BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Over-moderation and derailing topics

 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:37 / 30.04.04
Tood - I think your ideas are feasible, although it would need some rebuilding (some more rebuilding). But would people feel that Barbelith was fragmented by this personalised experience, or tailored? It's certainly a very interesting idea...

As to the second, making the starter moderator of his/her thread doesn't give them divine right to veto all changes - it merely puts them at the same level of the *other* moderators of that forum.

Just as a point of information - any moderator can veto any proposed change in a forum they moderate. Therefore, somebody with mod powers in a thread they had started would have the power to veto any proposed moderation that occured while they were at their computer. Again, I think that this discussion is taking place in the shadow of changes by Tom that may render it obsolete... the resultant Barbelith may be more like your plan, Todd...
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
17:42 / 30.04.04
Haus, if you really think I identified you, I suggest you look again. You did it yourself, I'm afraid. Unless of course you knew by some other means that I was quoting a PM without consent, other than it being your own.

And I messaged you after deciding to disagree with your mod action so that someone else could decide. OK, alright?

And as a moderator - and I can't stress this strongly enough - I think comics go in the comics forum.

Introduce me to the policy all you will, but you decided for yourself that my topic should be moved without talking it out first, didn't you? You also didn't see fit to bring it up with me first. So yes, it did seem like you decided you knew what was best on your own, going against all the other existing topics that do exactly the same thing as mine which I keep mentioning...

If I appear to be having a tantrum, it's because you're being a jerk. Please don't talk to me like a child, Haus. I am quite aware of what is going on, and where I'm posting.
 
 
bitchiekittie
17:50 / 30.04.04
A more considered approach might see the function of moving threads as putting them somewhere where they are more likely to get the reception they would profit from.

I agree with you, but when there isn't a clear problem (ie an obvious fluff thread started in headshop) shouldn't it at least partially be up to the intent of the thread's author? for example, one could begin a thread where the question posed would be perfectly suited for headshop, but the author is seeking a less regimented, more casual and conversation-esque response and therefore posts it in conversation?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:53 / 30.04.04
Well, since the only thread in which it would have been likely to turn up was this one, and it had not, assuming it was recognisably a PM seems pretty safe.

Anyway. Moderators propose moderations. Other moderators have the right to agree, disagree or abstain. That's a technical requirement. The rest is policy. It seems I shoudl either have asked in thread or PMEd you, depending on whom you talk to. I suggested a moderation and gave a reason. You voted against it and messaged me. I accepted that there was clearly an issue to be explored, undertook to leave it where it was and counselled against using your moderator powers thusly:

You are welcome to be as adamant as you wish about where you want your thread to be, and so can anybody else about theirs, and your opinion will have as much weight as theirs (see Kovacs in the "literary agent" thread in Books). However, you have a power that many of them do not - the possession of what is in effect a permanent veto on any moderation request that you feel does not treat your posts or threads the way you want them to be treated.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
17:56 / 30.04.04
There is no issue save the one you seem to have invented. That is what I am saying, and why your decision to move my topic in the first place makes no sense to me.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:57 / 30.04.04
I agree with you, but when there isn't a clear problem (ie an obvious fluff thread started in headshop) shouldn't it at least partially be up to the intent of the thread's author? for example, one could begin a thread where the question posed would be perfectly suited for headshop, but the author is seeking a less regimented, more casual and conversation-esque response and therefore posts it in conversation?

I'd say partially yes, and also the responses - a seriosu starter which for some reason got a lot of discordian larping might be judged rotted to the bone and moved to the Conversation, to clear the ground for another thread in the Head Shop, to use your example. I didn't realise that a link to somebody's work, followed by a series of approving, helpful and critical responses, was either in its conception or its responses necessarily inimical to the Creation. It seems that I made a mistake, and the relation of creators of comic books to their work is more complex than that of budding novelists or musicians, or that we are putting the latter pair into the wrong forum. That's something that I have to go and think about.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
17:58 / 30.04.04
(hmmm...I had no idea that *one* veto does it for a moderation request. I guess I'm a "yes" man)
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
18:07 / 30.04.04
Haus, you might like to take another look in the music forum at least. I did point out "Albums by Barbelith" earlier in the thread.
 
 
Bed Head
18:09 / 30.04.04
I can’t keep up with this, so apologies if my post is already out of date.

Surely: a thread about superhero fights is for jokes and pretty much nothing else. In Conversation it might get better results, because it’s talking about comics that don’t exist and never will. It’s a fun thread, but it might be far more fun to let everyone have a crack. Plenty of people on this site read comics/ used to read comics without them feeling the urge to hang around the Comics forum to write about them. Move it, and then maybe you’d get Joey Deacon versus Stephen Hawking as well as John Constantine versus Lex Luthor. Friday afternoon, laffs all round. If that thread doesn’t belong in Conversation, then you might as well bung the Christopher Lambert one into Film.

shouldn't it at least partially be up to the intent of the thread's author?

Amen. On the ‘literary agent’ thread remaining in Books, there were maybe four or five core contributors to that thread who’d have probably kept contributing wherever it was. If anything, keeping it in Books possibly served to keep a limit on the number and scope of contributions, rather than throwing the topic open to the legions of amateur writers in Creation. If Kovacs or anyone else feels that best helps the thread continue in the way that they want it to, what’s wrong with that? His objections kept the thing from being derailed from the course he wanted it to follow. Barbelith happily accommodated. The decision is taken by mods in cases like xxsarahxx’s ‘Leon’ thread or sjhrbr’s ‘Atheism’ thread where the threadstarter isn’t offering any kind of proper lead.

I think there’s a strange view of Conversation and Creation coming up here which seems to view them as some form of demotion. Pretty much everybody on Barbelith reads books, a lot of people read comics. If you want a thread that’s by and large only read and/or contributed to by those posters who identify themselves as serious ‘book reader’ or ‘comic reader’ types, then there’s a specific place for it. If you want a more general, knockabout fun thread it’ll probably end up being funnier in Conversation. Kovacs’ thread almost got a response from me on the possibilities of getting a press and printing up your own book, but the decision to keep it in Books rather than Creation indicated to me that it was intended to be a thread about getting on in the publishing industry rather than the work itself. Actually, I think he said something like that. Maybe Suedehead would be very well advised to punt Sleeping Beauty towards Creation sometime soon, because there’s people who might see it there who won’t have seen it in Comics, people who might be interested but aren't habitual comics readers.


I don’t think Creation is helped any if it’s looked down on. Maybe it’s not the busiest forum, but I can’t see any actual argument being made here for abolishing it. Apart from that Flux doesn’t post there and so it’s surplus to his requirements.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
18:12 / 30.04.04
Haus- You will find the air quite breathable if you come down from what you believe is the moral high ground. Obviously the more rarefied atmosphere has left you feeling dizzy and in a slightly altered mental state. Suedehead was right, he didn't quote you or do anything to suggest it was you until after you outed yourself.

If you feel moderators shouldn't vote on actions that concern posts they have made then I suggest you flag it as something for Tom's attention, the system is set so that moderators don't get to vote again on stuff they've already voted on, I'm sure it would be possible to make it so they don't get to vote on matters that concerns their posts.

For what it's worth I think whether Suede was able to vote with a 'clear conscience' or not, he did the right thing by identifying himself to you by PM so that there was the option of trying to come to an amicable agreement.

But, in the way some Barbelith discussions come round on here, we're back to the same argument we had over all that stuff that Flux posted in the Conversation, 'I sat down on blood' and all that. That was Creation material there but Flux wanted to put on a show and so posted it where more people would see it.

I do think the Creation and it's future needs to be thought about and a firm decision made, either we're more ruthless about moving stuff in or we close it down and let people post to the other fora. To be honest, the only real contraversial thing would be where a Cameron Stewart thread would go, though I'd say where it's to do with a professional item like Seaguy or Catwoman it's comics, if it was something private like his website that would be Creation. Jenny Everywhere, self-publishing, Creation.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
18:16 / 30.04.04
Oh, look where it is.

And I post this as another example of it obviously being the comic book forum where I would post my work, because that is where I am most involved and what my work is concerned with. And as yet, nothing has ever been suggested that anyone do otherwise.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
18:28 / 30.04.04
My main interest is that I'd like to see Barbelith simplified as much as possible, because I am certain that the complications that we have made in categorizing every bit of discussion that we could possibly have has made the place feel stifling for a great many of us. I still think it would be in the best interest of all of us to collapse Music, Comics, TV/Film, Books, Art and Creation into one large Spectacle forum which can be sorted in the way that Todd suggests up the thread.
 
 
sleazenation
18:46 / 30.04.04
Flux - I'm a little hazy on what about the existence of a creation forum makes this place appear stifling - perhaps you could elaborate a little? To me it would rather imply the opposite of stifling, creating as it does an entire forum for people to discuss and present ways in which they have/are/will be creating stuff.
 
 
Tom Coates
18:52 / 30.04.04
Wow. Where to start.

I don't see the point in just throwing everything that we disapprove of (even if imaginary superhero battles are a valid reason for someone liking comic books) in the Conversation, as if the Conversation is some big dump which none of us should take seriously.

Well actually that's exactly what it kind of is for. That's the part of the board that's designed for chatting in, precisely so that chatting - rather than discussing, I guess - is not done elsewhere. To say that we shouldn't take it seriously just because it's for chatting in is kind of ridiculous to me. The board is better by far because we have a place where we can chat. That it is distinct from the fora where we're supposed to talk about subjects is part of its point and why it is so valuable.

Secondly, with regard to this post (specifically "Impartially, I still think I made the correct moderation decision. Shockingly, I am capable of deciding impartially"), I think I can say that while I'm not that anxious about it there are perfectly sound reasons why Haus should say that people should not necessarily be able to vote on or veto other people's moderations on their own threads. It doesn't matter whether you're a skilled moderator or not - you put the thing in that forum in the first place, so obviously you think it's OK. If someone else does not feel it's Ok, then logically you'd ask a (random) third party to split the difference - ie. any other moderator. Again - I don't think this is an enormous problem for the board at the moment, but I don't think it'll be a problem for long. One of the things I've proposed to Cal is that we should not have one-vote vetos any more (or at least we should have more flexibility about how many votes to do). And I'll try to add in a no-veto thing too.

To Todd - yeah that's conceivable, but I don't know how useful it is, since our main job with moving stuff is removing it from specific forums where it shouldn't be.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
19:01 / 30.04.04
The problem with the Creation forum is not with intent of even with usage; it's just that the fact that amatuer art (not to disparage anyone in particular's talent) is only going to appeal to a certain number of people, and indeed, a given individual is probably going to find more dreck than gold in the Creation on a day-by-day basis, even if they know/like the people behind the projects. Consequently, this makes keeping up with the Creation rather tedious - for instance, I haven't read raelianautopsy's novel - not because I don't care that someone on barbelith is writing a novel but simply because due to past experience, it's probably not something I'm going to be able to enjoy. But every so often I miss something really good, you know?

It takes a patient person to appreciate amateur art; you aren't a patient person, Flux. Some people here are, and there's nothing wrong with giving them their ghetto.

Personally, and this may appear to fly in the face of what I advocated earlier (having topics being capable of existing in two places at once) I'd rather have all amateur efforts consigned to the creation rather than in books, music, art, etc. That's how *I* would prefer barbelith to be organized, but I recognize that my more or less arbitrary decision on this issue might not be congenial to other barbelith users who have the same rights as I do w/r/t to board usage. But if we're going to have talmudic arguments about when is a novel a novel etc. every few months, it's probably a good idea to think of different ways of organizing the board that avoids "categories, " or at least makes them more useful.

And while I'm wishing, nested discussions *please*?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
19:02 / 30.04.04
Flux - I'm a little hazy on what about the existence of a creation forum makes this place appear stifling - perhaps you could elaborate a little?

I don't object to the Creation, because there's nothing wrong with encouraging each other to make art. I just think it is a bit absurd to have a specific area roped off for us to be "creative" in. I think the fact that we have so many forums and boundaries keeping threads from moving in natural directions which is stifling. We're always so afraid of threads and forums going outside of some arbritrary remit that it keeps us from really embracing chance and letting things go off on strange tangents. I think those tangents tend to be a sign that we're having some kind of interesting discussion, not that we're going "off-topic" and wrecking everything. I think we'd be better off with a lot more freedom - I still think it's a mistake that the structure of the board doesn't encourage us to mix ideas from the other areas of the board without having us get all nervey about where the thread should go.

I look at the Ilxor boards, and they seem to have a much more thriving and popular community, and I don't think it's coincidental that they happen to have extremely minimal moderation and no subforums to speak of.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
19:11 / 30.04.04
One of the things I've proposed to Cal is that we should not have one-vote vetos any more (or at least we should have more flexibility about how many votes to do).

Has there ever really been a problem with this? I can only think of one - one particular moderator unable to understand the only solid piece of board policy we have and refusing to delete messages posted by our local troll. Other than that, I'm not aware of the one-vote veto having caused a problem.

Probably a discussion for another time and thread, but I can't shake the feeling that needing more than one negative vote to halt an action would be to make the whole notion of distributed moderation a little pointless.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
19:12 / 30.04.04
I don't think Ilxor's model is a good one because their format sucks and is hopelessly retrograde, and among other sins, they're responsibly for unleashing that awful term "rockist" into the wild. That just ruffles my hackles in the most unpleasant fashion imaginale.

This isn't meant as a dig at Tom, and I probably should be more humble as I've never started an online community myself, but I thought part of the mission of Barbelith is to be an experimental community, unlike others on the web, and most of the ideas/ways of organization mooted here seem to be things that are standard features on other bulletin boards, or indeed, as in the model of ILxor, a giant step backward in making online communication user-friendly. Aside from the moderation system, what's experimental about the way Barbelith *functions*? And, to wax pretentious a bit, what are some ideas for moving beyond the bulletin-board paradigm? Ideas that route around these problems, maybe?
 
 
sleazenation
19:21 / 30.04.04
You mean this ilxor?
 
 
Tom Coates
19:28 / 30.04.04
A giant step backward? Right - look that's fine. It's ok that you feel that way. I wish I could do more to take this place forward - it's not that I don't have ideas - but I can't always implement them as quickly as I'd like and yes, I'll accept that Barbelith hasn't moved as far forward as I'd like since we put in the distributed moderation.

If you feel that way, I'd like you to go into more detail about the stuff that you think should be happening - or more particularly the stuff that you think is obviously available elsewhere that we're not providing here. It's quite possible that there's good stuff out there that I've missed.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
19:41 / 30.04.04
Tom, I think that Todd was referring to Ilxor as being "a giant step backwards" (and I strongly disagree with that, but whatever), not what you've done.

Sleaze, I am specifically referring to ILM (which is unquestionably the single best music discussion forum anywhere on the internet) and ILE, which is ILM's sister board which covers everything in the world other than music.

Todd, "rockism" is a term which goes back several decades in the music press. And I maintain that your objection to the word stems largely from your misunderstanding of its meaning and usage. It is the perfect word to describe that particular critical philosophy.
 
 
Tom Coates
19:46 / 30.04.04
But as far as I can tell they're doing really different things to the things we're trying to do here, surely? They're really really fast and conversational. They're not particularly analytical or in-depth. I don't think we should be trying to emulate them, we should be trying to complement them, surely? Doing the stuff they don't do in any depth.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
19:54 / 30.04.04
Actually, I feel that on a great many threads and discussions, ILX has been far more thoughtful and analytical than anything I've encountered on B-lith in quite some time.

I see what you mean about the systems being different and yielding differing, complimentary results - personally, being involved in both B-lith and ILX in addition to blogs and another secret thing gives me some kind of net community balance because they all offer different things.

I don't think we should full-on mimic what they are doing, because I agree that the Barbelith project is quite valid. I'm just holding ILX up as an example of how fewer boundaries can lead to longer, livelier, and more detailed discussion.
 
 
bitchiekittie
20:20 / 30.04.04
gawd, haus, ouch.

I'm never playing with you guys again.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
20:51 / 30.04.04
(as far as stepping backwards, I was referring to ILX, not your efforts, Tom. ILX seems as "quick and dirty" as the message board format could possibly get, and while there's something to be said for lo-fi approaches, that would, as you say, change the character of barbelith.)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:59 / 30.04.04
I know it is slightly offtopic, but I have fallen in love with "I Love Sleeper"...

BK: I'm not sure what you mean. My intention certainly wasn't to offend you.

I feel a new thread coming on...
 
 
Char Aina
02:55 / 01.05.04
she maybe felt that you were taking the piss when you said you would have to go and have a big think about it?
who knows.


Honestly, the Creation forum just makes everything here a big mess - we'd be better off cutting it out, and having threads about comics be in comics, writing threads appear in lit/books, music threads appear in music, etc and maybe have a way of tagging those threads so people know that they are about work produced by members of Barbelith.



where would a thread about devising anew form of martial art go? and a thread about creating a new language? what about a new boardgame? or a sport? what if i am making samurai swords?

is it possible you hadnt considered creations outisde of some fairly limited categories?

and lets be honest, the point about getting the right response to your work is valid, and no one seems to have argued against it. making stuff is expected in creation and therefore goes on without the piss being taken, y'know?
 
 
Char Aina
03:02 / 01.05.04
. It doesn't matter whether you're a skilled moderator or not - you put the thing in that forum in the first place, so obviously you think it's OK.

is it fair to read the whole situation as someone trying to make sure they didnt lose their thread to another forum without any discussion?
contrary to my initial impression of the topic, it doesnt seem like there was going to be any attritious vetoing (attritious? dude.) going on, a pessimism which seems similar to that fueling the fear of 'moderators gone mad'.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
05:41 / 01.05.04
I think the day that someone complains because they desperately want to brag about a new form of martial arts that they've developed but it has no where to go should be the day we worry about it. As it is, in that unlikely event I'm not sure the Creation would necessarily be the best place for that, possibly somewhere like The Lab as it's health related? The only time we've had this problem was when a couple of people wanted a forum for the discussing of video games, for whatever reason the majority opinion seemed to be that there was little point and so we have several perfectly decent threads in the Conversation.
 
 
Tom Coates
08:41 / 01.05.04
Right. Ok. Let me get this back to practical issues for a moment - and this is aimed pretty squarely at Our Lady. You say we should worry about those threads that are about devising new martial arts later should the eventuality occur. My counter argument would be that there are twenty pages of Creation topics that I'm not prepared just to delete because a few people want the forum gone. If it's going, each of the topics on those 20 pages (something like eight hundred, I should imagine) will have to be moved individually into other fora - many to the conversation, but also many to other parts of the board. And - having been done - this cannot be undone. It would take a hell of a lot of effort to go through all the records on moderation actions and determine a list of topics to move back into a forum that we'd got rid of previously. A hell of a lot!

So let's start this reasonably, eh? Let's say that we have to be pretty bloody sure that getting rid of the Creation is the right thing to do before we make hard to reverse and time-consuming to implement decisions. I'm going to stand up straight away and say that - although I'm prepared to be convinced - I see no reason to get rid of the Creation at this time.

I'm not a great one for creating new fora generally. In the last - I think - three years we have had two new fora, Art, Fasion and Design which has stayed around and the one that emerged from September 11th which was then folded back into the Switchboard. Creating new fora is very simple, but knowing how to handle it once it's been created is not so easy. What do you do when people don't want it any more etc. For that reason, when people suggested the Creation I was careful to make sure that people would use it and there were some quite good arguments. Lots of people really like that forum too, unless I'm mistaken. So explain to me why it should be dismantled?
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:17 / 01.05.04
Everything I would have said has pretty much been covered already, but count me as a vote for keeping the Creation.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
17:20 / 01.05.04
Hmm, because it's a dead-end ghetto? Because we've got the case of Cam and Flux with posts outside the Creation purely because at least one of them didn't accept that his flights of fancy should go in there? Because hell, half the threads in the Conversation could quite justifiably be shipped into the Creation as much as you talking about shipping stuff out.

My saying close the Creation is only part of my argument, I apologise if once again I haven't managed to express myself fully in this discussion. As I see it we do one of two things, we either close the Creation and move all the threads therein out to whatever forum we think best OR we become a lot more rigorous about sending self-created stuff, like the Jenny Everywhere threads into it. I think that there's a bit of uncertainty that could do with being addressed, that the Creation, as well as being the forum where we work stuff out and get help with developing projects, should also be the place where we exhibit and notify of them when they are finished.

Does that make sense?
 
 
Grey Area
17:29 / 01.05.04
I'd agree with a certain degree of rigour being enforced with moving creative threads into the Creation.

Technical query: Would it be possible to have a list that shows where a thread has been moved? Maybe show the moves made in the last 5 days or so. If we decide to follow Our Lady's suggestion it might help people relocate threads that have been shifted into the Creation and other fora.

It would also serve as a warning system if moderators are being too move-happy...so if we see that 30 threads have been dumped in the Creation within the last 48 hours, we know there's an issue we need to address.
 
 
grant
18:53 / 01.05.04
Quick note (don't know how helpful) but I've always seen the Creation as a *collaborative* space, and the other art/media fora as a *solo creation* space. It's obviously a permeable membrane, and I think it should be. But if I post a new topic about a musical project in Creation, it's kind of because I either want critiques, workshop style (Maybe the Workshop would be a better name?) or else I want people to join in somehow. If it wasn't finished yet, as a project. I'd post it in the Music if I wanted a discussion or thought it fit in with some, I dunno, cultural movement or something, as a finished thing.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:34 / 30.06.04
Sorry, I know this is an odd place to ask this question but I notice that a thread on Peter Singer has been moved to conversation from Head Shop???? As Singer's a Utilitarian philosopher and the thread seemed to be on ethics this strikes me as a little unsound.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply