I've been informed that any discussion of moderator actions isn't allowed, so here it is with the moderator actions snipped out.

this has been sent in full version to boinc projects, boinc alpha, dr a, Eric k, and Matt

Proposal to alter the existing Moderator setup.

Changes: Put in place a “Senior Moderator”.

Reason: Given the limited time that Project Administrators have available to providing oversight of the existing moderators. Some Moderators may take it upon themselves to act in a way which is unbecoming to the project, and the result would be harm to the project itself due to reduced participation, and “bad news” being spread to other potential users.

Situation: Currently I'm getting PM's and Emails from users complaining that existing moderators are abusing their powers and “banishing” users based for the most part on “personal feelings”. I asked myself, “why are the telling me, I can't fix it?”. Then I thought that perhaps they just wanted someone to listen. The more I listened the more I decided to think of a way to help them. The result is this proposal. Certainly, they must be desperate if they are ending up coming to me. Some had the impression that input from me on this issue might carry more weight.

[BIG ole snip of moderator actions]

Possible Solution: I offer a couple Ideas. One, have admin take the time to provide oversight of every moderator action, especially those pertaining to “banishment”. The other is to provide for a “Senior Moderator” position. This position could be either “appointed by Admistration”, or “voted upon by the population at large”. If it's to be voted upon by the masses, then I give the following as a guide:
1)Have it be a two part process, a nomination phase, and a vote phase.
2)The nomination phase should last 1 week and be publically announced on the front page and each forum. This notification should also be in the form of a sticky thread when placed in a forum, with an auto-bump every 3 hours to ensure that even those who have “do not reorder stickies” checked can hardly miss it, or atleast have little excuse to not have known about the nomination.
3)The nominations should be posted by “username”, AND “account ID number”
4)At the termination of the nomination phase Seti admin should compile the list of names/account ID's and email the nominees to see if they'd accept the position if offered, and could be counted upon to dedicate a sufficient amount of time to do it right. Nominee emails should have a one week time limit to be received by seti.
5)The Voting phase should begin as soon as possible after the nominees notification email period ends. For the voting part, seti would need to create a webpage, or forum page which listed the nominees and have ONE check box next to each name. Totals can be displayed, but who voted for whom should be kept secret. Seti should check each vote to ensure a real person, can/has only voted once (check IP's, MAC addys, account Ids, etc). The voting form should clearly state, that fraudulent votes will be discarded, and then to actually discard those votes.

Senior Moderator Duties, Responsibilities, and Powers.
1)It would be the Duty of the Senior Moderator to oversee all User and Moderator behaviour.
2)The Senior moderator would be accountable ONLY to project Administration, and the term of office should be limited(if done by vote) to 6 months.
3)The Project would supply the Senior Moderator with a “mail list” and the ability to email any User or Moderator via that mail list. Access to that mail list should be limited to the Senior Moderator, and any Project Administrator. The Senior Mod would solely use this mail list in ALL communications or have copies of any communication also sent to this mail list in the form of Replies. This would ensure, that Project Administration can oversee the actions of the Senior Moderator. It would also limit claims of “abuse of power” of the senior moderator, etc.
4)All Votes for Banishment would be presented to the “Senior Moderator” with links to each moderators attempt to remedy the users' behavior. This could be links to the moderated posts, and copies of any/all communication with the user. It should also include the moderator who initiated the votes reason for believing banishment was necessary, and the moderators recommendation as to length of banishment. The vote itself should show the “senior moderator” who voted and which way, and include comments from each voting moderator as to their opinion on the banishment.
5)The Senior Moderator would be responsible for contacting the user and informing them of the vote, and to give the user a “last chance” to plead his/her case. The Senior Moderator would then decide on the proper course of action, and implement said action. The length of time the Senior moderator would give the user to reply would solely be left to the Senior Moderator, but should vary depending upon the frequency of posts by the user, the severity of the infractions and the frequency of them. Initiating a “vote to banish” should not affect a users right to post. Any frequent infractions should be able to be hidden until the Senior Moderator has a chance to review the situation. Of course, there may be worse case examples requiring the immediate banishment of individuals without giving them adequate notice, but those should be rare and reserved for spammers, pornography, violent users, etc.
6)The Project staff will provide the Senior Moderator with an account for use solely when performing his/her duties. All personal posts should be via their normal account.
7)The Senior Moderator shall use an appropriate avatar (such as a seti symbol).
8)The Senior Moderator shall shall be contactable via PM to any user (including the banished), and this PM shall be viewable by Project Administrators. The senior moderator and project staff should make a prominent place which displays the procedures, rights and responsibilities of each level of moderation, and also, the rights and responsibilities of the user.
9)The Senior Moderator, can moderate user posts, but should limit it to emergency or clearly obvious cases. Such as spam, pornography, or cleaning up empty/double posts. He/She should leave the majority of day to day user moderation to the moderation staff.
10) The Senior Moderator should have the ability to remove/appoint new moderators as he/she sees fit. Any “calls to remove a moderator” from other moderators should be forwarded with the list of voters, who voted which way, and complete with reasons and supportive evidence as to why you/they feel a moderator should be removed. The Senior Moderator will contact the moderator and inform them that such action is on the table, give him/her, the listed reasons, and ask for their opinion on the matter.
Essentially, the Senior Moderator, would have the Rights, Responsibilities, and Powers that a Project Administrator would have if they had to the time to perform these duties.

While this demonstrates what's happening at Seti, it could easily happen at other Projects. I recommend mechanisms be put in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening BOINC wide. My above Idea might not be perfect yet, but the fact I felt it necessary to put this much time into it, should demonstrate that I feel something is necessary to help.

Thanks for your time and consideration
Astro (Tony)

Concur :)

---

Concur :)

as well :)

---

Gruesse vom Saenger

For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki

Tell me again why we need full time moderators? There is no value added that I can see. I'm not being facitious here, I just don't understand why policing these boards is so important. Whatever is said here, if read, is soon forgotten; and the occasional crazy can be easily identified and banned, if that becomes an issue.

On the other hand, I'd like to see more "MVP"'s who can wisely offer more carefully crafted technical information about the many aspects of the project.

I just don't understand why policing these boards is so important.

At the end of the day, you're correct, it isn't important. I've always felt that moderation should be done with a light hand without controlling the conversation and natural flow and order.

---

Tell me again why we need full time moderators? There is no value added that I can see. I'm not being facitious here, I just don't understand why policing these boards is so important. Whatever is said here, if read, is soon forgotten; and the occasional crazy can be easily identified and banned, if that becomes an issue.

On the other hand, I'd like to see more "MVP"'s who can wisely offer more carefully crafted technical information about the many aspects of the project.

The project and message boards reside on servers associated with UC Berkeley.

I beleive Eric K. has written in the past about why mods are needed. These boards are not usenet, they may reflect on Berkeley, hence the need for moderation.

[EDIT]
Added link to Wikipedia for those unfamiliar with Usenet.

---

Sir Arthur C Clarke 1917-2008

I beleive Eric K. has written in the past about why mods are needed. These boards are not usenet, they may reflect on Berkeley, hence the need for moderation.

Tha's a two way street by the way. How the forum is moderated also reflects on Berkeley & our project. With that in mind, moderation then can either add value or devaluate the project from a participants perspective.

---

Why not just have less moderators? Weed out the jerks.

Why not just have less moderators? Weed out the jerks.

Problem is: the good ones give up, the jerks stay.

---

Gruesse vom Saenger

For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki

Why not just have less moderators? Weed out the jerks.

And who decides who they are??? Is that left to personal feelings, or perhaps documented history of their actions?

Note: I see this thread staying constructive for a bit longer, then turning into something which might be hidden.

... Note: I see this thread staying constructive for a bit longer, then turning into something which might be hidden.

Not sure I dare post here... I've got a good list of moddings! Don't want to be the one to banish the thread!!


All very good points posted.

Some random points:

• A lot of the arbitrariness could itself be 'modded' by peer pressure.
  
  
• The "You've been modded" emails could be a lot more friendly and helpful in their format.
  
  
• Perhaps have a 'mods forum' where anyone can post to make comment on moddings or would that just automatically invite flamings?...
  

Perhaps some simple guidelines need revamping...


This is all a volunteer and 'fun' effort. It would be a shame to see things get burdensomely bureaucratic...

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

...

What might you be saying?

;-)

Cheers,
Martin


DIRE WARNING FOR THE HUMOUR IMPAIRED: That is a joke! Yes?

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I totally agree with you on this subject, Astro.

The problem of moderators abusing their powers is well-known to me - at our school board, exactly the same thing happened and since we introduced the concept of a "senior moderator" (although we did it in a slightly different way), the initial troubles were no more.

However, there is one problem with senior moderators (it is a problem possibly only in Austria, I don't know about the legal situation in the USA) - they will be held responsible for everything, even if they didn't know. The fact that they have "subordinate" moderators is not an excuse, and senior moderators will have to take full responsibility for all actions (and possibly, inaction) of these "subordinate" moderators.

There might be only few who want to do this. I once did, and I'll have to think twice before ever doing that again.

---

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Just a comment that this is a very old problem, and not only for here.


(And I'm sure this was mentioned in another thread... Or was that modded?)

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Hmmm... I never read the 'politics' board, but now I find this thread, which I contributed to earlier today, is on the 'politics' board. Did I miss something, am I in some sort of warp, or did the mod's take over here too?

Hmmm... I never read the 'politics' board, but now I find this thread, which I contributed to earlier today, is on the 'politics' board. Did I miss something, am I in some sort of warp, or did the mod's take over here too?

No, they felt it was more of a political thread so they moved it here.

---

Hmmm... I never read the 'politics' board, but now I find this thread, which I contributed to earlier today, is on the 'politics' board. Did I miss something, am I in some sort of warp, or did the mod's take over here too?

It's a touchy subject which seems to have been moved twice now. I have failed to present my case to the mail list as well it seems. I am now examining it to determine why I failed to get the point across. To wordy and poorly structured are my first two self criticisms. Perhaps, better layout, less supportive documentation, etc. I don't know. I feel something needs to be done, but don't much care for how poorly it's turning out, and my failures as well.

There is a stickied thread in the Café called Information Regarding Forum Moderation, that talks about why the Politics forum was created; and it states that "what is acceptable (discussion) in a political thread in the politics forum, should be wider that what is acceptable in the Café."

"Astro" wrote:

Proposal to alter the existing Moderator setup....

I agree

---

flaming balloons

I also agree. I think its not the wording that failed to get your point across, it is the audience to which you are preaching Astro.

---

Daniel