Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasczak  One more thing to think about that I brought up in the wrong thread:
Think about how you'll rule on whether moderator actions should be open to public discussion. I have been on a board for six years where we didn't discuss moderator actions - users or mods.
Doing so can be very divisive. Look at the thread here about someone being banned on an entirely different forum.
On the other hand, transparency is often a good and healthy thing too.
Maybe the compromise is somehow prohibiting extended discussions. Of course, any such discussion should never take a thread off topic.
A moderator should never be the one to initiate public discussion. In other words, I don't think a mod should tell everyone "I gave that guy a warning for that." That kind of thing should be handled on PMs. But if the user wants to air his dirty laundry, maybe he should start a thread, and only then would the mod come in and give their side of it.
With the new rules as good as they are, I don't think there'll be a lot of problems anyway, and if there are, they'll be easy to settle. |
I think the issue here is that mods should only post in threads if its appropriate to do so. Otherwise the issue should be dealt with by PM. I would not like to see threads hijacked by mods trying to mediate a problem between members or with a particular member.
While I agree transparency is important I don't want to see the equivalent of public floggings. Apart from anything else, publicly calling someone to task puts them on the defensive and makes mediation more not less difficult.
Using Pm's to point out the problems with someones behaviour in a thead can often resolve the issue as the member does not feel they need to defend their position in a public way.
Moderators are part of a team and should never feel that they are alone in dealing with any situation. Another mod or admin can be asked for assistance or advice at any time.