Jump to content
Awoo.

Member Feedback - What makes a good moderator?


Danj86

Recommended Posts

Is it okay to ask this question here? I apologize if not. This topic is not for attacking the staff or anything like that.

I recall @Don Corleone mentioning the downfall of a forum he used to attend when people that weren't responsible enough became part of the staff. I've always wondered what it takes to be part of maintaining the peace and managing various other tasks for a forum.

Imagine you wanted to start your own community, what kind of people would you look for as an ally in making the process a reality?

I reckon it would be good if the person wasn't afraid to get in the middle of things and be able to lay down the law when needed. But I also think it's important that they are easily approachable and a good listener. It wouldn't be ideal if a moderator was intimidating as it could put people off about reporting stuff. I guess a level of patience would also be required as well, especially when dealing with people like me. lol

So what important traits do you all think is important in maintaining a forum?

I'm hoping the stuff that will be discussed here could be useful in the future. The Mods and Admins wont be able to play that role forever and maybe having a wide range of opinions on the matter could help a little in future choice making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patience, reliability, and I agreed that they should be approachable and a good listener (which is how I view them on this site, seriously).

Also being able to build up the community by bringing fresh ideas to the table or just being nice and welcoming new users to the forum.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do have a few ideas of what makes a good moderator.

Namely if there's rules applied to the forum, make sure to enforce them and remember them. And they have to be the ones prepared to make the hard decisions when the time requires it. Yeah I'm probably making it sound like some kind of dictatorship but that's not what I think is key to being a moderator. Another aspect of being a good moderator is being active within their own community and chats and respects the members of the forum. I think this is pretty important thing to note. I think its best to be a part of your own forum but not be an extreme doormat since you will have to give out warning, strikes, and bans.

I think you guys have the general idea. I'm not asking any of the staff to change their own personalities or ways of handling how they do things. I'm just stating what I think is ideal to doing a moderator job. I've done a few mod gigs myself so I do know a few what and what not to do things. I'm sure everyone has common sense enough to know how to do their job. But yeah that's what I personally think.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Be serious about the position and don't slack off. You need to remain active on the site, checking it at least once a day on most normal days.

-Don't be a smarmy or condescending asshole. I see way too many forum moderators become this and it honestly makes them worse for the community than some of the trolls or bad eggs on a website.

-Be friendly and engage with the community. Try to seem positive.

-Don't hand out infractions like candy, but have enough spine to give one out when someone is acting up enough. And don't come off as a cold robot that only ever over-emphasises the rules.

-Don't play favourites and be more trigger happy against users you might not get along with or don't agree with on certain topics, but don't be more lenient towards your friends or the users you respect more. Personal biases should be pushed aside as much as is humanly possible.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. I haven't been here long enough to have an opinion on this site's staff, though I have been on other forums over the years and I've seen some excellent moderators, but also some terrible ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's one thing I've noticed, being both a member and a moderator on multiple forums, is that it's extremely easy to make judgments on a moderator's qualifications or judgments when you're not the one responsible for maintaining the integrity of the forums.  I'm not trying to take the high horse position here, as I'm guilty of this as well.  I don't always agree with the mod actions we make here, and other moderators don't always agree with the mod actions I make, but I do empathize heavily with their position and understand that it's kind of a losing battle.  Basically, if you're going to be a moderator, you're going to be hated by someone, and there's literally nothing you can do about it.  I've tried all different methods.  I've tried to be eloquent and insightful in my approach, so that people know the difference between a minor offense and a major one, and I've also tried to be blunt and firm with people.  In the end, it really doesn't matter what you do; people are going to respond the same way, regardless.

Again, not trying to take a high horse route here.  I understand how bad it feels when someone tells you that something you did is wrong.  My point here isn't to say rather or not these reactions are justified, but that when someone says a moderator must be "this" or "that," usually in regards to having patience, thoughtfulness, etc., I've just come to learn that no matter how much these features are touted as great and desirable (and don't get me wrong, in general they are), when these features are exemplified, they go greatly underappreciated or are distorted into something negative, which is why many moderators here and elsewhere just plain don't bother.  Some forums even take on a "mods are always right even when they're not" approach to moderating, and while I would never want SSMB to have that kind of approach, after having some experience here, I can totally see why that policy would be attractive and even functional for certain forum atmospheres.

So basically, with that long-winded rant out of the way, let me provide my answer to the topic.  What makes a good moderator?

Well, there's no real formula to being a moderator, because the thing about the staff is that we're a team, and the great thing about teams is that we each have individual strengths and weaknesses.  Some moderators need to be the hard-ass, intimidating type, because when push comes to shove, they actually get shit done.  Meanwhile, we also need more soft-spoken moderators who are diplomatic and provide friendly relations between members.  Bearing in mind, the two can overlap, so it's not as easy as being one or the other.  There's also moderators whose impact isn't immediately noticeable, but still make a huge difference.  There are moderators that help us the most by just providing their unique insight on the matter, and there's nothing wrong with that.

So basically, there is no one or two things that make a moderator good, and while I can understand things like compassion, patience, understanding, and level-headedness for good reason seem like desirable traits, they're really not nearly as important as trustworthiness.  That is, if we give you these powers, our concern is that you don't use them for some shady and weird shit.  Basically, if this were my community and I were in charge of who became moderators, the first thing I would look for is someone who doesn't seem the type to vandalize things or mess around with things.  I would think the next most important thing, then, is a firm understanding of the rules.  It's not difficult to tell by post behavior which members just seem to understand what we're looking for in terms of post quality, spam policy, etc.  These kinds of members don't require that much training, because they already have very good sensibilities.

And I think that's actually about it.  I mean, don't get me wrong, there are traits that stand out to me aside from that, but to be honest, it's not like we signed a contract.  It's just a volunteer job for a forum about a cartoon hedgehog.  If someone goes rogue or whatever, just demote them.  It's good to take your job seriously, but only as seriously as it actually needs to be.  If you don't take it seriously enough, then you're just ruining the fun for everyone (which is why those "No Fun Allowed" types that we occasionally get are the literal height if irony), but at the same time, if it's causing you so much distress that it's keeping you up at night or intruding on your personal life, I feel like that's an outlet that is best just let go of.  The only thing I take extremely seriously is member safety, but that's a whole other can of worms.

ANYWAY, that's just my insight on the matter.  Don't know if anyone wanted it but there you go.

  • Thumbs Up 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Consider the opinions of users, and understand where they're coming from when arguing for/against a mod action, rule change, etc.

2. Don't be a dick.

3. Don't abuse your power.

4. Don't act as if this is some Indian caste system bullshit and act like you're on some high horse because you're a moderator, and I'm a mere member. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to Invisionfree and the various free-forum hosting services that have been floating around the 'net since the early 2000's, many of us have had the opportunity to be in this position, sometimes even higher (such as an admin) of at least one community. That being said, 

 

Quote

 Basically, if you're going to be a moderator, you're going to be hated by someone, and there's literally nothing you can do about it. 


Is absolutely true, regardless of how good you are at your job. Theres always somebody who is going to disagree with the status quo or question the rules. 


That being said, what makes a good moderator to me is a member of the community who realizes that they are indeed a member just like everyone else,  albeit one who has been tasked with making the boards more pleasant for everyone involved. Moderators who elevate themselves to a level of self-importance that they feel makes them above the rules, or at least less likely to be punished for their actions, is a common issue that I've seen on other communities. Condescending attitudes are another, the whole "I'm the mod and you're the member" type of thing where moderators can get very bossy and rude with enforcing the rules. I don't see the need in making a public spectacle of rulebreaking; if someone breaks a rule, to me, it's simply a matter of issuing the warning and shooting them a personal message about it, as opposed to typing up a paragraph response to the rulebreak below theirs calling them out on it and demanding that they stop. The whole "member x, cut the shit. Thats not allowed here, and x, y, z are getting warnings. Blah blah, blahblahblah..." smack dab in the middle of the thread just seems unnecessary, and at times can even seem like the moderator is throwing a (very unprofessional) temper tantrum.

This is in the context of Sonic message boards on the whole, not the SSMB in particular, per se. I'm not terribly active here these days.

In short:

1. Moderators should not consider themselves more to be helpful volunteers for the betterment of the community, and less to be "the law". 
2. Do not make a spectacle of handing out warnings. Do not try to "make an example" (if it must be done, do it as an announcement, not in a standard thread).
3. Do not use your position to intimidate others.
4. Do not try to run the site full-stop as if the position makes you an administrator.
5. Expanding upon #1, understand that you are merely a member who has volunteered to help enforce the rules, and absolutely nothing more.
6. Be kind and considerate when enforcing the rules. Talking down to people, especially in an aggressive tone, gives the site a bad rep. 
7. Remain level-headed and professional at all times when leveraging the special privileges you have been given as a moderator. Don't cock an attitude.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Cyalume said:

I don't see the need in making a public spectacle of rulebreaking; if someone breaks a rule, to me, it's simply a matter of issuing the warning and shooting them a personal message about it, as opposed to typing up a paragraph response to the rulebreak below theirs calling them out on it and demanding that they stop. The whole "member x, cut the shit. Thats not allowed here, and x, y, z are getting warnings. Blah blah, blahblahblah..." smack dab in the middle of the thread just seems unnecessary, and at times can even seem like the moderator is throwing a (very unprofessional) temper tantrum.

I don't agree.  I've seen this kind of disciplinary procedure experimented with before, and from my experience, it just leads to more rule violations, because people have no idea how we operate until after their first violation.  And really, rather you PM them about it, or do it publicly, it really doesn't change how they react.  Most members shrug off minor offenses and even strikes and move on.  Other get super-pissy.  They don't care how you did it, they just care that you did at all.

Having been on both the giving and receiving ends of this, I really don't think it matters or changes the perception of the moderators.  Most of the long-staying members just move on, because it's just a Sonic forum.  It's most likely not going to destroy their lives to be publicly reprimanded.  Hell, at least on this forum, I feel like most members are understanding of it even when we're very firm.  So I feel like it's a non-issue to like 90% of people.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Cyalume said:

I don't see the need in making a public spectacle of rulebreaking; if someone breaks a rule, to me, it's simply a matter of issuing the warning and shooting them a personal message about it, as opposed to typing up a paragraph response to the rulebreak below theirs calling them out on it and demanding that they stop. The whole "member x, cut the shit. Thats not allowed here, and x, y, z are getting warnings. Blah blah, blahblahblah..." smack dab in the middle of the thread just seems unnecessary, and at times can even seem like the moderator is throwing a (very unprofessional) temper tantrum.

I really wish I could agree with this, and with regards to minor offenses this may work sometimes. But sometimes, if we don't publicly call out people in this manner, people tend to assume we aren't doing anything about the problem. And, well, moderator-to-member relations are an important part of our job. It's not like we're just trying to look good for our own sake - no one wants to be on a forum where moderators appear to not be doing what needs to be done, it's not a great environment to be in at all. Plus, it does help other people know what behavior isn't acceptable.

However, I do agree with the general principle of not making a public spectacle of things when not needed. I kind of like the fact that we don't have "Banned" member tags on here anymore, or a list of banned people, or anything like that. Those things do seem a little unnecessary, and could possibly result in more drama. Not that those things have NO advantages or anything, but overall I like the way things are now.

As for what I think makes a good moderator, I've noticed that Superman enthusiasts who choose obscure Sonic Adventure references for their usernames tend to be the best at the job.

  • Thumbs Up 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Monkey Destruction Switch said:

I kind of like the fact that we don't have "Banned" member tags on here anymore

It took me awhile to get used to that because the "Banned" member tags were a good way of getting people to see "Oh, hey, this member is banned.  That means they won't see and thus can't respond to this post I made," which was an effective way of getting people to drop a subject in the event of flame wars or something like that.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Monkey Destruction Switch said:

As for what I think makes a good moderator, I've noticed that Superman enthusiasts who choose obscure Sonic Adventure references for their usernames tend to be the best at the job.

Superman's that guy who spins webs right?

As for the ongoing debate, I'm in the middle. Sometimes, the best way of getting a person to listen is a public call out. It sucks to be on the receiving, or even the giving end of that, but it's the same thing in School. Some people do shit to try look cool, only for the teacher to give a suitable punishment by directly giving that person attention by calling them out for doing something wrong. The end result is you look like a asshole for doing it, and the point will be clear not to do something as stupid as breaking the rules again. It sounds harsh, but when you see that, and people agreeing/liking the punishment post, you'll see why you were in the wrong, and try to better yourself. It's basically the same principle of when you're acting like an asshole in front of people, only to get called out. When that occurs, you'll likely see your actions in a new light.

That said, I think saying punishments once should be enough in a certain instance. Like for example, there's times where I've seen a mod close a thread with an explanation for why. Fair enough, that seems perfectly fine to me. However, if a thread was locked, it was explained by another mod as to why, and if it was something particularly bad, and required punishment for doing it. However, when a thread's been locked, I don't see any reason why mods would need to make a post in a locked thread basically stating what was previously said, and having two mods on a case. I guess what I'm trying to say is one calling out in one situation I think would be enough, and any more would just be overkill. Only exception I think is in cases where a topic has been locked, but a mod hasn't mentioned why. 

Don't know if that actually relates to the topic at hand, but just something I wanted to mention I guess.

Edit: I should mention this means from a strictly Mod standpoint, as in where a Member is being called out/warned/punished/whatever. From a member standpoint, as in if mods were in a debate as members, or calling out things as members, then I think it'd be fair game.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

However, when a thread's been locked, I don't see any reason why mods would need to make a post in a locked thread basically stating what was previously said, and having two mods on a case.

I think it's one of two things; we're either posting simultaneously, or within roughly the same time frame and are addressing similar things, that the thread gets locked before the other mod is ready to post. Even if it was a case where a thread isn't being locked, but two mods are active and looking at something, we might end up posting one after the other without realizing it. But, this doesn't happen that often because we're usually in communication and talking about what's being reported or what's going on in threads we're active in. And if it does happen, I don't feel it's that big of a deal.

It's also possible that the second mod might be addressing more specific behavior while the mod who locked it is just trying to contain the issue while the rest of us get to look at it and make decisions on any further actions that may need to be addressed publicly so everyone gets the point.

I don't think it goes much further that that, honestly. In either instance, I think it's highly unlikely someone's going to get double-punished, or whatever, unless we look further into the issue and find there is more going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On various occasions, we've had instances where moderators accidentally post at the same time and give out contradictory warnings.  However, I have yet to see where this has ever caused someone to be penalized multiple times for the same offense.  We are usually very quick in noticing that our actions overlapped and usually fix the error accordingly.

80% of the time, this isn't even a problem, because we normally talk amongst ourselves before making decisions.  But autonomy and efficiency being important virtues for a moderator (if previous feedback topics are any indication), we can't have those virtues if we also have to take time out to discuss things before taking action on commonsense problems.

This is partially what I mean when I say that things we do are distorted as bad, rather it's actually bad or not.  Moderators tend to step on each other's toes a lot, but as long as I've been staff here, this has never been a problem that isn't resolved almost immediately, and most members on the receiving end are also pretty cool about it, even if they are kind of salty about being punished in general.  It's really not that big of a deal.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/25/2016 at 0:47 AM, Tara said:

If there's one thing I've noticed, being both a member and a moderator on multiple forums, is that it's extremely easy to make judgments on a moderator's qualifications or judgments when you're not the one responsible for maintaining the integrity of the forums.  I'm not trying to take the high horse position here, as I'm guilty of this as well.  I don't always agree with the mod actions we make here, and other moderators don't always agree with the mod actions I make, but I do empathize heavily with their position and understand that it's kind of a losing battle.  Basically, if you're going to be a moderator, you're going to be hated by someone, and there's literally nothing you can do about it.  I've tried all different methods.  I've tried to be eloquent and insightful in my approach, so that people know the difference between a minor offense and a major one, and I've also tried to be blunt and firm with people.  In the end, it really doesn't matter what you do; people are going to respond the same way, regardless.

Again, not trying to take a high horse route here.  I understand how bad it feels when someone tells you that something you did is wrong.  My point here isn't to say rather or not these reactions are justified, but that when someone says a moderator must be "this" or "that," usually in regards to having patience, thoughtfulness, etc., I've just come to learn that no matter how much these features are touted as great and desirable (and don't get me wrong, in general they are), when these features are exemplified, they go greatly underappreciated or are distorted into something negative, which is why many moderators here and elsewhere just plain don't bother.  Some forums even take on a "mods are always right even when they're not" approach to moderating, and while I would never want SSMB to have that kind of approach, after having some experience here, I can totally see why that policy would be attractive and even functional for certain forum atmospheres.

So basically, with that long-winded rant out of the way, let me provide my answer to the topic.  What makes a good moderator?

Well, there's no real formula to being a moderator, because the thing about the staff is that we're a team, and the great thing about teams is that we each have individual strengths and weaknesses.  Some moderators need to be the hard-ass, intimidating type, because when push comes to shove, they actually get shit done.  Meanwhile, we also need more soft-spoken moderators who are diplomatic and provide friendly relations between members.  Bearing in mind, the two can overlap, so it's not as easy as being one or the other.  There's also moderators whose impact isn't immediately noticeable, but still make a huge difference.  There are moderators that help us the most by just providing their unique insight on the matter, and there's nothing wrong with that.

So basically, there is no one or two things that make a moderator good, and while I can understand things like compassion, patience, understanding, and level-headedness for good reason seem like desirable traits, they're really not nearly as important as trustworthiness.  That is, if we give you these powers, our concern is that you don't use them for some shady and weird shit.  Basically, if this were my community and I were in charge of who became moderators, the first thing I would look for is someone who doesn't seem the type to vandalize things or mess around with things.  I would think the next most important thing, then, is a firm understanding of the rules.  It's not difficult to tell by post behavior which members just seem to understand what we're looking for in terms of post quality, spam policy, etc.  These kinds of members don't require that much training, because they already have very good sensibilities.

And I think that's actually about it.  I mean, don't get me wrong, there are traits that stand out to me aside from that, but to be honest, it's not like we signed a contract.  It's just a volunteer job for a forum about a cartoon hedgehog.  If someone goes rogue or whatever, just demote them.  It's good to take your job seriously, but only as seriously as it actually needs to be.  If you don't take it seriously enough, then you're just ruining the fun for everyone (which is why those "No Fun Allowed" types that we occasionally get are the literal height if irony), but at the same time, if it's causing you so much distress that it's keeping you up at night or intruding on your personal life, I feel like that's an outlet that is best just let go of.  The only thing I take extremely seriously is member safety, but that's a whole other can of worms.

ANYWAY, that's just my insight on the matter.  Don't know if anyone wanted it but there you go.

What Akito is trying to say, for you tl;dr people, is that it is very important to have a sash that says "moderator" on it.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.