Moderation on Dumpshock, Should there be an appeals process? Options

[Cain]

Okay, after recent events, some question has come up about how the moderating staff does things and why they do it.

Speaking as someone who's taken warnings before, I received two warnings in the same day for essentially the same thing: saying one word (not a PA, not even snark) to a Shadowrun notable. I don't want to post the details in public, but I will send them to anyone who asks in a PM. At least one mod has gone on record to say that the moderation is uneven. Some people have felt targeted by the mods, and even go so far as to state that they feel like Dumpshock is kowtowing to the official CGL party line. At the very least, the thread that was temporarily locked and then reopened would not have been locked at all if the private communication were from WotC.

I think we all agree that this is a bad thing. Dumpshock should be inviting to all. And while I can respect the fact that the mod team does the best they can in that regard, something needs to change.

First of all, I suggest that they increase the size of the mod team. Bull has said publically there are only 6 active mods right now. That seems low. We need more, and we can get them the same way we got the last batch: via recruitment drive.

Second, I suggest that there be an appeals process put in place, so people can challenge mod calls. This can be done via email, if need be. If a decision was made in haste, it may seem too harsh after a good night's sleep. I also suggest that public discussion (via the News forum) be available so other people can chime in.

Will these solve the issues? Probably not completely. But I think it's a place to start.

[fistandantilus4....]

Changes that Randall Bills has said that he has received a sign from God that he will not make

1. Personal attacks, flaming, trolling, and baiting are prohibited. This includes any form of racism, sexism or religious intolerance.

So to have a mormon moderator give me not just one, but two warnings...

The first warning was for the much more expressive post previous to this which was most definitely a ToS violation. The Second warning was for coming back after I took you off the ban I and others did not think you'd earned, and you continued with what I'd just warned you for.

Individual moderators are allowed to go off on vindictive tirades

Not individual. As with other violations, it went up for review by others. Following up on a Warning we told you we would issue if you continued is no where near vindictive. Nor does three sentences constitute a tirade.

I do agree that you should have been able to respond. I did not realize that the method I was using was going to shoot you a no-response e-mail. Simply did not think about it. However, my e-mail is available and you don't have to be able to log in to see it.