Some food for thought

[SteveColes]

One of the first tasks that we, as group, take on, will be a complete review of our posting policies, moderation procedures, moderator job descriptions, etc. Is it becuase I think it is broke. No. Could it be improved? Of course.

But before we start to debate and start creating complex drafts, etc. I thought we all might benefit by taking a look backwards and seeing how we started in this area and see where we have gone.

The following threads were initially picked by me for this by a particular post, but as I read the threads they were in, I felt that reading the thread as a whole achieved my purposes of stimulating the conversation much better. Please remember that the post counts and title you see for the posters are what they are now, not what they were.

Please feel free to ask questions,etc. I think you may be surprised by what you read.

Moderators Wanted - North Carolina Woodworker

Moderators and Administrators - North Carolina Woodworker

More moderators and administrators??? - North Carolina Woodworker

Moderation Guidelines - North Carolina Woodworker

From the FNG - North Carolina Woodworker

I resign my position as moderator - North Carolina Woodworker

new yankee routertable - lessons learned? - in moderation - North Carolina Woodworker

Reminder - North Carolina Woodworker

Humorous posts -for the staff - North Carolina Woodworker

Judicial philosophy - Page 2 - North Carolina Woodworker

 

[woodArtz]

Ok, so what do we need to do...? Are there recent examples of marginal moderation that we can review. I think I get the... moderate in moderation. I have certainly adopted that philosophy. Is there another point? :dontknow:

 

[Ray Martin]

Perhaps I'm just confused by the wording, the grammar. Is this a board of directors decision? What are the tasks that the board put on this list of items that needs to be addressed?

 

[SteveColes]

Ok, so what do we need to do...? Are there recent examples of marginal moderation that we can review. I think I get the... moderate in moderation. I have certainly adopted that philosophy. Is there another point? :dontknow:

there's nothing to do just yet. I was just trying stimulate some re-thinking of the thing. Currently, when there is discussion, it seems to take a polarizing pov:
pre-emptive vs wait until clear violation
Strict interpretation vs no harm, no foul
And so on.

I've been coming to the pov that what we really need to do is go back and ask and hopefully answer some fundamental questions.
What are the duties of a moderator?
Why did the priority switch from helping to censorship
What is/are the goal(s) of the moderation?
Etc.

 

[SteveColes]

Perhaps I'm just confused by the wording, the grammar.:embaresse Is this a board of directors decision? Are you asking if I have the authority to start this task. What are the tasks that the board put on this list of items that needs to be addressed?

The Bod request is for clarification of the policy and procedures. It is my decision to conduct a review first. And even before that to question some of our common wisdom as part of that review. I also want to do this with all of the mods participating, for two reasons. First, group review with a small group will probably yield a better result than single person or a large group. Since the mod group is about the right size and are the most involved, i thought this was the right group.

 

[b4man]

I think I get it. I'm beyond ready


Barbara

 

[cskipper]

I think I get it. I'm beyond ready


Barbara

What Barbara said x2

 

[Mt. Gomer]

What Barbara said x2

Me too!

there's nothing to do just yet. I was just trying stimulate some re-thinking of the thing. Currently, when there is discussion, it seems to take a polarizing pov:
pre-emptive vs wait until clear violation
Strict interpretation vs no harm, no foul
And so on.

I've been coming to the pov that what we really need to do is go back and ask and hopefully answer some fundamental questions.
What are the duties of a moderator?
Why did the priority switch from helping to censorship
What is/are the goal(s) of the moderation?
Etc.

These are all important questions to answer. In order to do the job effectively it is essential that we're all working from the same set of goals, guidlines, and expectations. I'm curious about the phrasing of the second question though. As a new moderator I've never picked up on any desire, much less priorty, to censor. My impression is that everyone here is highly invested in keeping this a productive, welcoming, and open site dedicated to woodworking. From my first days here as an active member the moderators have been a great source of help and support and I think the vast majority of active members would agree.

The challenge is that we live in an extremely polarized society. No matter what topic (race, religion, dust collection, politics, government, war, education, BBQ, etc) people can have very strong opinions and in many cases they come with strong feelings about the people who may have the opposite view ("this is what I think and any one who doesn't agree with me is a *insert slur of choice here*"). Now I realize that this post would (and probably should) be quickly moderated if it was in the public forums but I think we need to be able to talk about it here in private so that we can come up with a moderation policy that makes sense. I saw a political cartoon a while back (specifically about the media and politics, but applicable to pretty much any subject where there are strong feelings) that sums it up much better that I ever could in words....

Ok, so I know I'm rambling here but when you give me food for thought that's what you're going to get...

The point I'm trying to make is that there is going to be strong and polarized feelings about a huge number of topics and there are places available to discuss all of those things. People who want to talk about them are more than welcome to do so in the appropriate place. As woodworking is a hobby that has no racial, social economic, politcal, or other connections/leanings/requirements/tendancies people with beliefs from across the entire spectrum of these topics are going to be drawn to this site. In order to keep this site the wonderful place it is I don't think it is at all inappropriate to draw very bright and clear lines around what topics are allowed and which aren't. That isn't censorship, it's keeping the peace. NCWW isn't taking a stand on one side or the other on any of these topics, we're not saying only people who agree with XYZ can participate, we're just saying that this isn't the appropriate place to discuss it. This is an important thing if we want to avoid having a "discussion" like the one in the cartoon.

I'm not sure what the answers are to "pre-emptive v. clear violation" or "strict v. no harm no foul". I do think that the looser we leave things the more room we have for error and the harder our job becomes. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, or that we don't want to do the hard work, just that it's a trade off. I experimented with some pre-emptive guidance on a recent saw-stop thread and it seems to have gone over pretty well though I'm not sure that's something we'd want to codify....

Soo... not sure I've done anything to help answer the questions but at least the discussion is under way.... I'm glad we're having it as I really do think it's important for us to all be working from the same set of instructions....

Travis

 

[SteveColes]

I haven't responded directly to anything yet becuase I keep hoping that there will be some more perspective or question raised by others. I have to leave shortly for Physical Therapy and since today I start with a new therapist ( my old one is having a brain tumor removed today:swoon I don't how this badly this new person will punish me. :rotflm:

But I'll leave you with this. Here are the first 2 paragraphs of the the overall posting policy. The Approach paragraph describes what I think is what the debate about pre-emptive moderation comes from.

General Policy

The goal of ncwoodworker.net is to provide a welcoming atmosphere that fosters a unique sense of community for any North Carolina woodworker who wishes to participate or lurk. The three main aspects to meeting this goal are:

1. Guests and members surfing our site should feel that they are welcome and that participating in our site is a worthwhile and pleasant experience. We strive to maintain a polite and helpful tone in our posts, replies, and questions.
2. We seek to ensure that guests and all members of their family are comfortable viewing site content. Every effort is made to monitor User names, avatars, signatures, biographies, and posts in pursuit of that goal.
3. Members may post threads, comments, replies, questions, and make suggestions without fear of abuse from other members or staff.
​

Approach

Our primary method of achieving the above is prevention. The staff, webmaster(s), administrators, and moderators are tasked with dealing with explicit violations of site policy and recognizing content with the potential to become disruptive to the site. Immediate corrective action will be taken in these instances.​

 

[Glennbear]

I hesitate to admit it but one of the links you posted I just read for the first time. :embaresse I found it gave me a better insight on moderation philosophy. http://www.ncwoodworker.net/forums/f39/reminder-10438/
I am not sure exactly what kind of feedback you are seeking but based upon my own experience it is quite easy to fall into being a "censor" rather than a "helper". :wsmile: