Where are the moderators?

[usually_quiet]

I think some members actually are accessing this website using a cell phone or pda, and as much as I dislike having to read it sometimes, we don't have a rule forbidding text message shorthand.

[Supreme2k]

No one said that we do, but if you're going to type garbage, you're going to get a garbage response.

[gll99]

It's a shame that over the years it's often not the newbie but it's the "frequent flyer" who perhaps out of a sense of entitlement, makes the mods' job harder by polluting threads with off topic, aggressive and often rude comments, frequently stirring up controversy thereby causing general unrest, inciting others (a few junior Wannabes) to unduly criticize fellow members for their slightest failings, prompting some to withhold their participation or questions out of fear of being ridiculed, agitating some to the point of even causing them to abandon the site altogether out of frustration and then finally either he himself leaves or goes too far and gets banned.

I understand from where you are coming, and blatant attacks do make the mods' job difficult.
On the other side of the coin "shit stirring" may be in the eye of the beholder. To some, merely saying "Do a search. That question has been answered many times." may seem harsh, though it is not the slightest. Is that not helping? Or when a first-timer comes to Videohelp asking about finding someone's IP address and is told to look elsewhere. It may actually be odd or even funny to some that a person would do that.
Also, there's a big difference between "criticizing fellow members for their slightest failings" and (for example) someone who has been here literally eight years and still doesn't use search or know how to burn a disc.

While I agree that "entitlement" is often a problem, it goes both ways. A newb who fails to read the rules (any of them), can't phrase his question correctly ("I need help" doesn't cut it), or acts like a jerk because it was pointed out that his methods are flawed, is not entitled to anything.

The old saying that's been quoted a few times here is "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
Often times, here, the saying changes to "...teach a man to fish and he'll come back in 10 minutes, say that it's too hard to even try, and demand that you do it for him. Then he'll say that he solved it on his own, most likely using the method that was first suggested to him.

I would gladly comment more on these points but it would be OT and it wouldn't advance your topic "Where are the Moderators". Some might use it as an opportunity to get into a p!$$!ng contest which SatStorm (at least based on his statement here) wisely tries to avoid.

Just a thought: a one dimensional mod qualification test.
Do you think any rules were broken here?
Supreme2k wrote

Your whole post shows a problem in itself. You are very prone to take this "job" personally. Just the phrase "because of the traps some users set up" screams volumes about it.

The moderator kindly answers your question about his whereabouts, activities and provides a personal explanation which most might not do.

Question: Is it appreciated or is he publicly challenged and analyzed?

Supreme2k wrote

As a mod, "xyz" (name withheld by gll99) also had this problem, often heavily implying "My word is law! I'm a lawyer!" He is much better as a "regular" now.

Anything wrong with this?

As an experienced member here, "Do a search" about which rules might apply and then try to render an impartial decision.

Since I can't really answer your question "Where are the Moderators", I'll bow out and I'm sorry, (I should get my knuckles rapped for getting involved ) I didn't want to pollute your thread but in fairness it was hard to let those statements pass without comment.

[Supreme2k]

As I hinted at with adam, even the mods are not "above the law".

The other mod in question was not "kindly" doing anything but taking shots at certain members and posts, while being just vague enough to seem..."kindly".

gl99, I don't believe that I've ever had a problem with you (or any interaction, for that matter), but "in all fairness", you polluted this thread with your first post. You may have stuck the word "mod" in there, but we know about whom you were talking.

Maybe ghost was a friend of yours, but someone imploding and getting himself banned by threatening several members dug their own grave.

[gll99]

Feedback Forum
General feedback is welcomed. If you have an idea or spot a problem about VH, start a new thread here. But no comments about specific Moderators or members please.

Reports
If you feel another member has posted, or sent a PM, that is against the rules, please use the Report function. But no personal comments or feedback please.

Comments or complaints about Moderators
If anyone has a comment or complaint they wish to make about a Mod's decision or conduct, they are asked to do so by PM only.

All disputes that arise from conflicts or vagueness in the AUP are to be decided soley by the webmasters or their moderators.

Last edited by Baldrick on Sep 24, 2003 14:44, edited 9 times in total

[Supreme2k]

Again, I don't know from where this animosity comes, but it's duly noted.


That "rule" seems to be outdated, which is why I did not cite it (though I knew that you would, eventually). There have been a few times where even mods went after each other in plain sight.

Even so, that rule doesn't apply. I was responding to his post (which was, to me, inflammatory), not "comment(ing) or complaint they wish to make about a Mod's decision or conduct"


adam is no longer a mod, so he's fair game :P

[lordsmurf]

This site has an odd membership too, unlike other sites, and I don't get why it is the way it is. Let me explain...

On most forums, if you talked back to a mod, he'd tell you to go **** yourself, the thread would be locked, and that would end the argument. That person might find himself/herself banned for a few days or weeks -- "quiet time" -- and then a repeat offense within a short span of time (say within 1-2 months) would earn a bye-bye-forever badge. For it to even come to this is unusual, most people know to not argue with mods/admins, they are guests in their virtual house. The issue would never again be spoken of.

Here, on this site, members not only feel free to talk back, but some feel they are entitled to be mouthy bastards. Some folks even register with no more agenda than to argue with a mod. What the hell is that all about? To go on further, some members expect mods to be a cross between a virtual Jesus and some sort of always-nice opinion-less automaton. That's just not realistic in any way. Moderators are volunteering their own free time to help a site for quite honestly nothing in return -- and then they have to deal with this BS? Can you blame them for leaving? I've seen this happen to pretty much every mod here these past 3-4 years -- especially ones of the "missing" list. Consider that most mods really want to just help with stickies, moving posts, polls and anti-spam duties --- dealing with ******** isn't what they signed up for.

[Supreme2k]

To add to that...


though it has been suggested, it is not usually long-time members who instigate battles with the mods or anyone else. It is usually newcomers who are too lazy to read the rules or don't care, regardless. Most often, it is the "regulars" who admonish the newbs for talking back to a mod. I can't even count how many times I've had to simply bring it to someone's attention that they were in fact talking shi-, er, back to a mod.

To rebut(?) one of ls's points, if the mods are to be treated as "only human", some of them need to realize that the same can be said for regular members (on second thought, most of the "some of them" are gone already).
Also, there is a difference between arguing with a mod about the rules ("Screw you! Like you never pirated movies!") and arguing with them when they are participating in a thread ("TY is better than Memorex." "No it isn't! BAN!")

I knew a guy who exemplified that last part. He was a CHP officer. When he came to hang out while off duty, he would often make remarks about what he could do to you when you disagreed with him on completely legal matters. It is what eventually got him dumped from the force (unable to get a law enforcement job in CA).

Some folks even register with no more agenda than to argue with a mod. What the hell is that all about?

It's creepy how much that has been happening lately

[gll99]

Supreme2k wrote

Again, I don't know from where this animosity comes, but it's duly noted.

gl99, I don't believe that I've ever had a problem with you (or any interaction, for that matter), but "in all fairness", you polluted this thread with your first post. You may have stuck the word "mod" in there, but we know about whom you were talking.

There is no animosity that I'm aware of.

I don't know what you read into it, but just so there is no misunderstanding, my original comments encompassed precedents repeated a few times over the last few years and were not specifically directed at any current member or action in particular. If and when I decide to call someone out there will be no ambiguity.

As far as "we all know whom you are talking about", is that the royal we? You must have someone or some situation in mind of which I'm not even aware nor interested.

Maybe ghost was a friend of yours, but someone imploding and getting himself banned by threatening several members dug their own grave.

ghost? Again you dredge up a name. Anything related to that situation is extremely vague and frankly none of my business or concern.

If you knew of certain past situations then you would see that my initial comments were in scope with ("Where are the mods"), accurate, reasonable and broad enough as to not point to anyone in particular (let the reader use discernment). It's true that my comments about the rules were a direct response to you. The parties in question are big boys and need no one to defend them. They'll speak up if they so choose. Obviously I was making the simple point that the measuring stick applies to all of us, but it was mild and rather inoffensive. I think we can agree on that can't we?

Now this is weird. Why do you feel the need to "duly note" the offense?

From my viewpoint, I simply accept that the unless revised by Baldrick, (with some moderator discretion where we take the risks if we transgress) the rules are as written. In other words just because someone doesn't get carded or banned for say, arguing with a moderator in a public forum, it doesn't mean the rule is invalid. It only means the moderator is thick skinned (very tolerant) about it and may even consider the value of the source (member) to the site. but it doesn't mean that there's always going to be a pass. Personally I'd give a private warning to a "senior" member who publicly challenges a moderator on site governance related matters, edit or remove the offending post and any future transgression would merit a yellow. Any more than that would become an outright ban. Why should anyone feel the rules no longer apply based on the last update date? Clarification can be obtained via pm. After all, as was said, interpretation about the AUP rests with the Administration.

