collapse

* Recent Posts

"Christ Is King" by Altair
[Today at 01:09:34 am]


Re: Cill Shift Schedule by SunflowerP
[Yesterday at 11:04:57 pm]


Re: Stellar Bling: The Good, the Bad, the OMG! by SunflowerP
[March 21, 2024, 11:21:37 pm]


Re: Spring Has Sprung! 2024 Edition by SunflowerP
[March 21, 2024, 10:24:10 pm]


Stellar Bling: The Good, the Bad, the OMG! by Altair
[March 21, 2024, 02:52:34 pm]

Author Topic: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'  (Read 5217 times)

winterleaf

  • Sr. Newbie
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2016
  • Posts: 18
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« on: July 31, 2016, 12:30:30 pm »
I am very confused about how this forum treats 'the flow of conversation'.

For instance it has the strange quotation rule, which it says is to facilitate this.  It's a bit annoying, tbh, to have to selectively edit which part of another post to quote when you don't necessarily want to quote anyone - but I'm getting used to it, since it's how you do things here.

So what really, really confuses me is that if 'the flow of conversation' matters so much here, to the extent that it makes its users jump through extra hoops, then why are moderators - staff, sorry - able to publicly moderate with huge messages in bold red and blue squares with big graphics right in the middle of said 'flow'?  Why isn't that aspect of site keeping private so that the 'flow' can go on, undisturbed?  

On the one hand, the users must not disrupt the flow of conversation at any cost.  On the other, the staff can disrupt a conversation for any reason.  I understand this is for 'accountability' purposes, but that doesn't make much sense either.  Firstly, I have no doubt that this site carefully selects staff who are not in it to misuse authority.  Secondly, accountability should be there for everyone but - apparently - site rules say that staff cannot be similarly publicly engaged with.

My suggestion is based upon the fact that this site is sending mixed signals.  Please rethink how you publicly moderate so that discussions do not need to be so disrupted, and also so that users have the chance to engage with moderators - for whatever reason - in private.  If not, I ask you - suggest, rather - to clarify the situation.

Lastly, the matter of editing.  If users are able to edit within 15 minutes, I think they should be able to do so.  If we, the user, can still see the button we don't feel we can be doing anything wrong.  And, yes, I did read all your rules when I joined but very few people are able to remember every point (and there are many rules that you have).  I just feel that this is a rule we don't need, and that it creates unnecessary extra work for staff to enforce it (thinking about staff).  People forget rules too - they log off for a few months, log back in, and they forget.  Editing between 3-15 minutes shouldn't be such a deal it has become, that is my suggestion.  In most cases it will be highly unlikely that someone responds to a new post in under 15 minutes.  Also, isn't there a way to lock a previous post from editing if there is a more recent post on the thread?  

Not trying to be the newbie who complains.  I'm not complaining, but I am confused and maybe a set of fresh eyes would be useful?  I don't know.  But I'm certainly not trying to be irritating or anything here.  I am trying to offer a new perspective which I am hoping might be helpful.  But one of the reasons why I chose this forum over another forum was to escape the humiliating practices of the mods on the other site - they had formed cliques and groups that no new person could compete with.  I don't get the sense that is what happens here when you publicly moderate, I do believe it's just because you enforce your rules that way, but to a newbie it's harsh.  It's a hammer-fall when you've only just got here.

Again, trying to be helpful.  :)  Honestly.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2016, 12:32:29 pm by winterleaf »

Darkhawk

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 5219
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 1123
    • View Profile
    • Suns in her Branches
  • Religion: An American Werewolf in the Akhet; Kemetic; Feri; Imaginary Baltic Heathen; Discordian; UU; CoX; Etc
  • Preferred Pronouns: any of he, they, she
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2016, 12:49:33 pm »
Quote from: winterleaf;194552
So what really, really confuses me is that if 'the flow of conversation' matters so much here, to the extent that it makes its users jump through extra hoops, then why are moderators - staff, sorry - able to publicly moderate with huge messages in bold red and blue squares with big graphics right in the middle of said 'flow'?  Why isn't that aspect of site keeping private so that the 'flow' can go on, undisturbed?  


Because we like being honest and upfront about our moderation so that everyone both sees what is acceptable behaviour and that we are being fair about enforcement.

If you have any familiarity with running a large resource, you are no doubt aware of the problems that people produce.  Some people will insist that they have no way of knowing that commonly moderated behaviour is unacceptable, since they never see anyone called out for it.  Some people will claim that cliques are getting rid of some posters for political reasons and that there is obvious unfairness in the moderation because it's all happening behind the scenes.

It's more work, and bluntly, it's a much larger pain in the ass.  At least here people have the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of others.

Quote
On the one hand, the users must not disrupt the flow of conversation at any cost.  On the other, the staff can disrupt a conversation for any reason.


If you don't want staffers making staff replies to you, try following the rules.  It's just that easy.  This is not "for any reason".  It is to enforce the procedures that keep the forum running well.

The Cauldron has been running under these particular rules for an extremely long time as internet sites go.  Obviously they work pretty well.

Quote
I just feel that this is a rule we don't need,


How nice for you.

Quote
and that it creates unnecessary extra work for staff to enforce it (thinking about staff).


The quoting rule was established to reduce staff workload, actually, due to a change in forum software, but thank you for your concern.
as the water grinds the stone
we rise and fall
as our ashes turn to dust
we shine like stars    - Covenant, "Bullet"

winterleaf

  • Sr. Newbie
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2016
  • Posts: 18
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2016, 01:05:33 pm »
Quote from: Darkhawk;194553
Some people will insist that they have no way of knowing that commonly moderated behaviour is unacceptable, since they never see anyone called out for it.

I do understand, but it also comes across as pretty harsh.  I think if people make honest mistakes, we prefer to be told so in private.  If, however, it is unacceptable behaviour   going on, I think most appreciate when that is publicly called out.  There are lots of rules that have less to do with behaviour, and more to do with protocol.  My suggestion is that rules on protocol are privately enforced, so as to be a little gentler on users, but rules about behaviour can remain publicly enforced??  Because for little things like protocol, the system of learning here is a bit like learning by humiliation - when the teacher tells the naughty kid to stand up for the duration of the lesson and the other kids learn by example.  

Quote
If you don't want staffers making staff replies to you, try following the rules.  It's just that easy.

I don't think that's quite what I said?  Unless you are calling public moderation 'a reply'?  Sorry I might just be tripping on a word here.

Quote
The Cauldron has been running under these particular rules for an extremely long time as internet sites go.  Obviously they work pretty well.

Again, not trying to be the newbie who comes in and shakes the system up.  I am just a fresh pair of eyes, and you can decide whether that's useful.  My point is that the public moderation thing might put people off having a discussion about it?  But if you think not, that's fine - of course.  As you rightly put, the site - and you - have been here longer.  I am not trying to undermine that.


Quote
How nice for you.

I genuinely cannot tell if that is aggressive sarcasm or not.  If it is, I don't understand why, sorry.  What is the reason for enforcing the rule between 3-15 minutes after posting that makes it SO necessary?

Quote
The quoting rule was established to reduce staff workload, actually, due to a change in forum software, but thank you for your concern.

That's interesting, if a little weird.  I've never heard of forum software interfering like that.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2016, 01:06:50 pm by winterleaf »

Darkhawk

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 5219
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 1123
    • View Profile
    • Suns in her Branches
  • Religion: An American Werewolf in the Akhet; Kemetic; Feri; Imaginary Baltic Heathen; Discordian; UU; CoX; Etc
  • Preferred Pronouns: any of he, they, she
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2016, 01:45:36 pm »
Quote from: winterleaf;194555
Because for little things like protocol, the system of learning here is a bit like learning by humiliation - when the teacher tells the naughty kid to stand up for the duration of the lesson and the other kids learn by example.  


If you're humiliated by being told "Hey, please don't do that, arright?" that is a problem beyond the scope of staff assistance.  Plenty of people - including staff members - have gotten blue-box reminders when they slip up on minor matters.  It's not a big deal.

If, as you suggest, we were to never use the blue-box reminders, but instead only speak up when we have a strike to put on someone's record, that would certainly not make the staff look less heavyhanded.  And, again, it would deprive people of the opportunity to learn from others' mistakes, thereby requiring us to do more work - even aside from the fact that public moderation means that we don't have multiple people posting a reminder to the same person in a barrage of staff effort, which would be badgering a person who made a simple error and hopelessly inefficient use of volunteer effort.

Quote
I don't think that's quite what I said?  Unless you are calling public moderation 'a reply'?  Sorry I might just be tripping on a word here.


It is a reply from staff, yes.  If you do not want official staff replies, do not do things that require staff attention.  Most people find this comparatively easy, with the occasional minor slip-up.

Quote
I am just a fresh pair of eyes, and you can decide whether that's useful.


Your comments are all things that have been considered and rejected multiple times in the fifteen or so years I've been here; I imagine that people did not start thinking they were improvements just because I showed up.  They are not compatible with the needs of the staff end or the clear running of the forum.
as the water grinds the stone
we rise and fall
as our ashes turn to dust
we shine like stars    - Covenant, "Bullet"

winterleaf

  • Sr. Newbie
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2016
  • Posts: 18
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2016, 01:52:40 pm »
Quote from: Darkhawk;194560
public moderation means that we don't have multiple people posting a reminder to the same person in a barrage of staff effort, which would be badgering a person who made a simple error and hopelessly inefficient use of volunteer effort.


