Moving questions and complaints about moderation here to keep the noise down.
It might seem like censorship, but we’ve got to do something to keep threads from going meta all the time.
(Q&C are still publically visible and there’s a note where the topic was split)
1 Like
@Windy_Skies , your call.
In general closing threads down is an intervention to cool down heated topics recommended by the moderation guide. https://meta.discourse.org/t/discourse-moderation-guide/63116
I did that. The “trying out new features” was just a way to signal that this forum has this feature.
I temporarily closed the topic to, like Luke said, cool down the heated topic.
Windy Skies had claimed to think whoever creates a topic has some sort of respect due, which did not happen on the Kite Networks topic.
I will no longer post to that topic due to inconsistent “moderation”, and am thinking I came to the wrong place to share such content.
Yes. I expressed that in this instance by temporarily stopping off-topic bickering. My assumption is always that a topic starter and the other participants want the topic to stay on topic and not let off-topic stuff become a problem. I will moderate according to this assumption.
This is the most gentle moderation possible, outside of no moderation at all.
Alternatives would have been to delete posts, to split the topic, and to close the topic permanently. I chose this option and stand by it, although splitting some comments into a new topic might have also made some sense.
1 Like
I stand by my decision that I was not posting wrongly, and will not continue posting to that topic.
We have all these edit functions to help really craft our messages.
Enjoy bringing the fruits of AWES discussion to the world.
A lot of narrative threads are being broken by overzealous moderation splitting of topics, like the now-missing response to Kitewinder’s worthwhile aside; “how 100W feels”. Future readers may wrongly suppose all these ideas went un-replied.
The posts have been split to a group message between @kitefreak @PierreB and moderators. I did not think the messages were relevant to anyone else or I would not have done so. Nonetheless I have mentioned:
Luke,
Quite a bit of legitimate MAWES comments got cut out in the split.
I hear you. I will think twice, before splitting topics to messages again and will tend to split them to public topics in the future, as has been common practise.
Some what about the broken content? If the break stands, may we fairly blame an unwise fetish for overrated “moderation tools” for distracting a maximal tech focus?
Really, we should just enjoy or ignore social noise. EU neat-freakiness has its place, but natural birth is messy. Good Luck finding any serious Mexican to bother moderating anything consistently. We would let the future data-mining bots clean up litter “manaña”.
All this is off-topic and should be discussed on https://forum.awesystems.info/t/split-from-mawes-misinterpretation-and-misunderstanding/493/24 .The same for my present post.
I was born that way, plain luck.
The New Forum has become self-aware. We can no longer follow Discobot’s logic. It doesn’t even notice us anymore. Here’s a grab of the Forum navigation space-
Wait a minute, Discobot seems to be creating a doomsday MAWES. Its just missing a tail.
Seriously, MAWES is the same thing as Kite Networks, so why are we creating a new topic? MAWES should have been tacked on to Networks.
Ahhh phew, noise down - we have posts in the correct place again.
Whatever Discobot is and whatever that sea-urchin map thing is, it looks nice.
Please keep personal, social, moderation or non technical matter away from tech focused threads.
Personal messaging is available on forum and you can respond in reference to each post.
There is plenty scope inclusive to create threads on any AWES related matters …
Maybe a history of AWES development thread would be good… Claims and bragging rights seem to be one of the most controversial matters debated
1 Like
It is OK now! Indeed only technical matter is needed for the public forum.
Best moderation practice is to tolerate off-topic comments if overall posting is pertinent. In the worst case, authoritarian moderation willfully sacrifices technical points in policing unwanted comments. Its also concerning that poorly informed moderators will fail to recognize creative relevance of odd comments to wide-ranging brain-storming. Many of the best ideas pop up from the muck.
Let the New Forum be the test of whether super-aggressive moderation really leads to success. The more anarchic Old Forum can serve as the essential refuge from over-zealous moderation as an organizing principle, and as the back-up scrap-bin for ideas falling thru the cracks. Its a good combination of approaches.
1 Like
An essential quality of a moderator is to assume his decisions when they have been applied.
Even more essential to Moderation is moderation itself. Moderation errors are best promptly corrected. Ideal Moderation is not Authoritarian. Will continue trying to get orphaned technical content back in its intended place, after immoderate topic-splitting broke it.
1 Like
There’s very little chance of moderation errors without posting errors. I haven’t seen instances yet where topics were moderated that didn’t need it. Look inward before looking outward why a thread was moderated. Post on topic and without reference to negative past interactions with other forum members and there will rarely be a need for moderation.
And after your post was moderated, if there was any on-topic content in it, you can:
1 Like