Hazel - moderation

heyyy, Emily Brown81 for moderator 🎉 👋

Oh, sure. As if. 😁 It’s like they say—if you dream it, you must have wanted it. Let's get real here.

Rather than hunting for some new moderator, I’d argue we should just scrub "user_name" from the list entirely. The guy hasn't been active in eight months—his last post was way back before the pandemic hit.

Ashley Vaughn79 said:Just for the sake of a hypothetical discussion... who would you suggest for an additional moderator on the forum?

I guess you could pick 3, 4, or 5 names... maybe add some relatively constructive arguments as to why those specific people. 🙂

I guess they might let us do this. 😬
I guess we've had similar hypothetical debates on the forum before.

Ashley Vaughn79, please don't trivialize the situation.

Being a mod isn't about how much someone posts, whether they participate in every single thread, or if they write beautifully. user_name and user_name are prototypes of what a good moderator should be.
If it isn't clear what I mean—it's about the ability to spot problematic posts (as user_name puts it, Wikipedia-style), and having the necessary calm to guide users in a heated debate toward cooling down, or seeing when they go too far and need a warning or a ban.

That’s the main reason we haven't had a permanent moderator on the US forum since user_name left. They haven't found that balance where a little bit of energy actually solves the issues. Instead, they just get overwhelmed.

The state of things on this forum is such that my small contribution could fix the entire sub-section in a week, which means things are in really bad shape.

Honestly, what can I say about the survival of this exhausted, poorly managed thread?
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220331
Of course the thread devolved into total trolling...

In fact, that's become the standard way of opening threads on the forum lately.
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220417

rustydrifter10, the situation is still critical...

Go team user_name! 🎉

Noah Fowler3 said:Ashley Vaughn79, please don't trivialize the situation.

Being a mod isn't about how much someone posts, whether they participate in every single thread, or if they write beautifully. user_name and user_name are prototypes of what a good moderator should be.
If it isn't clear what I mean—it's about the ability to spot problematic posts (as user_name puts it, Wikipedia-style), and having the necessary calm to guide users in a heated debate toward cooling down, or seeing when they go too far and need a warning or a ban.

That’s the main reason we haven't had a permanent moderator on the US forum since user_name left. They haven't found that balance where a little bit of energy actually solves the issues. Instead, they just get overwhelmed.

The state of things on this forum is such that my small contribution could fix the entire sub-section in a week, which means things are in really bad shape.

Honestly, what can I say about the survival of this exhausted, poorly managed thread?
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220331
Of course the thread devolved into total trolling...

In fact, that's become the standard way of opening threads on the forum lately.
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220417

rustydrifter10, the situation is still critical...

Even if I grant you that point, it doesn't change the core of her question: how do we actually identify and select someone capable of moderating? In theory, yes, high activity isn't a requirement, but our only real metric for evaluation is forum engagement and the assessment based on that participation. 🤷

I’m not trying to be provocative; I am genuinely asking, especially since we all remember how difficult it was to find moderators for this forum, and quite frankly, there was a very good reason for that struggle.

Noah Fowler3 said:Ashley Vaughn79, please don't trivialize the situation.

Being a mod isn't about how much someone posts, whether they participate in every single thread, or if they write beautifully. user_name and user_name are prototypes of what a good moderator should be.
If it isn't clear what I mean—it's about the ability to spot problematic posts (as user_name puts it, Wikipedia-style), and having the necessary calm to guide users in a heated debate toward cooling down, or seeing when they go too far and need a warning or a ban.

That’s the main reason we haven't had a permanent moderator on the US forum since user_name left. They haven't found that balance where a little bit of energy actually solves the issues. Instead, they just get overwhelmed.

The state of things on this forum is such that my small contribution could fix the entire sub-section in a week, which means things are in really bad shape.

Honestly, what can I say about the survival of this exhausted, poorly managed thread?
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220331
Of course the thread devolved into total trolling...

