Don't Feed the GDed Trolls

[laurence]

Do you really feel that way, twaddle? Do you feel confined and forced to conform? I've have yet to see you hold back. Do you really feel the moderators on this board have run a cult not allowing any opinion that does not conform to the 4 pillars of investing? Are all 100k+ posts on this board incense burned before the statue of Bogle? I don't believe you think that, or else you wouldn't still be here.

If you have a serious beef with how things are run, please, by all means, lay them out. Posting a clip from your favorite '70's body snatcher movie doesn't seem constructive.

Oh, woe for the "free spirits" and "victims of over-moderation" just because they verbally harassed a few dozen people - just for fun - or presented a different yet equally plausible view like high fee mutual funds rock, variable annuities are the way to go, water isn't wet, gravity doesn't always work, Kiyosaki is a genius. They are immediately met a lynch mob of zealous, mindless slaves to dogma. Considering how many long timers and former moderators post much less frequently now, or not at all, I'd say the "free spirits" are the ones who have done the job of running people off, not the other way around.

 

[twaddle]

d00d, are you following the same threads I am?

I just saw a beagle make an unprovoked attack on a new member. A suspected troll, of all things. Maybe I'm missing some history on those two, but that seemed uncalled for. Did you moderate? Did anybody?

No, instead another member recited the Miranda Act.

Normally, I ignore these little tiffs. But this has become a frequent occurance here. I have no idea what's going on, but I sense that the mods and ex-mods aren't exactly setting great examples.

Personally, I get my share of attacks, but I treat it as sport, and I very rarely make ad hominem attacks. I don't think I've ever called anybody a troll.

How 'bout we just ban the use of the word "troll." Maybe that would help. Or maybe the nasty atmosphere here is all in my head. Stranger things have happened.

 

[laurence]

I would agree things seem to be at a low ebb for civility, but the mods are under attack right now for moderating. The OP is now asking for members to take matters into their own hands by using ignore, a bunch of people jumped in shouting free speech, and the free for all was on again. Did I miss something?

The moderators are slammed for being heavy handed, then slammed for letting things run amok. That's the price to pay, but it would be a real shame to see this community unravel because of a few contentious posters running most others off.

 

[twaddle]

I don't think it's a matter of mods doing too much or not enough. Let's look for root causes.

We have a few people with "moderator emeritus" titles, and we have a few more with "moderator" titles. Like it or not, those people will be looked at as models for proper behavior. The norms are established by the alpha dogs here.

So, if any of those respected alpha dogs engage in attack behavior, that says "it's OK to engage in attack behavior" to all the other pups here. Even worse is when the alpha dogs show that they are a united force and give one another public high-5's.

Some of the mods and ex-mods here are outstanding, diplomatic, and keep all of their reprimands out of the public space. One or two tolerate and/or engage in anti-social behavior. I'm not going to name any names, and certainly the problem isn't limited to the alpha dogs, but the alpha dogs lead the pack.

 

[laurence]

Hmm, well I guess I didn't notice any deference paid to me, but I can be obtuse. A community of FIRE minded anti-establishmentarianists following "alpha dogs"? Hmmm.

I certainly respect the notion of not naming names, but if you think mods are abusing their powers and/or positions, then provide that feedback. PM's work just fine, you can also report the post and it will only be seen by the moderators. - having said that, I would not be surprised to get a PM myself.

After all is said and done, the goal is to provide a board that the maximum number of people can enjoy and learn from. Sometimes we may fail in our duties, or fail to separate our moderator powers from our personal involvement in threads. I have never banned or moderated a person I was engaged in debate with, but had my moderator label led to undue influence or intimidation on the board, I am sincerely sorry.

 

[twaddle]

I'm not going to call anybody out, as fun as that would be, but here are a few random suggestions:

1) If you don't already have something, maybe the mods could have their own code of conduct.

2) Kill the "moderator emeritus" titles unless those who have them agree to uphold that same code of conduct.

