Questions and innuendos about Moderators

[W3H5]

I would like to do that but the site might get lo

 

[Rainbow Dash]

Anyone below Jordan has the potential to be banned (e.g. sharing of login details). Obviously if Jordan is somehow banned, it's either as a result of a rogue mod, or, the forum ceases - it's his forum afterall.

I believe site owners can't be banned since they can just access the ACP & unban their IP address.

Now can mods ban each other? It'll be funny if you guys all got mad & ban each other.

 

[Danny]

At least one Moderator has been banned before.

 

[Rainbow Dash]

At least one Moderator has been banned before.

Oh details! Unless it is some CIA file **** going on with it.

 

[Danny]

A few years back, a Mod allowed his account to be compromised and user sUn went on a banning and editing spree.

 

[Rainbow Dash]

Anyway I have a question. What is the duty of the Staff Emeritus? They don't show up on the staff list thingy, why?

 

[W3H5]

Retired mods are given the emeritus title.

 

[Tornado]

They are retired staff members/moderators.

 

[Danny]

They don't show up because they're no longer staff. Staff Emeritus are members that have given up their position, most often for time constraints and other commitments.

The shiny badge is really just because it's pretty.

Edit: Ohhhh I hate you both so much.

 

[Rainbow Dash]

Oh, if they used the word Retired instead of that fancy word...

My school sucked so I'm not the brightest.

 

[W3H5]

My school sucked so I'm not the brightest.

Mmm...noted.

 

[Tornado]

Edit: Ohhhh I hate you both so much.

I am everywhere you want to be.

 

[Qvale]

What do you mods think of wannabe mods-- in other words non-moderators that try to moderate. Do you guys see them as helping the community or annoyances that should be put in their place? I'm curious as to what your answer will be since I've seen this wannabeing before and IMO its quite annoying.

 

[daan]

Some of it is fine. Some of it is not. It all comes down to what is said, and how it is said.

 

[TB]

I fully admit to being a pseudo-mod before getting the call. To the tune of Duke saying just keep doing what you're doing.

As daan said, it's more about how something is said that makes it cross that line from suggestion to overstepping your bounds.

 

[Sonygamer455]

At least one Moderator has been banned before.

Yea Jon was a super moderator that got banned.

BMW///M3 is another. Anybody know why he was banned?

On a related question, why is rainbow dash banned??????

A few years back, a Mod allowed his account to be compromised and user sUn went on a banning and editing spree.

Hmmm I wondered what happened to those guys, now I know. I bet you $10 they were IP banned.

What do you mods think of wannabe mods-- in other words non-moderators that try to moderate. Do you guys see them as helping the community or annoyances that should be put in their place? I'm curious as to what your answer will be since I've seen this wannabeing before and IMO its quite annoying.

Especially the hypocritical ones. I had one guy tell me to read the AUP once, when yet he himself doesn't read it too well ether. He made it glaringly obvious to me when he kept putting capitals in all the wrong places. People like that just annoy me.

 

[Pupik]

M3 was banned for mass-deletion of posts from those in which he disagreed with (even though they'd followed the rules and made responsible arguments), from what I've read.

 

[Sonygamer455]

M3 was banned for mass-deletion of posts from those in which he disagreed with (even though they'd followed the rules and made responsible arguments), from what I've read.

Oh yea, seems like I remember plundering through an old thread recently and I believe Josh mentioned how he was banned. I am going to look through it again.

 

[Famine]

What do you mods think of wannabe mods-- in other words non-moderators that try to moderate. Do you guys see them as helping the community or annoyances that should be put in their place? I'm curious as to what your answer will be since I've seen this wannabeing before and IMO its quite annoying.

It depends on the context.

The first line of defence is the forum membership. A polite reminder from a regular contributor means we don't have to get involved. A reported post from a regular contributor is often the first we'll know about an issue too - we cover most of the forums ourselves, but we can't necessarily cover every thread so a heads-up is sometimes a big help.

Wading in with a pair of size twelves (UK. Other kooky measurements are also available) and bossing people about... isn't really helpful. While sometimes you might see staff being a little antagonistic, there's often a behind-the-scenes reason for giving someone short shrift (like... we've already had to deal with them far more than we should have to, or they're a returning member - you guys can't see everyone's warning/infraction history on every one of their posts, but we can). When other members copy that, it can escalate something as simple as dropped caps into a full-blown slanging match that sees points handed out like flyers on the Vegas Strip.