In fact, that's become the standard way of opening threads on the forum lately.
https://www.example-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1220417

rustydrifter10, the situation is still critical...

I didn't mean to trivialize it, believe me.

If I understood you, and if I personally hated the main forum rules because they weren't to my liking, I’d probably be jumping down administration's throats and blowing up their inboxes (not that it matters, I assume they're already used to 😬 ).

But am I really the only one who thinks the issue isn't so much about the new moderator, but rather that the forum is such a massive community that it spent a period without any moderation at all?
It makes sense that trolls spread during those times, and you can't just fix that overnight. Especially when it's just one person who likely has a real life outside of this.
That's how I see it.

At the same time, besides the expressed dissatisfaction here (whether justified or not—I'm not getting into that, since I haven't been following the forum actively this week), I haven't seen a single reasoned suggestion with a specific name for someone you think would be a better moderator than the current one.

Emily Brown81 showed up just to troll and someone actually supported her... wow.
That doesn't count. 😬

It's easier to take that route.

Alright, the floor is yours. 🤷
Post your suggestions for additional moderators along with arguments as to why that specific person should be chosen and why you think they'd be better than the current mod. Don't be difficult and don't nominate yourselves; that's the only rule.
We can discuss hypothetically, why not?

Why is everyone silent now? 😬

(I've shared my own suggestions and reasoning whenever I felt it was necessary... at least I made an effort to think things through.) 🙂

And yes, I will always favor lighter moderation over a dictatorial approach.
Personally, I'm quite glad I haven't had to deal with user_name in a moderation capacity.
I imagine I'd be handing out a ton of bans today. 😁

ruggedscout76 said:Even if I grant you that point, it doesn't change the core of her question: how do we actually identify and select someone capable of moderating? In theory, yes, high activity isn't a requirement, but our only real metric for evaluation is forum engagement and the assessment based on that participation. 🤷

I’m not trying to be provocative; I am genuinely asking, especially since we all remember how difficult it was to find moderators for this forum, and quite frankly, there was a very good reason for that struggle.

user_name knows exactly why I told her that, and I'm not planning on sharing that here.

Generally speaking, you can spot a moderator by how they react to certain situations.

Specifically, look at how they communicate with others. I'm not talking about being polite or "nice," but about assertiveness. A moderator needs to shut down undesirable behavior immediately, and sometimes that means they can't always be pleasant to everyone. You don't need more than a thousand posts to get a sense of whether someone fits that mold.

Tenure on the forum matters because you need to understand what worked and what didn't in the past. An ideal moderator should probably be active for at least three years. That way, they won't come in and change rules on the forum just because it seems logical to them, only to clash with the established habits of the community.

I honestly don't know why it took so long to find a moderator for this forum; I can't see anything in the moderation logs. ☕ And I don't see a reason for the delay either. It's better to make a decision—even if it's the wrong one—than to drag things out indefinitely.

It wasn't a mistake giving Alexander Gray2 a chance. I'm not against him, but he needs to start doing what moderators are actually supposed to do: steer discussions in the right direction. Right now, it doesn't even feel like there's a moderator present on the forum.

Because they don't actually have a single decent suggestion to offer🙄

They just sit there criticizing... as if saying "give it some time" solves anything.
The forum was left completely unsupervised, which basically turned it into a magnet for everything nasty.
From total idiots to those mindless trolls who exist just to cause trouble.
Oh sure, let's just give the new manager more time before we start whining again. Is that the plan?
My suggestion? Maybe give him some actual help, because cleaning up this mess takes time, and I'm assuming he has a life outside of this and can't—or doesn't want to—be glued to the forum 24/7.

p.s. the rule about GIFs is absolute garbage🙂

Toxic, we can probably just agree to disagree on this one. 🙂

In my view, a moderator really ought to maintain a level of decency toward everyone, or at least as much as their patience allows. It’s entirely possible to be firm and consistent without losing your manners; frankly, it's just a matter of how one was raised. If you possess the "power" to issue a warning or a ban—to effectively remove someone from the forum—and yet still feel the need to be rude to them in the process, then I suspect you lack the character required to actually "dispense justice."

