Forums rules, please clarify

Hello,

Could somebody please clarify rule # 2:

"Posts discussing moderator actions are not allowed and will be deleted."

Are moderator's replies/comments/recommendations in the forum considered to be an "action"?

--
http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.ca/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vk-photo/

Here ya go:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50210696

We have no new moderators. You guys fight like kids in the playground and complain about each other more than most of the other forums added together. This means you get more moderation from the DPR staff.

We will soon introduce moderators selected from the community, who will act more transparently. Until then you have the same moderation you always had, and you bring this attention on yourselves.

I deleted a lot of threads this morning because they broke rule number 2:

Posts discussing moderator actions are not allowed and will be deleted.

Note that we will not discuss the moderation of posts that break the rules by discussing the moderation of users.

SJ

Simon Joinson, Editor-in-chief

dpreview.com

connect.dpreview.com



Anyone more helpful?

--
http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.ca/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vk-photo/

I don't think it is considered a "moderator's action" if they just participate here with "replies/comments/recommendations" like every other forum member.

What looks more like "moderator's action" is probably locking a thread or deleting single posts, etc.

Doesn't look like a very smart rule to me;  if it is against the rules to "discuss the actions" of these moderators the only result will be "discussions about the moderators" themselves!

RS

The previous poster posted the rule and correct reference but to be 100% clear, my (and any other mod's) posts about a topic absolutely can be addressed and are NOT considered an 'action'. DPR encourages active discussion, so disagreement with a mod concerning a certain topic is NOT an offense.

The 'actions' the rule speaks of are things like deleting  or editing posts, banning (temporarily or permanently) users, or similar. Conversations about the act of actually moderating, in other words.

--
Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

That would also be against the rules. If you have a question or issue you are welcome (encouraged even) to contact the moderator directly via PM. Hopefully most moderation issues can be worked out privately without issue.

--
Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

So far it is not against the rules as that rule only mentions "the actions" of the moderators. I'd recommend to change that rule "Posts discussing moderator actions are not allowed and will be deleted" to "Posts discussing moderators and their moderating actions...."

If I was an American, I'd probably start talking now about some amendment to the constitution, right of free speech and other nice theories, lol!

RS

If a member who is a moderator and acting as a moderator ( deletes, moves, warns, locks, bans, etc ) you cannot discuss that on the forums.

It is fine to discuss the general process of moderation as long as specific moderator activity is not referred to.

If a moderator posts an explanation of an action, you can link to it as a way of providing information to another member.  However actually debating a specific note is really breaking the basic rule.

Moderators are obviously going to apply common sense if they see members trying to circumvent the rules.  A few people always seem unable to accept that no means no.

Beyond that moderators are normal members, and as long as normal levels of civility are used you can reference what they post as much as you like.

--

StephenG

Well, I suppose you're welcome to talk about us if you'd like, but if that talk is insulting or attacking that would then be a violation of the rules. It is against forum rules to insult or attack ANY forum member, mod or not.

--
Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

"Attacking", I understand that it would not be very well thought of.

What about "Criticizing"? That can be done in a constructive and civilized way, type "I think this MOD has overreacted, the answer was really quite sensible".

I hope that I made myself clear, please don't overreact!  

--
Antonio http://ferrer.smugmug.com/

I understand what you're saying. As a human being I even agree with you. However, the way that the rules are written I would still have to say that such discussions that directly discuss the actions of a moderator would violate the rules and be subject to deletion. Sorry dude.

--
Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

Learning hard way. Clever

--
http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.ca/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vk-photo/

It's absolutely not my intention to talk about moderators, all I am trying to point out is that the poor wording, the imperfectness of the present rule, might lead exactly to what you also see as a possible outcome, insulting and attacking moderators.

Tell dpr to modify this rule the way I suggested; it will save you moderators and all of us from a lot of unnecessary trouble!

René

No.  You can't attack moderators in any fashion.

If you or any member has an issue with a specific moderator then the then your only legitimate form of redress is by contact the Admins via Feedback or PM.

Otherwise we'd be a target for every troll, flamer and bored drunk on the internet, never mind the people who take any action against them as a motive for revenge.  We're not here to be victims or targets.

--

StephenG

You clearly didn't read (as Biggs23 did) what I wrote, yet responded to it!

My post clearly ruled out "Attack" (explicitly) and "troll", "flamer", "bored drunk", "revenge", "victim" or "target" (implicitly). Or so I thought, English is not my everyday language, my apologies if I was not clear!

--
Antonio http://ferrer.smugmug.com/

I understand what you mean, I'm just unsure as to whether there's a vehicle to make such a change. Nonetheless, at this point I think it makes the most sense for you to take what we've been saying and keep it in mind going forward. If the mods find the rule's wording to be problematic we'll do our best to address it with the appropriate admins.

Thanks.

--
Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

I sent feedback suggesting dpreview should either have a Code of Conduct for their moderators, or else a rule that a person cannot act as normal forum member and moderator in the same thread. Does anyone read the feedback?  I'd like to think so; but I've seen little evidence of it.

Some moderators will no doubt complain that they are volunteers and should not have their forum membership restricted in this way as a consequence.  However, as the many forum members who donate their time to serve in roles such as volunteer fire fighter, lifeguard (or life saver as we say out here) at the beach or pool, helping out with numeracy and literacy programs at the local public school, etc., volunteer roles often carry much heavier responsibilities than simply remaining polite and civil on an internet forum...

Joe

... does not mean DPR will take it up.

Don't confuse something not being done with you being ignored.

--
StephenG

> the imperfectness of the present rule

As I've pointed out before, you cannot define perfect rules for something as imperfect as human interaction.

--

StephenG

and I'm going to start posting cutesy pie cat photos;
you have been warned.

If it keeps on at this rate, we may as well open up a Pedant's Forum.