Showing respect to other members of various age, abilities and knowledge, applying the rules to ourselves first and reporting suspect spammers, multiple thread starters etc. via the "report this post" tag makes it easier for the administration to concentrate on other site duties. In some cases that could help explain the original question you asked in the tag line.

There's no reason for upset over a differing viewpoint. As far as I'm concerned there is no more to it than that but you're free to see it otherwise.

[Supreme2k]

Come now, are you saying that your pointing out my comments regarding a mod's post, then posting a rule that doesn't even apply isn't just a little antagonistic? Or at least appears so?
The rest of your post does not apply, as I said before, because I was addressing a participant in this thread and his post, not a mod's decision or conduct. By posting in this thread in a general manner, he is just a regular member. Had he posted "You are being issued a warning for mentioning warez." or "I'm moving this to the Mac forum.", then he is acting in a mod capacity. Just as an on-duty police officer cannot just go into a bar with his friend's and start getting drunk, but still expect to exude the same level of authority. The advantage here is that the mods can be "one of the guys" one moment, then put back on their mod caps when the need arises.

You may want to follow your own advice. You know, about not getting upset over differing viewpoints?


BTW,
we = readers of this thread

[gll99]

First:
What I tried to say in broader terms in my earlier comment and what Satstorm said more eloquently, lordsmurf put quite bluntly but even more clearly and to the point in his comment. History shows that while newbies might argue with site authority they can be quickly disposed of by the mods if they become a problem. It's not so easy with so called OT "chums" of a mod who think they rule the roost expecting special treatment placing themselves above the peons and finally when they go too far and need to be corrected they gather their troops, cry to another mod trying to cause discord with flattery, complaining, backbiting etc... I won't add more because the details are better left to rest. No wonder some mods and members stepped away or left. This has happened more than once. Fortunately a few are still members but not many participate much anymore.

Second:

we = readers of this thread

All Kreskins? Everybody gets one free guess. Winner gets a prize.

I'm not talking about disagreeing with a mod on a video related topic. That's why I said "challenges a moderator on site governance related matters"

However, I think you keyed in on the wrong part of the quote. We have differing viewpoints about whether the following bold statement applies.

Feedback Forum
General feedback is welcomed. If you have an idea or spot a problem about VH, start a new thread here. But no comments about specific Moderators or members please.

The point has been made and I have to admit answered by default. The fact you haven't been warned or carded at least twice by now means you're obviously right in your interpretation. So I'll have to admit I'm wrong.

I don't want you to feel like I'm deliberately antagonizing you so I'll end my participation in this thread.

Peace.

[SatStorm]

He is not right. We are too soft.

[jimmalenko]

If demand warrants more Mods, then I'm sure Baldrick would go about recruiting/promoting them.

I would hazard to say that it is generally newer members that require Mod action moreso than members who have been around a while and know how things work and how/where to find things.

However upon perusal of the number of posts and new members each month ( https://forum.videohelp.com/statistics ), I'd suggest that the site is not getting the throughput it once did in the heady times of 2004-2005.

[AlanHK]

On most forums, if you talked back to a mod, he'd tell you to go **** yourself, the thread would be locked, and that would end the argument. That person might find himself/herself banned for a few days or weeks -- "quiet time" -- and then a repeat offense within a short span of time (say within 1-2 months) would earn a bye-bye-forever badge. For it to even come to this is unusual, most people know to not argue with mods/admins, they are guests in their virtual house. The issue would never again be spoken of.

Here, on this site, members not only feel free to talk back, but some feel they are entitled to be mouthy bastards. Some folks even register with no more agenda than to argue with a mod. What the hell is that all about? To go on further, some members expect mods to be a cross between a virtual Jesus and some sort of always-nice opinion-less automaton. That's just not realistic in any way. Moderators are volunteering their own free time to help a site for quite honestly nothing in return -- and then they have to deal with this BS? Can you blame them for leaving? I've seen this happen to pretty much every mod here these past 3-4 years -- especially ones of the "missing" list. Consider that most mods really want to just help with stickies, moving posts, polls and anti-spam duties --- dealing with ******** isn't what they signed up for.

