-- Posted by jsia at 4:43 am on July 4, 2009 I know this is a hot topic, and sorry if I'm repeating this, but the amount of times I've been flamed for removal of posts from people, after I've been the first person to vote to hide a post is shocking. Why can't that message be just sent "From Support Leader" like some moderator actions are? If they want to question why it was removed, then there is no reason why they can't post it in Member-to-Moderator. -- Posted by Spice at 4:46 am on July 4, 2009 all our removed posts are from our account, if you can't deal with it, don't hide it. you're not moderators anyway, you're support leaders -- Posted by SoaringFalcon2010 at 4:46 am on July 4, 2009 I agree. -- Posted by jsia at 4:50 am on July 4, 2009 Quote: from Spice at 9:46 pm on July 4, 2009 all our removed posts are from our account, if you can't deal with it, don't hide it. you're not moderators anyway, you're support leaders It's not the fact that I can't handle it, it's that it's unecessary. The time it takes to read abusive messages from them could be better spent elsewhere. -- Posted by Spice at 5:01 am on July 4, 2009 Well, the simplest thing is not to moderate. We only have topic removals and DoSS masked by "moderator" everything else comes from our user. You are Support Leaders, support instead of moderating if your time is better spent elsewhere -- Posted by jsia at 3:03 am on July 5, 2009 Quote: from Spice at 10:01 pm on July 4, 2009 Well, the simplest thing is not to moderate. We only have topic removals and DoSS masked by "moderator" everything else comes from our user. You are Support Leaders, support instead of moderating if your time is better spent elsewhere So you're telling me not to help keep the site clean, then I see mods screaming out saying they can't cover the whole site by themselves? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just think you're contradicting yourself. I don't have a problem with hiding/moving topics, I'm making suggestions to try to help improve how the site works. -- Posted by Spice at 5:45 am on July 5, 2009 Hiding behind "Support Leader" doesn't improve the site at all. We don't have it except for topic removal, which many moderators are up for removing. We also have it for DoSS. Every other moderation action has our username attached to it for the member to see. And, reporting things does just as well as using the hide feature yourself. You're a Support Leader, not a moderator. Making this a feature will benefit the site in no way whatsoever. and you say you have better things to do than listen to people rant about post removals -- you have better things to do than hide replies, in that case, as Support Leaders. -- Posted by cutie2 at 6:00 am on July 5, 2009 I know how you feel, I feel disgruntled each time I do any moderating and a second later my inbox is flashing. I think the fact that it comes from my name encourages them to PM me instead of submitting an MER for others to look at it. Blech! But, it does make me think about my actions - and I've also had to harden up and accept that some people are going to dislike me for doing things 'to them'. Can they submit an MER on an SL's action, or is the only option to take it up with the SL in question or make a topic? -- Posted by jsia at 7:03 am on July 5, 2009 In that case Spice, then why don't they say "From Support Leader" then within the actual message say something like "this action was made by jsia...". Then at least they have to go to my profile and click send message, giving them an extra minute or two to stagger flames that they might be planning on throwing? -- Posted by Spice at 8:10 am on July 5, 2009 Oh yeah, make it harder for a user who might legitimately want their post back. -- Posted by Wolf at 10:22 am on July 5, 2009 I disagree, and most of the mod team (almost unanimously) supports topic deletions being sent from us as opposed to "Moderator." I disagree because it is your responsibility to adequately look into every single rebuttal made by a member who's post you've removed.  If you've removed it, you must have a valid logical reason why.  If you feel you have made an error, then you must either file an mer with the post listed, or talk to a mod via pm. -- Posted by Charolastra at 4:47 pm on July 5, 2009 If there's a valid reason for removal then you should be able to defend yourself for any reason. I think SLs removing posts sometimes actually causes more problems than it does benefit. I haven't voted to remove even a single post since I became SL and probably will not be any time soon. -- Posted by The Mixed Tape at 5:16 pm on July 5, 2009 I'd honestly have to say no to this, around the basic factor of what Elizabeth said. I understand you saying that we can better spend our time elsewhere, but then again, no one is forcing you to read their responses and reply. If they were to have a serious issue with your decision to Vote to Hide their post, they would take it to a moderator. If they have a certain reason to explain/disagree with the removal of their post, then they should be able to talk to you directly about it. Instead of having to (like you said) go to your profile and message you. I don't see any reason why the current system is flawed. I disagree with the thought of trying to be hidden in what we do. If you made a mistake, you should be able to stand up and say that you did. If they are just a little grumpy, then you have to be able to take it with a grain of salt and move on. I disagree completely. -- Posted by hI jAMES at 6:05 pm on July 5, 2009 Even though I use the feature, our job shouldn't even be about moderation. It's about support. If we're going to deal with moderation issues, we could at least tag our name to it. And if there are better things to do than to hear a member complain, then there are better things to do to than to moderate to begin with. And if you removed a post with the right intentions and for the right reason, then it should be easy to explain to a complaining member why there post was deleted. If by chance you're not getting through, then you can direct them to either contact a mod or file a MER. You don't have to hear them complain and complain. But they do have right to complain not matter how trivial the argument is over. I still have a stored message from a member complaining about a post removal from last year. It actually kinda hurt my feelings. But I took it for what it was worth and replied with a cool head. And many other SLs can do the same. I understand your reasoning but we should be completely accountable for our actions. And members should know who it's from since moderation is no where in our "test" to even become SLs or something we primarily focus on. -- Posted by hithere at 8:25 pm on July 5, 2009 i'm not a pussy so i have no problem ignoring flames but i agree that there would be no harm in making actions anonymous as long as there's an obvious link in the message that goes to MER or M2M most people making arguments against the OP here seem to me to be doing so because they are somewhat morally opposed to the idea of somebody "hiding"...which doesn't really have anything to do with the established ideals of the site, while the amount of flaming does if somebody actually cares about their post being re-added, they will certainly click a link to make an MER or a topic in M2M -- Posted by Charolastra at 11:30 pm on July 5, 2009 Quote: from hithere at 11:25 pm on July 5, 2009 while the amount of flaming does I think the discrepancy here is within the SL action itself rather than anonymity. Some people view SL action against posts as detrimental, I know I somewhat do. There are clear cut instances where SLs removing posts helps to speed up the deletion process, especially in the Supportive forums when people post stuff like: "tl;dr". And then there's cases when some SLs remove posts for the sole reason that it offends them or have a vendetta against someone. I've seen these instances and it's often gross to witness. So the idea behind having your username visible when you move a topic or delete a reply is so that the user who feels that their content is being deleted unfairly can report the post and have someone actually qualified evaluate it (like a moderator). People feel this will increase accountability, so that the user can bring it up in MER if there's harassment attributed to the action. If it were anonymous, the user would have no way to judge, it would be unaccountable unless a mod sees it. -- Posted by Spice at 12:07 am on July 6, 2009 Quote: from hithere at 4:25 am on July 6, 2009 i'm not a pussy so i have no problem ignoring flames but i agree that there would be no harm in making actions anonymous as long as there's an obvious link in the message that goes to MER or M2M most people making arguments against the OP here seem to me to be doing so because they are somewhat morally opposed to the idea of somebody "hiding"...which doesn't really have anything to do with the established ideals of the site, while the amount of flaming does if somebody actually cares about their post being re-added, they will certainly click a link to make an MER or a topic in M2M as a team, we're generally striving to open levels of communication, not close them. I find PM a better way to discuss putting a post back, personally. And have put a couple back before now, even before I was a moderator I recognised I had in fact made the mistake and assured the user that I would get a mod to put it back, and why I was in error. The post was put back. If you're moderating, you should put up with what comes with it, if you make a mistake or a user wishes to defend themselves, then this should be quick and easy for them. We're meant to be a community, not a bunch of anonymous moderators who can hide and just ignore it, because no-one knows where the actions are coming from. I see this doing more harm than good, and I don't think it should be a feature even considered for implementing. -- Posted by hithere at 12:09 am on July 6, 2009 edit:response to charolastra alright i understand what you're saying. but in my opinion, evaluating the validity of a post removal based on the reason for which one believes the SL removed the post instead of on the reason that the SL gave for removing the post is terrible moderation. in order to have a post re-added, the member whose post was removed must argue that his/her post did not break the guideline that the SL said the post broke, regardless of the personal reason(s) for which the SL removed the post and yeah, i'm pretty sure mods do review SL post removals, just as they review mod post removals. but maybe i'm also assuming that there are less cases of SL power abuse brought up by non-mods than there really are... -- Posted by hithere at 12:21 am on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Spice at 12:07 am on July 6, 2009 as a team, we're generally striving to open levels of communication, not close them. I find PM a better way to discuss putting a post back, personally. And have put a couple back before now, even before I was a moderator I recognised I had in fact made the mistake and assured the user that I would get a mod to put it back, and why I was in error. The post was put back.   