Oh I definitely think there's a communication issue. Simply not in the regard that others here are making out.
I agree insofar as little communication is given on why a decision is made. But the decisions are ultimately made. It is our part of the bargain as members of this community to abide by that decision regardless of how vehemently you may disagree with it. Yes, you may contest what conclusion you've been slapped with and yes, you absolutely are allowed to be peeved with such outcome. But when taking things through the official route doesn't work for you, it's for a reason. At this point it's down to the member to either grin and bear it or face the consequences when they try and stir up trouble because of it.
However this simply doesn't work if the decision is unjust and no one should stand by and let nothing happen. If you put exactly what you said in a completely unfair situation then, even if mods have the final say, it doesn't necessarily make it right. The fact is that no community, whether it's an Internet or your local community, should just take decisions on the chin without questioning authority. If no one questioned anything then it's a good chance we would live in a world with no democracy.
Now it may sound silly of me to compare this to a real life scenario, and I'm not necessarily saying we should treat this matter like that, I'm just simply using it as an example.
TheBlueReptile said:
isn't an excuse at all. It's a risk factor that has to be taken into consideration. As Axle has already pointed out, people are not promoted to the moderation team with carefully being selected, sometimes by the referral of the community. Even then, steps are taken to ensure the risk is managed ongoing. Moderators cannot take whatever action they please as they're held accountable for each of them.
What's being suggested here is to give the power to override a mod's decision, a decision with a relatively low risk factor, to the general community.
That wasn't suggested whatsoever. Kitsu is voicing the right for members to at least have a say in matters. A forum is a community like any other at the end of the day. While you may have a hierarchy--whether it be members, HKs, Mods, Admins etc.--I believe that everyone has the right to have an equal say despite their rank.
I'm not saying that there has been any bad decisions by the mod team (current or past), but the right to question is a right that we most definitely should have. Again, usually strength comes in numbers, and one member complaining about a thread being closed (which was the original topic?) Is likely not to be taken into account. So this, as a suggestion thread, is an outlet for a suggestion by Kitsu, which I thought made perfect sense as there were many threads that were closed quite prematurely to the disappointment of many who were enjoying the topic at hand.
TheBlueReptile said:
A community populated by malicious and ill-intended members as well as those who want to contribute positively.
The former greatly outnumbers the latter. Plus its easy to differentiate between someone who is causing controversy for the sake of it, and someone who is making a civil suggestion. I don't know whether you're referring to people causing trouble in this thread, but I think it's simply members voicing their say.
If that's a problem though, said members are susceptible to bans.
TheBlueReptile said:
I'm yet to experience the throw-away use of the term "controversy" on these forums. But you knew what I was referring to and would appreciate it if you didn't try to paint my response as an overreaction to something simple.
To cause controversy is quite literally to cause a public display of opinionated debate, in this instance one of heated debate. I'm not talking about one member making a flippant comment and another taking offense, I'm talking about a direct attempt to undermine the decisions of the mods and belittle those involved by shouting it from the rooftops. If you have tension with the mods or the way they have dealt with something then that's a shame and something that should definitely be addressed. However, it should be addressed respectfully and without causing unnecessary disruption to the community. All people are doing by making blogs about how unfair theirs or another's ban is, is trying to get reactions from people against the mods.
Controversy is sometimes exaggerated and I think people do sometimes need to sit back and realise it's an Internet forum, but it does exist maybe just not on the level people make it out to be. Also just because you haven't experienced such it doesn't mean it's nonexistent nor does it mean you can take the position to speak from a pedestal that represents the masses, which I get the feeling you're doing.
Like I've said above, I don't think this whole discussion was an attempt to stir controversy for the sake of it or to "undermine" as you said. I don't recall you were present at the time, but this was on the back of a few threads being closed quite prematurely and--at that moment--another was closed, which many disagreed with. However, this wasn't an outlash at the mods as we were discussing this in a civil manner at the time, and many thought the wrong decision was made. I don't see what was so "disrespectful" about the original post by Kitsu, maybe you could expand? It was done because we thought our say was getting shot down without no where to reason. It's not exactly a huge problem, but nor should we take it on the chin.
TheBlueReptile said:
Having an actual public forum in which to display your concerns about the moderation doesn't seem like a bad idea to me in theory. It's out of the way where people don't have to scroll past actual content to gain access to it, and would allow general opinion to be collected on issues that fall into more of a gray area. However, we as a community are not mature enough for it to be effective in my eyes. It would be swarmed by the "Why was I banned?!" blogs that we've seen punctuating the blogs section and would likely often result in Mods vs Members debates that are only going to lead to frustration when attempts to overturn subjectively unwise decisions are unsuccessful.
I honestly think that it could be abused, but again, it's easy to differentiate between a troll-like posts and an actual suggestion. The original suggestion, being: for mods to delete posts instead of closing the thread straight away, is a legitimate suggestion rather than a simple "why was I banned". The mods can easily spot the difference between the two and make the right decision.
---
Me agreeing with Kitsu (and others) isn't exactly me being against the mods and nor should it be seen as such; however, I think we should work together to make the community better. Mods are bound to make wrong choices from time to time; it happens and I can relate as I honestly don't see myself as anywhere near a perfect HK either.
Mods should have the final say as that is their job, but if a bad descsion does occur then members should have the right to voice their say on the situation at hand. This shouldn't be treated as a members vs mods scenario, but instead a cooperation between both parties.