Paul Martin8 said:Because they don't actually have a single decent suggestion to offer🙄

They just sit there criticizing... as if saying "give it some time" solves anything.
The forum was left completely unsupervised, which basically turned it into a magnet for everything nasty.
From total idiots to those mindless trolls who exist just to cause trouble.
Oh sure, let's just give the new manager more time before we start whining again. Is that the plan?
My suggestion? Maybe give him some actual help, because cleaning up this mess takes time, and I'm assuming he has a life outside of this and can't—or doesn't want to—be glued to the forum 24/7.

p.s. the rule about GIFs is absolute garbage🙂

honestly, that was the easy part ☕

Noah Fowler3 said:user_name knows exactly why I told her that, and I'm not planning on sharing that here.

Generally speaking, you can spot a moderator by how they react to certain situations.

Specifically, look at how they communicate with others. I'm not talking about being polite or "nice," but about assertiveness. A moderator needs to shut down undesirable behavior immediately, and sometimes that means they can't always be pleasant to everyone. You don't need more than a thousand posts to get a sense of whether someone fits that mold.

Tenure on the forum matters because you need to understand what worked and what didn't in the past. An ideal moderator should probably be active for at least three years. That way, they won't come in and change rules on the forum just because it seems logical to them, only to clash with the established habits of the community.

I honestly don't know why it took so long to find a moderator for this forum; I can't see anything in the moderation logs. ☕ And I don't see a reason for the delay either. It's better to make a decision—even if it's the wrong one—than to drag things out indefinitely.

It wasn't a mistake giving Alexander Gray2 a chance. I'm not against him, but he needs to start doing what moderators are actually supposed to do: steer discussions in the right direction. Right now, it doesn't even feel like there's a moderator present on the forum.

And you know exactly why I'm reacting the way I am. 😬
Come over for a drink tomorrow and we can keep talking about this.

I can't deal with this here; someone will probably try to take a shot at me. 🙈
It feels like I'm walking a fine line, even when I was just asking for your suggestions regarding moderators. 🤦 😁
Oops. 😍

Paul Martin8 said:Because they don't actually have a single decent suggestion to offer🙄

They just sit there criticizing... as if saying "give it some time" solves anything.
The forum was left completely unsupervised, which basically turned it into a magnet for everything nasty.
From total idiots to those mindless trolls who exist just to cause trouble.
Oh sure, let's just give the new manager more time before we start whining again. Is that the plan?
My suggestion? Maybe give him some actual help, because cleaning up this mess takes time, and I'm assuming he has a life outside of this and can't—or doesn't want to—be glued to the forum 24/7.

p.s. the rule about GIFs is absolute garbage🙂

It’s surprising how much you and I see eye to eye on this situation. 😁
I also think he needs assistance; having someone to consult with regarding moderation or to split up the different threads is a completely different thing.

I would never want to be a solo moderator on this forum.

Ashley Vaughn79 said:I didn't mean to trivialize it, believe me.

If I understood you, and if I personally hated the main forum rules because they weren't to my liking, I’d probably be jumping down administration's throats and blowing up their inboxes (not that it matters, I assume they're already used to 😬 ).

But am I really the only one who thinks the issue isn't so much about the new moderator, but rather that the forum is such a massive community that it spent a period without any moderation at all?
It makes sense that trolls spread during those times, and you can't just fix that overnight. Especially when it's just one person who likely has a real life outside of this.
That's how I see it.

At the same time, besides the expressed dissatisfaction here (whether justified or not—I'm not getting into that, since I haven't been following the forum actively this week), I haven't seen a single reasoned suggestion with a specific name for someone you think would be a better moderator than the current one.

