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.

[Ol' Scratch]

Eh, favortism is par of the course on and off Internet forums. There's really not much you can do about it. It's not like a forum is some kind of stalwart democracy with champions of good facing off against the tyranny of evil men. It's just a collection of like-minded individuals coming together to share in a common passion. The moderators included.

Unlike a lot of forums, most of the moderation actions here seem to be at least discussed either beforehand or while determining a final verdict for a major infraction. The moderators are also regular, every day people and each action is a personal decision to one degree or another. Some see things more critically than others, or react more harshly on topics that are very personal to them (such as racism or religious persecution). And in some cases if someone is acting particularly riled up in an argument, they often get the brunt of the heavy-handedness despite numerous other people being a part of the argument. God knows I've had that happen to me enough times. And yeah, it does just piss you off all the more. But so what? Did it quell the argument and settle things down? More often than not, yes. Is your life somehow ruined by a short ban? Were you honestly not deserving of a ban? Are you unable to make a living, support your family, or feed your children because you can't post on an Internet forum for a week? Of course not, because neither your world nor anyone else's revolves around a God damned forum. So just shake your fist at the few assholes who pissed you off, be petty and refuse to play in any games with them in the future (<coughs>), and go find something else to do for a bit.

Would it be nice if the moderating team was a group of impersonal robots who waved their mighty ban-sticks with equality for everyone? Yeah. But, honestly, I don't think I'd want to participate in a forum like that. I like the somewhat personal, small, family feeling I get here. It's why I don't post on larger ones like RPG.net or Wizards of the Coast's sites. While I can't stand a good number of people here, I still think its one of the best online communities around and I'll defend that sentiment to the end.