[{quoted}](name=Hungry Cancer,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=aAl4ytb8,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-04-09T17:51:03.491+0000)
If you'll let me, I'd like to address every point you bring up.
Mods are not Rioters, they are volunteers (the last time I asked a mod about it he told me the vast majority were adult teens which is obviously a problem but that was about a year ago so it may not be that way now) and worst of all they aren't even properly trained and so they apply the "rules" as they see fit, and each mod does so differently resulting in a lack of consistency and creating an environment where it is impossible to know what will get you banned/suspended/deleted and what won't. It's a basic fact of legal sciences (even though this isn't about true legal matters it does stem from the same vein of study and is definitely relevant) that without consistency of enforcement you cannot have a functional system of rules.
First, our age range is around early 20s, all the way to mid 30s. While I am unaware of everyone's age, and I wouldn't be surprised if we have at least 1 or 2 older teens in our ranks, we are not a majority of teens.
May I ask what your definition of "trained properly" is? Because before the Volunteer program really kicked into high gear, the Boards were moderated by a third party moderation group. It was actually Riot's decision to move away from that, and use Volunteers who were actually a part of the community. So, in their eyes, they had no problems having "untrained" volunteers run their official forums.
And yes, every mod does operate with some autonomy. However, that isn't to say we don't constantly discuss actions taken. And due to these numerous discussions that we have every single day, everyone tends to get on the same page in terms of moderation.
The other problem is that the U-rules are based on the concept of "insults" which currently has 2 meanings in North America, the original meaning which is based on the intent of the writer/speaker and the definition currently being used by the American liberal/Social Justice Warrior (those are their terms for self identification and not me getting political) community which is based on the feelings of the reader or listener and suggests that if you don't like what was said then its an insult, I'll let you take a guess as to which paradigm the "mods" are promoting and adhering to.
I understand your point here, however, the majority of "insults" we remove our very obviously used as insults. For example, the OP's comment that was removed. He was using a low ranking as a means of insulting the person he was responding to. When something is very blatantly used as an insult, we'll remove it. Is it too much to ask to not intentionally insult the person you're talking to?
And your comment comes at an interesting time. Us mods just did have a pretty lengthy discussion yesterday on the general use of "SJW" and "snowflake". The general consensus was that if something is used very broadly, and generally, but could be perceived as an insult by someone reading it........we'll let it slide. Do we prefer people not to use those terms? Yes. But we're not going to punish people for using them.
As a professional who makes his living setting up professional systems I often use Riot's mod program as an example of what you should never do since its a system that was determined to be more trouble than it was worth 5 years ago when we were initially gathering data on board/forum protection/moderation systems and it puts children into positions of authority they aren't prepared for and then tells them to figure it out.
1: Read above......we are not children.
2: Not only are we in constant contact with others who have not only moderated numerous other forums, servers, and whatnot, but we are also in constant contact with actual Rioters, and mods that have been a mod on these boards for years. So, by no means are we left on our own to "figure stuff out".
3: I am actually very curious where and when this data you mentioned was collected. Do you mind if I ask you to link some documents for the rest of us to read?
As far as your comment goes, you're never going to get it restored as the mods never do so even when they admit that a comment wasn't worthy of action. They have created a community amongst themselves and they WILL blindly defend each other as you've already experienced from "the herald".
And the reason why we don't restore comments or posts on the Boards, even when we screw up, is because we can't. It's simply not built into the Boards framework right now. Will we implement something along those lines in the future? Maybe, but something like that would be pretty low on our priority list.
Also, would you not try and defend someone you work with, if you think they're performing at the expected standards? Also, saying we "blindly defend each other" is something of an exaggeration. While I have yet to see any real argument break out myself, I do know that in the past, mods have butted heads, and it's led to some interesting turmoil. Plus, we do criticize each other when necessary. We are not without our faults, and others will point them out when they surface.