Emily Brown81 showed up just to troll and someone actually supported her... wow.
That doesn't count. 😬

It's easier to take that route.

Alright, the floor is yours. 🤷
Post your suggestions for additional moderators along with arguments as to why that specific person should be chosen and why you think they'd be better than the current mod. Don't be difficult and don't nominate yourselves; that's the only rule.
We can discuss hypothetically, why not?

Why is everyone silent now? 😬

(I've shared my own suggestions and reasoning whenever I felt it was necessary... at least I made an effort to think things through.) 🙂

And yes, I will always favor lighter moderation over a dictatorial approach.
Personally, I'm quite glad I haven't had to deal with user_name in a moderation capacity.
I imagine I'd be handing out a ton of bans today. 😁

It’s not about me having a grudge against the moderator—I’m really not that kind of person. It’s just that none of the threads on this forum are actually readable anymore. I took a look at Alexander Gray2's posts, and where exactly was he standing his ground? I can't even remember the last time there wasn't an issue in the chat room. It honestly frustrates me, especially when I see how he handles other threads. I at least expect him to direct new topics properly, but I linked two new threads where you can clearly see nothing has been done. Are those two threads actually readable to you?

Look, that's a massive file, which is exactly why I said we need to bring on another moderator. There's really no excuse for why the threads haven't been cleaned up yet—especially since "real life" isn't a valid reason here. If someone accepts those responsibilities, they should actually follow through.

I'm not going to suggest anyone for moderator. I want to be able to praise them if they do a good job, but I also need the freedom to call them out if they don't. If I recommend someone, I lose my right to criticize. Plus, any praise I give later would just look biased—everyone would say, "Of course he's praising them, he's the one who picked them."

user_name isn't some kind of dictator. I’ve taken plenty of warnings from him myself. I earned them. For instance, user_name gave me a partial ban once. It doesn't change the fact that both of them did exactly what moderators are supposed to do. Back when user_name was around, I spent a ton of time reading this forum. I'm sure a lot of others did too.

ruggedscout76 said:Toxic, we can probably just agree to disagree on this one. 🙂

In my view, a moderator really ought to maintain a level of decency toward everyone, or at least as much as their patience allows. It’s entirely possible to be firm and consistent without losing your manners; frankly, it's just a matter of how one was raised. If you possess the "power" to issue a warning or a ban—to effectively remove someone from the forum—and yet still feel the need to be rude to them in the process, then I suspect you lack the character required to actually "dispense justice."

To me, it isn't even about how they were raised; it's just pure ego.
Mixing ego with moderation is a dangerous combination.

Add some complexes into the mix, too.

Man, what a total mess that creates. 😬

Paul Martin8 said:Because they don't actually have a single decent suggestion to offer🙄

They just sit there criticizing... as if saying "give it some time" solves anything.
The forum was left completely unsupervised, which basically turned it into a magnet for everything nasty.
From total idiots to those mindless trolls who exist just to cause trouble.
Oh sure, let's just give the new manager more time before we start whining again. Is that the plan?
My suggestion? Maybe give him some actual help, because cleaning up this mess takes time, and I'm assuming he has a life outside of this and can't—or doesn't want to—be glued to the forum 24/7.

p.s. the rule about GIFs is absolute garbage🙂

It says right there that we should give him time, but new threads definitely need better moderation...

And obviously, he needs help.

ruggedscout76 said:Toxic, we can probably just agree to disagree on this one. 🙂

In my view, a moderator really ought to maintain a level of decency toward everyone, or at least as much as their patience allows. It’s entirely possible to be firm and consistent without losing your manners; frankly, it's just a matter of how one was raised. If you possess the "power" to issue a warning or a ban—to effectively remove someone from the forum—and yet still feel the need to be rude to them in the process, then I suspect you lack the character required to actually "dispense justice."

You didn't quite catch the point I was making..

The point is that a ban should be the absolute last resort.

Why do you think being assertive equals being rude?

Ashley Vaughn79 said:To me, it isn't even about how they were raised; it's just pure ego.
Mixing ego with moderation is a dangerous combination.

Add some complexes into the mix, too.

Man, what a total mess that creates. 😬

I don't buy the ego argument. People with high self-esteem have big egos because they actually believe in what they do. They stay steady. Sure, they mess up—we all do—but they stay consistent and you can actually learn from their standards.

I do agree on the insecurities part. Any combination of complexes is a bad move.

Noah Fowler3 said:It says right there that we should give him time, but new threads definitely need better moderation...

And obviously, he needs help.

You didn't quite catch the point I was making..

The point is that a ban should be the absolute last resort.

Why do you think being assertive equals being rude?

You used the word "polite."🙂

That said, I find myself agreeing with much of what you've said. Moderation isn't nearly as straightforward as it appears on the surface. Some users have become quite settled on the forum during the period without moderators, and it takes time to re-establish order. For every thread resolved, three more pop up while everyone tries to gauge what is actually permitted. When there were no mods, everything just slipped through, and many took advantage of that freedom. Now, we're dealing with the fallout in the form of a crowd of trolls who made themselves at home. However, if the moderation remains consistent, they'll eventually lose interest and move on.

P.s. I miss the GIFs too.🕺

ruggedscout76 said:You used the word "polite."🙂

That said, I find myself agreeing with much of what you've said. Moderation isn't nearly as straightforward as it appears on the surface. Some users have become quite settled on the forum during the period without moderators, and it takes time to re-establish order. For every thread resolved, three more pop up while everyone tries to gauge what is actually permitted. When there were no mods, everything just slipped through, and many took advantage of that freedom. Now, we're dealing with the fallout in the form of a crowd of trolls who made themselves at home. However, if the moderation remains consistent, they'll eventually lose interest and move on.

P.s. I miss the GIFs too.🕺

I actually used "really polite." 🙂

What bothers me most is the new threads that aren't even readable. Again, Alexander Gray2 needed to handle that better, and he still can. It's harder to enforce order on threads that are already running full steam, I'll give you that. But just like how he stepped up in the chat room, he can do it in those threads too. It's not rocket science. 🤷

We'll get GIFs back. This is the third time they've banned them, only for them to realize later that the PDF isn't indexed by Google. 🙂

We need a moderator who isn't just going to rubber-stamp chats and trolling—someone who actually hands out warnings and bans. Honestly, Louise Hay was a perfectly fine moderator

All the idiots—people like Alfa Prodigy, user_name, Matt, that one guy, Nosonje, and all the other morons and trolls—should be permabanned on their very first post. Anyone making height an issue, all those chronic losers, and that whole crowd of idiots who just pile on to mock the same group... they all need to go.

There was a thread recently where people started hurling insults left and right, and instead of just banning them, they were handing out little 5 or 10-point warnings. In the end, almost nobody actually got banned, even though people were insulting each other's families in the most disgusting ways possible. It was repulsive. 🤦

I could establish some order there within a week, but frankly, I don't have the stomach to sit there and read through such a massive heap of stupidity in one place. ☕

Given how serious things have become here, 🙏 I honestly think the board needs to dig a little deeper into their pockets and bring in someone like Professor Štulhofer to help moderate the forum ☕

Noah Fowler3 said:I don't see the point in just nominating someone for moderator. Why do that? You should just check the forum archives for a week and see who actually shows potential. Give them a shot, watch how they handle things, maybe offer some guidance or help out. If they don't step up, then you look for someone else. It’s really not rocket science. 🤷

Well, that was exactly my point.

If the mod isn't working?
Fine, make a suggestion and back it up with reasons why you think someone else would be better.

Silence. 😬

In the professional world, I've always felt that pointing out problems without offering any solutions is pretty pointless. Sorry, not sorry.