Minimodding

[Jyosua]

@ Tino

Dude, you were the one demanding we make a set system of warning people and that it be strict. :P You wouldn't take no for an answer.

@ Death

That wasn't a flame, it was a creative way of summing up your personality, which being sarcastic. :)

And it wasn't a threat to ban, it was nicely telling you to shut up or gtfo if you didn't like it.

[Tino]

It seems he didn't like your insistence in the warn thread.

There are too many admins watching this thread right now

I suppose, but I didn't tell him what to do. No, what I did was make suggestions and argue my points.

[Jyosua]

I suppose, but I didn't tell him what to do. No, what I did was make suggestions and argue my points.

If I wanted to debate over it, I'd say so, but I'm pretty sure I made it clear we weren't changing it. So arguing your points then becomes telling us what to do.

[lolDeath]

@ Death

That wasn't a flame, it was a creative way of summing up your personality, which being sarcastic. :)

And it wasn't a threat to ban, it was nicely telling you to shut up or gtfo if you didn't like it.

"Self-righteous prick" "We can easily do away with you".

I am loving this forum so much right now. Thank you for creating this environment where opinions can be freely expressed from all sides without anyone needlessly taking offense.

[Tino]

If I wanted to debate over it, I'd say so, but I'm pretty sure I made it clear we weren't changing it. So arguing your points then becomes telling us what to do.

I suppose we had a misunderstanding there then, since it was never my intention to command you in any way.

[Jyosua]

"Self-righteous prick" "We can easily do away with you".

I am loving this forum so much right now. Thank you for creating this environment where opinions can be freely expressed from all sides without anyone needlessly taking offense.

You're most welcome. I guess you understand now, that saying "I believe that if you guys did this instead" is better than going "I'm not posting here because the staff sucks at doing it's job".

Thinking you can do better is not welcome, but giving friendly suggestions is.

How else am I supposed to describe that, other than "Self-Righteous Prick"?

Again, @ Tino, if things fail, we'll probably take your suggestions into consideration, but as for now, we're not changing it.

[Tino]

Again, @ Tino, if things fail, we'll probably take your suggestions into consideration, but as for now, we're not changing it.

And I'm perfectly content with that.

And again, apologies if anything I said gave you the impression I was commanding you in any way.

[lolDeath]

I feel as though I am slowly finding the actual point at which moderation will steer a topic back on track with my posts in this thread, but I'll still say that I did not mean to say I was not posting because the staff sucks, I am not posting in that particular debate because the MEMBERS derailed it in the first place. I don't know how my posts came off that way to you, but I am only offering you constructive criticism.

I will change my wording, or something, to make it easier to understand my point.

[Jyosua]

And I'm perfectly content with that.

And again, apologies if anything I said gave you the impression I was commanding you in any way.

It's fine; outside of that one thread, you've been a very good member. It's just that one thread I was referring to when I said Tino Mk II.

The post of yours was deleted now by another staff member, but here it is:

/facepalm

As of now, I am not going to debate here until the moderators get off their asses and start to keep topics from being derailed. It is pathetic.

That's quite inflammatory towards the staff, basically saying we suck and do nothing but hang around.

[Tino]

It's fine; outside of that one thread, you've been a very good member. It's just that one thread I was referring to when I said Tino Mk II.

I see where you're coming from ^_^

But instead of saying practically the exact same thing over and over again, I suppose I'll actually say something relevant to what the topic was originally created for.

I personally don't think it's necessary to create a rule against back-seat moderating (or minimodding, whatever you want to call it), but it wouldn't matter if we would have a rule against it. The way it is now, back-seat moderating qualifies spam, which is against the rules, and if we would have a rule against back-seat moderating it would be against the rules, and I'd say both violations would have equal weight.

So yeah, I personally don't think it matters a lot whether we add a rule against back-seat moderating, since it will be the same without a rule against it.

[lolDeath]

Woah I do not remember posting that, I must have been aggravated over something else that happened and I guess it bled through to what I was saying. My most sincere apologies.

[Jyosua]

Woah I do not remember posting that, I must have been aggravated over something else that happened and I guess it bled through to what I was saying. My most sincere apologies.

Now do you see why I was upset with you? XD Read what you post twice!

[Meteor]

Get back on topic, guyz.

[Jyosua]

...

*facepalm*

Actually meteor, we are on topic. This was all about one example of minimodding.

[VincentASM]

We all know he's joking though, right?

Regardless, there's a time and place for jokes.

[Cynthia]

To be honest here's my view on the subject:

Moderators are supposed to be our role models, and people selected by the board leaders to keep people in line. So why should it be a crime to assist them, or try and lighten their workload a little?

I don't think it's needed to make a rule to punish people for acting like the people who are SUPPOSED to be role models anyways.

People forget that there is a difference between, "minimodding," and just trying to get the last word, as a lot of the time people just say something like, "get back on topic," and people yell at them for, "minimodding," they are just saying to get back on topic because either their side is losing an argument, they are attempting to be a troll, or they are just trying to joke around. There's a number of different reasons they could be doing it, however there are people who legitimately are trying to help the community.

