Moderator Protocol

[Dominique]

(mod note-I tried to find the appropriate place to put this and this is the best I came up with. Move if neccessary-I thought I remembered seeing a more targeted thread but couldn't find just now)

P.S. TomL, in a surprise move, has become a moderator and took it upon himrself to edit out some of the words from my previous post. Please do not 'edit' out my words here in the future. I am not making any unfair personal attacks here, and have saved the contents of this post for records. If my posts are continued to be edited for material which TomL feels hurts his feelings, then I will consider ceasing from posting here in the future. A moderator already once caused terrible damage to this forum through his editing of people's posts; let's hope TomL doesn't (continue making) the same mistake.

This is such a prob-is there no strike out feature mods can use to cross out bad lines while leaving content intact? If not, dissallow edit feature for mods-I see no productive purpose for all this aggravation-*my two cents*.

[HaloNoble6]

We will be implementing a rule that will disallow moderators from touching a post which deals directly with that moderator, just as justices remove themselves from cases for which they have a personal connection with due to "conflict of interest."

I personally don't know whether the lines in FC's post merited deletion as I never saw them.

And actually, there is a strikeout feature, at least in html there is. Is there one in BB code, David?

[Dominique]

We will be implementing a rule that will disallow moderators from touching a post which deals directly with that moderator, just as justices remove themselves from cases for which they have a personal connection with due to "conflict of interest."

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Good to hear.

[DavidOdden]

Independent of the question of moderators messing with posts that directly mention them, if a moderator alters someone's post, is it automatic that the original poster is notified and that the modified post is necessarily marked as having been altered by a second party?

[HaloNoble6]

Neither of these things is automatic. It is not required, according to the moderating guidelines in the forum rules, that a moderator notify an author of edits or deletions. Typically, I always notify a poster if I've changed anything and I leave a note at the end of the post. If I delete a post, I usually don't say anything because the reason for deletion is always obvious (at least to me).

Should these two things (automatic poster notification, automatic "edited by X" note at end of post) be implemented, if possible? Leaving a note at the end of a edited post is mandatory according to the moderation guidelines, should notifying the author also be?

[Dominique]

Should these two things (automatic poster notification, automatic "edited by X" note at end of post) be implemented, if possible?  Leaving a note at the end of a edited post is mandatory according to the moderation guidelines, should notifying the author also be?

I'd say yes. It would cut down on the public arguments by immediately taking it behind *closed doors* and it would save time backtracking to explain. Also it's rude to just delete/edit someone without even telling them what they did wrong. It shows a lack of respect and it's so easily avoided with a simple note.

[EDIT-to add:]

For example I thought this response by you Felipe was totally appropriate and tactful. Perhaps overtly so, but better to err on the side of prudence than negligence.

Edit: Message sent to Zeus via PM.  Attempting to handle issues privately rather than publicly. --Felipe

Edited April 14, 2005 by Dominique

[TomL]

I will abide by whatever the admins decide. Actually, I had thought maybe I should have someone else edit the post, but no one else was around. I mentioned it to David in my IRC channel and he said he'd have a look and then he disappeared.

I figured that if I was judged smart enough to be a mod, then I must be smart enough to separate insult from intellectual content, which is exactly what I did. I did not delete the entire post, but I left his very good questions intact and there for all to see. I have nothing to hide, but I don't deserve to be insulted like that, either. I have insulted no one.

My post regarding dondigitalia's statement were in regards to the statement, not the man. Free's statements attacked me personally.

Pony Girl and I had both decided a couple of days ago to become Premier members because we've been getting so much pleasure from this forum. And Felipe's invitation for me to be a mod (which is something he approached me with; I didn't ask for it) indicated that has been reciprocal for the most part.

If Free Capitalist and I cannot work out our differences and figure out a way to coexist, I will most likely stop coming here also. I would like an opportunity to reconcile with him, and I will PM him all the personal contact information I can in an attempt to converse with him directly and resolve our differences.

