Opinions wanted - new idea/s

first of all, this idea (thanks to Travis Lambert) is about notating when a moderated thread had previously been ARed. his thoughts were to see if it would encourage people to AR instead of making comments in threads.

personally, i like the idea (assuming i can remember to do it).

so, First Question: Would you guys like to see it notated when a thread was moderated due to an AR.. but also, when it's not. which would have to be longer than simply "AR" or "non-AR", because sometimes a thread has been ARed, but i'll moderate it before ever having seen said AR. any suggestions?

how about:
"prompted by AR"
"not prompted by AR"

please let me know.


Second, merging threads by different OPs. i agree that this would be great to make the forums easier to find what you're looking for.. but i'm also worried about the fall-out of people being offended because someone else's thread title is used to reference all merged threads. as a ResMod, i can't change thread titles (or edit anybody elses text for that matter).. and even if i could, some people wouldn't be happy with whatever i chose to title the newly merged threads.

so, it would be nice and neat. but do you think it would end up having an adverse effect?



if anyone has any more suggestions, please feel free to introduce them here.

One of the long standing problems with LL "justice" is that not only is the complaintant unaware of any resolution, but frequently the accused may be totally unaware of the charges.

I once received a forum suspension and was never told the reason or the offending material. How could I possibly learn to avoid such conduct if I have no idea what I did that was offensive. To be honest, there are things that I had written here in the past that I would readily admit were in poor taste - but I knew what I was doing and wouldn't have taken exception if I had received sanctions. In the case for which I did get a suspension I quite simply had no idea. I think "locked in response to AR" maintains the "don't point fingers" LL mentality whilst providing infinitely more feedback to potential offenders.

Regarding thread merging, it would certainly reduce clutter, redundancy and cross-linking (e.g. at least three threads in the last two days about vresp.com). If you want to maintain a modicum of impartiality, the thread numbers are - I think - issued sequentially: first one in wins the header.

Thanks for thinking about how to better moderation. I appreciate it.

The transparency of justice has always been a concern of mine. When it's hidden, not only can't the accused learn, neither can anyone else in the community. I try to make sure when a thread has moderation that the reasons are given (even if the articulation is lacking).

I think these ideas are good, I will start marking moderation prompted by ARs or complaints hence forth. Something akin to half the moderation going on right now isn't a result of ARs.

I haven't observed a correlation between unreported threads and minor infractions.
The observation I have made is this:
People will not report breaches but they will still expect them to be dealt with. When they are not, they will file it away as evidence to support theories of double standards & favoritism, and with the final bit of stress they lash out. I don't see this as anyones fault, just a fact of how the forums work. Being proactive and not waiting for ARs can help keep the amount of this down; ultimately resulting in a happier community.

Travis mentioned picking and choosing threads. If you are being proactive and not waiting for ARs you do have to develop methods for identifying threads at risk of being ARed. Long threads in a short period of time is one red flag of risk. When you get close up to it, it is picking and choosing what you check. There isn't enough time to check every thread.

Nada Epoch is the second on EVERY thread in the script library, I can't believe that it is a helpful service, just annoying to track down the other thread because links aren't clickable anymore. Strife shut down a thread about open source based only on his opinion that it was inevitable and good, then put a sticky in the forum about how good open source is. I didn't agree, and basically just stopped using the forums after that (and libsecondlife land bots pillage and plunder, and suck search resources). Strife can have his opinion, but there was no sense of objective moderation -- that objectivity should be sought, and the result was just not using these forums at all (just an example of what happened to me, don't mean to dreg up old, bad memories).

So in my opinion, basically alway lean towards tolerance of views, don't police minor infractions -- the impression left is that moderators are authoritarian and jack-booted in nature. Only major infractions should be dealt with, it would make these forums more pleasant. Also IM or message the person who infracted, and either warn or explain to them, not just a public lashing then a closed thread. Education is more powerful than, well, power.

