interface modules - part I

Discussion in 'gV governance' started by Mars, 3 Apr 2011.

Topic Status:
  1. Mars

    Mars MCP

    the mcp is loathe to moderate. deleting posts, editing posts, issuing infractions, quarantining or scrubbing members are not the things that we want to do. unfortunately, any hope that such acts would be unnecessary are not realistic.
    the intent of forum nodes is to segregate user-generated content into logical sectors, allowing inhabitants to, for the most part, regulate their own gV experience. not everybody enjoys cross-forum drama or flamewars just as not everybody wishes to partake in thread games and light-hearted discussion. the idea is that if a person does not wish to become involved in a vitriolic flamewar, they simply avoid posting in area17. we have sought to accommodate for the many by writing out appropriate nodes, yet that seems to not be sufficient.
    there appears to be three critical control points that are failing, with varying regularity:
    • threads sometimes get posted to the wrong node
    • followup posts are sometimes grossly off-topic, or are ad hominem attacks
    • modules are sometimes too slow to react, and cannot stop the downward spiral soon enough.
    early in the genesis of gV the mcp mentioned interface modules. the time has come to discuss them in more detail, to decide as a community how they should be operated, who should operate them, and when they should be operated.

    currently, interface modules are limited to accessing the 'reported content' control panel, deleting posts/threads/profile comments (soft, non-permanent deletes leaving a placeholder), moving threads, splitting posts from a thread, and merging posts into a thread. if a module is not sure exactly how to deal with a thread/post, they can also 'unapprove' them and they will be placed into a queue to be dealt with by the mcp.
    interface modules cannot lock threads, make threads sticky, permanently delete, see ip addresses, or ban users that have graduated from 'new arrival' status.
    due to the nonsocial intent of interface modules, interface modules may not start threads, reply to threads, 'like' content, post profile comments, or engage in private conversations.

    the current role of the interface module would likely be limited to ensuring the various nodes are used as intended and removing inappropriate personal attacks and the like before they have an opportunity to 'poison the well' or become intertwined with the discussion to the degree that they cannot easily be separated.
    this is open to change, depending upon what the community desires.

    topics for discussion could include:
    how to select inhabitants to take on this role?
    should the identity of particular modules remain unknown?
    is the appointment permanent? temporary? subject to peer review?

    please feel free to share your thoughts and ideas.

    vigorous debate of this posting is encouraged, but under no circumstances should the thread be derailed or used as a venue to deride one another.
    let us make this more clear: the MCP will not, under any possible circumstances, tolerate off-topic commentary or ad hominem exchanges within the threads it initiates.
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Lias

    Lias Open Community!

    Define each role and allow anyone interested (with enough trophies) to send a private PM to apply. Or place an 'apply' button at the bottom of each module task description. Applicants receive a PM letting them know their application was received and was or was not accepted, and why. Keep all eligible applicants in queue and let them take turns.
    every three months a complete turnover. And posters grade each three month stint.

    I think eligible module volunteers need to keep up a presence here and a post count. Perhaps at least ten posts a week to be eligible to take over a module.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Lain

    Lain End of line. #resist

    I think the module operators should remain anonymous, and if that anonymity is breached the module should change hands. It's important for the operator to remain anonymous so that no favor can be implied or intended, and it relieves said operator from a barrage of requests, bullying, and the usual baggage that comes with being a 'forum moderator'.

    I like the turnover every three months idea. Quarterly makes perfect sense, and operators who fair well should be able to accept additional tenure.
    • Like Like x 3
  4. Love

    Love Feel the love

    Are we clear that this segregation was ever decided upon as desirable by the community?

    My (very possibly wrong) recollection is that the nodes sprang into existence over time, and that there was very little if no community input at all during this process, regarding this process.

    There were a couple of these threads that I didn't participate in, so my question isn't meant to be leading. Did we ask for the segregation of topic, and more specifically the type of content filtering suggested here?
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Han Held

    Han Held <3 Internet Mean little kid <3

    +1, I agree with this post, and I think it would help to prevent or at least stave off the establishment of a gv/FIC.
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Wad

    Wad Drama is Fascinating

    • Trophies, duration of membership, or any other sort of 'seniority status' should not be used under any circumstance to establish or deny eligibility, beyond the already extant "new arrival" status. Otherwise you're already establishing a paradigm of 'some are more equal than others' right from the start.

