single action by the minute.

[hellfish6 7]

We just unpinned them, guys. It's not like we've gone and locked them. I'm sure all you politicos will keep it right on top as usual anyways.

Besides, you never know when something else important might get stickied up there. Like when North Korea invades.

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

Okay, so you may pinn them again after the VIP´s. I guess thats one of the reasons they got unpinned...

[Placebo 29]

Okay, so you may pinn them again after the VIP´s. I guess thats one of the reasons they got unpinned...

No.

But I may pin them again if/when I feel confident that the constant atmosphere of flaming/flame baiting has gone for good, same as in the other forums.

[Balschoiw 0]

Hey placebo what´s all that flame and flamebaiting about? Is a controversial discussion labelled as "flaming" from now on ?

Especially the Iraq thread didn´t contain flaming like it used to over some months now. I can´t follow you here.

If you need place for the VIP awards tell so but don´t make up a case that doesn´t exist. You are the moderators and if something goes wrong with certain members or flaming in ANY thread is detected you have to do your job. That´s what you are for. If you want to avoid flaming or flamebaiting at all you have to lock every thread once it´s up. Honestly I don´t think that these 2 threads were too offensive or anything like that. Denoir already pointed out the stats. If you need space for other pinned threads tell us but don´t try to tell us a story that is not true.

[Placebo 29]

Is a controversial discussion labelled as "flaming" from now on ?

No.

Quote[/b] ]If you need space for other pinned threads tell us but don´t try to tell us a story that is not true.

If it was because I wanted to free up space I would have said "I'm unpinning these to free up space", that's not what I said, so that's not the reason.

[Balschoiw 0]

Ok placebo. No offence.

[Placebo 29]

No problem

I'm very pleased with the response to my decision, the point was for it to serve as a reminder that the existence of those threads shouldn't be taken for granted, so far that seems to have worked, I'll continue to keep an eye on things

[denoir 0]

What are you complaining about? The threads are unpinned, nothing else.

The complaint is that the unpinning was made under false pretenses by the Placebo Administration. The pre-unpin claims and the reality simply don't match. By a simple look at the real numbers you can easily seen that the Placebo Administration's claims of Posts of Mass Flaming were greatly exaggerated. The  data presented by the Iraq Thread Survey Group clearly shows that the Iraq thread is far more civil than your average thread on this board. The unpinning was made on the basis of false and conveniently selected intellgience and hence unjust.  

No, but seriously the problem is that the threads were singeled out because of alledged misbehaviour in them. While I don't think there was malicious intent, it was certainly an incorrect perception of the situation. The reason for this being that since Placebo never actively reads the threads, the only thing he hears about it is when something goes wrong in them. Examining the facts and the statistics you can easily see the errors of the perception of the threads. The Iraq threads have required 32 times less moderating than the average thread on the board. You are three times less likely to get flamed than in the average thread on the board.

So statements like "I may pin them again if/when I feel confident that the constant atmosphere of flaming/flame baiting has gone for good, same as in the other forums." are simply not consistent with the real deal. He could not possibly know what the constant atmosphere is as he doesn't read them. And the statistics confirm that.

The problem is not in the unpinning. It makes no difference for the posters and gives the moderators more work. The problem is that the unpinning is presented as a "punishment" and a threat because of alledged misbehaviour of the members. This allegations have been proven to be false, through both statistics and through the testimony of people who actively read and post in those threads (and hence have a better picture of it then sombody who just gets the negative stuff).

I know Placebo well enough to know that he is by now perfectly aware of his error in perception of the threads. I know also that there is no way in hell he can back down now and lose face. And that is perfectly alright by me, it has to be that way. The moderators have to be able to make decisions without every one of them being questioned. (And I made an error of starting this discussion here, rather than through PMs).

