I want more modding, do you?

[SensiblePerson]

@kerowo

If you give the mods too much leeway in their decision making powers then all mod decisions have the appearance of personal decisions. This reinforces the idea that “mods have favorites” and “TLMHGTG” and you run the risk of someone who is modded taking it as a personal affront and leaving in a huff.

If the rules are too elaborate you have to deal with rules lawyers seeing just how close they can get to the line. These people get everyone pissed off at the mods for not doing anything to stop these horrible posters despite the rules being clear that there is nothing to be done.

Agree, this here is the challenge I’ve tried to articulate a couple times in this thread.

(What is “TLMHGTG” though?)

@kerowo

Currently we aren’t really doing either and are stuck in a weird limbo; vague rules and a community that doesn’t want any modding to happen without a handful putting in their 2 cents on it.

Yes!

@kerowo

I would say Keed was right if I hadn’t eaten recently and if he wasn’t saying what had been proposed way back on Unchained: Mods have authority to mod people but all mod decisions can be overturned by community feedback. This requires that mods document what they did and that there is a forum for discussion by the community. These don’t have to be the same thread, which as we’ve seen too often gets derailed into oblivion, but they both need to exist.

I’m not quite sure what you’re agreeing with or not agreeing with based on your first sentence. But it seems to me we do have a place for mods to document their actions and for the community to discuss them (the Log of Key Moderator Actions thread).

@kerowo

“Authority to mod people” in this case means taking actions more involved than requesting people to stop taking shots at each other, things like editing or deleting posts (a whole other conversation) to locking threads to temp bans.

Right, and I’d add, if this is made progressive (i.e, consequences increase on an agreed-upon schedule), that should help rebut concerns about arbitrary, capricious, or biased modding.

@kerowo

To stop the tendency we have to talk something to death put a reasonable time limit on community feedback to an event and then take an up/down vote on it. If we gave an identifier to each mod action that could be used to name the discussion thread. This would be a place to excise any non-mod action posts in the mod-action thread and provide something that could be locked at the end of the discussion period.

This sounds a little over-complicated to me, but if that’s what it would take to get a community consensus on more active modding, I’d be for it.

@kerowo

This would be enough to get us started.

Thanks for posting. I appreciate the thinking and input.