A place for discussion of policy.

This is not the place for discussion of particular actions. The correct place for that is still the moderators email list.

---

BOINC WIKI

It's a tough position,

For reasoning to be hidden isn't what people want to hear, but, you have to realize there are younger people here and some very conservative people as well. Bad language, graphic content, etc...

In 99.9% of moderation I believe the reasoning is self evident.

For the other .1%, you may have to find a venue that will allow you to express your opinions where members participating are all of the same ilk. (Same goes for the other unacceptable posts in this venue.

My site is moderated by me and there are no moderation actions. I may fix typos for you but that's about it. But, you see, this is MY site I am talking about.

This is not our forum so we must play by the rules of the owners. Litigation avoidance is always a major consideration. I'd rather have a moderated SETI forum than none at all, here.




.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

As some have realized, I am a new moderator to Seti Main but have been a moderator in Seti Beta for quite a while. I remember when the updated policy was first put out and there is a Web Page defines what the Moderation Policy is...

Moderation

So each time you create a new Forum Thread, of just click Reply. You are bound to acceptable use of that policy. The short version shows up on the left side of your screen in your web browser.

The Site, Forums etc. are the property of Seti@home, You are a a registered guest. Just like someone coming into your home everyone is bound to defined set of rules for behavior.

When a Moderator takes action it is because "you" have did something that violates that policy. Something that violates acceptable use in some way, they are reacting/correcting the problem.

If you feel someone abused your "limited rights" under that written policy, it explains what you need to do. Plain and simple.

Regards

Pappa

---

Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project.

As some have realized, I am a new moderator to Seti Main but have been a moderator in Seti Beta for quite a while. I remember when the updated policy was first put out and there is a Web Page defines what the Moderation Policy is...

Moderation

So each time you create a new Forum Thread, of just click Reply. You are bound to acceptable use of that policy. The short version shows up on the left side of your screen in your web browser.

The Site, Forums etc. are the property of Seti@home, You are a a registered guest. Just like someone coming into your home everyone is bound to defined set of rules for behavior.

When a Moderator takes action it is because "you" have did something that violates that policy. Something that violates acceptable use in some way, they are reacting/correcting the problem.

If you feel someone abused your "limited rights" under that written policy, it explains what you need to do. Plain and simple.

Regards

Pappa

* Posts must be 'kid friendly': they may not contain content that is obscene, hate-related, sexually explicit or suggestive.
* No commercial advertisements.
* No links to web sites involving sexual content, gambling, or intolerance of others.
* No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.
* No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.
* No abusive comments involving race, religion, nationality, gender, class or sexuality.

These rules seem very reasonable to me. What I think part of the problem is, it that some moderators are stepping beyond them and moderating because of perceived insults or imagined wrong doing rather than what is actually being posted or intended. This is leading to miscarriages of justice which is fuelling resentment against the moderators in a significant number of posters.

Our only means of recourse is making a complaint via the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address. However..when our complaints are either ignored or responded to with insults (sometimes obscene) from a minority of moderators this no longer seems a viable option.

We also have a situation where moderators themselves have been insulting posters on the boards and again complaints and requests to remove the offending posts are ignored until the posters take their complaints to the boards.

Calls for banning at the slightest infringement (sometimes imagined) of these rules is also fuelling resentment.

In my experience a good moderator will try many avenues of conflict resolution before threatening a ban...especially when a lot of those conflicts have been triggered by moderator behaviour in the first place.

As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with the moderation policy..it is the application of it that is the problem.

Hopefully Pappa, you will help bring a little calm, tolerance and reason to the moderator group.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Hmmm, the listed author of this thread is JM7, yet the first post is by ICE. Seems a bit odd. What happened to the first post? Was it moderated?

Hmmm, the listed author of this thread is JM7, yet the first post is by ICE. Seems a bit odd. What happened to the first post? Was it moderated?

I suppose that Ice posted his post into the Café, and JM7 moved it here, starting a new thread with it.
I also have done such things on the boards where I am a mod. Maybe it's a bug in the board software...

---

Account frozen...

This thread to discuss moderation policy, but not specific actions or issues, is an excellent idea. It allows for the posters and moderators to publicly debate policy and its interpretation.

It also gives posters an avenue to raise general policy from a specific action or issue, as long as the principles of the discussion relate to a general point of moderation policy and interpretation.

Excellent opportunity, and a good place to keep sparkling clean.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Hmmm, the listed author of this thread is JM7, yet the first post is by ICE. Seems a bit odd. What happened to the first post? Was it moderated?