About Nada, he is a full moderator in charge of the script library, the ResMods and Nada are kinda like ships that pass in the night without noticing each other. It has been a long time since there was an AR of a Script Library thread but sometimes it happens (low single digits). I'm sorry to say this but I don't remember this incident but I'm pretty sure there was an AR that brought it to my attention. I don't remember making a sticky on the benefits of Open Source, doesn't mean I didn't. I am tempted to take this thread off-topic by detailing how SL has benefited from Open Source but lets not go there. LibSL *sigh* I am and have lobbied for better security and better accountability. A lot of people just complain, they don't submit feature suggestions to JIRA; I have a couple of FS on JIRA about landbotting. There is too much that could be said about CopyBot and the underlying issue of IP Theft; lets not drag this issue off topic on that. I do every so often write informational stickies, I try to keep them to the facts, unfortunately there is always debate of facts and I'm sorry if I don't always give them a fare sake. To be honest I don't remember any run-ins you may have had with LR or me. We process so many threads we rarely remember specific infractions or those who perpetrated them.

I generally turn a blind eye to minor infractions and most of those that do get processed don't result in a LR review (unless I'm asked to send it along to LR for review). This means that most infractions don't result in any further action.
My experience has been that when I do PM someone about a problem in a thread, about 90% of the time I get attacked and jumped on; and they still don't do what is requested.

it should be noted that sometimes a thread will be ARed and a ResMod will check it, see that it could be an infraction meriting moderation, but then again it could be left alone.. it can be a hard call at times.

the point is that in these cases a thread can be left for Linden Review, but end up with no further action taken because LR says it doesn't need any.

so, sometimes a thread that looks suspicious has already been dealt with.. sometimes it's considered ok for the moment, but to keep an eye on it. in these cases, sometimes a ResMod will come in and try to encourage positive, on-topic debate.


other than all of that, i think i'll start notating whether something was prompted by an AR or not as well.

Well, you know I'm in favor of thread merging, although it would be nice if you were able edit the titles, even just to add a 'merged' notation....seems strange that you can lock something, but not do a minor edit. Then again, I think you should be able to remove names from threads that are locked for including them in personal disputes too; locking it only means no one else can comment, but the named party is still potentially being slandered.

Anyway, yes, I like the idea of including an AR notation as well.

Me too. I will note that while I see some threads get locked that I don't agree with, I do see a lot of threads continue that should not. And I also see a lot of threads with minor infractions that are allowed to continue, simply because they are a good or entertaining conversation generating forums activity. The system is imperfect, but it's a lot better than it could be.

Thanks, Broken. If you want perfection, buy an "A" flawless diamond - from a reputable dealer. If you want the bleeding edge of the future of the Internet, hang out in SL. AFAIK, that is the only way to have both.

I criticize LL sometimes, but you know, it's because I love what they're doing and are trying to do, and I just want them to do still better at it.

Strife is the moderator I run into most, and I want to say, Hey Strife! You're doing great! Keep up the good work! WE NEED YOU!

Now, back to ranting...

I'm confused about the term 'AR'. Do you mean people actually go in world and file an abuse report over a thread? That seems a little extreme. Or do you mean something else?

No, there's a button which looks like a white and red triangle with a black exclamation mark in it on the bottom left of every post that allows you to report it if you feel it's broken one of the forum rules.

i suggest u all take up tiddly winks...got to be more fun than moderating this crap!

First of all, i have the utmost respect for anyone who volunteers to moderate the chaos that can be the forums ))
I do have a question though........ if a specific message is reported (and let's, for the sake of my question, say found to be against the rules) from within an otherwise interesting thread, does that mean the thread is locked automatically?

Sally, if there's only one "off-color" post and it seems the thread has corrected itself, then no.. i wouldn't usually close said thread; however, if a particular post is reported and the there aer a couple pages where the whole thing just falls apart.. then yes.

sometimes the one respionsible for an offending post will be PMed and asked to change their wording or to omit any offending material (text, picture, otherwise).

so, it all really depends on the rest of the thread. (of course, if the thread was off-topic to being with.. of course, it'll be closed.)

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply Cybin. Guess i'm just hoping that a couple of bad/sad/otherwise unsavoury posts won't ruin the excellent experience and extremely useful resource the forums can be!

Yup!

The Script Library uses a post queue, ever post in that forum goes into it before it shows up. Nada has to approve each and every post (many posts get deleted). It's not a system that scales.

In most organizations scaling to match increased demand is accomplished by increasing the amount of resources applied toward meeting the demand.

So when a pre-moderated forum has a tiny number of people using it, it uses a relatively small number of man-hours to pre-moderate it.

When the number of posts needing to be read prior to approval increases by, say, a factor of one hundred, you spend a hundred times as much on pre-moderation man-hours and buy a hundred times as many man-hours per day of pre-moderation labor.

The repeated use of phrases similar to "not scaleable", "does not scale", etc., to suggest that a policy should not be implemented if it involves having to spend more in proportion to the size of your user population is quite silly and wearisome to see over and over and over.

Hoping to operate the world wide 3D internet with the same size staff one had when they were operating a virtual world beta test with 30 people online at a time is absurd. I have been reading people suggest that something along those lines is possible and to be expected and it is such a silly and unrealistic idea that reading it gets kinda aggravating a enough years.

I have never been a fan of forums being overly moderated personally. I think it blocks a lot of free speech and can just be a power trip at times. I can understand a limited number of hardcore rules that may need enforced, but people AR, and threads get closed for the smallest of reasons, on threads that cause no damage and hurt no one and I really don't feel theres a need for this type of moderation. And sorry for sounding like a complete newb, but what exactly does it mean when a forum is labeled sticky? Does that mean it contains official business or statements? Also, since mods are involved in this thread, I am interested in knowing weather moderators are more aware or know more information than the general population about the rules of LL, and the general business of LL that adds to the authority they have.

1) We keep an eye out for the power tripping and poor quality moderation. I take a few days off when things get stressful.
2) See my response to SuezanneC
3) Threads can be made sticky, they appear at the top of the forum. Stickied threads contain important information either rules or FAQs or something of the ilk.
4) There is no ResMod NDA, so any information I am given in the course of my ResMod duties I generally pass along if appropriate. I would say we are more familiar with the rules, only because we work with them on a daily basis. Trying to get leverage on LL would be very difficult, they have a tendency to not listen.

With more power comes more responsibility. The level of flack I get from doing my job would only increase. I don't need the added stress of more flack. I don't need more responsibility, I have enough trouble keeping up with my responsibilities on the forums. I don't need more power.

Point is, even if I had managed to get some leverage on LL, I wouldn't use it. I just don't need the stress. I don't want the stress.

@SuezanneC:
Your fear of scalable solutions is largely unfounded. They do in face exist. Take for example transportation. In the beginning people walked everywhere. Then came horses and carts which brought a new set of problems, sidewalks and stop signs were some of the first solutions. Then came traffic police and later traffic lights. As traffic increased in speed and congestion new solutions were needed, highways and then superhighways. From traffic circles to clover leafs. As the system has scaled up, the number of people required to run it has increased at a much lower rate. The core principal that has made these innovations possible is a system that people choose to follow the rules. That means the system must be designed to overcome peoples tendencies to not follow the important rules.

Social Disorder is defined as people not following the important rules. Any system that is in a state of disorder is either not functioning properly or broken. If it doesn't resolve itself then questions need to be asked "What solutions are there?" "Can it be redesigned so that it works?" The question that is always on the mind is "Is this an acceptable level of disorder?" There are two approaches, the short sighted ("How do I decrease the amount of disorder?" and the long view ("How do I redesign the system?" and knowing when to change between them is crucial.

The trouble on our forum revolves around the General Discussion Forum. When we have one, people ignore the rules. When we don't have one, people try to turn whichever forum is popular into the next General Discussion Forum. The obvious solution is to have a General Discussion Forum designed in such a way that people follow the important rules.

What should that design be? I don't know, I wish I did.

This type of social engineering is not impossible, look at any typical bank, they have an area for people to queue, and people use it.