Cyprus-Forum.com

[demetriou_74]

quick poll. i will give this peaceful protest they keep going on about a try.
we need 40 people to make this valid.

No personal blame on certain mods but in general.

[Svetlana]

er..what actually have the Mods done?

Banning is solely the provence of Admin, I am still not clear what the problem is about Moderators; we have not changed Forum policy, we merely take the load of Admin of ensuring peopole do not get abusive etc.

Lana

[Saint Jimmy]

The mods themselves haven't done anything in particular.

The problem, as I see it, is with having a number of mods. Each of them makes his or her own judgement calls of what constitutes abusive behaviour or unacceptable posts, and this does no good to uniformity or fairness or whatever you want to call it.

Plus, when we're talking about people who are active participants in the forum, it's bound to get personal at some point (if it hasn't already), and of course tilt the judgement scales. This certainly excludes you, brother, Alexandros Lordos and cannedmoose, but, if I may say so, I've seen some ridiculous post editing or deleting or whatever in the Cyprus Problem forum.

Who moderates that one, by the way? Has the list of who moderates what been published somewhere or is it some sort of state secret?

I think the answer to the forum's problems is not deleting abusive posts after they've been posted, but making sure that they don't appear in the first place.
In my opinion, the Admin should simply let go of this moderator police idea and start banning people who bend the rules. That should not only send the message out loud and clear, but also get rid of the root of the problem.


EDIT: so, how do you guys feel about it (the moderators themselves, I mean)? Do you feel like you are getting things done? Have you stopped any abuse from flying around? Is this moderating business something you feel is worth doing?

[Svetlana]

Hi Saint Jimmy

I can, obviously, only give you my personal view; I am sure the other Mods and Admin would not wish me to be their spokeperson LOL!

I understand your view on inconsistency; each Mod will have had a different life experience/tolerance level, possibly come from different national/cultural backgrounds and for some of us, English may not be our first language, so certain nuances and meanings might be differently understood by different people.

I will certainly not let my 'powers' as a Mod affect my normal behaviour and interaction with other members when posting; that would be a major crime in my book. In fact, I suspect I will bend over backwards to avoid being seen acting in this way.

The names of the Moderators on each topic, appear just below the particular Forum title; there are three Mods on CYProb. I rarely venture outside 'my' two topics: General Chat and 'Meeting People', so cannot comment about inconsitency of action by Moderators.

You asked what I think of my role; well 'my two topics' are fairly free ranging, so deserve some latitude. What has been my major challenge has been coming to terms with 'whom is close to whom' so I can see what is 'matey banter' and what is plain unpleasantness.

Yes, I think the role is worthwhile; personal attacks may or may not offend those involved, but for many casual Forum members it is a major turn off and it would be a great shame if we drove loads of people away and just ended up with a tiny clique of hard core members.

I like to think I am putting a little bit back into a Forum which gives me so much pleasure and interest.

Lana

[Saint Jimmy]

Ηello back!

The names of the Moderators on each topic, appear just below the particular Forum title

Indeed they are. I hadn't noticed, sorry!

Yes, I think the role is worthwhile; personal attacks may or may not offend those involved, but for many casual Forum members it is a major turn off and it would be a great shame if we drove loads of people away and just ended up with a tiny clique of hard core members.

I see that. Fair enough.

As I said, the problem I see is not with the 'easy' forums. Especially for the Cyprob forum, I believe it is absolutely vital to allow everyone to speak their mind, however extreme it might be. Even if it would serve no purpose other than to remind us all that we've got to face that crap (pardon my french), too, somewhere along the way. It's also the acid test to how we are going to react to it in real life. IMO.

If moderation of the Cyprob forum could be removed, I would be happy.

[Michael Coumas]

If what I have read on these forum pages to date is anything to go by it seems some subject matter is possibly able to moderate itself. In others moderators are a necessity. I assume of the many on here not too many know each other personally and consequently cannot possibly know with what authority the other is putting forward an argument. I am often not only shocked by what I read but sometimes almost ashamed to acknowledge that the comments written are from a fellow countryman. The level of passion felt for any subject is not in my humble opinion any excuse for personal abuse, foul language or general derogatory remarks about an individual, their Country, gender or religion. If we were able to conduct ourselves as adults at all times we perhaps could be left alone, we obviously cannot therefore please do not attempt to eliminate moderators.

[erolz]

Plus, when we're talking about people who are active participants in the forum, it's bound to get personal at some point (if it hasn't already), and of course tilt the judgement scales. This certainly excludes you, brother, Alexandros Lordos and cannedmoose, but, if I may say so, I've seen some ridiculous post editing or deleting or whatever in the Cyprus Problem forum.

And having excluded Alexandros you mean then that myself or MicAtCyp have made some 'ridiculous' moderating decisions. For the record I have removed one comment (and I put my name next to the removal so it could be seen who had done it) and split a topic into two threads. This has been the extent of my moderation to date.

You want mods to be people who do not participate in the forums? I believe that I can seperate my actions as a moderator from my personal views as a poster. If you have any evidence that I moderate differently depending on who I am moderating then please present it. If this is the case then I would be the first to agree I was not a suitable person to moderate.

I think the answer to the forum's problems is not deleting abusive posts after they've been posted, but making sure that they don't appear in the first place.
In my opinion, the Admin should simply let go of this moderator police idea and start banning people who bend the rules. That should not only send the message out loud and clear, but also get rid of the root of the problem.

This would not and does not work either. Recently the mod took the extreme measure of suspending a couple of posters for a mere 2 days. One of them had returned, under a new nickname, within 24 hours of being suspended. Banning someone does not mean they leave the forums. It means they return under a different user name even more intent on causing harm and disruption to he forum.

EDIT: so, how do you guys feel about it (the moderators themselves, I mean)? Do you feel like you are getting things done? Have you stopped any abuse from flying around? Is this moderating business something you feel is worth doing?

I believe the comment I removed was done so fairly and consistently with the forum rules re personal abuse. If it had remianed there is in my view a high probability that at best the person being insulted would have contacted the admin to complain or at worse would have responded in kind leading to an escalation of insults and the loss of the thread as far as discussion of the issues go. By removing it within minutes of it appearing I believe that such action did nip this in the bud.

I believe the thread I split was appropriate to split. The thread had a very specific topic and the posts split out from it were not related to this topic. Those posts still exist - there was no censorship, just a 'tidying up' of the section as far as I see it.

Moderation has two objecives in my view. Firstly trying to help keep the forum / section tidy such that it becomes a more useful resource to all. Thus duplicate threads are combined, threads that diverge are seperated and threads in the wrong sections are moved to the right ones. None of this involves censorship at all. The second role is to aid the admin in the policing of the rules. It is not reasonable to expect the admin alone to do this on a forumm of this size imo.

I take your point about the number of moderators appointed and how this can lead to inconsistencies (like the thread on prositution which is clearly against the rules of he forum but still remains). However I can see and understand why the admin chose so many diverse people and not just one or two.

In my view moderation is necessary to protect the forum from disintergrating into a battle ground of abuse and become dominated by those that wish to see it do so. If moderatrion is necessary and useful then who is to moderate if not some of the existing users of the forum, unless you are suggesting that we 'hire' independent moderators with no previous connection to the forum?

I think the reaction to the introduction of moderators here, whilst understandable to a degree, is a knee jerk reaction and not in proportion. Let's give it a chance. If after a period of time you feel that moderation has made the forums less useful and valuable and attractive to rsponsible posters - then make your case after this has been shown in your view and we can all discuss it (though this forum is NOT a democracy - it is a personal fifedom of the admin / owner). I feel your reaction against moderation is based more on the concept itself and not on the actuality of how it is being implemented here. Thats my view anyway.

[Saint Jimmy]

Erolz,
I see what you're saying. Once again, you make sense. The technical functions of moderation (such as splitting topics and moving them to other sections) are not a problem. What gives me a sour taste is the 'policing' function. I guess you're right, it's just the concept of having to be policed in order to behave in a civilised manner that I find degrading.

Let's give it a chance.

Sure. Not really a problem with me, as I'm not a regular any more. I just thought I'd take a stab at verbalizing this anti-moderation sentiment that has been floating around. I'm still not sure if I accomplished that.

P.S.: the 'ridiculous moderation' comment was a mistake on my part. I would hereby like to withdraw it and apologize to you and MicAtCyp for implying that; it just came out wrong and I didn't even know who the moderators were.
The moderator may edit the original post. (only the last part was a joke)

[erolz]

What gives me a sour taste is the 'policing' function. I guess you're right, it's just the concept of having to be policed in order to behave in a civilised manner that I find degrading.

I too am saddend that we need policing to behave in a civil manner - but's thats an issue that extends far out beyond just this fourm. A world where policing of people was not necessary because no one did anything that was 'wrong' would be a wonderful one but not one that I expect to arrive any time soon - not in the world at large or this forum in particular.

P.S.: the 'ridiculous moderation' comment was a mistake on my part. I would hereby like to withdraw it and apologize to you and MicAtCyp for implying that; it just came out wrong and I didn't even know who the moderators were.

No problem and thanks for the appology. The fact is moderators will make bad decisions at times (myself included) and atm the whole moderation thing is very new here and both non moderators and moderators alike are getting to grips with it. Like I said before let's all give it some time and see how it pans out. If it turns out that moderation is doing more harm than good then I will be right there with those seeking to have it changed or removed. Atm I think it's too early to make that determination. I believe this forum is an important place. My only motivation in agreeing to be a moderator is to help the forums be as good as they can be for the majority of the forums users. At he moment I think the decision to introduce moderators is consistent with that objective.

Like I say I understand that people do not like change and that people do not like to be 'policed' either - especially if they are used to not being policed. All I would ask is that people give the new system a chance.

[Turkey (( *]

I have the feeling that the mods also have voted!!