How a moderator can ruin a good site for users

[strad]

And there in lies the rub...Some would say there is an Agenda...and dare I say it? Favoritism.
FWIW..I have moderated and I do know how hard it can be at times, but I found I agree with the statement...
"That government is best which governs least."

[Richard]

I'll come admit to being the dictator being debated by WB. I'm loathe to drag out blow by blow accounts of who said what and when. However, I do need to give some context.

This thread was triggered because I asked WB to limit betting odds to the relevant thread. I then took action to back that up.

This wasn't some spontaneous ego trip. I explained it in PMs to WB. Several people had complained about it in the threads, and others reported it to mods. I also see several posts in this thread agree with this.

Also as Hollus pointed out, WB has awesome talent for digging out facts. He is an asset to the forum, I do mean that sincerely and long may he continue.

[xpensive]

I resent when you're trying to limit the discussion to WB alone, you know very well that it goes much further than that?

[xxChrisxx]

Excessive zeal is to be expected when someone initially wields the banhammer for the first time.

In general moderating is a time consuming and completely thankless task; when it's done well it's ignored, and when people have a problem they are quick to bitch and complain.

All of my posts that have been moderated, on reflection, I agree with the reasons.



My only complaint is that the level of moderation on technical issues/claims on the forum is utterly shocking. There seems to be no minimum standard for evidence or reasoning behind a technical claim.

A well thought out post with a technical claim; supported by calculations and analysis is treated in the same way as a post with wild speculation (bordering on making --- up) and semantic reasoning.



It's the reason I don't post here more, it winds me up and I make rash posts that quite rightly get moderated.

[WhiteBlue]

It appears that we have collected a nice bouquet of opinions on the issue. It is good to see that I'm not alone in being pissed off by being censured.

In my view mods are not supposed to delete content unless for proper reasons that can be evaluated and defended on the basis of published board policy and rules. I may not be squeaky clean when it comes to sticking to all rules. I have been warned several times in the past and banned for some time for stepping over the line. I take that as part of being an active poster who likes a bit of jousting as expensive has called it aptly. But that is different to being censored on the basis of having an opinion that is disliked by some blokes who gang up with a moderator to set new standards for posting out of the blue.

If someone holds an opinion which I dislike regarding a disputable issue and I complains about it to a moderator I expect a good mod to take non destructive measures to resolve the conflict irrespective of his own opinion. In this case I have been posting odds in team threads showing what the betting people thought about various prospects like Ferrari getting on top of their technical issues. Some people did not like it and opined that odds are totally ambiguous and betting is only for weak characters who gamble away their dole money.

Obviously this is not what I think of it. I do believe that with proper time correlation the odds give a pretty good indications what the general public expects at the time. And I think that is relevant if you discuss non technical issues like the competitiveness of teams in the mid term. I agree that one can honestly hold a different opinion. But it is still an issue of opinion and not an issue of respecting the board rules.

If RL wanted to keep such opinions or posts out of team threads he could have set up a thread to discuss it and get an opinion poll from the users. If a majority of users thinks that betting odds do not express a valid view of team prospects or driver prospects and they feel molested if I mention it on team or driver threads I would accept that verdict.

What I object to is a knee jerk reaction to a small opinion sample and a blanket ban on mentioning the issue anywhere outside the dedicated odds thread. It really did upset me. RL told me to cool off when he deleted seven or eight posts or copied them away from where I posted them. I was in a mood to call him names worse than a dictator but I went away for two weeks and thought about it.

I'm prepared to be reasonable and compromising and I do not want to make a huge issue of it. Let's have a proper discussion and set a rule that is based on reasoning and not on the willy nilly inclination of a few. Most people who have voted in this thread seem to agree with me that mods should use more restrain when they are imposing intrusive measures. I think that should give Steven and the mods some food for thought.

[Pierce89]

The mods have been a LITTLE overzealous as of late, but look at it like Lewis getting slammed to the back of the grid: A notice to everyone to follow the rules.

[alelanza]

...Most people who have voted in this thread seem to agree with me that mods should use more restrain when they are imposing intrusive measures...

Ah cmon, the thread's title and especially the poll's heading is designed for people to choose option 1.
If you're interested in what people think of it then do a proper poll and word it in a reasonable manner. Plus, if there's a thread for odds (which i find reasonable), why sprinkle it across other posts? If anything, sounds to me like such moderation is much needed, it would certainly get me to read this forum more often.

[strad]

It's simple...When moderation goes with me...It's good
When moderation goes against me...It's bad!
I think the laundry has been aired.
I'm not sure what WB wants.

[Steven]

First of all, Ciro left to pursue other things in life. He was a valuable asset but left without angry feelings. There's no "bringing him back", if he wants, he will come back.

Secondly, the question on what WB wants, to me is pretty clear. More freedom is needed for him, but I don't see any reason why. The number of posts is indeed astonishing, but does not warrant the behaviour displayed from time to time. Example of this is yet another breach of rules in this thread, as hollus kindly pointed out.

I can only agree on one thing about this thread, and this is that moderators perhaps should be a little more aligned. I don't however see any problem with any moderator right now, even though I'm aware the still differ somewhat.

[bar555]

Are moderators getting paid ? No ! So we can not hire a new better qualified for the job nor throwing an unwanted one to the dustbin. Moderators are volunteers and are here because we need somebody to do the dirty work.They are not lawyers to work strictly by the rules but rather open minded persons having their own personality . In plain words i like diversity but not arrogance and i do not see arrogance among the current moderators even though i miss Ciro .

[Echo]

You guys are pathetic!

Mods are mods =D>

[bhall]

It's simple...When moderation goes with me...It's good
When moderation goes against me...It's bad!
I think the laundry has been aired.
I'm not sure what WB wants.

To live in a fantasy land where bookies impart sage wisdom to go along with their betting odds, where there's no such thing as rank hypocrisy, and where every car and driver is born in zie Vaterland.

[WhiteBlue]

Example of this is yet another breach of rules in this thread, as hollus kindly pointed out.

I have to admit that I was still angry even after two weeks about what I perceive as abuse of power. I take that dictator moniker back and apologise for that emotional remark. I have offered a reasonable discussion about the issue but neither you not RL seem to be interested.

[Steven]

WhiteBlue, now claiming that neither me or richard are interested is maybe just a little bit too much. We have both replied in this thread and are giving our thoughts. I'm very sorry if these are not what you have expected when starting this thread, but I'm also happy to see it's not just 2 people who disagree, not the least with your thread title.

If we would not be interested, we would not take the time to post here, explain where there's a delete or advise you when something is inappropriate.

[strad]

Actually Tomba..I appreciate that.
And I note that as the thread progresses, WB falls to his usual tactics.
While I have had my own disputes with the Mods, they have always explained their side and listened to mine. My question as to what WB wants was I guess rhetorical...If he wants an apology,,I don't think he's owed one and isn't likely to get one. In the end this isn't a democracy and I think, WB..Myself or anyone else that doesn't like it is free to leave.
The owners can run it the way they like. Y'all can open up your own site and run it different if you like, but I can assure from experience that it's harder than it looks.