Also keep in mind that a lot of members due to their disrespect for other members will do it just to have something to complain about for a person they dislike. Those people normally make it fairly easy to tell that's why they are doing it.

Mostly after being around for a good amount of time, you'll be able to tell the difference, as a lot of members here just like to discussion to remain relevant.

[Crystal Shards]

There's a difference between actually posting something relevant and saying, "Guyz come on let's get back on topic," or, "lol this topic should be closed," or, "does this serv a purpos?" etc.

I don't care what your reasoning is for saying stuff like that but if someone is posting one or two sentences about how the discussion is "off-topic" (despite when they go off on useful or interesting tangents, which again people don't seem to understand) or how they personally feel about the topic, then they might as well just report the post and leave it alone, because essentially it's spam. I personally don't care who thinks a topic has outlived its purpose or didn't have one to begin with; if people are still finding relevant stuff to talk about (tangent or no tangent) I don't need SUPERMEMBER stepping in to tell us we're wrong for wanting to discuss something.

[Cynthia]

There's a difference between actually posting something relevant and saying, "Guyz come on let's get back on topic," or, "lol this topic should be closed," or, "does this serv a purpos?" etc.

I don't care what your reasoning is for saying stuff like that but if someone is posting one or two sentences about how the discussion is "off-topic" (despite when they go off on useful or interesting tangents, which again people don't seem to understand) or how they personally feel about the topic, then they might as well just report the post and leave it alone, because essentially it's spam. I personally don't care who thinks a topic has outlived its purpose or didn't have one to begin with; if people are still finding relevant stuff to talk about (tangent or no tangent) I don't need SUPERMEMBER stepping in to tell us we're wrong for wanting to discuss something.

Well I for one if I am directing a topic towards the original discussion and my subtle hints did not work, I will say that we need to get back to the original discussion, and then add something relevant to the original discussion, so it's not really spamming then. It is if that's all someone says though.

I WILL agree on the "this topic needs to be closed," thing however, as on this forum as soon as one person does it, you get a ton of others spamming it until it happens, or those people give up.

I say if it is REMOTELY related to the original topic, then there's no reason to close it. However if a topic is about say politics and it ends up talking about cats, than yes, people need to get somewhat back to the original topic, or take it to PMs or an instant messenger.

In some cases though, the discussion can just be moved to the "Far From the Forest," section, and it'll be fine, however the problem with that is people spam it with MORE pointless posts.

It's a win-lose situation, there's no way to make it have nothing but positive sides, without negative.

[Crystal Shards]

All the topics that have been derailed that I have seen went off on a tangent that was at least interesting, if not enlightening. It hasn't been reduced to cats from politics, to use your example, but yes, I would agree. And in that case, you report the post to a mod and in the comment box just ask them to rerail the topic.

[Cynthia]

All the topics that have been derailed that I have seen went off on a tangent that was at least interesting, if not enlightening. It hasn't been reduced to cats from politics, to use your example, but yes, I would agree. And in that case, you report the post to a mod and in the comment box just ask them to rerail the topic.

Well see if people didn't try to steer it back to the original post, whether subtle or using my method, then the moderators would be up to their necks in reports.

Only report if a topic is REALLY off topic, and attempts to get it back on topic have failed.

[Crystal Shards]

That's not true, because most of the people bitching in the first place don't get that a topic can go on a related tangent and still be useful.

[lolDeath]

Or maybe the people bitching just have a different opinion and there's nothing to get, "useful" being subjective and all.

[bunny: spider bitten]

That's not true, because most of the people bitching in the first place don't get that a topic can go on a related tangent and still be useful.

That's a hard concept in general for some people. Though a lot of people are so quick to disregard something as irrelevant, they are not any better off.

Or maybe the people bitching just have a different opinion and there's nothing to get, "useful" being subjective and all.

For what it's worth, topic titles are more guidelines than the law. If you can clear up two or three issues in one topic, why shouldn't you? And no issue is going to be so cut and dry that something else can't be brought up.

Edited November 24, 2008 by bunny

[Knife]

I hate to use this example, but I guess I'll have to.

At one point, Lyle was flaming Hika for getting a free 100 posts for winning a contest. Since there was no mods on at the time, the users (mostly Songbird) had to help out the situation by telling them to calm down and stop flaming. Otherwise, Lyle and Hika would just continue flaming each other.

While what I said is remotely related to mini-moding, the point is that a person shouldn't be punished for trying to help. At least not in FFtF. Now when people say stuff like "This topic should be closed", then it gets annoying. But yeah, case-by-case basis works here.

[Crystal Shards]

While what I said is remotely related to mini-moding, the point is that a person shouldn't be punished for trying to help. At least not in FFtF. Now when people say stuff like "This topic should be closed", then it gets annoying. But yeah, case-by-case basis works here.

There is a difference between genuinely trying to diffuse a situation (which in all honesty in that case should have been kept to PM) and just spouting out crap. Minimodding implies acting like you have the authority of a mod (generally posting several times, saying the same thing (like "guys on topic"), phrasing being authoritative, or several members posting the same thing and then talking about how the other members are wrong), which many members do here. Genuinely trying to help is a different situation entirely, and I have not seen that happen here yet.