I'm a mod on a local site, where many people know each other in real life.
And so there are many feuds that spill over into the forum, and and flame wars can cause real world consequences. So we try to keep a lid on it, though we very rarely permanently ban people.

And often I have been attacked and called a bigot, nazi, dictator, if I stop a thread where someone is claiming that some else set their dogs to kill his cat (real story -- but not the story the other guy told). And I can't make the most innocent, if sometimes ironic, comment, without being pilloried for bullying posters using my mod status. Though clearly it earns me far more vilification than respect -- the same poster claiming I'm silencing views I disagree with personally (rather than protecting the site from libel, which is what I'm actually doing) fails to realise that his own post shows that isn't true. The site is too small for me to get away with having a Secret Identity as a mod, it would soon be known and earn me even more ill will for trying to hide. And I can't lose my temper and flame someone no matter how much they deserve it. (So when I go on Slashdot I make up for it and vent a bit more than I should.)

[Seeker47]

Showing respect to other members of various age, abilities and knowledge, applying the rules to ourselves first

And I can't lose my temper and flame someone no matter how much they deserve it.

What you both said very much reminds me of a friend who was in the computer services business several years ago, and was fairly active online. He was quite even-tempered -- even uncommonly so -- always avoiding sharp response to even the most unwarranted attacks or deliberate provocations, which though infrequent did occur from time to time. It wasn't just being a fundamentally good person: he regarded this as the correct professional demeanor, and in any case simply smart for business purposes. Even though the stakes for me are rather different, I don't know that I could always succeed in emulating his example, but I'd like to, and I try to do so.

[lordsmurf]

I have NEVER bought into the idea that being a punching bag for verbal abuse, or some sort of tampon, is required to be "professional". Some people not only expect you to take it, but smile while it's being done. I'm sorry, but that's bullshit.

I consider professional to be holding yourself to a higher standard ethically, and capable of producing excellent work in your field. And if that process requires telling somebody to **** off to accomplish it, then so be it. And you know -- that's really how it operated prior to all the political correctness crap that has invaded our society and turned so many people into wusses. Why should I be afraid to offend people who are offending me? How the hell is that fair?

And while it may seem to go against conventional wisdom, the whole "bad for business" shtick, there are just as many customers who will use you because of this stance as those that would avoid you. In fact, in my old college pre-PC marketing and public relations books, there are chapters on this topic, one that I fondly recall titled "Divorcing the Customer". It's where you shed yourself of the pricks. Businesses still do it -- and these days it gets them "bad PR" -- but those companies always end up healthier than not.

[Nelson37]

AH, "Divorcing a Customer". A sacred and hallowed concept.

There's professionalism, and then there's being a doormat.

I know this might surprise some folks, but I see nothing wrong with blunt, even brutal honesty. Life is too short. Now when someone is paying my bill, that gets them a little wiggle room, but I don't need the money That bad. Experience tells me the A-holes are much more likely to screw you in some way.

[GKar]

///

[GKar]

//

[stiltman]

If demand warrants more Mods, then I'm sure Baldrick would go about recruiting/promoting them.

I would hazard to say that it is generally newer members that require Mod action moreso than members who have been around a while and know how things work and how/where to find things.

However upon perusal of the number of posts and new members each month ( https://forum.videohelp.com/statistics ), I'd suggest that the site is not getting the throughput it once did in the heady times of 2004-2005.

Strange, I was noticing the same...What's nice, I think this site is maturing into a site that was once only about backing up your DVDs to a more infomitive site about about DV,HDV, and conversions

Really every knows by now there are really only 2 programs that are being updated with new DVD structures. What I think people are starting to realize, this site is more than that....Hell, just look at the DVD-DVDR forum

[gadgetguy]

Funny, for me this site was never about backing up DVDs, but rather putting my own work on VCD and then DVD. It used to annoy me that there were so many posts about backing up. (Not the fact that people were backing up, but just that there were so many posts about it. And so many asking the same questions.)

[redwudz]

Uhh, guys? We're probably getting a bit off topic from the OPs initial question. Just a reminder.

[freebird73717]

redwudz is that your way of saying you and yoda need help?

[SatStorm]

I believe that it is his way to remind to all of us, that this is the feedback subforum and not the off topic one.

[Faustus]

yeah, wait what?

[SatStorm]

That.

[stiltman]

OK to answer the OP's title....

Just look above this post

Almost 4 in a row