Boards›Discuss the Boards

@Teridax68: Moving this discussion here

Aptest·7/30/2017, 1:05:59 PM·3 votes·542 views

> I'm partially inclined to agree, as moderation itself is not directly related to Rengar, but the topic of moderating on the megathread is relevant to this megathread, and clarifying the level of moderation that goes on here is helpful to advancing the argument, as previous lack of clarity on my part led to a series of non-contributive posts that then had to be deleted. > > Because said user thought I was trying to cover my tracks by deleting their posts, they also persisted in their negative behavior even further, so I'd rather avoid that kind of incident. In future megathreads I still hope to enforce strict standards for posts, and will clarify the OP to make sure it's a known fact from the start, but it is nonetheless important to get feedback on how to do megathreads in the future, and will always be the case.

1

Surely you can see this this is creating much more off-topic noise than the problems it is supposed to solve. A visible portion of the discussion is Teridax68 talking about his own moderation. Like I said in my post, you've read what I had to say, it's off topic, remove it and if you want to discuss this matter further, do it HERE and not in the megathread. You are the one who decided on these rules so please abide by them.

You are saying it is relevant to the megathread because it is your own posts. When it was "said user" discussing problems with the moderation on the megathread you did not apply same standard. So please, one standard for everybody and everybody includes the moderator.

2

I'm pretty sure "said user"'s comments were relevant and on-topic, even if they were somewhat abrasive. IMHO the probability of you having made a mistake in deleting these posts is significant: it is more significant IMHO than the probability of you being correct in deleting them. And I will probably disagree with you on the "being negative" issue too.

That being said, I don't think discussing the moderation belongs in a dedicated megathread so I don't want to reply to you there. I did think that a single post there on the topic from me was relevant to gain the visibility on the issue. Hopefully this post catches your eye also.

3

I do not think you "cover your tracks". I do think you probably are unjustly confidant in your ability to distinguish between valuable and irrelevant posts, and also you have an erroneous estimation of the damage that off topic posts can do to the discussion. What usually happens is that off topic, trollish or irrelevant discussion is ignored. If it is developed, it probably also has some value which merits being explored.

4

I certainly hope that in future megathreads you take more of a leading role in the discussion, rather than an enforcing role. For instance, in your thread declaration you said that rengar players did not consider the one-shotting to be a goal for the rework. However is this true or not? worth some exploration. The core problem with thinking about the rework is that there is a major dissonance between what a rengar player would want out of the champion, and what a non-rengar player would consider to be fair to play against. You could play a role in trying to lead an exploration into this question. This is a much more constructive role for you to play than the "this is my thread and these are my rules" approach that you are currently leading.

8 Comments

Teridax687/30/2017, 1:52:03 PM2 votes

My thoughts on this:

  1. The user in question's deleted posts did not provide feedback on the megathread and its moderation, and instead attacked specific individuals, which did not just include me. They were not on-topic. I also did not say my posts were relevant to the megathread because they were my own posts, I specifically stated that the posts in that line of comments, including your own and those of other users, were relevant because they do seriously discuss what the level of moderation should be on the megathread, and on future discussions of the same type.

  2. Said user did post on-topic comments that I made no attempt to delete. I specifically deleted those that did not contribute to discussion. I do think I made a mistake, but it was in not specifying the degree to which the megathread would be monitored for quality, and in not applying a one-day ban to that user to time them out before they could start launching a string of angry personal retorts on there. You invoke statistics and personal judgement in your assessment of my treatment of that user, but I am curious as to where this is coming from: did you see the user's posts that I deleted? Did I make questionable decisions prior to that incident? Where is this suspicion coming from?

  3. I do not think this is the case, and in fact I think I underestimated how damaging troll posts could be until recently. I originally did not think Rioters cared particularly about vitriol launched towards them on Gameplay, but interaction with other Wardens and members of the moderation team actually taught me that hostile behavior towards designers on the sub-board is what has actively been driving them away from there. Because the later posts made by that user did exactly that, without contributing to the main topic either, I preferred to exercise caution and remove them.

  4. I completely disagree with this as well. I may be qualified to coordinate between players, emphasize some points of discussion, condense them into the OP, enforce the rules, and so on, but I am by no means qualified to lead the discussion itself. I am not a Rengar main, or particularly experienced with the champion, and so trying to direct it myself would be very unlikely to touch upon the points that truly matter. Before the megathread started, I had a very different idea of Rengar and what his issues were, so taking a more hands-off approach to the path of conversation actually helped me learn more about him, and helped paint a much more complete picture of what the community wanted for him. As a Warden, it is my responsibility to make sure good discussion is had, and that means enforcing the rules, even if it comes to the displeasure of certain individuals, but it is not my right to control the conversation itself in the same way.

To make things clear, I do want to make sure I'm taking on a constructive role. I am here to help you, not simply tell you off when you do something wrong, and I do try to lead by example in setting better standards for posts on Gameplay, which includes setting up good topics of conversation with passionate players and working towards high-quality discussion. However, at the end of the day, not everyone here behaves nicely, and it's up to us Wardens to make sure that behavior stops before it starts affecting everyone else.

Aptest7/31/2017, 1:05:49 PM1 votes

of course you're going to start suspecting every action I or any other Warden take.

I judge you based on the principles you have declared. If off topic and unrelated discussion does not belong in the megathread, and one such topic is led by Teridax68, than obviously Teridax68 does not adhere to the rules. If these rules are enforced against others but not against Teridax68 than obviously we have selective enforcement. if the selective enforcement is done by Teridax68, than the conclusion is obvious.

I do not understand how you can claim to know enough to accuse me of hypocrisy

Because no knowledge of the deleted posts is required for me to make this case. Only the discussion that you have led on the quality of your moderation, in which enough evidence is displayed: which I have kindly asked you move here.

which means that if you start off just assuming we're making judgment calls in bad faith

I do not assume this. It is evident that there are double standards at play.

but it would help significantly more if you pointed to the specific instances where you disagree with what I did.

My grievance with your conduct is as follows: the posts in which you argument in detail on the quality of your own moderation do not belong on the megathread. If other people can't talk there about the quality of moderation (I agree with you there), so can't you.

do not see the consequences of your own negative behavior,

I will break it down to you:

  1. the behavior is not negative
  2. the consequences are not negative.
  3. there is no shaming.
  4. there are no issues in this matter that you need to look at

and as Wardens

you are not accepted by me as speaking for any warden other than yourself or for the group of wardens as a whole, and you are not accepted by me as representing the group of wardens or as being a representative member in the group of wardens.

as far as I am concerned you are yourself and only yourself, and my discussion here is with you, not with other people.

Do you want us to moderate less on behavior

What I want you specifically to do first is to apply the same rules for yourself as you do to other people. I think we can start there with you.

As a moderator, I can promise you that cutting down on toxic behavior brings a tangible improvement to a community space...

you are talking in broad nonspecific noninstances here.

Aptest8/2/2017, 5:03:52 PM1 votes

Ad hominem and name-calling tick all of those boxes.

I mentioned an instance involving me ad another forum person. Talking about another person and my experience in regards to them does not constitute an attack on their person. and.... name calling? where is that coming from? no where, from what i can see, you just made that one up.

As for ad hominem. Ad hominem is if I say you are shit person and therefore your argument can be disregarded. I don't think I did this here, and I certainly did not do this with respect to the other poster I mentioned.

Let me be clear here:

If I have heated arguments with other posters, and they use harsh, abrasive language towards me, I think this is completely ok. If they call me names, it is ok. If they attach to me labels, it is ok. If they try their hardest to prove I am a piece of overly-inflated, sardine crested marang pie, it is ok.