[TomL]

And now I see he is insulting me directly again in this post.

I request another mod to edit the post and remove the direct insults without deleting the intellectual content.

[Dominique]

Also as an aside I'd like to say (while we're on the topic of moderators) that I commend Felipe for appropriately responding to posts (after an initial *growing pains*) and splitting threads. I've found it most helpful to have the threads split up as you have done Felipe.

[softwareNerd]

Also it's rude to just delete/edit someone without even telling them what they did wrong. It shows a lack of respect and it's so easily avoided with a simple note.

Well said, Dominique! A moderator ought to be a little moderate, what? Or am I reading too much etymology into the word?

Some quick thoughts:

1) Some posts (like the advertisment for cigarettes that someone posted on the forum) ought to "disappear".

2) For everything else, I think it's best to PM the original back to the author. This way, the author always has their original work of art.

3) In a borderline case, give the author the opportunity to edit the post himself. So, the original post goes back to the author with a note like: "A moderator has temporarily edited your post for the following reason: ... ... Your original post is below. If you would like to edit it yourself and send it back, do so. If your editing is acceptable to the moderators, we will use your revised version."

4) Sometimes it is important to edit a post because leaving it in its current state is inflammatory and will simply encourage a flame war. In a borderline case, one can wait --many posters visit the forum daily.

5) It's fine to take into account who the author is. Not just fine, it is actually important to do so. Are we dealing with an Objectivist/student of Objectivism (a.k.a. "potential long-term customer) or are we dealing with a non-Objectivist. Is this a newbie? Is this a long-time poster who is usually polite etc.? Is this someone who adds value to the forum? The more value a poster is to the forum, the more he deserves an opportunity to make his own edits.

[HaloNoble6]

Thank you Dominique for those kind words. I've learned to liberalize myself, instead of being a hardcore right-winger (kidding of course).

Also it's rude to just delete/edit someone without even telling them what they did wrong. It shows a lack of respect and it's so easily avoided with a simple note.

I agree, except when the post being deleted doesn't even Merritt the courtesy of a note.

[TomL]

I am happy to report that Free Capitalist and I have resolved our differences privately. With any modicum of will power on my part (easily done) there should be no further recurrence.

By the way, I did leave a note at the bottom of the post in question after I edited it.

Edited April 14, 2005 by TomL

[Dominique]

Thank you Dominique for those kind words.  I've learned to liberalize myself, instead of being a hardcore right-winger (kidding of course).

I agree, except when the post being deleted doesn't even Merritt the courtesy of a note.

What is this "Merritt" you speak of?

And who amongst you is fit to decide unequivocally what is of *merit* if you aren't willing to back it up by banning the member. By my opinion anyone who's allowed to be a member here neccessarily has some *merit*. If not-ban them and forego all manner of tact, they clearly are not worth it. But if it's worth having them be allowed to discuss here, it's worth identifying (and allowing them to possibly rectify) their mistakes.

[softwareNerd]

What is this "Merritt" you speak of? 

You beat me to it!

[HaloNoble6]

Leave me be, I'm in a rush to pick up my top value at the aiport, not time to double check the spell checker!

[Dominique]

You beat me to it!

Unfortunately I think I (necessarily) made some *sp-errors* of my own.

[DavidV]

is it automatic that the original poster is notified and that the modified post is necessarily marked as having been altered by a second party?

The "Edited By" note is automatic, and cannot be disabled.

[DavidV]

And actually, there is a strikeout feature, at least in html there is.  Is there one in BB code, David?

There is a strikeout feature, but I think it would be pretty insane silly to start using it for moderation. The purpose of editing posts is to remove offensive and distracting aspects, and this wouldn't accomplish that.

Edited April 14, 2005 by GreedyCapitalist

[HaloNoble6]

I've updated the moderator guidelines to reflect the "conflict of interest" issue and asked that moderators inform posters if a post of theirs is deleted.

I've also added to the poster etiquette section and asked that posters not start threads with just a link.