My personal least favourite example of mini-modding is the instructional report. This is when a member reports a post and includes instructions to the staff on what we should do with it. It happens surprisingly often - "ban this member", "this guy should be infracted" and suchlike. It's nice that they've noticed there's an issue and they've gone to the trouble of reporting it to us (though commonly it's just someone taking a personal dislike to a post and it's not an AUP issue), but how they'd moderate a post isn't relevant unless they happen to be staff...


Ultimately we tend to draw actual mods from the good mini-mods. The people who don't go out of their way to be an arse to someone because they're not quite hitting all of the AUP at once, but steer folk the right way in threads and forums they're already active in. We tend to find the bad mini-mods end up in the site's deadpool...

 

[Slash]

I have a question. When a staff member leaves etc and because "Staff Emeritus", I know they lose their mod rights but do they still have access to the (I'm not sure how GTP works but generally this is how it works) sub forum dedicated to the staff to voice their opinions on site matters?

 

[Pupik]

I have a question. When a staff member leaves etc and because "Staff Emeritus", I know they lose their mod rights but do they still have access to the (I'm not sure how GTP works but generally this is how it works) sub forum dedicated to the staff to voice their opinions on site matters?

Yes; we can still see what happens behind the scenes. The expectations from us is rather the same...I wouldn't go revealing who did what to get in trouble and the staff talk still stays off-stage. Staff Emeritus cannot apply infractions, warnings, bans, see deleted stuff, nor use the top-secret gadgets.

But what I can't see is Famine, daan, and Omnis making fun of me behind my back, calling me an old retired geezer.

 

[Slash]

Yes.

That's what I thought, thanks Pupik.

 

[R5]

I have a couple of questions.


Lets say Jordan leaves for a bit, and a thread contains masses of stuff which you need to delete (let's say, scripting that freezes computers when the thread is clicked on so you can't edit the post) what is done about it? Do you tell everyone?

Also, if you ban a member permanently, is it possible that he/she can be unbanned?

 

[Slash]

As far as I know it is possible to unban someone the same way you ban them.

 

[Pupik]

Lets say Jordan leaves for a bit, and a thread contains masses of stuff which you need to delete (let's say, scripting that freezes computers when the thread is clicked on so you can't edit the post) what is done about it? Do you tell everyone?

We'll do what needs to be done. If it means deleting a small bunch of essentially meaningless posts to "get things un-jammed", then yes...although I've never heard of that happening. Usually, if things are slow, we'll hear about it, and Jordan would try to resolve it with the hosts. That does happen, on occasion.

Are we going to inform every poster that "post#xxxxxxx needs to be edited or was deleted" because we had a problem yesterday? No...time marches on, and some things are just fleeting moments.

Also, if you ban a member permanently, is it possible that he/she can be unbanned?

If they are set to have an expiring ban, then yes. A permanent ban is exactly that, you either understand the rules, work with the rules, or if you cannot play within the rules of the site, we're not going to give another chance to the same account (un-banning is a nuisance, anyhow). Even then, banning is something all the staff are aware of, and we discuss the seriousness of it together, except for obvious spammers/spambots.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

...On a related question, why is rainbow dash banned??????...

It happened in the “Oh, oh, oh, I'm making a Ludicrous Claim!” thread the other night. She didn’t understand what the thread was about, and made an arguably vulgar, but ludicrous claim about herself.

Someone explained to her that the thread was for calling other members out, like when the 12 year old says he drives a Viper.

She said she thought that was a legal way of trolling here. Someone told her it was not trolling, just getting to the truth. They also told her it was against the AUP to knowingly give false information here.

Things escalated.

She said something like ‘the AUP is from a dictator’.

Things just kept escalating.

By this time some people were asking for an end to the conversation.

A Mod stepped in and banned her.

If I could, I would point you to the scene of the crime, but shortly after that, it was scrubbed clean.


EDIT:

On a totally different subject: Are the Mods able to read personal (PMs) correspondence between GTP members?

 

[Terronium-12]

No. Private messages are just that - private.

We'll only be able to read any number of messages in the event they're reported. Jordan, on the other hand has magic we do not if something so drastic is absolutely necessary.

 

[R5]

Thanks for the answer

 

[PeterJB]

No. Private messages are just that - private.

We'll only be able to read any number of messages in the event they're reported. Jordan, on the other hand has magic we do not if something so drastic is absolutely necessary.

So Jordan's Obama then?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Yes, but you can trust Jordan. He's the government. And if you can't trust the government, who can you trust?