I know this as we went through the same thing a year ago with the Mid East thread. After a review instead of closing it as was first advocated by Placebo and Shadow, we agreed on the compromise of posting in the thread, asking people to be a bit nicer. Apparently this time the moderators that support and contribute in political threads (Ralph, Ex-Ronin, Hellfish and Warin) did not provide the necessary counter-weight.

Well, I've said my piece and as far as I'm concerned I have no intention of debating this further. While this won't lead to the threads getting pinned back, I hope that it will raise some awareness and prompt the people making the decisions to look at things a bit more objectivly next time.  

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

he complaint is that the unpinning was made under false pretenses by the Placebo Administration. The pre-unpin claims and the reality simply don't match. By a simple look at the real numbers you can easily seen that the Placebo Administration's claims of Posts of Mass Flaming were greatly exaggerated. The data presented by the Iraq Thread Survey Group clearly shows that the Iraq thread is far more civil than your average thread on this board. The unpinning was made on the basis of false and conveniently selected intellgience and hence unjust.

Could not help it.

[Placebo 29]

I know Placebo well enough to know that he is by now perfectly aware of his error in perception of the threads. I know also that there is no way in hell he can back down now and lose face. And that is perfectly alright by me, it has to be that way. The moderators have to be able to make decisions without every one of them being questioned. (And I made an error of starting this discussion here, rather than through PMs).

I'm not aware of any error of perception, there has been a history of flaming/flame baiting in those threads, as you know from your own part in their history.

I was reading one of them the other day, saw some flaming/flame baiting between two of the main contributors to one of the threads, decided that as our polite moderator warnings had obviously not worked in the past something more serious was needed. I never stated it was permanent, I never stated it was temporary. If it's proven to me that the lesson has been learned then there is no reason that they can't be pinned again, while senior forum members continue to squabble they won't be re-pinned however.

Also while there is an attitude of mocking condescension to those contributors whose opinion is deemed unworthy, intellectually challenged, unfounded or whatever I will also lean towards keeping them unpinned. I won't name names but there are a couple of forum members who have their opinion and view and choose to express it and they're treated like the village idiots and totally shot down, that's not on, everyone who makes their thoughts known in the threads deserves the same kind of respect as anyone else, sure disprove their argument if you so wish but there is a way of doing it, and a way of not doing it, when you do it by completely dismissing them and putting them down it's tantamount to flame baiting, you leave them with no other means of response. For the record I'm not talking about any specific recent events, I know it still goes on but I'm speaking historically.

[bn880 5]

Well you know Placebo you have to understand the frustration we go through when new people join the fun with the same old rhetoric that has been disproved many weeks ago. It is not a personaly thing per say to taunt the newcomers, on my part it is frustration that this sort of knowledge is not yet common. I don't want to get too specific, but it's hard to be nice when someone spills propaganda at you. That is what happened at least in my case, but I admit, the truly right thing is as you say, to be polite and patient. Just goes to probe nobody has infinite patience and understanding.

[denoir 0]

I'm not aware of any error of perception, there has been a history of flaming/flame baiting in those threads, as you know from your own part in their history.

No, I don't. To the best of my knowledge I have neither as a moderator nor a member been accused of any forum rules violations in those two threads. If you are refering to the thread that led to my resignation, I hate to disappoint you, but it was neither of those threads. It was a short-lived thread about the death penalty.

Quote[/b] ]I was reading one of them the other day, saw some flaming/flame baiting between two of the main contributors to one of the threads, decided that as our polite moderator warnings had obviously not worked in the past something more serious was needed.

Again, you are refering to an unsubstantiated personal experience. The post restriction statistics talk for themselves. I don't think you realize the massive traffic in those two threads. Between dec 2002 and june 2003, the Iraq threads were alone responsible for 16% of the board traffic that period. At the same time the number of post restrictions from the threads only made up 5% of the total. That means that the Iraq threads were three times less problematic than the average board thread. (32 times better if you look at all moderating actions).

So either your opinon about what is going on in these threads is very wrong, or the moderators (of whom by the way most are active posters there) have not been doing their job. Which is it?