OK, that makes more sense to me - thank you for explaining.

Quote
I imagine that people did not start thinking they were improvements just because I showed up.

 
I never said I thought my suggestions were de facto improvements.  I have tried really consciously not to come across like I have 'new kid on the block' syndrome.  It seems like, despite those efforts, I've failed.  These are just suggestions and I couldn't necessarily know whether they've been raised before, so all I can do is post my thoughts and receive your replies.  That's it.

I'm really sorry you felt the need to be passive aggressively sarcastic.  I appreciate what you do.  I do have forum moderation experience, yes, so I do understand these concerns.  I am sorry if mentioning these or asking for clarification irritates you.  

But I feel better, at least, for voicing my thoughts.  If you could explain the warning/strike system that would be appreciated.  Do these expire?  Or is there a limit?  I would really hope they expire, especially if this site really is as old as 15 years.

Thank you.

Allaya

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Location: Out of My Mind
  • *
  • Posts: 964
  • Country: no
  • Total likes: 88
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Idio-syncretic
  • Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2016, 02:03:44 pm »
Quote from: winterleaf;194555
My point is that the public moderation thing might put people off having a discussion about it?  But if you think not, that's fine - of course.  As you rightly put, the site - and you - have been here longer.  I am not trying to undermine that.


I have observed that public moderation has served rather well to foster discussion. Everybody is equal and if you mess up, someone lets you know and things move on. Hell, I've even gotten blue and red box warnings myself.


Quote
I genuinely cannot tell if that is aggressive sarcasm or not.  If it is, I don't understand why, sorry.  What is the reason for enforcing the rule between 3-15 minutes after posting that makes it SO necessary?


We're a multi-national forum with people that visit at assorted times. It's not uncommon to have a fresh post viewed a great many times less than five minutes after being made.

Forbidding edits after about 5 minutes is a primitive form of version control. It's the best we can do within the limitations of this particular forum software; it breaks spectacularly otherwise.

It also discourages editing abuse along the lines of "I never said that! How dare you!" when someones says something ignorant or offensive and then erases it.


Quote from: winterleaf;194561
I'm really sorry you felt the need to be passive aggressively sarcastic.


Maximum irony achieved.
Service is the rent we pay for the privilege of living on this earth.  — Shirley Chisholm
No doubt the truth can be unpleasant, but I am not sure that unpleasantness is the same as the truth.  — Roger Ebert
It is difficult to get a person to understand something when their livelihood depends upon them not understanding it. — Upton Sinclair (adapted)
People cannot be reasoned out of an opinion that they have not reasoned themselves into. — Fisher Ames (adapted)

winterleaf

  • Sr. Newbie
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2016
  • Posts: 18
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2016, 02:25:17 pm »
Quote from: Allaya;194563
Maximum irony achieved.

 
Argh!  This is where the internet can really get you down.  I was being totally genuine!  I don't like the idea I made someone feel that way that they felt the need to post like that.

Still - can someone explain the warning system to me or point me to a link where I can read about it?  Do warning and strikes expire or do they just accumulate?

Morag

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Location: witch's hut down the lane
  • *
  • Posts: 2735
  • Country: ca
  • Total likes: 356
  • cranky witch mom
    • View Profile
    • Priestess of the 3
  • Religion: Priestess of the 3
  • Preferred Pronouns: she/her
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2016, 03:23:47 pm »
Quote from: Allaya;194563
We're a multi-national forum with people that visit at assorted times. It's not uncommon to have a fresh post viewed a great many times less than five minutes after being made.

Forbidding edits after about 5 minutes is a primitive form of version control. It's the best we can do within the limitations of this particular forum software; it breaks spectacularly otherwise.

It also discourages editing abuse along the lines of "I never said that! How dare you!" when someones says something ignorant or offensive and then erases it.

 
TC is actually the only forum I've stayed on for any good amount of time (9 years this summer I think) and a BIG reason for that is the rule about editing and our refusal to delete posts.

On other forums they'd allow that, and it was like being constantly gaslit -- a post I KNEW had said something else would change, or absolutely disappear, making me question my grasp on reality. I've been gaslit my entire life by abusers, so I'm really not keen on having it done to me anymore, whether intentional or not.
Pray drunk. Hex sober.
Priestess of the 3
"The most powerful god at any given moment is the one who can solve the moment's problem."
-Darkhawk

winterleaf

  • Sr. Newbie
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2016
  • Posts: 18
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2016, 03:34:00 pm »
Quote from: Morag;194567
TC is actually the only forum I've stayed on for any good amount of time (9 years this summer I think) and a BIG reason for that is the rule about editing and our refusal to delete posts.

