Moderation of threads

[Sherlock Holmes]

Originally Posted by AldeberanBlack

I wish to comment on the moderating policy of banning a certain word and topic from the Ministry of Magic forum. It's the word the moderator named "Alastor" highlighted in red on the "UK Politics" thread. The discussion was based on a certain British political party which obviously has the banned word as its core ideology. Banning this word effectively means that discussing this political party is essentially impossible. It would be like discussing Sinn Fein without mentioning Irish republicanism. This is problematic for the thread, since the ideology and policy of the British political party in question will be of key importance to the upcoming British general election and after all the thread is called "UK Politics"

Alastor quite rightly reminded posters that "racism" is a banned word in the DoIMC. However, that ban was put in place primarily as a result of the tensions within American politics. In the UK thread, we've decided it can be allowed in regard to the BNP.

[AldeberanBlack]

OK thankyou.

[eliza101]

I am banned for saying that Snape is one dimensional. A post on the Snape thread is up there and it says that being a schoolyard bully is worse than being a genocidal dictator and nothing is being done about it. You are supposed to be Mods. Try doing your jobs.If you don't want to tackle the blatant racism on the Snape threads then resign. If you secretly agree with the opinions being discussed then you should also resign.
Morgoth, I may be opinionated, but one of those opinions is that racism does not belong in this forum. By the way I read about this post on another site. Do you like this forum turning into a laughing stock?

[Hes]

Eliza. We all know that there is more to this then you make it appear to be with this post. If you have issues with posts you report them or owl a mod.

[gertiekeddle]

Originally Posted by eliza101

I am banned for saying that Snape is one dimensional.

Nope.

We generally don't discuss measures on members in public for privacy reasons, but if you really want to I'm happy to repeat that you were temporarily forum-banned for ignoring a moderator's request to drop a topic for the sake of keeping a thread discussion alive. That's what you were told by staff and we didn't lie about it.

You were not banned, because you posted your opinion. The content of the post was fine, it was the topic itself what was just asked to be avoided and so - for particular during the activity of the Hot Zone Policy - got us only one possibility to act.


The general matter: CoS staff consists of several members from five continents with different backgrounds, different age ranking from 20 to 70 and as such with highly controversial opinions about Snape (as also other topics).

I'm always open for critiques on our moderation style. I'm aware that we're more stern than many other forum's staffs. But I'm also convinced that it is actually impossible that we ban a topic not being 'of our opinion' since we simply hardly agree on anything among ourselves - no matter how easy this explanations seems to appear for many members.

[eliza101]

Originally Posted by gertiekeddle

Nope.

We generally don't discuss measures on members in public for privacy reasons, but if you really want to I'm happy to repeat that you were temporarily forum-banned for ignoring a moderator's request to drop a topic for the sake of keeping a thread discussion alive. That's what you were told by staff and we didn't lie about it.

You were not banned, because you posted your opinion. The content of the post was fine, it was the topic itself what was just asked to be avoided and so - for particular during the activity of the Hot Zone Policy - got us only one possibility to act.


The general matter: CoS staff consists of several members from five continents with different backgrounds, different age ranking from 20 to 70 and as such with highly controversial opinions about Snape (as also other topics).

I'm always open for critiques on our moderation style. I'm aware that we're more stern than many other forum's staffs. But I'm also convinced that it is actually impossible that we ban a topic not being 'of our opinion' since we simply hardly agree on anything among ourselves - no matter how easy this explanations seems to appear for many members.

This is the last post I will be putting on any of the boards here on COS. It's sad because I have loved this forum. I am not leaving because of the ban. You say that I broke some rules and I am banned. Fine, they are your rules and if I want to post I have to obey them. What I am trying to say to you goes beyond my being banned. The Snape thread has degenerated into 'The Snape Fangirl Club'. The high point of the discussion today would seem to be what music Snape would like. That and how shcoolyard bullying is worse than the actual deaths of millions of people. Bullying of people who take a more balanced view of this character in endemic, defence of racism and bigotry is endemic and character bashing of every other character in the books from Dumbledore down the lowliest house elf happens regularly. You mods are supposed to apply the rules with an even hand and you don't do it. I don't matter in the grand scheme of things. I got banned, big deal, I will survive this believe it or not. I am concerned because this site once meant a lot to me and now I will never visit it again.

[APolaris]

Miss Eliza,

As the poster of the message in question, I would very much prefer that you did not leave the site. You seem relatively active, quite happy here other than some decisions, and fairly well-liked. I for one think that your leaving would be a disservice to both yourself and the site. All perspectives are necessary.

Additionally, as the poster towards whom much of Eliza's last post's bitterness is directed, due to misreading of my post with the potential to offend her, I would like to appeal her ban as well. The fault lies as much with me as with her. I don't think her post on the Snape thread justified a ban. Plenty of others have said Snape is one-dimensional on that thread who haven't faced a ban, nor is there a rule under which they deserve to.

The discussion of music tastes on Snape's thread, like his artistic taste, was proposed not as a "fangirl" move (at least one of the other posters and I are both men), but because it adds an additional dimension to his character. Notice how the discussion thereof included debate about whether he would indulge his melancholy, avoid tunes that would too strongly remind him of his turmoil, etc. I would enjoy very much seeing how every character's tastes reflected who they are, including Sirius in particular. We had also just been reflecting on his teaching patterns at length, including debate on personality vs. style, with several including some of his fans mentioning that he taught poorly. I myself admitted that he only *would* have been a good teacher had his personality changed.

I would also like an opportunity to elaborate on my post for your sake, set as "spoiler" to differentiate it from the central purpose of this post:

Spoiler: show

I did not say being "a" schoolyard bully was worse than being "a" genodical dictator. I said that the former's collective has a worse impact on humanity than the latter. This isn't belittling the impact of dictators; rather, it's emphasizing the impact of bullies, which is too often belittled in itself. There are relatively few genocidal dictators and hundreds of millions of bullies. Can you show that they don't have a worse impact? Genocidal dictators rob millions of people of their lives, but bullies rob hundreds of millions of their livelihood and sometimes lives, and unlike with the relatively tame James and Sirius, it doesn't often end in adulthood. They force those people to spend their youth and frequently their entire lives literally wishing they'd never been born. There are worse things than death (Dumbledore said that!) and one of them is a hellish life. Bullying itself has also led to the deaths of millions of people through both murder and suicide, while destroying the quality of life for the majority of the remainder.

I also missed the racism on the Snape thread, and in fact fail to see how a person can go from talking about Snape to saying anything racist. Racism tends to imply a person has a problem with a particular race. If there were such a post I would object to it as well. Also, were there any real bullying on that thread of people for disliking Snape, I would tell the person off myself, for they make other Snape fans look bad. I have not seen any, however. I'm also missing the Dumbledore-and-Winky bashing. I think it may help to quote some specific cases to help both the mods and myself better see your point.

As for the "site" in question, if you even want to call it that, I've seen it myself. It's easy to find on Google. It's not so much a site as a small community of people who were banned from Livejournal for being too dumb and too intolerant of independent thought, and started a variant on another site, on an account where the name, mission statement and slogan are all stated in ways that befit the immaturity, extremely shallow analysis, lacking elaboration, inability to analyze anything within context or even to interpret a sentence correctly, and pitiful critical-thinking skills of its posters. Nobody could ever take that "site" seriously except for its own bloggers.

If the mods indulge my request to reverse the ban in question, I hope you will return and make your case eloquently. Who knows, you may help someone to see a fresh new perspective that they hadn't considered before. Even if not, it's not right to deprive yourself of community with people with whom you're well acquainted due merely to a single thread for a character you don't even like.

[Morgoth]

And here in lies the problem, folks.

Two different sides of the debate trying to explain what they meant. Welcome to 8 years of debating Harry Potter on CoS Forums.


We are set the impossible task of trying to temper two sides that have two very different sets of perceptions. Differences in nuance and tone cannot be conveyed over the internet, so the raw, written word is the only way to draw conclusions over individual conduct. One side suggests something, perfectly innocently and the post-reporting begins. One single line out of place sets things ablaze on here, because there is this common goal of always being right. Of always having the last word, irrespective of the frivolity of the campaign. There is no harm in 'moving on' as many a moderator has requested people do time & time again in these threads.

Eliza, you wrote something that got peoples backs up. I then had to read about your anger toward me and the staff in a Social Group not at all set up for that purpose. You seem completely incapable of tempering yourself when asked to. You presume to know the score about how we moderate on here, but you do not have the benefit of the great "All Seeing Eye." You do not see the warning logs like we do, so your accusations toward us do not measure up to the past few years of warnings that both sides of the debate have received.

Your scope for how we deal with issues is blinkered, rather heavily by your own personal bias. To rationalise your issues, we need to take them in the wider context of the debates at hand. Your bitterness toward the fanbase is exemplified by your characterization of them. You've shown your disdain for people by your bitter posting in this thread today and then expect the Mods to 'resign' for lack of dealing with your personal disgust. But unless you see what part YOU play in lowering the tone, no amount of action we do will ever completely satisfy you. Unless you are prepared to look at yourself and wonder where you fit into all this, what we do is merely a fools errand.

There is no 'safe' way to moderate a debate surrounding Snape or any hot button HP issue. We spent several years deeply embedded in the "Love Wars," a period in which Harmony & Heron shippers went at it with posts so long, it made dissertations look like footnotes. There are debates going back years that have scarred the perceptions of members forever, to the extent that our only course of action is to move under our own imperfect perceptions and do our best to temper the debates. What you do not see, rather regularly, is how we request people to edit posts. How we make in-thread comments for people to 'move on'. We attempt to give people opportunities to correct comments or attitudes before things get too far. You cannot say you never had the opportunity if two or three posts above you, a moderator says "Move on."

However, we sometimes *miss* things. That's human nature. We rely on the post reporting system. We rely on keen eyes. But that doesn't mean we'll capture every incident of every waking hour. Things get missed, but if that does not excuse us of our responsibilities it does not entitle others to act like lone gun[persons] and enact their own retribution by way of snarky, unhelpful posts in reply. In that way, we'll treat you as equally as you treat others.

If your last hurrah to me, Eliza, is to say I am a laughing stock, all I can suggest is that you get your membership card to the club of people who repeatedly relay that same message to me just before they make a sweeping exit from the site. I would warn you though, one of those club card holders has socks older than lanifiel.

I'm leaving it there for now, because opinions have been made. I won't go further with any public discussion of members warnings.