|
If stale arguments are probateable, then the mods should provide an exhaustive and frequently updated list of which ones are considered stale. Otherwise it's an extremely arbitrary rule that can be used to shut down discussion without warning.
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 08:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 15:10 |
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:That suggestion is basically concern trolling mods into becoming a Ministry of Truth. Thanks for calling feedback trolling, that's very productive. I think the overarching problem is lack of transparency. This is a site-wide problem, but a lot more noticeable in D&D where things are more contentious. The only thing that posters see is which posts get probated and the mod's explanation for why. Reporting can feel completely useless because there's zero feedback there. This leads to the perception that the rules are being applied arbitrarily. Whether that perception is accurate or not is going to be difficult to prove, again because of the lack of transparency. When none of us can see what's going on behind the scenes, it's easy for mods to hide their biases (whether they do this intentionally or not). A couple weeks ago I got in an argument with another poster. I accused them of making a stale argument, and ironically I got probated for "posting about posters" (this is another extremely arbitrary rule). Lots of other people were probated responding to them. I talked to another mod about it, asked why none of the other poster's posts were probateable when they was doing the exact same thing. I was told to report the posts, and I did, and nothing ever came of it. So yeah, just based on what I can see, it seems pretty arbitrary.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:What’s going on behind the scenes is that the vast majority of reports are archived after a moderator posts one word reply of “resolved” or “misc” to them, depending on if an action was taken or not taken. If you don’t understand why you were probated, you should reach out to the person who probated you, or Koos. I did exactly that. I PMd you specifically, not just to ask why I was probated, but why the other poster hadn't been probated for being a caustic, condescending rear end in a top hat and also posting about posters. I did what you told me to do and nothing happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 21:34
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Looking up, I remember that conversation. Your subsequent 3 reports were processed by a moderator other than me, who offered a specific comment for why no action was taken. I'll ping them with the specific report, but it's not up to me to say who that was, or to share their reasoning on my own. They aren't obligated to chime in either, but you're always welcome to PM Koos about this - they'll know which reports you're asking about. This is another big problem, and it feeds into the lack of transparency. All the mods don't seem to be on the same page, they all have different ways of doing things. Like, that alone should be proof that the rules are being applied arbitrarily.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 22:14
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:Was this the exchange with Discendo Vox in Politoons about a cartoon being gaslighting? June 27-28th? If so I handled some of those reports and also had a PM exchange with you. Yeah, and like I said, that's kind of a problem. I and others got probated because cinci just hands out a lot of probes, and then DV gets off with just a warning despite being way more aggressive because you take a lighter approach. It's arbitrary even if you're not deliberately trying to be unfair. Lack of transparency, diffused responsibility, and inconsistent moderation styles. It all leads to posters having the perception that the rules are pretty much applied at random at best, or along ideological lines at worst. If that's not true, then it might help to fix those things to try to alleviate that perception. Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 22:55
|
|