Moderating

[foq]

Great argument spooks. Now work on world peace

[Demiurge]

My point was not really about the closure of specific threads. I don't really care about commenting about Kimp. It was more about the way it was done--sometimes reasons weren't stated, and, when reasons were stated, they seemed to mark a change from how things were done in the past, and to lead to unacceptable consequences if followed to their logical end. Obviously admins and moderators have the right to impose any standard they want on the forum discussion, to close any thread, and to ban any person. However, everyone coming here and talking is a cooperative activity, so I just felt that things weren't being explained well enough to keep everyone on the same page.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'd never question Baker's closure of a thread. This is because over the years he's shown that he cares about the community, he thinks things through well, and he's responsible. So, if he did something I disagreed with, due to his reputation I'd still trust that it was probably the right thing to do. It's different for a new moderator. I hope I haven't sounded condescending.

I appreciate your opening this thread and now feel compelled to speak more candidly because I believe there's an important point that I'd like others to more clearly see. I agree with the concerns you stated that started this thread and would add that the issue isn't whether administrators and moderators have the right to impose any standard they want, but how administrators and moderators sincerely respond to satisfy the community's needs.

Notice that Souless had chosen to do and say a number of alternative things in response to your and my queries and hasn't addressed the main point yet. I felt frustrated and disappointed when Souless had opted to avoid addressing the main point in the way he did, because I perceived his several responses as passive-aggressive and inappropriate.

I believe their moderators should be open to criticism and responsive to the members' needs and queries, because their moderators serve the needs of the members, not the other way around, and I'm not OK with how this is being handled. Nevertheless, I continue to look forward to these types of situations being handled better in the future and am open to offering my assistance.

[Souless]

I appreciate your opening this thread and now feel compelled to speak more candidly because I believe there's an important point that I'd like others to more clearly see. I agree with the concerns you stated that started this thread and would add that the issue isn't whether administrators and moderators have the right to impose any standard they want, but how administrators and moderators sincerely respond to satisfy the community's needs.

Notice that Souless had chosen to do and say a number of alternative things in response to your and my queries and hasn't addressed the main point yet. I felt frustrated and disappointed when Souless had opted to avoid addressing the main point in the way he did, because I perceived his several responses as passive-aggressive and inappropriate.

I believe their moderators should be open to criticism and responsive to the members' needs and queries, because their moderators serve the needs of the members, not the other way around, and I'm not OK with how this is being handled. Nevertheless, I continue to look forward to these types of situations being handled better in the future and am open to offering my assistance.

I'm sorry Demi.. But i grow tired of reading your long winded points.. I keep being left confused at what the problem is... Maybe if you were to reply in a more simpler manner I will be able to correct what you want.. In other words.. Maybe i'm not as intellectual as you and you need to dumb it down.. Thanks!

[Demiurge]

I'm sorry Demi.. But i grow tired of reading your long winded points.. I keep being left confused at what the problem is... Maybe if you were to reply in a more simpler manner I will be able to correct what you want.. In other words.. Maybe i'm not as intellectual as you and you need to dumb it down.. Thanks!

I know you grow tired, are left confused, and suggest things be more simple. I also know that you're a responsible moderator, and I'm not OK with how you're handling this. What specifically has stopped you all this time from answering Spooker's first and only question?

I know you want things to be simple, but this is turning into a complex mess. And you have the power to simply answer Spooker's question, don't you?

[Souless]

Well what is Spookers Question? I just see a big wall of text...

[Phenom]

I'm starting to wonder how Souless got MOD'd.(not that i care really)

I never pictured him as a forum mod... a Server admin possibly.


Honestly it feels like quakeone.com has started losing its integrity in the past 2 years mainly dew to Baker's "2% theory".

Its usually one asshole at the party who fouls up the whole evening.

Congrats on your MOD Souless, hope you know what you're doin!

[Souless]

I'm starting to wonder how Souless got MOD'd.(not that i care really)

I never pictured him as a forum mod... a Server admin possibly.


Honestly it feels like quakeone.com has started losing its integrity in the past 2 years mainly dew to Baker's "2% theory".

Its usually one asshole at the party who fouls up the whole evening.

Congrats on your MOD Souless, hope you know what you're doin!

I asked Baker if he needed help so he could focus on other things and not have to worry about cleaning spam off the boards. I'm moderator on two other community forums. If you have to write a 100 word essay to get your point across you have to much time on your hands.. Just get to the point and ask the question or make the statement.

[spooker]

I wouldn't go as far as Phenom. I'm not out to question your abilities as an admin or challenge your power in any way. I was trying to give some constructive feedback that I thought might help improve the site.

My initial question was: why did you close those threads? I don't care if the threads are open or closed, but when the moderator's foot comes down, I do want to know why. Your stated reason was that the thread mentioned Kimp. This concerned me because it seemed to mark a change in the way the forums are moderated. In the past, criteria for censoring people have been more narrow, like for example because someone posted pornography, spam, or racial slurs. Also, in the past, no topic has been off limits on the forums, as long as it wasn't intrinsically offensive, so it seemed strange that you were saying that the topic of Kimp is now off limits. A new moderator who seemed to be following new rules--that's why I spoke up. What bothered me was not the fact that you closed the threads, but how you explained it. I wanted to know that you're not just acting randomly or instinctively, but rather following some sort of coherent policy. I was looking for something like this, which Baker posted when he closed a thread recently:

This isn't an appropriate thread and I'm closing it.

This site doesn't exist to insult people who are banned from the forums and can't respond. That other thread was about Kimp's behavior on the servers in relation to these forums and the participants of that thread actively play Quake on the same servers as Kimp discussing their frustration.

It's impossible to argue with that, because it shows us what he was thinking, and also sends a clear signal as to what sort of forum moderating people can expect in the future.

[Souless]

I may be a moderator but it has nothing to do with power or authority.. I care about what the quake community feels or thinks so I'll do what you'd like me to do.. So i opened the forums back up.. My reasoning to close the current threads was due to the constant spamming of kimp.. I mean when you have 3 or 4 threads all stating basically the same stuff about kimp i feel it's like beating a dead horse and also detracting from what this site is all about which is our enthusiasm and enjoyment to play quake. If you feel that my reasoning isn't adequate I apologize. I've been a mod here for about 5 months now, and a member of the community for much longer then that. I really havn't seen much change at all on the boards these last 5 months so don't expect it to change in the future.

[Phenom]

I wouldn't go as far as Phenom. I'm not out to question your abilities as an admin or challenge your power in any way.

Challenge everything.

I asked Baker if he needed help so he could focus on other things and not have to worry about cleaning spam off the boards. I'm moderator on two other community forums. If you have to write a 100 word essay to get your point across you have to much time on your hands.. Just get to the point and ask the question or make the statement.

I'm not tryn to start a mutiny here! lol

You just didn't seem like the type who would "waste time" dealing with other people's BS on the forums.

I'd like to see the forums "kimp/omicron/paradise" free just as much as the next Quaker and i find your will to help clean up the "scum" admirable Souless.

I just really hope you're intentions are global

[Baker]

Souless is doing a fine job.

Moderating is an "art" and not a science. It's not always easy deciding where to draw the line and having the right intentions is the only thing that matters.

[Demiurge]

Souless is doing a fine job.

Moderating is an "art" and not a science. It's not always easy deciding where to draw the line and having the right intentions is the only thing that matters.

You might have noticed that Souless responded to Spooker's question with "Well what is Spookers Question? I just see a big wall of text... " You say he's doing a fine job, and I'm not OK with how he's handling this.

I agree that it's not always easy deciding where to draw the line and would add that the issue isn't what a person's intentions are, but how the person's actions affect other people, because as the saying goes, "The path to hell is paved with good intentions."

[Souless]

You might have noticed that Souless responded to Spooker's question with "Well what is Spookers Question? I just see a big wall of text... " You say he's doing a fine job, and I'm not OK with how he's handling this.

I agree that it's not always easy deciding where to draw the line and would add that the issue isn't what a person's intentions are, but how the person's actions affect other people, because as the saying goes, "The path to hell is paved with good intentions."

No.. I responded to your wall of text asking what his question was... I then typed my own wall of text to try to explain myself and answer Spooks question. I thought maybe wall's of text is all you might understand.

[Grim Warlock]

I closed the one thread that was singularly designed to insult Kimp (by someone who really doesn't even know who Kimp is.):

http://quakeone.com/forums/quake-tal...mber-year.html

Because that thread specifically designed to insult and troll and is something that got decided back in early 2008 when Omicron and Paradise ended up trolling other forum members.

Maybe in a few days a list of the [very, very few] forum rules will get posted for clarity.

But re-read all his posts like 10 times & was so damn immature! He must be a 5 year old, unless he has the brain of one. And how many accounts does he have? 50? If not, more. That's why I made a Thread about him. He truly was the QuakeOne (banned) Member of the Year.

[Demiurge]

No.. I responded to your wall of text asking what his question was... I then typed my own wall of text to try to explain myself and answer Spooks question. I thought maybe wall's of text is all you might understand.

Yes, I understand walls of text, directness, indirectness, sincerity, dismissal, passive-aggression, etc. You're already aware that you had the opportunity to simply and sincerely answer Spooker in the first instance, and you instead chose to alternatively do and say other things. And I'm not comfortable with that.

Nevertheless, I am glad to see that you did belatedly give some answer to Spooker's question. Thank you.