3) Create one or more generic "moderator" accounts and use those for moderation. Make wild and crazy posts under your own name and personality, and make moderation a nameless and faceless job.

 

[laurence]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll make sure the this is seen by the rest of the mods.

 

[brewer12345]

3) Create one or more generic "moderator" accounts and use those for moderation. Make wild and crazy posts under your own name and personality, and make moderation a nameless and faceless job.

I think the other two might be good ideas, but I give a big thumbs down to #3. Leaving the mod tags on personal IDs keeps things out in the open.

 

[maddythebeagle]

d00d, are you following the same threads I am?

I just saw a beagle make an unprovoked attack on a new member. A suspected troll, of all things. Maybe I'm missing some history on those two, but that seemed uncalled for. Did you moderate? Did anybody?

No, instead another member recited the Miranda Act.

How 'bout we just ban the use of the word "troll." Maybe that would help. Or maybe the nasty atmosphere here is all in my head. Stranger things have happened.

That "new member" turned out to be an old member previously banned...Yes, Lawerance rebanned the miscreant...See how I didnt use the "T" word

 

[twaddle]

I think the other two might be good ideas, but I give a big thumbs down to #3. Leaving the mod tags on personal IDs keeps things out in the open.

Well, I think (3) may be the only one with any teeth. It solves several problems:

-- Who wants to be a mod if they can't particpate freely in the threads without a lot of self-censorship?

-- A generic mod account might make it easier for the mods to regulate one another (and the ex-mods) when they're "out of uniform" and out of line.

-- It makes it easier for them to keep the peace without fear of retribution and without taking the often thankless feedback on moderation personally.

The downside is that bad moderator calls wouldn't be as accountable, but if they have their own code of conduct, it should be easy for them to hold themselves accountable.

Bottom-line is that moderation is a thankless task, and it's never going to be easy to herd cats, so I was just focusing on changes that *might* help without increasing their load. Feel free to come up with other alternatives or other possible root causes.

 

[brewer12345]

Feel free to come up with other alternatives or other possible root causes.

No thanks. I like things more-or-less as they are.

 

[Martha]

I don't care one way or another whether I am "moderator emeritus."

I agree with Brewer that making moderation nameless and faceless is not a good idea.

Moderators on this board historically have been people who also are avid participants. Sometimes a moderator can become very involved in a heated debate. When this occurs I believe that the particular moderator should not use his or her moderator status to criticize or edit a poster participating in that discussion and another moderator should intervene if things get out of hand.

Otherwise, moderators should follow the same guidelines as everyone else.

 

[maddythebeagle]

No thanks. I like things more-or-less as they are.

back from the original start of this thread....

Until the mods grow a pair.....

I believe that you have "looped" back on your own thread.... I never thought it possible....Yeah, the modulators have a thankless job...a quick PM to one of them seems to quickly do the trick...I think the concerns about their opinions overshadowing others is overdone....Frankly, there are a lot of very opinionated folks here in general....

 

[twaddle]

OK, so we keep the status quo. That means everything here is peachy, right?

My impression is that personal attacks have gotten out of hand. Honobob dragged up a thread from 2004. In that thread, we see a group of people with widely divergent viewpoints. There is some ribbing, but there are no nasty personal attacks. There was an implict code that said "personal attacks are verboten."

I was thinking last night about when things started going downhill here. Some might argue that it's a recent phenomenon and a natural side effect of growth.

I think it started when John Galt was directly attacked and chased away.

 

[laurence]

Well, I think (3) may be the only one with any teeth. It solves several problems:

-- Who wants to be a mod if they can't particpate freely in the threads without a lot of self-censorship?

-- A generic mod account might make it easier for the mods to regulate one another (and the ex-mods) when they're "out of uniform" and out of line.

-- It makes it easier for them to keep the peace without fear of retribution and without taking the often thankless feedback on moderation personally.

