The arguments thread

"My problem with DPR is that the original Z6s and Z7s weren't much of it, and moderation changed, deleted, adjusted, banned, whatever and whomever they needed to put them in a favorable light. That's just crooked business. And if I were a mod, or if someone wanted me to do that in business, the answer would have been no."

What you have said is exactly right. I can recount numerous times he deleted anything that put those cameras in a poor light. It occurred over and over. Bob is explaining (paraphrasing) "he was just enforcing the poorly made rules as he seen them." I have direct evidence he went way, way beyond just that over a time frame that spans years. Just because a conversation has been had with him and he's tried to explain away some things...spare me! In order to really determine what he was up to one would have to be privy to every pm; at a great deal more than just bobs experience with him to properly draw a conclusion as to his actions. It would not paint a pretty picture to do so! I think it would extremely difficult to learn anything from someone as ignorant (as the mod in question) and my best advice is - get off this hill before you die on it.

Both observations are spot on I think. I do think there was no need to get into this conversation - it seems a bit sordid that the mod in question is privately justifying his/her actions.

Bob - your responses do appear like you are defending the actions of the moderator in question, even though you may just trying to be fair. Silence is better sometimes.

That was my impression too, but it may just the result of the fallacy that users of a brand don't want to know about other brands.
I am a Nikon user but I do want to understand what Sony or Canon is doing better or worse compared to Nikon. As a Nikon user I often post in Nikon forums, even when I want to compare with other brands. Because that is "the community" that I am engaging with.

Perhaps DPR guidelines were dictated by Amazon.

While I signed up awhile ago, last night was the first time I started reading. This thread sounds like the same DPR on a new format.
A shame, IMO, thought it might be different.

Marie

I've read through this thread and what I have to say is it is impossible to pass a judgment when we hear only one side. He is not hear to present his case. It is easy to go on and on and on without him being able to defend himself. I am a Nikon user, therefore I read almost all posts about Z cameras and some of them were pure bashing and nasty.

Hi, I disagree with that - as DPR would never allow a discussion of this kind. The thread would be deleted or the poster banned.
This site is trying to adopt a more open and liberal mindset which is a good thing IMO.
Of course there is a lot of anger stemming from DPR days but its better to let people air their views - eventually as people start to trust that this site is not the same, these discussions will die down. Trying to stop or censor such conversations would start to look like DPR.

To be fair, I'd say this thread is largely an outlier and I wouldn't put too much emphasis on it when evaluating the site on general level. By far most of the threads are about gear and photography rather than persons or moderation policies. (I'm not against discussing them, it's more that I find it hard to personally relate to some of the more dramatic outtakes)

No, that is not quite correct afaik.

It is not that he is unable to come here and defend himself, it is him choosing to not come here and defend himself.

As far as I can tell it is because here he would be playing on a level playing field with everyone else and not be able to hide behind and abuse his moderator 'super powers' to deal with those he doesn't like and/or agree with.

I don't see why whatever he is telling Bob about what went on behind the scenes at DPReview cannot be told by himself in a public forum like this. What Bob is telling us about what Mako is telling him about the behind the scenes workings at dpreview is effectively hearsay.

Yes, wrong choice of words on my part about him being able. But I maintain that without hearing his side of the story it is impossible to pass a judjement.

I don't get this discussion. I never had an encounter with a mod at DPR. But I have of course heard about it and seen the mysteriously locked threads, so I understand the feelings.But why are we even discussing if DPR moderators should moderate here?

I would have thought that if we are going to have moderators, they would be members that are active here and "know us". To bring them in from outside this forum seems like a bad idea to me, either they are hated DPR mods or come from somewhere else. Not only because they aren't part of the community, but also because people who strive for such positions are often the least suited. In my experience, of course.

Very wise of him!

From what I have read here, I can't imagine him getting a balanced and fair hearing.

In general, I don't see most people putting coming in front of people who very obviously dislike them strongly very high on their TODO list, whether the person is Pol Pot's and devil's child or not.

I do not know. I've looked through threads about moderation/moderators on DPReview and counted about +/- 25 out of 3600 members who expressed strong negative feelings.

You’ve based your opinion of an entire forum of thousands of threads by reading this one thread? Quite odd.

Marie wrote: While I signed up awhile ago, last night was the first time I started reading. This thread sounds like the same DPR on a new format. 
A shame, IMO, thought it might be different.

There are around three thousand posts here at dprevived… better get your readin’ boots on. lol

There are over 20,000 posts on DPRevived, but look which treads got the biggest amount of posts.

Edit: There are around three thousand posts here at dprevived.

@sagittarius
I only read the threads that interest me.

That is not what it says on the home page, but thanks for the correction. Good to know.