PDA

View Full Version : Moderators getting it wrong.



aastrotech
2009-Dec-06, 04:34 AM
This poll is concerning moderators making rulings where you think "that's just wrong". Blaming the wrong person, repression of unfavorable discussion, thread locking, warning, etc. whatever. You thought "that's just plain wrong".

Never means you've never seen it or don't care if they do.

Occasionaly means you think they made an honest mistake.

Noticably means you don't think it was an honest mistake.

Too often means you think it encourages bad behavior in some members.

Otherworldly
2009-Dec-06, 04:42 AM
I just wanted to post in this thread before it gets locked.

aastrotech
2009-Dec-06, 04:47 AM
I just wanted to post in this thread before it gets locked.

Then why did you vote occasionaly? This should be considered feedback. Locking it could be dishonest.

Otherworldly
2009-Dec-06, 04:48 AM
Then why did you vote occasionaly?

I didn't vote.

I've got an opinion on this, but I've seen some other people voice their opinions . . .

Obviousman
2009-Dec-06, 04:50 AM
I voted 'occasionally' but I would have preferred another option to accurately reflect my opinion: 'rarely'.

Buttercup
2009-Dec-06, 04:53 AM
I voted "occasionally." And I mean only occasionally; nothing I've yet seen has made me uneasy or negative-minded towards Admin/Mods. And yes I have been suspended once for 24 hours. :p Believe it or not. :lol:

swampyankee
2009-Dec-06, 05:05 AM
The moderators are, most likely, human. They will, doubtless, make the occasional error.

As did the person who posted the poll. "Occasionally" has two, not one "l," and "noticeably" has an "e" between the "c" and the "a," at least in US spelling.

Otherworldly
2009-Dec-06, 05:07 AM
The moderators are, most likely, human.

By contrast, one of the admins is a Vulcan.

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 05:07 AM
Just for the record, I'm fine with this thread so long as the discussion remains civil.


P.S. I voted "occasionally."

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 05:08 AM
The moderators are, most likely, human. They will, doubtless, make the occasional error.

As did the person who posted the poll. "Occasionally" has two, not one "l," and "noticeably" has an "e" between the "c" and the "a," at least in US spelling.

I've taken the liberty of correcting those typos.

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 05:09 AM
By contrast, one of the admins is a Vulcan.

Half-Vulcan, if you want to get picky about it.

Gillianren
2009-Dec-06, 06:55 AM
No one is perfect; even were I the one making all the decisions, I would not vote "never." If it were "too often," I'd leave.

I think a few members get away with too much; sometimes, I wonder if I am one of them, though there are a lot of posts which never make it onto the board--and ones I never type but instead end up as rants to my boyfriend or best friend or what have you.

John Jaksich
2009-Dec-06, 07:07 AM
The major reason that I voted the way the way that I did is -----> I go out of my way to be as conflict-free as possible.

However, if I spend too many hours in front the computer at this forum....sometimes it can antagonize my day. So, I try to be as helpful as I possibly can when I am here.


I voted "occasionally" ----by the way.

Tobin Dax
2009-Dec-06, 07:38 AM
I voted "occasionally." I pretty much agree with everybody above.


Half-Vulcan, if you want to get picky about it.

No one is perfect; . . . .
As a side note, I had to laugh at these statements back-to-back. I guess I am a Star Trek MegaNerd.

HenrikOlsen
2009-Dec-06, 10:04 AM
Now, why do I have the sneaky suspicion that aastrotech was the one to vote "Too Often".:D

BTW, the poll lacks the option "Beer!".

slang
2009-Dec-06, 11:12 AM
BTW, the poll lacks the option "Beer!".

No CowboyNeal option either!

Occasionally, for lack of a "very rarely" option.

clop
2009-Dec-06, 11:23 AM
This is a stupid thread. Who cares if the moderators get it wrong from time to time. Grow up.

Seeka
2009-Dec-06, 12:06 PM
It's interesting to see what peoples opinions are Clop.

AndreasJ
2009-Dec-06, 12:10 PM
Never means you've never seen it or don't care if they do.

Occasionaly means you think they made an honest mistake.

Noticably means you don't think it was an honest mistake.

Too often means you think it encourages bad behavior in some members.

