52yrral wrote:
Guess you'll be purple soon.
Already am. What could possibly be worse than an abrasive data crunching bunny? 2, yes...
Moderation in chess.com forums in need of drastic improvement
Sort:
Nov 20, 2019
0
#83
Perspectives...factions...variety... the world, and this microcosm, is made up of these things. They shake things up, spice things up and keep us on our toes...even us non- dancers.
We mods, evil, lazy, mad-with-power or just incompetent depending on one's POV, can be either overly strict or disgustingly lax according to one's expectations or preconcieved ideas of what a forum should look like.
Pretty much, being a moderator, which contrary to popular myth isn't about enforcing guidelines (a negative), is really about promoting the vision of the site creators (a positive) using the policies and guidelines as our tools .
As I said, there's no winning for mods and everyone who's not a mod knows better how to moderate ... which is ok since we end up with well attended threads such as this one.
Once again I must thank you for your keen insight ( *radar* ) in providing a clear view on an often distorted and misaligned discourse in these matters.
Nov 20, 2019
0
#85
batgirl wrote:
*snipped with apologies*
Pretty much, being a moderator, which contrary to popular myth isn't about enforcing guidelines (a negative), is really about promoting the vision of the site creators (a positive) using the policies and guidelines as our tools .
*snipped with apologies*
This is indeed a refreshingly positive view which hopefully all mods, staff and members share. Unfortunately it may seem to some that a mod is a tool with which to hurt others or by which others hurt us or hurts us by its own agenda.
Nov 20, 2019
0
#86
To be honest, Mr. Bunny, at least from my position (which I'm aware may be very different from that of the opposite side) I rarely detect a personal agenda in the mods I know. Most, if not all, are very careful about not acting on a personal level or even seeming to. Of course, there is no perfect world.
Nov 20, 2019
0
#87
batgirl wrote:
To be honest, Mr. Bunny, at least from my position (which I'm aware may be very different from that of the opposite side) I rarely detect a personal agenda in the mods I know. Most, if not all, are very careful about not acting on a personal level or even seeming to. Of course, there is no perfect world.
that's nice to hear. guess the next complain will be that mods are too detached 
Nov 20, 2019
0
#88
autobunny wrote:
batgirl wrote:
*snipped with apologies*
Pretty much, being a moderator, which contrary to popular myth isn't about enforcing guidelines (a negative), is really about promoting the vision of the site creators (a positive) using the policies and guidelines as our tools .
*snipped with apologies*
This is indeed a refreshingly positive view which hopefully all mods, staff and members share. Unfortunately it may seem to some that a mod is a tool with which to hurt others or by which others hurt us or hurts us by its own agenda.
So I'm not entirely clear bunny. Yes, clearly there are many here who represent the position that mod's are self-serving, out to "hurt", but what is your point? Do you subscribe to this view? If not ... why bring it up? It's a no brainer to state mods are biased, this observation applies to anyone. The question is intent, as like most all these issues. Mods can not, and should not be accused of predisposing a negative disposition. Most, if not all have good intentions. They often get it wrong, but not from any malevolence.
Nov 20, 2019
0
#89
MustangMate wrote:
autobunny wrote:
batgirl wrote:
*snipped with apologies*
Pretty much, being a moderator, which contrary to popular myth isn't about enforcing guidelines (a negative), is really about promoting the vision of the site creators (a positive) using the policies and guidelines as our tools .
*snipped with apologies*
This is indeed a refreshingly positive view which hopefully all mods, staff and members share. Unfortunately it may seem to some that a mod is a tool with which to hurt others or by which others hurt us or hurts us by its own agenda.
So I'm not entirely clear bunny. Yes, clearly there are many here who represent the position that mod's are self-serving, out to "hurt", but what is your point? Do you subscribe to this view? If not ... why bring it up? It's a no brainer to state mods are biased, this observation applies to anyone. The question is intent, as like most all these issues. Mods can not, and should not be accused of predisposing a negative disposition. Most, if not all have good intentions. They often get it wrong, but not from any malevolence.
the mustangmate & bunny dialogs
--------------------------------------------
bunny: there's a terrorist attack happening, folks. run!
mustangmate: are you saying you support the terrorists? if not, why bring it up?
---
bunny: the plants have not been watered. they will die soon
mustangmate: it's a no brainer to say that plants will die without water. so will we.