Quote[/b] ]Also while there is an attitude of mocking condescension to those contributors whose opinion is deemed unworthy, intellectually challenged, unfounded or whatever I will also lean towards keeping them unpinned. I won't name names but there are a couple of forum members who have their opinion and view and choose to express it and they're treated like the village idiots and totally shot down, that's not on, everyone who makes their thoughts known in the threads deserves the same kind of respect as anyone else, sure disprove their argument if you so wish but there is a way of doing it, and a way of not doing it, when you do it by completely dismissing them and putting them down it's tantamount to flame baiting, you leave them with no other means of response. For the record I'm not talking about any specific recent events, I know it still goes on but I'm speaking historically.

People that like to discuss politics often have passionate views on the subject. The atmosphere is charged, competitive, adversarial but certainly not uncivil. The people that get treated like village idiots are those who post unsubstantiated claims. We have established a very good and serious tradition of always backing up claims with references. Those that break that tradition are not taken seriously. Although you might not appriciate it, politics is an engaging subject and discussions are fierce by nature. This board is the convergence point of the OFP community and that community consists of real people that have non-OFP interests. BIS recognized that when they created the OT forum. And it serves an important purpose of people getting to know each other as human beings, rather than just some abstract figures that play the same video game. It creates a much stronger bond with the community members, including those you strongly disagree politically or on any other topic. Instead of chasing ghosts in OT, your time would be better spent to deal with what is discussed in this thread and that is a real threat to the entire community: the problems in the Addons & Mods forums.

It's very simple: there are forum rules. When people break them, they get punished. If they don't break them, they don't. If people in the Iraq and the Mid East thread are breaking the rules then you should by all means, whoever they are and regardless how serious, follow standard protocol and issue punishments. If they are not breaking the rules, then they should not be punished. You are going for something inbetween "I can't point out anything specific, but you have all been naughty and I don't like that thread anyway so I'll issue a collective punishment, that isn't really a punishment". And I don't think I need to point out the obvious flaws of such a practice.

If you feel that the threads require too much effort to be moderated, we can always go back to individual threads. If my memory serves me correctly, the current arrangement was made to simplify life for the moderators, rather than the posters. With one pinned topic people are much less likely to post redundant threads and thus simplifying your life. If you need a refresher, take a look at how things were before the unified Iraq threads.

[Placebo 29]

If you are refering to the thread that led to my resignation, I hate to disappoint you, but it was neither of those threads. It was a short-lived thread about the death penalty.

See even I'm not right all the time

Quote[/b] ]Instead of chasing ghosts in OT, your time would be better spent to deal with what is discussed in this thread and that is a real threat to the entire community: the problems in the Addons & Mods forums.

I've given my opinion in the thread.

Quote[/b] ]

"I can't point out anything specific, but you have all been naughty and I don't like that thread anyway so I'll issue a collective punishment, that isn't really a punishment". And I don't think I need to point out the obvious flaws of such a practice.

Other than your concern about the increased workload for us moderators I can't see what your problem is, as you say it's a punishment that isn't a punishment, I've merely removed them from being the focal point of the OT forum, they're still there, if people continue to post to them they'll stay up near the top.

You should be thankful your concerns have lead me to read them more regularly than I used to in the past, that way you needn't worry about anything going unmissed due to my biased absence  

[denoir 0]

You should be thankful your concerns have lead me to read them more regularly than I used to in the past, that way you needn't worry about anything going unmissed due to my biased absence  

I am glad to hear that.

Now, if you don't have anything more to add, I'd like to end this discussion, at least on my part. I think that everybody has made their positions and arguments clear and that very little can come out of continuing to discuss this.

[Major Fubar 0]

For eveyone who's been wondering where I've been, I've been having major probs with my home ISP, and my work has been cracking down on non work related internet usage.

Especially sorry to everyone I let down due to my absence from the OFP Combat Photography awards. (Especially especially Harnu - sorry bud.)