Topic: We need a new global moderator. - page 3. (Read 1226 times)

I'm not against more mods and certainly think there's a few people who have earned a place on staff with their report counts but I think it's a lack of reports that is the main issue. There's far too much spam but no real incentive for users to report it so staff aren't going to go out of their way to find spam to remove. I'm not sure how much tinkering theymos wants to do with this current software but I still think we should considering adding those reporter badges that come with a few small perks as I certainly think that would help boost reports and clean up spam.

Maybe it would be best to add some dedicated sub board mods for the boards that are lacking one but the P&S section is going to be a notoriously difficult board to mod and it's probably one where it's just best left up to globals rather than have someone who is going to be a focal point to put the blame on or attack when something in there doesn't go their way. Blatant spam can and should obviously be removed but everything else should probably be left alone and people can either argue why they disagree or just ignore that person if they're too annoying or crossing the line of decency/sanity.

It's the internet, you can always argue
I'd love to see that board cleaned up though, and if theymos would give me a Delete button, I'd take on the challenge.

I’m just an occasional guest on the Croatian board so I don’t even consider myself nearly qualified to be a moderator there. In addition, there are other much more active members who are suitable for the job, if it ever happens that the admin decides to give someone a chance to moderate that board. It seems that on this forum it is much better to come to terms with the old rules than to try to change something for the better at all.


I have already read an almost identical statement several times, which only confirms that some people just give up before others (including you). Such statements only make the situation worse by letting others know that they should leave that board to spammers - because if LoyceV says something is a lost cause, then there is no point in arguing.

Which is why I suggested escalating levels of temp bans first. If you've been temp banned four times already for spamming, and are still continuing to spam, then you are never going to change and banning you permanently is a suitable "last resort". Exceptions can be made as they are with the plagiarism rule for less black-and-white cases.

I don't disagree that spam/repetitive/redundant threads need locked, but this does not address the underlying cause of the problem. There are always more threads to post in and spammers can also open new threads faster than they can be reported and locked. Spammers chasing a paycheck will always find a way to reach their quota, whether or not 90% of threads are locked. It will just make the unlocked threads even more unbearable. The only solution is to starting handing out real punishments to the spammers and the campaigns which encourage them.

I would agree with you in this case, but moderators are not doing that very often or not at all, even with obvious case of spamming like for Livecoin dead thread that is still active in similar way.
I reported several times and asked for locking of that thread but my reports are still unhandled so I gave up doing that.
Other more thing that should be locked or moved to trash is duplicate topics, so we have multiple topics with exactly the same title and content across the forum.

Being a moderator can really be a punishment and not everybody could do it, but I think that Croatian board is probably the only active local board that don't have local moderator, so Cyrus is doing out work even if he doesn't speak out language.
We are not in emergency state yet, but we could end up like any other board and we need some cleaning up and reorganization.
 
PS
I don't argue with person L, I just ignore him.

All you need is someone to start locking up threads so that you don't get waves of redundancy. We have a search feature and commonly mention it, except for some reason we only seem to talk about it when another thread with the same topic pops up and not beforehand.

Spam threads with generic content can entertain discussion for a few pages before the substance becomes meaningless. Even longer threads that go on eventually splinter into subtopics which would be better reserved for new topics, for arguments in PM, or will diverge from the original topic in a way where the first page has little to do with the last.

---

More often than not, I would rather have a topic be locked rather than have dozens of posts from it to be deleted. Cut the problem from the root instead of chasing spam posts, because you know that spam will come from multiple users.

What if you had someone that focused on this, rather than working through the bulk of the report queue? Efficiency matters, and moderators' time is not infinite. I don't see how we would need the Serious discussion section if we properly moderated our boards. It's basically an ad-hoc solution that screams, "forum is a shithole, this is where we have real topics"

There is not anyone who does not have any bias on a subject. What is more important than not having a bias, is the ability to remain neutral, despite said bias. For reference, I have a 99% accuracy rate in reporting posts, and this includes some reports that were marked "bad" in error, such as those reporting double posts.

There are a handful of threads in which actual debate takes place. There are also a decent number of threads with extremist viewpoints and interpretations.