Why do you feel the need to redefine terms refering to frequency to refering to intent like this? You are practically ensuring that people who vote before reading the OP - and like it or not, lots of people do - will misvote.

mahesh
2009-Dec-06, 12:19 PM
I DON'T BELIEVE IT!

can't believe this 'sniping' about the BAUTmods....must be silly season sundays...
why all the shouting about the mods and admin here all of a sudden?
c'mon...geddouddahere already...
go...look up at the stars or something...or the sun...use a filter okay??!!

If your skies are overcast...there are enough stunning pictures here in the astrophotography section to keep idle minds occupied fully for a loooong time..!!

I soooo agree with you clop.

edit:
STOP IT ALREADY

HenrikOlsen
2009-Dec-06, 12:51 PM
can't believe this 'sniping' about the BAUTmods....must be silly season sundays...
why all the shouting about the mods and admin here all of a sudden?
It's not really "all of a sudden", you can almost set your clock by the regularity with which aastrotech makes these threads.

Seeka
2009-Dec-06, 12:56 PM
BTW, the poll lacks the option "Beer!".

Well said:D

Arneb
2009-Dec-06, 12:58 PM
It's not really "all of a sudden", you can almost set your clock by the regularity with which aastrotech makes these threads.

Considering this, maybe I should have checked "Never" just for the hell of it.

Seeka
2009-Dec-06, 01:05 PM
I DON'T BELIEVE IT!

can't believe this 'sniping' about the BAUTmods....must be silly season sundays...
why all the shouting about the mods and admin here all of a sudden?
c'mon...geddouddahere already...
go...look up at the stars or something...or the sun...use a filter okay??!!

If your skies are overcast...there are enough stunning pictures here in the astrophotography section to keep idle minds occupied fully for a loooong time..!!

I soooo agree with you clop.

edit:
STOP IT ALREADY

I have not been here for a while so I have missed all the drama that you speak of regarding mod/admin threads, but Mahesh it is quite reasonable to want to know how people feel about the way baut is managed. There is no shouting or sniping in this thread? You know sometimes a positive can emerge from a civil discussion like this and it can be quite healthy. Note that I said sometimes. Don't run it down so fast.

Lianachan
2009-Dec-06, 02:22 PM
The mods are, with one obvious exception, human and fallible. Some, of course, more than others. They should not be held up as gods - they are quite simply posters, the same as everybody else, but with extra responsibilities and powers. I expect those get in the way of their enjoyment of the board, more than anything else. But we must absolutely be allowed to criticise them.

The Backroad Astronomer
2009-Dec-06, 02:36 PM
Now, why do I have the sneaky suspicion that aastrotech was the one to vote "Too Often".:D

BTW, the poll lacks the option "Beer!".
I woukd prefer a cheese option too.

Strange
2009-Dec-06, 02:38 PM
Why do you feel the need to redefine terms refering to frequency to refering to intent like this? You are practically ensuring that people who vote before reading the OP - and like it or not, lots of people do - will misvote.

Yep. I would have voted "never" if I had seen this. But didn't because no one is perfect.

iquestor
2009-Dec-06, 02:39 PM
I voted "occasionally." I pretty much agree with everybody above.



As a side note, I had to laugh at these statements back-to-back. I guess I am a Star Trek MegaNerd.


fascinating.

edit: I voted occaisionally.

Paul Beardsley
2009-Dec-06, 03:25 PM
I would have voted "They occasionally err on the side of leniency" if it had been an option - as I would have expected of such a poll if it was intended to be constructive.

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 03:37 PM
I think a few members get away with too much.

That's the most common criticism we get. The second most common is that we're too strict on certain members. Occasionally we get both complaints about the same member....

mahesh
2009-Dec-06, 03:40 PM
Beardsley, I like your succinctness.
Henrik, sorry, you get the beer, I'll attend to the pizza.
Steffanie, sorry, okay my rant isn't / wasn't directed at any body's thread in particular...just lately, I seem to sense, that there seems to be a plethora of similarly noisy threads...more or less demeaning the mods/admin...
rattling the stuff...you know, not like in Cool Hand Luke's aah's shakin' it boss!!!...just silly...
clop says it nicely...

Like nothin' better to do with one's time...so let's go shake the BAUT...
GO, LOOK UP AT THE SKY....already !!!!

Now, I expect to be mauled here...

PEACE ... SHALOM...

okay...just don't be loud...

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 03:48 PM
This is a stupid thread. Who cares if the moderators get it wrong from time to time. Grow up.

This is just the sort of comment that would lead me to close the thread, so please avoid in future.

Otherworldly
2009-Dec-06, 03:50 PM
This is just the sort of comment that would lead me to close the thread, so please avoid in future.


Yes, but then there would be another thread to discuss that action :)

Lianachan
2009-Dec-06, 03:51 PM
just lately, I seem to sense, that there seems to be a plethora of similarly noisy threads...
For the record, as it may not be obvious unless you actually look into the thread - one that looks like it's mine isn't really.

Tobin Dax
2009-Dec-06, 04:12 PM
Now, why do I have the sneaky suspicion that aastrotech was the one to vote "Too Often".:D
When I first opened this thread (between the third and fourth posts), there was one vote for "Too Often" and one vote for "Occasionally." All I know for sure is that Otherworldy isn't responsible for either.

Paul Beardsley
2009-Dec-06, 04:22 PM
I think a few members get away with too much; sometimes, I wonder if I am one of them
I don't think so. You speak your mind, but you manage to call a spade a spade rather than a <censored> spade.

Incidentally, I can't help wondering if there should be a poll for how good posters with a beef about moderators are when it comes to admitting that they have made a mistake.

The Backroad Astronomer
2009-Dec-06, 04:52 PM
That's the most common criticism we get. The second most common is that we're too strict on certain members. Occasionally we get both complaints about the same member....
Somedays are better than others for me. :D

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-06, 04:56 PM
Incidentally, I can't help wondering if there should be a poll for how good posters with a beef about moderators are when it comes to admitting that they have made a mistake.

I, as well.

ToSeek
2009-Dec-06, 05:39 PM
I don't think so. You speak your mind, but you manage to call a spade a spade rather than a <censored> spade.

Incidentally, I can't help wondering if there should be a poll for how good posters with a beef about moderators are when it comes to admitting that they have made a mistake.

We don't keep score, but we've gotten responses from "You're absolutely right, I'm sorry, and I promise not to do it again" to "You're a bunch of power-mad bullies who are out to get me." Most of the time, though, we don't get any feedback at all.

nokton
2009-Dec-06, 06:20 PM
I've taken the liberty of correcting those typos.

Oh My, ToSeek, you come so close. When were typos the true harbingers of a
misunderstanding? Only in contest is the word of mouth questioned, and the meaning
of the word not taken.
It is a fact of life, that anything that is about a purpose will be challenged.
I have hope, ToSeek, that any challenge will have it's heart in reason and science.
I believe you understand my meaning.
There is nothing wrong with the control of courtesy and good manners on this site.
Nokton.

slang
2009-Dec-06, 08:35 PM
When were typos the true harbingers of a misunderstanding?

Who says they are? Sometimes bad spelling in very visible places is very annoying to those who value correct use of language. Correcting a spelling error that "hurts the eyes" so to speak does not necessarily mean anything to the conversation. It's just a courtesy to the poster and readers, and probably prevents in thread comments, PM's and/or reports. Everyone wins.

Tucson_Tim
2009-Dec-06, 08:42 PM
I didn't vote.

I've got an opinion on this, but I've seen some other people voice their opinions . . .

I've never seen a member given a warning for having an opinion (unless it's an ATM idea in a subforum other than ATM). I've seen warnings and suspensions/bannings for adhom attacks and bad language. I've also seen people disagree with those opinions. There are two factors when posting: the content and how it is presented. A member was recently suspended, not for voicing his opinions but for name-calling while doing it.

Gillianren
2009-Dec-06, 08:55 PM
When were typos the true harbingers of a misunderstanding?

If I understand what you mean "harbinger" to mean in this context, quite often, actually. Typing exactly what you mean to say in the clearest way possible limits misunderstandings; words typed wrong are often typed as other, similar words, which leads to uncertainty as to what the person's actually talking about.

clop
2009-Dec-06, 09:40 PM
This is a stupid thread. Who cares if the moderators get it wrong from time to time. Grow up.

In what can only be described as a triumph of contemporary irony I have been awarded a one-point rule infarction for trying to defend the moderation team.

Heh heh, that made my day!

:)

clop

captain swoop
2009-Dec-07, 12:00 AM
No, you were awarded a point for the tone and content of your post after a warning on Tone by an Admin.

Moose
2009-Dec-07, 12:26 AM
I see two morals here.

