Moderation of Gina Rinehart thread in VPT

[David]

I'd like to bring this section of the Nick's BB rules to people's attention:

[1061]

[David]

You're mistaken in thinking that the request was solely aimed at you; your (highly offensive) post was the catalyst, but it was a general warning aimed at all posters who think that it is funny or appropriate to denigrate an individual because of their weight. You will note that WPT's post and thread title were edited as well.

As people seem to think they have carte blanche to do this every time Rinehart's name comes up, the reminder was necessary and appropriate. We would ask you to keep the rules in mind in future when posting.

[watt price tully]

[watt price tully]

[David]

[stui magpie]

Here's some feedback.

To be a good moderator (IMO) the person needs to put their own biases and opinions to the side. The job is about keeping conversation on track, not being the organise, not policing their own opinions, letting debate flow even if they disagree with some of the content and only intervening when necessary.

A good Mod is like a good AFL umpire. Not noticed, has no influence on the game, only pops up when necessary.

You constantly split threads because you can, you break up another because one of your pet subjects, fat chicks, gets a run.

David, basically, you're a crap mod.

If you want to be a good one, develop the ability to step away from your own beliefs, look at the big picture and just let things go. For someone who has issues with authority, you have a very authoritarian approach to being a Mod.

And FWIW, no I don't want to be a Mod. I have to walk that balance every day at work. So when I come home and get on Nicks I can be me, I can vent , I can type bullshit, wind people up for fun and do ll the stuff I couldn't do if I had the responsibility of being a Mod.

[David]

Stui, I didn't write the rules; I merely interpret them. Mocking and belittling someone because of an attribute beyond their control (race, sex, sexuality, etc.) is prohibited on this forum for good reason. I make no apology for upholding those rules.

I'm sorry to hear that you don't like the way I moderate�likely, you're not aware of most of what I actually do; but that's beside the point�but I'm sure you'll respect that I'm not moderating for your benefit alone. I'm happy to take constructive critique and feedback, but "you're a crap mod" is hardly useful.

[Morrigu]

Sorry David I'm sure it is not an easy job - but you really are currently too heavy handed and seem to be applying your own moralistic interpretation of posts with an distinct authoritarian attitude.

[stui magpie]

[stui magpie]

[David]

I didn't say it was a personal attack. Please don't put words in my mouth.

[David]

Can anyone provide some distinct examples in which they feel my (or anyone else's) moderating has not been up to scratch?

I'll start with the two critiques in Stui's post:

1) This particular instance of moderation.

No apologies whatsoever. If someone had made a similar remark regarding someone's race, sex or sexuality, (I hope) you would have agreed with me on its unacceptability and supported its moderation. I'm sorry if you think overweight people are fair game, but they're not.

This isn't about protecting Gina. Every time you make a cruel or hateful remark about her figure, you insult every woman in the world of that figure as well. Allowing that kind of stuff on here has the potential to intimidate posters (or potential posters) and dissuade them from contributing. That is the spirit in which the Nick's BB rules have been written.

For me, that's a much more serious problem than a couple of posters not being allowed to make their hilarious fat jokes.

2) Thread splitting and merging

I do this for everyone else's benefit, so I'm happy to take feedback on this. My impression, and that of the other mods, is that users find thread derailments frustrating and distracting. Posts generally aren't getting deleted (unless they're gratuitous trolling); they're just spawning new threads. From what I've observed, this has in many cases greatly aided the flow of conversation and allowed many topics to be discussed at once, instead of one petering out because its thread has taken a sharp left turn. Once again, though, I'm happy to hear objections to this.

That's all I can think of for now. Are there any other instances of us behaving in an overbearing or authoritarian manner? Bring them up and we can discuss them.

[stui magpie]

David, this is about you not the mod group in general.

Are you familiar with the concept of reflection? Taking a step back and reviewing your own actions as if by a third party, seeing your actions through the eyes of someone else?

It's a great way to self moderate if you can develop the discipline, it's like a constant checking mechanism.

So, try to reflect instead of being defensive, See through others eyes if you can, why a number of people from varied demographics have issues with your moderating style.

This it's what's called constructive criticism. It can still hurt, are you mature enough to take it?

[watt price tully]