Structurally speaking, I believe what you are describing are two different concepts, rather than an inter-connected one:

(1) A new global mod to pick up forum-wide moderation slack
(2) A local mod for P&S and other sections that require moderation

A global mod shouldn't be wasting their time moderating non-moderated sections, as I am certain there are more than enough mod reports to get through, especially from those types of sections.
Furthermore don't expect a new global mod to be picking up slack elsewhere from badly moderated sections, unless you want a global mod to become quickly exhausted.
I like the ideas of what you are suggesting to improve forum moderation, but to me they are two distinctly separate proposals it seems. Just my two satoshis.

---

I've read worse ideas. You can be annoying, provocative, as well as irritating with attention to detail, but otherwise well-respected by many here. Global mod material basically, I definitely wouldn't put you in charge though


This sounds like the most sensible solution. In my opinion appointing local mods should be based on accuracy of their mod reports, rather than anything else. Reward/punish those making those reports is the obvious choice.


Working in pairs or small groups is definitely the way forward to avoid the dictatorial control from a single mod in a particular section (especially P&S I imagine).
Appointing a single mod to a "controversial" or problematic section would be a disaster. They would also just get harassed by PMs I imagine.

If I were in charge - that's a scary thought, isn't it - I would probably appoint a couple of moderators to each of those underserved boards. For example nutildah and DireWolfM14 for P&S, LoyceV with o_e_l_e_o for BD/Press, dkbit98 and Lucius for Croatian boards, mainly to punish them all for complaining so much but also to give a bit of a proactive push to clean those boards instead of waiting for reports, which could be a good deterrent without banning. And I'd hope that having two mods work out some sort of agreement between them could help with the inevitable bias accusations and moderation complaints. If they start slacking a year or two from now, pick someone else from active users.

I'll admit that I thought FlyingHellFish was a poor moderator of the P&S section because he was too biased, and I was of the opinion that his bias influenced his moderation duties.  For the same reasons I think QuickPrimeSeller7 would also be poor moderator of that section, even if I do agree with him (in political terms) more often than not.  If he's volunteering, my (presumptive) vote is "NAY."

---

I actually enjoy a political debate from time to time, but I find the P&S section to be more of a troll show than anything.  There are very few rational debates, and both liberals and conservatives end up reverting to trolling one another.  I often find myself succumbing to the trolling as well when I engage in those topics, which is why I tend to steer clear of most of the threads there.  It takes a lot of effort to remain calm and rational when most participants are engaging in such BS.  I don't envy anyone who tries to moderate that section.  

Speaking of reading, I didn't say you're abusing the trust system. I said "misusing", which is a weaker word than "abusing" in this context and can include unintentional usage, whereas abuse is typically intentional. However if the shoe fits feel free to wear it.

Anyway, those ratings are soft negatives, and putting such a chickenshit label on a user for expressing their opinion is a dick move, totally incompatible with your declarations of "[encouraging] everyone to have a well-reasoned debate" and "[making] well-reasoned counterpoints". This is the intertubes equivalent of throwing a rotten egg at your opponent and running away when you lose the argument.

But hey, if those are the qualities theymos is looking in moderator candidates, you're definitely a frontrunner.

I enjoy reading about politics, and I enjoy talking about politics. Everyone has their own biases. I would however be fair to everyone.

You must not be able to read.
Banning someone, means that someone is being removed from the community. Theymos wants to remove someone from the bitcointalk community, only as a last resort, even for people who cause problems for theymos personally.

There was a time in which I used to look for threads/posts to report and acclimated a decent number of reports doing so. I don't think that is the intended way that reports should be made. I think it is best to report threads and posts as you are browsing the forum as if you would be if you were not going to report any threads/posts.


I think the businesses themselves should be called out publically when they employ (via crappy signature campaign managers) people who make a lot of low effort posts. If a business wants to stop criticism about the harm their advertising is doing to the forum, they will need to get their campaign manager to do a better job at policing campaign participants, or if the campaign manager is unable, or unwilling to do so, the company will need to find another campaign manager.

I sympathize with this feeling - I think that the frustration that is created within members who actually care for this forum content and well being is far greater than the "consequences" of those same abusers. I'm not diminishing the work from the mods who delete these threads, but I'm sure that it's also tiresome for them to be always deleting the same kind of threads/posts created by the same user(s), especially when the rules being broken are constantly the same.
I fully support free speech - I'm from the opinion that one of the most powerful and beautiful things of live is free speech. People can say whatever they think about a certain subject and it's up to the listeners to make a critical judgement and determine if they're are either against or aligned with that vision. That works well for Facebook/Twitter because they are (supposedly) un-moderated platforms and if I don't like the person I can simply block him / move on with my life. The problem in communities such as our is that that we can't keep "forgiving" the same user over and over again by continuing to break the forum rules (and most of the time the same rules) - if he/she doesn't respect the forum rules, why do we have them in the first place? Just for them to be guidelines of correct behavior?

I totally understand that newer members may occasionally break the rules and a couple of warnings should show him that perhaps he should think twice before making future threads or at least re-think his way of posting. But when that fails, why should we just continue to erase his threads ? If he/she continues to show a lack of effort or the rules, why should we continue to increase the load of work for mods regarding his/her threads?

Also Good Luck with the reputation section lol
the topic was for the global mod so expect that already  

+1
but I think if this will be a possibility, 1xbit will surely be on the number one spot.

Edit:
I say, Dabs should be back on the position. despite of having issues on the past of soliciting.

Pretty much. I was doing 100+ good reports a day pretty consistently for months. Now I only report the most grievous of rule breakers - malware, phishing, selling stolen credit cards, that kind of thing. After I've reported the same spammer 50+ times and they are still getting paid to churn out more one liners as fast as I can report them, then what's the point?

I get that, and you'll know from previous discussions that I'm as staunch a defender of free speech as you are, regardless of how much I disagree with that speech. But your right to free speech doesn't also give you a right to destroy the possibility of having an intelligent discussion on Bitcoin Discussion because there are 10 nonsense replies for everyone 1 meaningful one.

Another opinion I share, and upon searching, discovered I said pretty much exactly that to you in another conversation 3 years ago. We are sounding a lot like broken records here.

Completely agree. The worst part is that we already have very clear rules regarding signature campaigns and spamming, but they have gone completely unenforced for years.

But the forum still has rules, unofficially official as they might be. And between altcoin boards, off topic, and other crappy boards there is definitely no lack of opportunities for shitposters to be free. I don't think we really needed to sacrifice Bitcoin Discussion to the hordes of shitcoin spammers.

I think that many of mods/global mods have left and none of them have been renewed, so this claim seems logical. The question may be who will be and whether he has enough experience in identifying low-quality posts.
I don't visit the political department but definitely the politics, off-topic and altcoins need more mods.
In general, my activity in the forum is no longer the same as before, so I do not know whether the spam level is normal or not, but in general we need more global mods.

I like this idea.  I don't want to throw all campaign managers under the bus, there are some who are quite diligent and respectful of the forum.  They are the ones who are quite critical of the users they allow in their campaigns, and don't tolerate spam.  It doesn't take much to figure out who they are.

But, there is very little accountability for spamming by many campaign managers.  Most of the guilty ones tend to be new.  They accept managerial positions for shady campaigns that are intent on spamming the forum, hiring as many accounts as possible, at meager rates, and send them out to flood the forum with low quality posts.  It seems like the only thing these managers care about are the blatant violations of the rules, like plagiarism, but when it comes to the quality of posts they are completely oblivious.  They tolerate low quality posts and spam because the rules are vague and they know they can get away with it.

Those campaign managers are earning money for their tasks, but their employers are the ones who are really responsible for the spam.  The managers themselves have an obligation to preserve the quality of the forum, but they don't seem to concern themselves with the preservation of the opportunity, the opportunity that wouldn't exist if wasn't granted by the forum, not the shady outfit for whom they work.

That doesn't work with the forum's mission to be as free as possible.

I report much less than I used to do. I've given up on automated searches to find spam, and I don't want to spend my time going over topics in which almost all posts deserve reporting.

AFAIK, user receives temp ban only when their post got deleted in mass number lets say 50 or above, to increase the quality of the forum the number can be decreased upto 5 times so when someone receives 10 good reports against them then it is better to impose a temp ban just as the above suggestion says. But there are also people claims that their posts are getting reports just for personal vengeance against them so its kind of confusing as well.