1) What you say can have consequences, sure. But _how_ you say it is far more important.

2) A popular message doesn't really need very much protection. An unpopular message, regardless of its merits or lack thereof, is prone to attract pileups. A pileup in a semi-anonymous environment where communication takes place at a distance means a risk of mob behavior. Mob behavior is more of a threat to our community than is a single-person four-year meltdown. If we seem to be protecting the messenger of unpopular speech more than we are those rebutting it, we are.

You're (always) allowed to disagree, but say it nicely.

Lianachan
2009-Dec-07, 01:04 AM
Incidentally, I can't help wondering if there should be a poll for how good posters with a beef about moderators are when it comes to admitting that they have made a mistake.
Ahh.....but what if they didn't make a mistake? The mods, like all humans and half-Vulcans, are not perfect.

Orion's Fan
2009-Dec-07, 01:53 AM
The great thing about such a forum as BAUT is that you have the freedom to leave if you do not agree with the guidelines or how they are enforced.

Of all of the message boards and forums that I am a member of, this one seems to allow for more leeway and certainly more discussion of decisions made by moderators and board policy. The leeway sometimes gets in the way of the discussion of the topics at hand and is probably the one thing that I would change if I could.

aastrotech
2009-Dec-07, 02:00 AM
Yes, but then there would be another thread to discuss that action :)


That would be against the rules.

Lianachan
2009-Dec-07, 02:01 AM
The great thing about such a forum as BAUT is that you have the freedom to leave if you do not agree with the guidelines or how they are enforced. You are free to leave any forum whatsoever, surely?
Of all of the message boards and forums that I am a member of, this one seems to allow for more leeway and certainly more discussion of decisions made by moderators and board policy.Which I think we all agree is a good thing.

Orion's Fan
2009-Dec-07, 02:08 AM
You are free to leave any forum whatsoever, surely? Which I think we all agree is a good thing.

You are free to leave any forum at any time. I am just not sure why some stick around to complain over and over and over about things that they do not agree with, instead of going elsewhere or creating their own board.

As to your second sentence, I think in some cases (many, perhaps) that's not a good thing. It detracts from the purpose of the forum and the discussions of the board topics.

aastrotech
2009-Dec-07, 02:27 AM
Only in contest is the word of mouth questioned, and the meaning of the word not taken.


I like that. Is that a quote? Where from?

Eta C
2009-Dec-07, 02:32 AM
Occasionally, because nobody's perfect. I support the moderators in what is, in many ways, a thankless task. Far too many of the complaints are of the "If I ran the Zoo" variety.

01101001
2009-Dec-07, 02:39 AM
I support the moderators in what is, in many ways, a thankless task.

So it isn't:

Mods, thanks! You and your wisdom and your actions are appreciated.

Fazor
2009-Dec-07, 03:49 AM
If I had a problem with the way the forums are moderated, I wouldn't continue to frequent the site.

Have there been decisions I don't agree with? Yeah, sure. But I'm not the one making the decisions; why should I expect them all to agree with my personal opinion?

ShadowSot
2009-Dec-07, 04:54 AM
I lurk a lot, reading and trying to edumacate myself through the threads here. I've seen occasional slip ups, but the mods seem to work to correct it, usually offering up apologizes.

ineluki
2009-Dec-07, 01:02 PM
The second most common is that we're too strict on certain members.

From "neutral" members or from the "usual suspects"?

grant hutchison
2009-Dec-07, 01:30 PM
From "neutral" members or from the "usual suspects"?I doubt if there's such a thing as a "neutral" member in this context. If someone feels strongly enough to comment, they've presumably had time to form an opinion about the individual concerned.

Grant Hutchison

ToSeek
2009-Dec-07, 01:47 PM
From "neutral" members or from the "usual suspects"?

I try to avoid making such distinctions, though I can't say I am fully successful.

Cougar
2009-Dec-07, 02:22 PM
Occasionally, because nobody's perfect. I support the moderators in what is, in many ways, a thankless task.

Ditto.

marsbug
2009-Dec-07, 02:30 PM
The mods here do a good job, but threads like this aren't a bad thing. It's feedback for them and the watchers do need watching.

Hlafordlaes
2009-Dec-07, 02:30 PM
Occasionally, because nobody's perfect. I support the moderators in what is, in many ways, a thankless task. Far too many of the complaints are of the "If I ran the Zoo" variety.

This.

Swift
2009-Dec-07, 02:55 PM
From "neutral" members or from the "usual suspects"?
By the way, a neutral member is one who either has equal quantities of positive and negative charges, or one who's pH is around 7.

pghnative
2009-Dec-07, 03:03 PM
By the way, a neutral member is one who either has equal quantities of positive and negative charges, or one who's pH is around 7.or surrounded by Alps...

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-07, 03:52 PM
The mods here do a good job, but threads like this aren't a bad thing. It's feedback for them and the watchers do need watching.

Keep in mind who is watching the watcher's watchers.

Paul Beardsley
2009-Dec-07, 05:29 PM
or surrounded by Alps...

Hmm, Toblerone... (drool)

mike alexander
2009-Dec-07, 05:49 PM
Hmm, Toblerone... (drool)

Oh, stop drooling. You'll get the thread all sticky.

The Backroad Astronomer
2009-Dec-07, 06:30 PM
Keep in mind who is watching the watcher's watchers.
Then who is watching the watcher's watcher's watchers.

Arneb
2009-Dec-07, 07:39 PM
Then who is watching the watcher's watcher's watchers.

There was a new man to the zoo....

hhEb09'1
2009-Dec-07, 07:55 PM
Oh, stop drooling. You'll get the thread all sticky.I actually made the suggestion that threads like this be made sticky, for openness.

Thanks for the help, Paul

korjik
2009-Dec-07, 10:52 PM
oh, man, now it is all over my keyboard.

Paul Beardsley
2009-Dec-07, 11:00 PM
Thanks for the help, Paul
Always glad to be of service, especially when I wasn't even trying. ;)

slang
2009-Dec-07, 11:47 PM
So, aastrotech, how about some feedback on the current vote results? You did post this poll with a reason, no?

ShadowSot
2009-Dec-07, 11:57 PM
Just wanted to state, that the current number of votes is 42 for occasionally.
A very good number.

clint
2009-Dec-08, 12:53 AM
Half-Vulcan, if you want to get picky about it.


No one is perfect ...

For a moment there, I thought you were asking for trouble Gillianren :lol:

Tobin Dax
2009-Dec-08, 01:22 AM
For a moment there, I thought you were asking for trouble Gillianren :lol:
Hooray, someone else saw that, too! :lol:

Starfury
2009-Dec-08, 01:34 AM
Much more often than not, the Mods get it right.

To my knowledge, I have yet to accumulate close to enough infraction points to warrant a suspension, though I have been told to "knock it off" a time or two.

tnjrp
2009-Dec-08, 07:35 AM
Then who is watching the watcher's watcher's watchers.I keep hearing about this guy called God... :shifty:

clint
2009-Dec-08, 09:34 AM
Hooray, someone else saw that, too! :lol:

I had to read it 3 times to make sure it really wasn't meant that way
(an intense burst of laughter didn't help - which also prevented me from seeing your post ... :))

mugaliens
2009-Dec-08, 09:55 AM
I just wanted to post in this thread before it gets locked.

Lol - you're in the pink, as they say.

I said "occasionally," as by and large they do ok here on BAUT (as I've said many times before).

Still, they're only human. Room to grow, if the spirit's willing, an all that.

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-08, 04:47 PM
I keep hearing about this guy called God... :shifty:

Bah, elves in my back yard are the more likely explanation. ;)

Jim
2009-Dec-08, 08:28 PM
I keep hearing about this guy called God... :shifty:

I think you want the Vulcan Administrator thread.

tusenfem
2009-Dec-09, 03:28 PM
Just wanted to state, that the current number of votes is 42 for occasionally.
A very good number.

Actually, I like the 11 even better :p (going against my own personal rule not to use emoticons). Always knew I was infallible, infallable, inflamable, .... whaddevvah!

Whirlpool
2009-Dec-09, 04:22 PM
I voted occasionally , because Nobody's Perfect. :)

01101001
2009-Dec-09, 09:55 PM
Actually, I like the 11 even better...

The poll should not have been open to mods.

They always skew up.

Spoons
2009-Dec-10, 05:44 AM
I voted occasionally, because Nobody's Perfect.

I'm tempted to request that ToSeek change my username to 'Nobody'.

While I agree that it is a good thing for the mods/admin to get feedback, I'd agree that there does seem to be too many of these threads these days. Though I didn't really pay these types of threads much attention as a lurker, so I admit I wouldn't be the best judge of it.

There's no harm in voicing an opinion, (Are we there yet?) but when it's repeated ad nauseum I think it can start to become offensive (Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?).

So long as something useful comes out of the thread (in this case a clear pat on the back) I think these can be ok. Some of them I really don't see much value in.

I don't know if I'll vote (I'd vote occasionally) if it's still on 42 - I don't want to upset that apple-cart. I'd say mods generally do a smashing job. From me, it's thanks for all the time you guys invest in keeping our land tidy and civil.

slang
2009-Dec-10, 07:59 AM
I'm tempted to request that ToSeek change my username to 'Nobody'.

Careful, buddy.. I'm pretty sure some admins and moderators are on the record stating that nobody would be banned for no reason at all!

Spoons
2009-Dec-10, 08:58 AM
Mmmmm... can of worms - a meal in itself!

mugaliens
2009-Dec-11, 07:17 AM
Then who is watching the watcher's watcher's watchers.

The...

Nevermind. It's winds up as circular reasoning, anyway.

Buttercup
2009-Dec-11, 02:51 PM
There's no harm in voicing an opinion, (Are we there yet?) but when it's repeated ad nauseum I think it can start to become offensive (Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?).

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Hilarious! And so true! Thanks for giving me that laugh; needed it. :D

01101001
2009-Dec-11, 04:23 PM
This poll is concerning moderators making rulings where you think "that's just wrong". Blaming the wrong person, repression of unfavorable discussion, thread locking, warning, etc. whatever. You thought "that's just plain wrong".

Never means you've never seen it or don't care if they do.

Occasionaly means you think they made an honest mistake.

Noticably means you don't think it was an honest mistake.

Too often means you think it encourages bad behavior in some members.

So, by the results, what did you learn? Are you glad you ran the poll? Do you think it's a representative sample of registered members? Do you think you got enough participation to conclude anything? Did you think you would? What results did you expect? How are these different? What should the results have been, in your opinion? What do you think BAUT Forum moderators should do different to poll better? Did you have a point to go along with the poll? When do you plan to do the next one?

Never 14 16.47%
Occasionally 59 69.41%
[Occasionally or never 74 85.88%]
Noticeably 10 11.76%
Too often 2 2.35%

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-11, 06:48 PM
Do you ask a lot of questions?

captain swoop
2009-Dec-11, 07:46 PM
Quite reasonable to ask for some feedback from the OP of the thread and poll. Otherwise what was the point of it?

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-11, 08:40 PM
It's just that "some" isn't really "some", but "a lot in one post". I agree in principle, though.

Arneb
2009-Dec-11, 08:47 PM
It's just that "some" isn't really "some", but "a lot in one post". I agree in principle, though.
If "a lot" is the concern, one might rephrase the question as,

"so, aastrotech, which conclusions do you draw from this poll?"

Actually, I'd like to have this one answered.

slang
2009-Dec-11, 09:45 PM
OP's last activity was after I asked the same question in #73. But maybe he missed that one.

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-11, 09:46 PM
If "a lot" is the concern, one might rephrase the question as,

"so, aastrotech, which conclusions do you draw from this poll?"

Actually, I'd like to have this one answered.

So would I.

For that matter, I want to know his motivations for changing his definitions from the poll to the first post.

01101001
2009-Dec-11, 10:39 PM
Do you ask a lot of questions?

Sure do. They come out of my interest in BAUT Forum. I think the OP would be gratified that fellow members seem to care about the results.

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-11, 10:40 PM
Sheesh. Make one facetious statement, and everyone gets all serious about it.

01101001
2009-Dec-11, 11:04 PM
Sheesh. Make one facetious statement, and everyone gets all serious about it.

OK. I apologize for getting serious here at BAUT. What was I thinking?

Was I thinking? How would I know? Should I know?

SolusLupus
2009-Dec-11, 11:15 PM
I don't know, should you?

Arneb
2009-Dec-12, 01:52 PM
OP's last activity was after I asked the same question in #73. But maybe he missed that one.
I have a sneaking suspicion he may have missed both.

hhEb09'1
2009-Dec-12, 02:22 PM
Never 11 14.29%
Occasionally 55 71.43%
[Occasionally or never 66 85.72%]
Noticeably 9 11.69%
Too often 2 2.60%I thought about these results, and decided I should make some recommendations to my fellow moderators. An obvious first reaction was just to ban 11 posters, I figured that would fix everything.

So, as a sort of puzzle, I ask, which 11 am I thinking of? :)

Messier Tidy Upper
2009-Dec-12, 03:24 PM
The moderators are, most likely, human. They will, doubtless, make the occasional error.

As did the person who posted the poll. "Occasionally" has two, not one "l," and "noticeably" has an "e" between the "c" and the "a," at least in US spelling.

Well everyone knows Americans can't spell properly! :lol:

(Nor can I but that's besides the point!) :lol: :whistle:

I voted 'occasionally' I think the mods here generally do a good job although there are always exceptions. Not that I've experienced or seen all that many - & we are all human. I think! :lol:

Sometimes things seem a bit restrictive or topics are locked when I don't they should be but that's about it really.

Messier Tidy Upper
2009-Dec-12, 03:28 PM
OK. I apologize for getting serious here at BAUT. What was I thinking?

Was I thinking? How would I know? Should I know?

Telepathy? :lol:

On yourself. Retrospectively.

slang
2009-Dec-12, 05:26 PM
So, as a sort of puzzle, I ask, which 11 am I thinking of? :)

Top 11. Just to make sure that sometimes you do something wrong, and this question merely turns into a subjective opinion issue. ;)

ToSeek
2009-Dec-12, 08:31 PM
I thought about these results, and decided I should make some recommendations to my fellow moderators. An obvious first reaction was just to ban 11 posters, I figured that would fix everything.


How about as a Christmas present each moderator gets to ban one person of their choice? ;)

Seriously, aastrotech went off in a huff some days ago when a PM discussion we were having didn't meet with his satisfaction. I gather he'll be back eventually, but he's taking a break right now, of his own volition.

hhEb09'1
2009-Dec-12, 08:54 PM
Never 11 14.29%
Occasionally 55 71.43%
[Occasionally or never 66 85.72%]
Noticeably 9 11.69%
Too often 2 2.60%
So, as a sort of puzzle, I ask, which 11 am I thinking of? :)Just to clarify my puzzle, I meant that the puzzle was the choice between the 11 who voted "Never" and the 11 who voted "Noticeably" or "Too often" :)

Swift
2009-Dec-12, 09:38 PM
Just to clarify my puzzle, I meant that the puzzle was the choice between the 11 who voted "Never" and the 11 who voted "Noticeably" or "Too often" :)
I don't know. I'd rather randomly pick 11 members and ban them. Maybe put a little more fear back into our style of moderation. Smiting, we need more smiting.

:whistle:

:shifty:

;) Just kidding. (or is he? - dramatic music dun, dun, dun)

captain swoop
2009-Dec-12, 09:56 PM
Mount Olympus type Smiting? Greek Gods seem the most random.

Swift
2009-Dec-12, 10:02 PM
http://www.afunzone.com/halloween/lightning_icon_s.gif

Tobin Dax
2009-Dec-12, 10:02 PM
Why am I afraid that ToSeek is going to change his avatar from Spock to Gul Dukat?

antoniseb
2009-Dec-12, 10:32 PM
Why am I afraid that ToSeek is going to change his avatar from Spock to Gul Dukat?
I don't think that's going to happen.

Tobin Dax
2009-Dec-12, 10:39 PM
I don't think that's going to happen.
:lol: Oh, crap.

captain swoop
2009-Dec-12, 11:33 PM
What's as Gul Dukat?


I was thinking more of 'Star Trek' Greek Deity aliens.

Gigabyte
2009-Dec-12, 11:44 PM
Damn you for making me look up Gul Dukat.

ABR.
2009-Dec-13, 12:41 AM
Never fear, Tobin Dax...I knew who you were talking about. But then, you knew that....

mugaliens
2009-Dec-13, 08:34 AM
Wow. It's up to 12, now.

So who's the new mod?


Smiting, we need more smiting.

Smite me.

No, wait!

Ahhhhhh...hh..h...h.........h... ....

Moose
2009-Dec-13, 11:32 AM
Wow. It's up to 12, now.

So who's the new mod?

Nah, I worked out how to stuff the ballot box. I'm just doing it slowly enough to make it look good.

/ Wait, did I just say that out loud? :shifty:

Gigabyte
2009-Dec-13, 05:32 PM
The current poll seems to reflect reality.

Spoons
2009-Dec-13, 05:47 PM
Yes, but Moose is skipping rocks off the surface.

Chuck
2009-Dec-13, 05:48 PM
The "Noticeably" and "Too often" are political. The "Never" are religious. They should all go.

Gigabyte
2009-Dec-13, 05:51 PM
None of them matter at all.

forrest noble
2009-Dec-14, 01:31 PM
moderators getting it wrong

On this new system of infractions I have received three infractions, never having a clue why I received any of them. The explanation for the first was completely somebody's imagination (crazy ideas), the last two infractions I received today for no know reason -- to me. I asked for an explanation.

In the past I also received suspensions for no valid reason, ever, why? The whole system seems to be often based upon someone's wild, imagined ideas, convincing a moderator by complaint. Not a bit of truth to any of it. Is this the way anybody wants BAUT to be run!

antoniseb
2009-Dec-14, 01:39 PM
On this new system of infractions I have received three infractions, never having a clue why I received any of them....

The new infraction system is taking some time to get used to on both sides, but...

-You have only received two infractions, one on October 30th for a "veiled ad hom", and a two-pointer this morning for ATM in a mainstream section of the forum.

-you can look at your profile and see the infractions tab, and view the details of the infraction.

-for our part, I'd like the infraction to automatically insert a link to the offending post, but it doesn't, and the moderators don't always supply the link, but in the future we'll be more consistent about that.

I've looked at your offending post this morning, and I'd have to say, the offense is not imaginary.

captain swoop
2009-Dec-14, 05:13 PM
Also in the Q&A thread concerned the mod posted a warning about introducing ATM into Q&A threads and stated you had been awarded an infraction.

forrest noble
2009-Dec-14, 11:40 PM
moderators getting it wrong

concerning an unstated subjective interpretation by moderators of the definition of what an ATM hypothesis is: Example of 2 point infraction:

Planetary magnetism for Uranus and Neptune is not understood. There is no mainstream explanation why Neptune and Uranus's magnetic profile is the way that has been observed. There is only speculation from mainstream astronomers/ planetary physics. The mainstream link below speculates concerning complex fluid motions of these planets as did my comment in the QA section. No proposal was made or wrong information was given, only possibilities involving fluid dynamics, electricity, and magnetism similar to what is discussed in the link below. It was specifically identified in the thread as only a speculative possibility. To even mention known possibilities discussed by mainstream physicists is apparently considered ATM (http://www.bautforum.com/space-astronomy-questions-answers/97867-ice-giants-have-weird-magnetic-fields.html), an infraction worth 2 points, without warning! -- even when there is no accepted mainstream explanation?

These are quotes from the link below:


Although various explanations for Uranus' and Neptune's unusual magnetic fields have been proposed, their cause has remained unexplained.


Since planetary magnetic fields are generated by complex fluid motions in electrically conducting regions of the planets, a process known as dynamo action, they are intricately linked to the structure and evolution of planetary interiors," write Bloxham and co-author Sabine Stanley, a graduate student in Harvard's Department of Earth and Planetary Science.


Determining why Uranus and Neptune have different field morphologies is not only critical for studying these planets' interiors, but is essential for understanding the dynamics of magnetic field generation in all planets."

http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/03.11/06-planets.html

captain swoop
2009-Dec-15, 01:04 AM
If you have a problem with the moderation of your posts then report them, don't bring your personal complaints about your ATM posts into this thread

agingjb
2009-Dec-18, 03:12 PM
I voted "occasionally", and would have voted "rarely" had that option been given.

But even so, I don't entirely understand all the criteria for suspension. For instance, suspending a participant, other than than the OP, in a CT thread, for not answering questions seems to establish a new implicit rule.

Moose
2009-Dec-18, 04:02 PM
But even so, I don't entirely understand all the criteria for suspension. For instance, suspending a participant, other than than the OP, in a CT thread, for not answering questions seems to establish a new implicit rule.

Not really. The intent behind Rule 13 is to force non-mainstream claims to be supported by evidence.

In ATM, because of the mandated time limit, we also have to be sure that nobody gets to hijack the OP's thread with their own ATM claims. If someone wants to make an alternate claim, they must make and defend their own thread.

In CT, there's little need to force claims into separate threads. But all the same, anybody making a non-mainstream claim is expected to defend their claim with evidence.