On other forums they'd allow that, and it was like being constantly gaslit

 
Interesting you feel so passionately about it, and I'm glad to hear it's worked out for someone.  But I have no idea what you mean by 'gaslit'.

SunflowerP

  • Host
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Location: Calgary AB
  • Posts: 9909
  • Country: ca
  • Total likes: 732
  • Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs!
    • View Profile
    • If You Ain't Makin' Waves, You Ain't Kickin' Hard Enough
  • Religion: Eclectic religious Witchcraft
  • Preferred Pronouns: sie/hir/hirs/hirself
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2016, 03:41:39 pm »
Quote from: winterleaf;194569
But I have no idea what you mean by 'gaslit'.

 
Gaslighting.

Sunflower
I'm the AntiFa genderqueer commie eclectic wiccan Mod your alt-right bros warned you about.
I do so have a life; I just live part of it online!
“Selfishness is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live.” - Oscar Wilde
"Nobody's good at anything until they practice." - Brina (Yewberry)
My much-neglected blog "If You Ain't Makin' Waves, You Ain't Kickin' Hard Enough"

SunflowerP

  • Host
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Location: Calgary AB
  • Posts: 9909
  • Country: ca
  • Total likes: 732
  • Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs!
    • View Profile
    • If You Ain't Makin' Waves, You Ain't Kickin' Hard Enough
  • Religion: Eclectic religious Witchcraft
  • Preferred Pronouns: sie/hir/hirs/hirself
Re: On the matter of 'the flow of conversation'
« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2016, 07:10:41 pm »
Quote from: winterleaf;194564
Still - can someone explain the warning system to me or point me to a link where I can read about it?  Do warning and strikes expire or do they just accumulate?

 
This took a bit of putting-together, because it's not as simple as 'expire vs accumulate'.

The basic pattern is, three strikes merits a one-week gag; a rules violation after the gag period has expired gets a permanent ban. This can vary, nearly always in the direction of lenience - the staff member issuing a warning might explicitly say that it’s not a strike (in which case it doesn’t count as one), or that even though it’s technically the violator’s third strike they aren’t being banned (often, conditional on doing, or ceasing to do, some specific thing).

Strikes don't expire, but we do take when they were given into account. A person who has become a valuable contributor since an early warning will likely be given grace regarding that warning. Or more generally, in cases of more significant mod action involving long-term members, the entire posting history of the poster is taken into account.

It should not be a surprise to anyone what action is next if they continue a particular behaviour. Warnings and strikes will make it clear what the possible consequences are. In general, it's very hard to get banned for a single action (outside of something like active spamming, invasion of privacy, threats, or something equally serious).

(Reminders - in the blue box - are never strikes; they’re meant to be exactly what it says on the tin, a reminder about a relatively-minor violation, or a thing that people frequently slip up on accidentally.)

Sunflower
I'm the AntiFa genderqueer commie eclectic wiccan Mod your alt-right bros warned you about.
I do so have a life; I just live part of it online!
“Selfishness is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live.” - Oscar Wilde
"Nobody's good at anything until they practice." - Brina (Yewberry)
My much-neglected blog "If You Ain't Makin' Waves, You Ain't Kickin' Hard Enough"

Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
22 Replies
4287 Views
Last post January 02, 2014, 05:43:47 pm
by AthenaiiseSofia
10 Replies
22800 Views
Last post March 06, 2018, 08:08:20 am
by Noctua
414 Replies
34917 Views
Last post March 13, 2015, 05:01:30 pm
by sailor
3 Replies
1427 Views
Last post September 13, 2015, 04:38:37 pm
by Darkhawk
1 Replies
1013 Views
Last post May 21, 2018, 02:36:51 pm
by EclecticWheel

* Who's Online

  • Dot Guests: 227
  • Dot Hidden: 0
  • Dot Users: 1
  • Dot Users Online:

* Please Donate!

The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.

* Shop & Support TC

The links below are affiliate links. When you click on one of these links you will go to the listed shopping site with The Cauldron's affiliate code. Any purchases you make during your visit will earn TC a tiny percentage of your purchase price at no extra cost to you.

* In Memoriam

Chavi (2006)
Elspeth (2010)
Marilyn (2013)

* Cauldron Staff

Host:
Sunflower

Message Board Staff
Board Coordinator:
Darkhawk

Assistant Board Coordinator:
Aster Breo

Senior Staff:
Aisling, Allaya, Jenett, Sefiru

Staff:
Ashmire, EclecticWheel, HarpingHawke, Kylara, PerditaPickle, rocquelaire

Discord Chat Staff
Chat Coordinator:
Morag

'Up All Night' Coordinator:
Altair

Cauldron Council:
Bob, Catja, Chatelaine, Emma-Eldritch, Fausta, Jubes, Kelly, LyricFox, Phouka, Sperran, Star, Steve, Tana

Site Administrator:
Randall

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal