h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Of course not Brian

Well, I was all for sanctions against those volunteers who got abusive on another site, but I was surprised to see you've removed them. Not before time.

The trouble is, I don't know if you've replaced them with anyone more trustworthy. Maybe if they don't know who the others are they can't engage in these offsite cabals, which has to be a good thing.

They must be dying to know who the other mods are (I would be). It will be interesting to see how they develop ways of furtively asking other researchers, or responding to what they believe may be furtive requests of secret mod-membership.

And other non-mods will play the game of witch-hunt, looking to *out* them.

Oh dear. We'll just have to wait & see, eh?

Let's hope it's 'Plus ca change ...'



But still, you all know that you can all trust me, eh?

tiny writing; "heh heh heh"

will these new changes stop the backstabbing and driving/evicting good personnel from hootoo ?

It's very hard to know. Each person gets pissed off with the site and leaves for a different reason. I don't know if anyone has taken all the reasons and studied them.

Moderation is supposed to be good for you, i.e. do all things in moderation. Sleeping, drinking, eating, etc. Is there a moderate way to approach this? I could never remember who was a moderator and who wasn't, and frankly I didn't care. It can't have been a fun job.

When I make an honest mistake, and the moderators remind me that it was a mistake, I try to take a lesson from it. Some of my mistakes are typos, which I seem to make more of with the passing years. I;'m riting a story about the Typo Universe.

The problem with moderation is not when you make typos and the moderators remind you by hiding your posts. Nor is it the problem where someone wants to be as foul-mouthed as they like and the moderators prevent them. We don't want that sort of person here.

The real problem is when someone has a concern about the way the site operates and wants to have a discussion with the community about it. There's a thin line to be trod between making constructing comments about ways to improve the site and comments that are seen as criticisms and abuse.

Yep. It's understandable in a way. With an all volunteer crew it's easy for those volunteers to feel unappreciated and defensive when others criticize whether it's meant to be constructive or not.

Unfortunately this seems to have created a culture where discussion concerning the operation of the site is discouraged. Whether this is policy or just perception it has the same result.

>> There's a thin line to be trod between making constructive
comments about ways to improve the site and comments that
are seen as criticisms and abuse. <<

Indeed and well said Gnomon.
Take for example the criticism I have just received from Tav
and Dmitri for what was intended to be a wry, satirical comment
on the nature of cyber-space. It never fails to shock and sadden
me that my irony is so often taken seriously.

I have been a here lo these many years and have suffered
moderation and abuse from the Cabal of the Humourless too often.
And yet, I am not bitter; cynical perhaps but never bitter.

I did mention Kafka after all...

So it ain't my fault, y'see...


~jwf~

Thanks for mentioning Kafka. You reminded me that I had not read any of his stuff, so I went to the library and got his "Metamorphosis." I may want to not read it just before bedtime, though.

{Unfortunately this seems to have created a culture where discussion concerning the operation of the site is discouraged}

The problem may have been that the moderators were also the people attempting to tinker with the design of the site. For example, when they thought (for reasons which I cannot fathom) that it would be a good idea moving threads they didn't like from popular forums into unpopular ones, they were able to bulldoze it through despite popular protest, as they had the ultimate control via the moderation tools even after their reasoning had been exposed.

To have moderators who aren't connected with the other volunteers will prevent that sort of corrupt activity, but we may see different kinds of problems. The community now has less of a say in the workings of the site - but then we had very little when dealing with the previous regime.

(not a reply to anyone in particular)

tbh moderating any kind of forum is a thankless task and I for one am happy not to be doing it any more (I didn't mod here)

But having said that. This isn't any kind of collective or democracy, it's a website and everyone signs up to those rules. So basically the bottom line will always have to be "like it or lump it"

on the other hand a dialogue between the members(researchers) and the powers that be can be constructive and helpful. But again, those types of things can quickly descend into a bunfight and nobody is a winner.

I am sorry jwf. No, I didn't see the irony because in my experience many people on the Internet (and I mean the wider Internet and not specifically h2g2) do really act like that. They think just because something is online it's not real and they are allowed to show their worst behaviour.
Just a few days ago I left my guild in GW2 because of people like that. (not a big loss, leaving that guild, but still...)

{This isn't any kind of collective or democracy, it's a website and everyone signs up to those rules.}

I have to disagree on that point, Sho. It's a unique web project in which the community generates the product, and so has a large stake in its operation and development.

Take that away, and you would be right.

In my opinion, the main objective of the volunteers here is to nurture and develop that community - to keep them fed, watered and happy so that the project may continue to thrive. You can measure their success largely by measuring the community.

We'll have to agree to sort of disagree Icy.

To a certain extent yes, we are doing what you say and building a community. But with a free-for-all on rules and moderation it's not a place I'd like to hang out.

Oh, of course, Sho. We're probably violently agreeing with each other.