Moderation

You know what has alluded me until now but I feel is very true. The one quality which is overlooked is that if we really need a moderator, we need one who does not want to be a moderator. A reluctant moderator if you will. This applies in many walks of life and it often just works. Someone that does not want the role, but does it anyway because they will be good at it. It really applies in management. The best managers' are the specialists in their own roles, who have years' of experience, enjoy what they do and are respected in their field. They have zero want or will to manage, but they do it because they are the only one's that are going to do it right. They step up with that knowledge.

The reason for doing so is not for the power trip. This caveat is one of the top way's they will not intervene for stupid stuff, will allow active discussion without bias, and have zero agenda. Someone that is desperate to moderate here is more likely to go too far (not always, but more likely). What will these clown moderators at dpreview do with their lives. Just look at how that mako2011 banned Maoby in this thread for posting about this site. Do people get any more sad, pathetic and childish than that? Sum's up years of what I've seen there. Good riddance Dpreview.com

There are a few sites popping up now. The one that wins, is going to be the one with none of the original mods. I promise you that.

It did not for me, except in the cases where it carried negative gravitas.

I would be a reluctant moderator :-)

Same. As an admin for multiple FB pages in the multi thousands , I do find it can be a challenge and rewarding at the same time

Although I joined dpreview in 2008, I have been an infrequent poster, especially over the last few years. However I have continued to follow a number of the forums. Having followed this thread with interest, I would like to offer the following to the ongoing debate.

With a forum the size it already is and in the hope that it will grow, moderation of some kind is going to be needed.

Good moderation is not easy, it is time consuming, the larger and more diverse the membership, including those for whom English is not their first language, the more difficult it can become. It therefore follows that there will need to be a number of moderators. Perhaps a question that needs to be addressed is, who is watching the moderators?

If we go down the route of this forum being owned by the users, could/should the task of moderation be partly our corporate responsibility? In one of the forums I participate in, after being a member for a while and having made a number of posts, a report post button becomes available, if 5 members report the same post it is automatically removed from the thread for admin to review. Although this is most often used to report spam posts, it could used to remove a post that at least 5 people (or any other number believed to be appropriate) found unacceptable and passed to a moderator.

As a final point, I have noticed a number of posts advocating light touch moderation allowing for robust debate. I have some personal sympathy for that point of view. However in the same way that I hope people of different genders, races and beliefs are welcome here, I would like to think that people who, as one poster described it, are less “thick skinned” are also welcome and feel encouraged to participate.

David

must be close :-) i was just on the pentax forums posting some flowers and noticed all the locked threads then i looked at the mod list and guess what :-) it was our favourite mod at it again :-)
Don
Aussie humour :-)

Libel refers to defamation that occurs in print, and slander refers to defamation that occurs in speech. Although this distinction still exists in the United States, it no longer exists in Australia and hasn't for some time. The Defamation Act 2005 (Cth) abolished slander and libel.

I'd settle for no politics allowed and be happy. Some introduce their views no matter the subject. The last couple of years on DPR were really good about cleaning that up.

I am like a broken record on this. This is how forums on any (!) topic go south. It occurs in two steps:

1. Poster A posts a comment about a camera, lens, photograph...
2. Poster B posts a personal comment about Poster A rather than discussing a camera, lens, photograph...

From there things go bad. Personal zings and politics will ruin any forum.

I did the humour in Don’s post. Mako seems to have become a lot more rigid…for quite some time. He was actually helpful with me dealing with a fanboy who would stalk posts and scream being the victim. For me, I like the idea of everyone having a clean slate here and the idea of more accountability with mods….and the freedom to respect discuss their actions. The fact that the mod posts have become the most popular here in DPRevived is pretty good indication it was not working at DPReview.

Perhaps we can avoid maybe 1/3 of flames and boost overall civility if we adopt a uniform and consistently used, oft repeated description of the ISO setting. As you know more than anyone, it is an extremely misunderstood and controversial topic. Maybe if a group of moderators write up one concise definition then just re-paste it every time it comes up, maybe, hopefully, we avoid all of the wasted energy surrounding that subject.

I don't really understand nor see that any ONE topic often becomes a focus point of invective argument. It often is anything, which sideswipes a thread into a personal word war between a few. A tough 'soft' border which mods must navigate. As a contributing user you can 1. Ignore the thread from there on. 2. Ignore the skirmish and bring the thread direction back with your post 3. Join the melee and throw fuel on the blaze.
You see 'ISO' , I see 'IQ', let's cal the whole thing off... LOL!
'Moderation' - defined well by all dictionaries, both for those who are users and as a 'job' function.
Here
No Moderation means bringing a shovel to help bury DPrevived, quickly and cleanly.
How to implement 'Moderation'.
Given a NEW site/forum/meeting place, it's good to try new ideas.
Defined term of being a mod - a good idea, maybe 1 yr is too short to really become effective, maybe 3 is too long... or 4 or 5 ??? IDK...
How to pick/find those who have a well balanced value set and and are neither a 'hanging judge' nor a 'kumbaya' pushover. Moderators are generally 'moderate' themselves. That seems the real issue.
I think we all consider ourselves 'moderate', until it comes to the HOT button, then we rationalize.
I see 2 things. 1. NEW users without a history in some reasonable observable history in another forum, should not be chosen as MODs.
2. those in consideration and have some history in other forums (like DPR) should be reviewed for their history. That includes MODs from prior forums.
I know... complicated... I don't see a way around it, for those 'in charge' of the site. Maybe AI ? LOL! sorry... LOL!
Thx
Yuri

EDIT: another thought , a 'mentoring' system which would be applied to all MODs at the outset (regardless of prior anything). And after some term of being 'mentored' by a 'Mentor Team', then maybe also being considered for possible 'mentor'. Those who have already put the work into the site, like Bob, would be the initial 'Mentors'... ?

I agree 100%. I'm probably thinking about the same mod, and would leave a site where he was given any authority.

I was a moderator for the past few years on the "Canon Rebel" forum. It was fairly low traffic and had some well-meaning helpful posts and good behaviour/engagement from the small core group of members who participated regularly. I tried to keep a fairly hands off approach, really just monitoring for spam, approving new members and checking for complaints daily. I mostly took it on out of a feeling of duty toward the forum that I grew up with, to give back (despite not having used a Rebel camera for many years). I'm 100% happy to leave the MOD duties behind, it made it a bit more challenging to intact with members (its harder to hang out with everyone when you're the police, so to speak.) I never had to tangle with some of the more challenging subforms (but caught of glimpse of it in the private mods sub-forum), and wish the best of luck to those who take on the responsibility. It requires a degree of pragmatism, and remembering that you're not there to be the leader, or direct the discussion, but to keep the people with bad intentions from ruining the experience for everyone else.