A criticism

[Bobby Rico]

I didn't know where else to post this but I figured I'd put it here so it doesn't interrupt the flow of any existing topic-

I do have a small criticism I'd like to bring to the mod's attention.  I realize I risk a significant lowering of my rating for making this post, but it is important to me that this issue be raised.  This issue is dealing with the occasionally malicious attitude or acts the mods of this site perpetuate against some members of this site.  I have noticed in my time on this board that there seems to be this attitude amongst certain mods to publicly slam a forum contributor for certain opinions or comments they make.  While I agree in no uncertain terms that there are occasionally good reasons for this (such as against individuals who post things that are offensive, or people who deliberately spam), but I have noted that there are occasions when certain mods seem to take pleasure (this is a conjectural statement I realize, but it is the perception I have) in the berating of a member who has a difference of opinion (perhaps an opinion born of improper logic or bad taste) but an opinion no less.

I bring your attention to this thread-  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/66438.0.html

This is just a recent example of what I'm talking about.  A member was given a warning for essentially defending his position.  The warning was only given after he engaged in an argument with the mods granted, but my issue here is that the argument could have easily been avoided if some of the mods had not added fuel to the fire as appeared to be the case in this particular matter.  The fact that the poster began earning the ridicule of more than one mod in this instance was simply uncalled for, and in my mind served to do little to de-escalate the situation, which is what the mods should be focusing on, as opposed to being the dispensers of personal criticisms, that in the long run appear petty and argumentative. The guy ended up getting cornered and did what all animals do when they're cornered- he attacked. 

Frankly, I find the attitude distasteful and disgraceful.  Especially given that the public beratings often draw in the attention of a certain segment of posters who are naturally inclined to support the mods positions, and as such get in on the proverbial dog pile.  Now, in any other forum on the internet, this wouldn't be an issue- but this forum and the mods in particular I would think, are representational of our Armed Forces.  For potential future members of the Armed Forces, whose only exposure to the military are these forums, this can leave a tremendous impression on them as to the attitudes of our men and women in uniform.  It makes it look like we're all petty, bickering, elitist bitches, with nothing better to do than pick other people and their opinions apart like vultures to carrion for our own amusement.  This isn't the case in all of these situations certainly, but in the example I gave, that is the picture it paints, and I'm sure it isn't one that the Armed Forces would appreciate. 

I realize the mods have a job to do here to keep things sane on these forums.  But what happened in that particular thread, and has happened in the past, is completely unnecessary.  If I were to make a suggestion it would be that if and when the mods see someone beginning to act up, they try to deescalate the situation one-on-one by speaking to that individual through PMs, as opposed to making a public spectacle out of him or her.  By making it public, all you do is encourage that poster to wage a war of words, and then all that happens is the thread gets gummed up with senseless bickering- and more often than not the mods are drawn in which does not put them in a good light, and nothing gets accomplished.

Anyway, that's all I have to say on this issue.  Beyond that, I think the mods do a good job keeping things peaceful here, and compared to other public forums out there, this one is certainly the best run by far.

Thanks,

Rico

 

[George Wallace]

Bobby Rico

Why is it that you think Mods have no rights to engage in any of the posts?  I looked at that link you provided and it was well into the discussion before a Mod contributed to the conversation.  A Mod who just happens to work in the Film Industry, and who as such was pointing out some 'inaccuracies' in a certain individual's posts.  If you think that is unfair, then I really wonder why you are here, as it would appear that you prefer a Totalitarian Society where people are muzzled from freedom of speech.

I am now going to ask you a simple question.  If you beaked off to your RSM, would you think it proper for him not to "come down on you from Great Heights"?  The RSM is an appointment tasked with 'discipline', but it still does not restrict him/her from the rights to engage in conversation.  You can figure out the rest, I am sure.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Bobby, I am curious, on how many occasions have you reviewed one of those posters' entire message history to see how many times they have engaged the staff or other members.  Keep in mind also that any clearly inappropriate comments were removed from the open forums.  One aspect you are not addressing is the long slow build-up of frustration with certain posters, you don't see the breaks they received from individual Moderators or the warnings they were sent privately.  It doesn't appear that you have considered any long-running conflicts of attitude, which are sometimes exacerbated by others jumping in without fully appreciating the entire story.  It's easy to take single threads in isolation, but quite often there is a long history behind the flare-ups.  Let me tell you, we'd be happy to roll out the staff discussion threads at times, but that would be inappropriate.  Be sure, however, the Staff has a long and effective collective memory of posters who repeatedly contravene or skirt the Conduct Guidelines.

I would like to point out that there has been a lot of soul-searching among the staff to find ways to maintain decorum on the boards - Tone and Content on Army.ca

The one critical aspect we cannot control is the cooperation of the mass of members who frequent the site.  Nor should we engage in a completely impersonal moderation style without participating ourselves, you would not want an invisible moderation staff simply deleting anything not precisely in accordance with the Conduct Guidelines.


Mike
Army.ca Staff

 

[the 48th regulator]

Bobby,

A very good post.

I allowed my feelings towards another member of this site to take control of my posts in a very good thread.

I used the fact of being in the Film industry to edge my way into the thread, and bait him to a fight.  Freddy G reacted to my attack aggressively and was penalised for it.  Had I not started the whole fracas, I am sure he would not have attacked me as he did.

I want to apologise for my actions last night, please do not Broad stroke all members of the Moderation staff or the site members by my negative actions of last night.

As a Member of this site, and a poster first, I should have known better than to act that way.  I would not accept that from another member, when I wear my Mod hat, and no-one on the site should have to see that from me.

Again,

Thank you for the Thread Bobby.

Dileas

Tess

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

tess we're a team and you're a big part of it. We've reviewed the whole scenario and at the end of the day we (as the Staff cadre) have taken away a few points for next time. But at the end of the day Freddy G's post history and more than supports the current warning.

Bobby, I appreciate you raising the question... you did so tactfully and it was indeed a valid question. George, tess and Michael, I think your responses are bang on.

 

[KevinB]

[soapbox]

ahem...

  Freddy's postion was dumb I'm sorry to say;
1) he made a factual error (always bad for the credibility)
2) as a JUNIOR officer - if he wishes to critique the leadership (or lack thereof) of someone it may help to have a foundation.

3) lastly - and even I figured this one out -- name calling - specifically name calling with mods - does not get anyone anywhere fast (the exception being accelerated thru the warning system) I'm the first one to call BS on a mod if I think they are out of line, and I dont think this was anything like that.

[/soapbox]

However, I agree with his initial position - but not for the reasons he posted.

 

[Bobby Rico]

George-  Valid point.  And you're right, the RSM would have complete right to come down on me.  But would he do so tastefully, and respectfully?  I would hope to think that I as a member of his regiment, would do so respectfully and tactfully, and if possible, in private, and not attempt to bait me into arguing with him more as a means of humiliation. 


But I digress- as I said above, I think you are all WELL WELL WELL above being pulled into petty arguments.  Human nature tends to make fools of us all once and awhile unfortunately.

I greatly appreciate the responses and acknowledgment of this issue.


Respectfully,

Rico

 

[Scott]

In this case I was the one playing the heavy so bear with me...

-I saw some mouthing off in the thread and, after reading it through, dropped in some words of advice to try and straighten it out as I was not active in the thread (one common rule we have among the DS is that you will not moderate a thread you are involved in and this works for the most part. Obviously some times it has to be ignored but that is definitely a rarity)

-The user in question decided to fire back at the direction he was given and was given one final chance to wind his neck in a bit.

-He responded with name calling and petty accusations and now he's in the system for it.

I have been informed, by the member in question that his name calling wasn't directed at me, that makes no difference and I explained such to him. His warning will expire and he will be bale to post to the boards again if he wishes. In light of his posting history I would have been within my rights to just ban him and forget about it but I decided to go this route as I deemed it a bit more fair given that it's been some time since he's been in the system.

To be perfectly honest, I just was not in the mood for this. I had read through a blatant troll's demise here and wasn't going to have any more of it yesterday.

And need I mention that any warning given can be appealed to Mike Bobbitt, we make such known in the message we send to users and go so far as to provide the link right to a blank PM box addressed to Mike.

There's been alot of soul searching here to try and find the happy medium but the plain fact of the matter is that it shall never be found. Someone is always going to be treated unfairly in their eyes or in the eyes of someone else. We aim to keep it at its lowest but there's always going to be some small issue, it's the nature of the beast.

And as a final note, if anyone ever has an issue with a warning I issue they need only PM me for an explanation, I'll close any gaps you may have in the reasoning. Of course, there's not much I can do if you still disagree, but I am willing to discuss it.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Someone will probably scream at me for closing this down, but, I believe we've covered this particular one sufficiently. There is also a pretty good general thread on this type of stuff, as pointed out by M. O'Leary.

So, with the normal caveats, I'm locking this.

Milnet.ca Staff