    • The roles to be filled should not, again, under ANY circumstance, be open to be "applied" for. Invariably, those most desirous of exercising authority over others are the same least equipped to have that authority. Rather, it should be an 'honor' extended to members in good standing, to accept or refuse.

    Those accepting the responsibility should be barred from posting during their term of service. This is the ONLY way to insure both impartiality, (to the extent that is ever truly possible) and that no one becomes 'entrenched' in the role of 'enforcer', since, to do so would mean they could no longer participate. You don't have cops going into a bar to have drinks while on duty. So, when someone is 'serving', they should be willing to forego all posting activity for the duration of that service. Referees don't get to play the game they're refereeing for good reason. This would have the added bonus of making it far LESS desirable to "play cop" to the ones that see it as just a chance to "flex their muscles". That being said, quarterly might be a bit long to 'sit it out'. Monthly might better fit this model.

    • Anonymity of moderator in no way insures the lack of favoritism. In fact, it almost guarantees the opposite. The goal here is to share the 'work', not to 'relieve the operator from the job "of being a forum moderator". If you already are thinking of ways to get out from under the load you're volunteering for, you probably shouldn't volunteer in the first place. Everyone SHOULD know who the current "sheriff" is, precisely because it holds that person who is now wielding the power to full accountability for the even dispensing of that power. Beware those already seeking to hide behind an anonymous badge.

    • Term Limits should be strictly enforced. Allowing those who "do well" only encourages the formation of entrenched interests. It's a very easy system to "game". It takes no effort at all to make one moderator "look good" if just a few trolls coordinate their efforts to keep a low profile during that moderator's term, then, through utilization of their numerous socks, 'acting out' during the tenure of a moderator they wish to discredit. Strict enforcement of term limits, with NO EXTENSIONS would curtail that potential boondoggle. There would be a need to 'recycle' anyway, since being restricted from posting would probably cause many members to choose NOT to serve anyway, when asked. But there should be a mandatory period between terms served...say 6 months. So no one could serve more than twice within any given year.
    • Like Like x 4
  7. Pep

    Pep Eats Mars for breakfast

    As with politicians, only those who don't want to do the job should be given the responsibility.

    Pep (knows this might create some difficulty, but is sure that it can be resolved.)
    • Like Like x 4
  8. GradyE

    GradyE Hybrid Angel

    This would make it rather easy to figure out which member/s had assumed the role of interface module.
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Wad

    Wad Drama is Fascinating

    If you read my post, you'd see that I argued against anonymity in the very next paragraph...We should KNOW, not even have to guess. Anonymity only serves the purpose (possibly nefarious) of the moderator, not the community.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. GradyE

    GradyE Hybrid Angel

    My apologies. I missed that. (late/tired)
  11. Pep

    Pep Eats Mars for breakfast


    Pep (isn't really helping, is he.)
    • Like Like x 2
  12. Lias

    Lias Open Community!

    I'm not sure why these folks can't post while acting as anonymous mod.
  13. Pep

    Pep Eats Mars for breakfast

    Well, actually, they already do. Does that help your unsuredness?

    Pep (replace "can't" with "shouldn't" and you might start a valid discussion.)
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Bulldick!

    Bulldick! Rampaging

    II fully agree with VVI here, under these conditions I am willing to remain a member of a moderated gV.

    I still think that the whole idea is not going to end well...

  15. nina

    nina still prettier than you

    why would it not end well?
  16. Snapper O'Callaghan

    Snapper O'Callaghan It's not a hug. I'm not finished strangling you.

    I think that constant turnover will result in a very uneven mod style. Moreso than usual.
  17. Snapper O'Callaghan

    Snapper O'Callaghan It's not a hug. I'm not finished strangling you.

    Because people don't like to be moderated.
    • Like Like x 3
  18. Pep

    Pep Eats Mars for breakfast

    I like that idea.

    Pep (If you know it's going to be arbitrary, but you also know that it's going to change soon, it makes it more fun.)
    • Like Like x 1
  19. LeeHere Absent

    LeeHere Absent Just Lee

    I am requesting that the deleted posts from this thread be moved to the appropriate section in the forum.
    • Like Like x 4
  20. Pep

    Pep Eats Mars for breakfast

    PS It's like going out on a succession of blind dates rather than being stuck in a monogamous relationship.)
Topic Status:

Share This Page