I suppose that Ice posted his post into the Café, and JM7 moved it here, starting a new thread with it.
I also have done such things on the boards where I am a mod. Maybe it's a bug in the board software...

My opening post is the currently the third post listed. I moved the first two (including one of mine) from the Cafe.

---

BOINC WIKI

As some have realized, I am a new moderator to Seti Main but have been a moderator in Seti Beta for quite a while. I remember when the updated policy was first put out and there is a Web Page defines what the Moderation Policy is...

Moderation

So each time you create a new Forum Thread, of just click Reply. You are bound to acceptable use of that policy. The short version shows up on the left side of your screen in your web browser.

The Site, Forums etc. are the property of Seti@home, You are a a registered guest. Just like someone coming into your home everyone is bound to defined set of rules for behavior.

When a Moderator takes action it is because "you" have did something that violates that policy. Something that violates acceptable use in some way, they are reacting/correcting the problem.

If you feel someone abused your "limited rights" under that written policy, it explains what you need to do. Plain and simple.

Regards

Pappa

* Posts must be 'kid friendly': they may not contain content that is obscene, hate-related, sexually explicit or suggestive.
* No commercial advertisements.
* No links to web sites involving sexual content, gambling, or intolerance of others.
* No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.
* No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.
* No abusive comments involving race, religion, nationality, gender, class or sexuality.

These rules seem very reasonable to me. What I think part of the problem is, it that some moderators are stepping beyond them and moderating because of perceived insults or imagined wrong doing rather than what is actually being posted or intended. This is leading to miscarriages of justice which is fuelling resentment against the moderators in a significant number of posters.

Our only means of recourse is making a complaint via the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address. However..when our complaints are either ignored or responded to with insults (sometimes obscene) from a minority of moderators this no longer seems a viable option.

We also have a situation where moderators themselves have been insulting posters on the boards and again complaints and requests to remove the offending posts are ignored until the posters take their complaints to the boards.

Calls for banning at the slightest infringement (sometimes imagined) of these rules is also fuelling resentment.

In my experience a good moderator will try many avenues of conflict resolution before threatening a ban...especially when a lot of those conflicts have been triggered by moderator behaviour in the first place.

As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with the moderation policy..it is the application of it that is the problem.

Hopefully Pappa, you will help bring a little calm, tolerance and reason to the moderator group.

Missing was the more info that can be reached from a link at the bottom of the quoted material.

To maximize discussion and flow of information, our message boards are moderated. Message board postings are subject to the following posting rules:

Posts must be 'kid friendly': they may not contain content that is obscene, hate-related, sexually explicit or suggestive.
No commercial advertisements.
No links to web sites involving sexual content, gambling, or intolerance of others.
No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.
No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.
No abusive comments involving race, religion, nationality, gender, class or sexuality.
Moderators may delete posts that violate any of these rules. The authors of deleted posts will be notified via email. Gross offenders may have their ability to post messages temporarily revoked (though to prevent abuse only project administrators have the ability to do so). Additional kinds of bad behavior ("bugging" posts to trap the IP addresses of other participants, excessive thread creation to spam the forums, etc.), while not listed in the formal rules, may still lead to similar penalties.

If you think a post violates any of the posting rules, click the red X on the post and fill out the form; moderators will be notified of your complaint. Please use this button only for clear violations - not personal disputes.

We try to be as fair as we can when moderating, but in a large community of users, with many different viewpoints, there will always be some people that will not be happy with our moderation decisions. While we regret that this happens, please realize that we cannot suit all of the people all of the time and have to make decisions based on our resources and what is best for the forum overall. Please don't discuss our moderation policy on the forums. We aren't a social engineering project nor are we in the business of creating a perfectly fair system. So such discussions tend to be counterproductive and potentially incendiary. If you have a legitimate claim, send email to the address below.

This moderation policy is set by the SETI@home project. If you have comments about the policy, email setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu.

Please note the request not to discuss moderation policy on the forums. The instructions to the moderators forbid the discussion of specific actions on the forums. This seems to have caused the most rancor as people refuse to use the mechanism provided for complaints, but instead post complaints on the boards, and when these are correctly deleted, start flaming the moderators.

---

BOINC WIKI

Please note the request not to discuss moderation policy on the forums. The instructions to the moderators forbid the discussion of specific actions on the forums. This seems to have caused the most rancor as people refuse to use the mechanism provided for complaints, but instead post complaints on the boards, and when these are correctly deleted, start flaming the moderators.

I think alot of people tried that; going through channels...like making an appeal to the inquisition.

Hi: Waving to everyone!

---

Account frozen...

If an employee feels ufairly treated there is NO effective means of appeal against it. Whats the point of consulting the very people who harassed you in the first place? People believe that you will simply stick together out of loyalty to each other. Whats the point of complaining to Management? Are they likely to over-rule the very people they appointed?

Well, you've highlighted the basic problem, what do you suggest we all do about it?

When you find the solution, please forward it to every human resources department on the planet... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Nice to see some things never change no matter how long you've been gone.....

---

This raises one of the general issues I mentioned at my first post below

This does raise the issue of replies to a specific moderator, which may be copied to the modlist (setimods©ssl.berkeley.edu), where a reply from the non-mod has been shown to be rude and unacceptable.

What policies and plans are in place for the moderators to deal with this situation, provided the reply can be shown to be genuine and the original action appeared to the non-mod poster seemed to be arbitary.

Any policy should include information to the non-mod poster, privately, as to what stages/steps have been gone through and the verdict/action reached.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Ice's posts removed from this thread per Ice's request.

Ice's posts removed from this thread per Ice's request.

Many Thanks. I hope I find it the first where I originally put it as I specifically requested.

And I hope I added a point about the application of moderation policy here. Wanting.

---

flaming balloons

Ice's posts removed from this thread per Ice's request.

Many Thanks. I hope I find it the first where I originally put it as I specifically requested.

And I hope I added a point about the application of moderation policy here. Wanting.

I hope everything is back to your satisfaction, Ice.

I believe the mod consensus is that what happens in email does not matter and the mods can say what they want in reply to you. Even if what they send you is obscene and insulting.

Bearing that in mind I would strongly recommend against anyone here using the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address to voice their complaints.

I will of course change my opinion on this when I have evidence that the mods have changed their policy and do intend to do something about moderators that send abusive emails to posters.

---

Reality Internet Personality

I believe the mod consensus is that what happens in email does not matter and the mods can say what they want in reply to you. Even if what they send you is obscene and insulting.

Bearing that in mind I would strongly recommend against anyone here using the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address to voice their complaints.

I will of course change my opinion on this when I have evidence that the mods have changed their policy and do intend to do something about moderators that send abusive emails to posters.

I agree. I've red x'd a post, still it sits in the same thread, a blatant insult to me, but yet it sits, because theres an apology a few posts after.

As someone said earlier in the thread, some only delete what they want based apon their own personal feelings in the matter, not by the rules.

HI!!! ::waving to everyone::

---

I believe the mod consensus is that what happens in email does not matter and the mods can say what they want in reply to you. Even if what they send you is obscene and insulting.

Bearing that in mind I would strongly recommend against anyone here using the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address to voice their complaints.

I will of course change my opinion on this when I have evidence that the mods have changed their policy and do intend to do something about moderators that send abusive emails to posters.

It is very difficult in general to deal with offensive emails. Nothing the recipient can show people is forensically reliable - the sender can be spoofed, to give only one example. I gather that with cooperation of the ISPs etc involved you can sometimes obtain information which is reliable enough to be taken further, but I have no experience of that and imagine that it would be a lot of work to get it.

I believe the mod consensus is that what happens in email does not matter and the mods can say what they want in reply to you. Even if what they send you is obscene and insulting.

Bearing that in mind I would strongly recommend against anyone here using the setimods@ssl.berkeley.edu address to voice their complaints.

I will of course change my opinion on this when I have evidence that the mods have changed their policy and do intend to do something about moderators that send abusive emails to posters.

I agree. I've red x'd a post, still it sits in the same thread, a blatant insult to me, but yet it sits, because theres an apology a few posts after.

As someone said earlier in the thread, some only delete what they want based apon their own personal feelings in the matter, not by the rules.

HI!!! ::waving to everyone::

I would fully support both K and Jeremy in their assertions. As Michael Roberts points out e-mail headers can be spoofed, making the assertion the poster receiving the defamatory e-mail is lying. However, unless otherwise proven, the onus of innocence on the non-moderator poster should be the rule. There should be no proof of criminality, by spoofing headers, on the non-mod poster.

In the law the victim, and indirectly the accused, should remain innocent unless there is proof the headers have been spoofed.

This means if a mod has been defamatory then the onus should be on the SETI moderators to enquire in to the practices of their own, and come to a consensus on that, in principle, breach which should then be dealt with.

An additional point to raise, and taken in to account, should be whether the mod (assuming it is a mod - please bear with me) alleged to be committing defamation in their e-mail has had complaint made against them for the same offense before. This would build a case of consistency, particularly if different people were making the allegations, and not one poster all the time.

Some sort of explanation should be given to the poster in question, even if the discussion and action against an alleged defamatory mod is dealt with privately.

::waving to all::

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues