Connections 321 - Sat 27 April
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Site Rules
186 Answers
We, the great unwashed, know what rules are applicable to us, but what rules exist for the guidance of AB moderators, & how can we access them please?
Answers
I will be honest......
10:57 Tue 06th Jul 2021
naomi - // ^I know that was said, but it's not true. Mods can delete posts and close threads regardless. Anything less wouldn't make sense. Pointless having a mod around who can't deal with a situation on any thread because he's contributed to it. That would be silly. //
To clarify - Mods are not permitted to remove posts or threads, or close threads in which they are engaged, if that engagement leads directly to the action.
That prevents any accusations that a Moderator is using their position unfairly to censor arguments, or simply shut down an argument which they feel they are not winning.
Therefore a Moderator is not prevented from a moderation action on a thread to which he or she is involved - only that they are not allowed a moderation action that can be interpreted as misuse of their position - which is pretty much common sense i am sure you will agree.
As I have advised many times, any and all moderation actions require an appropriate reason which has to be provided before the action is allowed, and all are flagged to the Ed and Team who can see which Mod has acted, and why.
If the Ed and Team feel the action was not appropriate, they may reinstate the post or thread, and advise the Moderator accordingly, but obviously any such action and communication is between the Ed and the individual Mod only.
To clarify - Mods are not permitted to remove posts or threads, or close threads in which they are engaged, if that engagement leads directly to the action.
That prevents any accusations that a Moderator is using their position unfairly to censor arguments, or simply shut down an argument which they feel they are not winning.
Therefore a Moderator is not prevented from a moderation action on a thread to which he or she is involved - only that they are not allowed a moderation action that can be interpreted as misuse of their position - which is pretty much common sense i am sure you will agree.
As I have advised many times, any and all moderation actions require an appropriate reason which has to be provided before the action is allowed, and all are flagged to the Ed and Team who can see which Mod has acted, and why.
If the Ed and Team feel the action was not appropriate, they may reinstate the post or thread, and advise the Moderator accordingly, but obviously any such action and communication is between the Ed and the individual Mod only.
naomi - // A shift of the goalposts. What they’re ‘permitted’ to do and what they do and get away with are two different things entirely. //
I appreciate you have a vested interest in simply not remembering, or deliberately not understanding what I have said numerous times, because it enables you to be sniffy about Moderators, but I'll try one more time -
You have no idea which Mods remove posts or threads, or why they have done so, because that information is privy to the Ed and team only.
You speculate endlessly, and negatively, but the fact remains, you don't know, so I am at a loss to understand why you like to pretend that you do.
I appreciate you have a vested interest in simply not remembering, or deliberately not understanding what I have said numerous times, because it enables you to be sniffy about Moderators, but I'll try one more time -
You have no idea which Mods remove posts or threads, or why they have done so, because that information is privy to the Ed and team only.
You speculate endlessly, and negatively, but the fact remains, you don't know, so I am at a loss to understand why you like to pretend that you do.
Moderators use the Site Rules to decide what is and isn't appropriate for The AnswerBank. They have the best interest of the site at heart, which is what makes them good at what they do.
If moderators act in a biased manner then we would speak with them about it and act accordingly. If they continued to act in a biased manner then we would remove them as moderators.
If moderators act in a biased manner then we would speak with them about it and act accordingly. If they continued to act in a biased manner then we would remove them as moderators.
gulliver - // It's not just answers they remove , three complete threads were removed yesterday , before they even got off the ground. //
I don;t know what threads were removed, and obviously no-one apart from the Mod involved knows why - but the Ed will know and if the removals are not valid, the threads will be returned.
Just so you know, the Editor can and does moderate as well - it's not all down to the flack-receiving complained-endlessly-about souls who try and keep the site running smoothly.
I don;t know what threads were removed, and obviously no-one apart from the Mod involved knows why - but the Ed will know and if the removals are not valid, the threads will be returned.
Just so you know, the Editor can and does moderate as well - it's not all down to the flack-receiving complained-endlessly-about souls who try and keep the site running smoothly.
Corby - // "Get away with" implies the actions are not permitted but as has been made clear yet again, if that happens, the EDs have words with the Mod. //
Indeed it has, and it is pointed out regularly, I know, I am the one who does the pointing!
But there are a dogged few who delight in not accepting what is said, because that would remove their pointless conspiracy theories, and stop them having something to moan about.
Indeed it has, and it is pointed out regularly, I know, I am the one who does the pointing!
But there are a dogged few who delight in not accepting what is said, because that would remove their pointless conspiracy theories, and stop them having something to moan about.
I think this is about a thread that was closed yesterday for no apparent reason. No arguments, no Site Rules broken - but nevertheless it’s been closed - and it’s the second on a similar subject to be closed inexplicably recently. I have emailed the editor and asked for it to be re-opened but as yet it remains closed. That is what causes people to question both moderation standards and, as Jim would say, ‘quality control’. When this sort of thing happens you can hardly blame members for having little faith in either. The explanations just don’t wash because the reality doesn’t support them.
https:/
https:/
I was just about to ask, naomi has beaten me to it, why for example was this thread ; https:/
removed? It was a valid discussion on a valid subject I think, don't you andy?
removed? It was a valid discussion on a valid subject I think, don't you andy?