If you're moderating, you should put up with what comes with it, if you make a mistake or a user wishes to defend themselves, then this should be quick and easy for them.   We're meant to be a community, not a bunch of anonymous moderators who can hide and just ignore it, because no-one knows where the actions are coming from.   I see this doing more harm than good, and I don't think it should be a feature even considered for implementing. yes, i fully understood, before i made my first post in this topic, that you and the mod team have the personal opinion that the site is best when it has communication that is the most open and the least anonymous, and that you and the mod team have other personal opinions about how the site "should" be, but thankfully davjs has not given me nor the site itself the responsibility of holding the same personal opinions that you and the mod team have about how the site is coded i mean go ahead and post your opinions in this topic, but don't quote me without acknowledging the validity of my opinions, because my opinions are just as valid as yours on this specific issue -- Posted by Spice at 12:24 am on July 6, 2009 But it's how it currently is right now =\ I never said your opinions are not valid. Jesus -- Posted by Charolastra at 12:37 am on July 6, 2009 I wouldn't necessarily call it power abuse by SLs either. Sometimes it's just incompetence: "this seems bad, let's remove it" mentality. Other times it actually is though and it's sad to witness. In any case, to the OP, I think it's probably a good idea not to internalize a member's frustrations on yourself. Eliminating arrogance and explaining reasonably to the member I feel would best alleviate the situation and if they're still persistent then this is borderline harassment and should be reported. By reporting them, you'd be making sure a mod takes knowledge of it for future reference. -- Posted by Scarlet Tears at 1:43 am on July 6, 2009 The member 2 moderator forum can be best used for other things. Why fill it up with a bunch of spam asking why some topics got removed. It's just easier for the mods imo. -- Posted by SpRiNgS at 2:40 am on July 6, 2009 you shouldn't let it get to you. if you removed it 100 percent of the time it's for a purpose. the person should understand that, and if they don't, file a complaint or just get over it -- Posted by jsia at 3:33 am on July 6, 2009 Well we are all entitled to our opinions and to make suggestions. I wasn't making this topic in hopes of changing people's minds and saying this is how it must be, it was simply a suggestion on how I believe LW can be improved. Everyone who has replied has made good points, and I honestly believe there is a better way we can manage this that everyone can agree on, but until we think of it...we will have to agree to disagree. -- Posted by Editor in Chief at 9:44 am on July 6, 2009 If you're removing a post from a user, you have to take some responsibility for that. Most of the time the responses back are just stupid angry noise, and there isn't anything to do with it but laugh. But occasionally someone has a legitimate complain, and I think it's perfectly fair for the person who removed it and decided it was against the rules to see their response. Why would the poster have to speak first to someone who had nothing to do with it being removed? Seeing the response to the work you do should be a positive experience, even if it's just learning a lesson. When you do remove posts it's not just an anonymous thing - you better be damn sure it should be removed, or else the user will know exactly who to come to and you'll deal with the 'consequences.' And finally, as so many SL's hope to eventually be Mods, this is a good experience to see how members react to things we do. -- Posted by Cyanotype at 5:24 am on July 9, 2009 Support Leaders not being moderators are accountable for their actions more so than moderators because we are not moderators. We need to be able to defend our actions and if a reply you vote to hide is hidden, you need to be able to defend it. Masking the person who initiated the post removal opens the door to abuse and a lack of accountability. I disagree completely. -- Posted by Catlin at 2:57 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from W0lf at 3:22 am on July 6, 2009 I disagree, and most of the mod team (almost unanimously) supports topic deletions being sent from us as opposed to "Moderator." I disagree because it is your responsibility to adequately look into every single rebuttal made by a member who's post you've removed. If you've removed it, you must have a valid logical reason why. If you feel you have made an error, then you must either file an mer with the post listed, or talk to a mod via pm. Half the time they got no valid complaint so I don't bother replying. I have been flamed, but I just ignore them (: -- Posted by Wolf at 1:11 pm on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Catlin at 5:57 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from W0lf at 3:22 am on July 6, 2009 I disagree, and most of the mod team (almost unanimously) supports topic deletions being sent from us as opposed to "Moderator."    I disagree because it is your responsibility to adequately look into every single rebuttal made by a member who's post you've removed.  If you've removed it, you must have a valid logical reason why.  If you feel you have made an error, then you must either file an mer with the post listed, or talk to a mod via pm.     Half the time they got no valid complaint so I don't bother replying. I have been flamed, but I just ignore them (: That is perfectly fine :D