So, I suppose it's worth chiming in here from the admin perspective.
My time to actively moderate has unfortunately gone down corresponding with the uptick in activity before the expansion. So, frankly, I've been a bit more hands-off than usual. Historically, the RPC -- since the 1.0 days -- has been fairly low key in its moderation, but the reality is that such an approach worked better when the site was smaller. We're getting another wave of new people and people coming back (which started around, oh, say, January), and there's definitely been some additional tension since then. There's things that can be done by members to help tamp that down (assume good faith, don't get baited, don't be dismissive of others, etc.), but there's also things that can be done on the management side.
To that end, the mods and I are working on a clear set of specifically unacceptable behaviors in accordance with the existing forum rules, as well as a listing of what the consequences are for engaging in such behaviors. We'll be taking a more active stance in enforcing these rules, and the consequences will include things such as the suspension of posting privileges and temporary bans -- enforced automatically by the forum software at certain thresholds of behavior. I've also made it a point to reemphasize being transparent in moderation; if a thread needs to be moderated except in the case of patent nonsense, the mod will make a post explaining what was done (thread split, thread lock, post deletion, etc.).
Part of this is also maintaining our commitment to privacy, which is why we'll continue to eliminate offending posts and apply warnings in private. I don't view it as particularly productive to give bad posts a place to go where they can still be quoted, linked, etc., nor do I think a place where people can challenge any moderation decision openly is valuable. It's a hard enough job to moderate without worrying about whether the bad actor in question is going to turn right back around and demand satisfaction publicly; it's also no fun to be the target of a personal attack and have to see it staring back at you in perpetuity.
If there's a concern regarding bias on the part of the mod team or me, I would be happy to discuss it privately via PM. I should hope that, during my tenure as admin, I've demonstrated that I try to treat everyone equally (and I like to think I'm far enough removed from most of the RP on the server that no one would think I was actually in a clique that was represented on the RPC), but naturally, perception is reality in forum management.
For what it's worth, if there is a sufficient perception that I have some bias for or against some posters based on a perceived clique, I would certainly be willing to step down as administrator in favor of someone the community finds less biased.
#magicAdminHat
My time to actively moderate has unfortunately gone down corresponding with the uptick in activity before the expansion. So, frankly, I've been a bit more hands-off than usual. Historically, the RPC -- since the 1.0 days -- has been fairly low key in its moderation, but the reality is that such an approach worked better when the site was smaller. We're getting another wave of new people and people coming back (which started around, oh, say, January), and there's definitely been some additional tension since then. There's things that can be done by members to help tamp that down (assume good faith, don't get baited, don't be dismissive of others, etc.), but there's also things that can be done on the management side.
To that end, the mods and I are working on a clear set of specifically unacceptable behaviors in accordance with the existing forum rules, as well as a listing of what the consequences are for engaging in such behaviors. We'll be taking a more active stance in enforcing these rules, and the consequences will include things such as the suspension of posting privileges and temporary bans -- enforced automatically by the forum software at certain thresholds of behavior. I've also made it a point to reemphasize being transparent in moderation; if a thread needs to be moderated except in the case of patent nonsense, the mod will make a post explaining what was done (thread split, thread lock, post deletion, etc.).
Part of this is also maintaining our commitment to privacy, which is why we'll continue to eliminate offending posts and apply warnings in private. I don't view it as particularly productive to give bad posts a place to go where they can still be quoted, linked, etc., nor do I think a place where people can challenge any moderation decision openly is valuable. It's a hard enough job to moderate without worrying about whether the bad actor in question is going to turn right back around and demand satisfaction publicly; it's also no fun to be the target of a personal attack and have to see it staring back at you in perpetuity.
If there's a concern regarding bias on the part of the mod team or me, I would be happy to discuss it privately via PM. I should hope that, during my tenure as admin, I've demonstrated that I try to treat everyone equally (and I like to think I'm far enough removed from most of the RP on the server that no one would think I was actually in a clique that was represented on the RPC), but naturally, perception is reality in forum management.
For what it's worth, if there is a sufficient perception that I have some bias for or against some posters based on a perceived clique, I would certainly be willing to step down as administrator in favor of someone the community finds less biased.
#magicAdminHat
The Freelance Wizard
Quality RP at low, low prices!
((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages))
Quality RP at low, low prices!
((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages))
