Nintendo-Europe on 17 July 2012
| Aielyn said: As someone who spent a reasonably long stint as a moderator on The Wiire Boards, back before The Wiire died, I have to say that, in my opinion, the real issue is the lack of warning. On the Wiire boards, there was one particular event that caused a major shitstorm, if you'll excuse the term. The event? A staff member (staff had moderation privileges) deciding to ban a person for what was a relatively minor infraction, which resulted in a big back-and-forward between that staff member and the bulk of the community, with quite a few members receiving a ban as a result. I was working on PhD at that point in time, and I hopped online only to find this massive mess having been created - I ended up spending most of the day cleaning it up. And as I said, it was all because of an overuse of the "banhammer". If moderators are just stepping in and banning members for comments, then they're not doing their jobs. The moderator's primary job is to actually develop a connection with the community and an understanding of the community, so that they can deftly guide the community. The banhammer should be the last tool in the set, and only used when all other options have been tried. It shouldn't be the primary form of moderation. If someone tries to troll, the first step should be to defuse the troll's post - either remove the offending comment (if it is appropriate to do so) or find a clever way to dismiss their post as simultaneously inaccurate and poorly constructed. If they try to troll repeatedly, then it's time to give direct warnings. If it continues, use the higher non-ban options (you should be able to set them to "moderated", so that a moderator has to give their posts the OK) for a little while. The banhammer only comes out if they continue. Obviously, if it's a spambot or similar, the banhammer is quite fine in such a situation. Any other approach will inevitably cause problems. This thread is an example of this. What ends up happening is that people start posting similar trollish comments (the first two replies in the thread are good examples) in solidarity, and start attacking the moderators rather broadly. Others will inevitably come to the defence of the moderator that did it, but that will only make a bigger rift within the community. I don't think that the moderators are fanboys of any system. I honestly think that they try to remain as neutral as they can. I also think that they're too willing to use the banhammer, and that this results in various members seeing them as anti- or pro-, typically based on where those members tend to spend most of their time. When a member sees a lot of bannings of people who criticise Sony, they quickly come to the conclusion that moderators are Sony fanboys. And I think that this is what has happened in this case. Any way, that's my two cents... OK, more like 37 dollars, but still. |
Indeed, an excessive reliance on banning already creates an undrinkable ambiance, add to that the idea that moderators are not neutral, and this is the revolution!