---
bunny: my thread was unfairly locked
mustangmate: a mod did it. so it must be fair. you cannot accuse a mod of being unfair.
i wonder what the relationship between mods and staff is.
because staff has been on my a$$ for years-just like you, bunny. many mutings. banned. come back and topics are locked-by staff.
but, with mods, my only issue has been when they are puppets of staff.
Nov 21, 2019
0
#91
poor examples bunny. I'll suggest you entirely missed a point being made and took it personal. I but stated your comment was unclear. You suggested something about moderation is perceived by some as a "tool to hurt"... whatever that means. The terminology conjures up all kinds of images, none of which are particularly accurate.
People lashing out at moderators know their behavior is out of line. They try to make it personal by making the accusation of being singled out. The fact is they simply don't like being "told what to do", reject any form of authority and feel a sense of entitlement to act as they choose. It's not about moderators per say, it's about all such persons with similar representation.
Nov 21, 2019
0
#92
MustangMate wrote:
poor examples bunny. I'll suggest you entirely missed a point being made and took it personal. I but stated your comment was unclear. You suggested something about moderation is perceived by some as a "tool to hurt"... whatever that means. The terminology conjures up all kinds of images, none of which are particularly accurate.
People lashing out at moderators know their behavior is out of line. They try to make it personal by making the accusation of being singled out. The fact is they simply don't like being "told what to do", reject any form of authority and feel a sense of entitlement to act as they choose. It's not about moderators per say, it's about all such persons with similar representation.
Why are they poor examples?
Did the bunny miss the point or was the point merely made with too many presumptuous assertions? Merely asking would have been so much easier. Once again, did the bunny take it personal? Or did you just perceive it so? 😊
By tool, a mechanism, a way.
Can't speak for most accusations against mods/staff and whether it's about being singled out. Perhaps you have collected these statistics. The bunny hasn't. Perhaps you haven't either and are just making assumptions again. The point was about subjective interpretation of the TOS and how it gets clouded by so many factors and how it gets used by people with malicious intent.
@batgirl seems to have understood the point well enough and she replied very well and on point.
#118 YAY !!!
Nov 22, 2019
0
#95
RedGirlZ wrote:
There's a very simple way to get rid of the Toxic trolling as you mention, but for some reason chess.com won't do it. The simple short term solution is to put restrictions on new members posting. All these comments and trolling you see are made by accounts less than 2 days old. Why should an account that new have access to the forums? they wouldn't understand the UI enough to be posting at that point.
You could just say that a troll will make tons of accounts, and just sit on them until the restriction period is over. Well to counteract this, you could force each account to have to play say 100 games before they can post, which isn't hard to do. It might not erase trolls but it would drastically decrease the amount you see.
The problem with trolling on chess.com is that there you can't stop a user from accessing the site if they really want to. What you can do is make the process of them interacting with the community more hassle than its worth.
I agree. It's not that they don't know how to make things better here, it's that they choose not to. That is disturbing.
RedGirlZ wrote:
But oh well, what can ya do.
Just give up and leave the Forums to the lunatics.
It's obvious they have no intention of trying to improve the situation, they have certainly had long enough.
Well I don't have a negative outlook about everything in life but what I can say is...here's what Chess.com did do RIGHT in the month of Sept. I assume Oct's figures will be roughly in the same ball park. 
Nov 22, 2019
0
#98
14,000 individual accounts muted out of 200, 000 abuse complains. Probably should be more like 10 times that number.
Nov 22, 2019
0
#99
RonaldJosephCote wrote:
Well I don't have a negative outlook about everything in life but what I can say is...here's what Chess.com did do RIGHT in the month of Sept. I assume Oct's figures will be roughly in the same ball park.
Thanks for sharing, man. Really interesting.
Individual accounts muted Vs mute actions - what are those?
So many reports may also indicate that members are too sensitive.
So many accounts muted/closed in a month! Not necessarily all belonging to different people.
RedGirlZ wrote:
those stats are just proof of the amount of abuse and TOS violations chess.com is experiencing. That's not a good thing lol.
It shows the effort being made.
There are millions of active members. It is impossible to police millions of members through live moderation of every chat.
Forkedagain may have been able to police hundreds of members but it is different when you have millions.
The only way to do it would be a draconian system like they have in China. I don't think anybody wants that.
The reporting system is working.
Guess you'll be purple soon.