The downside is that bad moderator calls wouldn't be as accountable, but if they have their own code of conduct, it should be easy for them to hold themselves accountable.

Bottom-line is that moderation is a thankless task, and it's never going to be easy to herd cats, so I was just focusing on changes that *might* help without increasing their load. Feel free to come up with other alternatives or other possible root causes.

Be careful! You might end up one of us if you keep it up!

 

[brewer12345]

I think it started when John Galt was directly attacked and chased away.

JG wasn't chased away. The braggart/liar couldn't take the ribbing he got when he was called on his BS. He chose to go of his own accord, AFAIK.

 

[twaddle]

The guy had a quirky personallity for sure, but I think it's obvious that a lynch mob was formed fairly soon after he was publically called out for his quirks. And these days, lynch mobs are SOP for this place.

 

[brewer12345]

The guy had a quirky personallity for sure, but I think it's obvious that a lynch mob was formed fairly soon after he was publically called out for his quirks. And these days, lynch mobs are SOP for this place.

I don't see it, personally, but you are welcome to your opinion.

 

[twaddle]

Brew, I enjoy reading you a lot. But, d00d, you don't see it because one of your personality quirks is that you enjoy running "trolls" out of town.

 

[REWahoo]

The guy had a quirky personallity for sure, but I think it's obvious that a lynch mob was formed fairly soon after he was publically called out for his quirks.

As I recall it the "lynch mob" consisted of his ex-wife who hijacked his password and said some rather uncomplimentary things about him on the forum. His response was to tuck his tail into his gonadinal area and seek other venues.

 

[Martha]

The JG situation was complicated and unusual. Significant moderation of a number of posters occurred and he left of his own accord because of a specific issue, not because of any lynch mob.

It is unfortunate if that situation, which was far from transparent, leads people to believe that we have a lynch mob culture.

EDIT: well I certainly was obtuse as compared to REWahoo!

 

[brewer12345]

Brew, I enjoy reading you a lot. But, d00d, you don't see it because one of your personality quirks is that you enjoy running "trolls" out of town.

Careful...

 

[REWahoo]

EDIT: well I certainly was obtuse as compared to REWahoo!

Some people call a spade a spade. Others call it a ***king shovel.

 

[twaddle]

Calling a spade a spade is fine, I guess, but not if you want to continue living with that person in harmony.

Something that might augment dory's fine "reasonable person" policy: never say something in a public online setting that you wouldn't say sitting next to that person.

And, yes, that means you probably wouldn't want to sit next to me.

 

[Nords]

That "new member" turned out to be an old member previously banned...

See, that recycled troll could've behaved under his new alter-ego and no one would've been the wiser. However the behavioral pressure turned out to be too much and he quickly reverted to his old ways.

I don't care one way or another whether I am "moderator emeritus."

Same here. If the mods & admins feel it's distracting from the board's focus then they can have my "moderator emeritus" badge too. I even have an 80x80 version of my avatar on my HD. Not, of course, that I feel it's necessary for the mods to obtain our blessing to do either of those actions.

The JG situation was complicated and unusual. Significant moderation of a number of posters occurred and he left of his own accord because of a specific issue, not because of any lynch mob.

Yeah, we've never had another poster spout as much BS, get challenged on it, and keep coming back to spout more! We've never had someone register an account, start claiming that "she" was his wife (now "ex-wife"), debunk his claims, allege various felonies, and then publicly thank the alpha dog in the lynch mob for calling him on his claims.

JG has been ignored at a couple other boards, too. He's now happily spouting his crap in letters to the editor of his local paper, so I don't feel bad for his loss of socialization.

In general those who carp at this board's moderation are blissfully ignorant of what's happening behind the scenes. Before wrapping oneself in a copy of the First Amendment and peeing on another poster, try walking a mile in a moderator's shoes.

Those who find a board with better moderation should go to it. And don't hesitate to tell this board's staff how that other board's better methods could be adapted here...