Most mods need to be replaced but, I doubt that will happen
Regardless, I've noticed a lot of behavior with mods and regs that cause way more drama than is necessary.
So here are my suggestions:
1)Mods should have a list of rules too.
If all mods responded to situations with the same attitude and following the same guidelines, it would avoid bias/favoritism and drama. And is more professional.
2) Mods should administer all warnings via inbox.
When some do it in the inbox and others do it on board (ultimately publicly embarrassing the person), it provokes different responses and looks like favoritism is involved. ESPECIALLY when the regs are warned privately and the newbs are warned publically. Which is usually what happens.
When mods warn in the inbox, the person usually won't be as defensive because there isn't an audience to flame them. They are more likely to listen and acknowledge they did something wrong. And if it does turn into a discussion, it won't cause more traffic on the board and others won't get involved.
When mods do it on the board, 9 times out of 10, the person being warned WILL become defensive. Then the discussion will be about the so-called "broken rule" and then the person ends up being banned for "being off-topic" and "questioning mod actions". Just causes more drama, more unnecessary traffic and provokes the targeted user to continue breaking rules.
3)When mods administer a warning, it should be done calmly and without insults/rudeness/sarcasm.
When they do, it is unprofessional and of course, causes more drama. When someone sees a mod calmly warn one user, then warn AND insult another, it DOES look personal and biased.
3)"Discipline Badges" should be removed.
Mods claim they value maturity, yet these badges are petty, pointless and obviously immature. They also make the person a target for future ridicule and insults which ultimately leads to MORE drama and unnecessary traffic. And other people that might have wanted to post will also see this and get intimidated. Also, the fact that a mod has the power to brand a user for as long as they "see fit" promotes the obvious hierarchy in the board and, in my opinion, is an abuse of their privileges as well.
4)I know this won't happen but I'll say it anyway: Post counts should be removed or left only in the statistics.
Higher post counts make people feel like they have a higher status and can talk down to people with lower post counts. Then like to claim that they've "been here longer" and can talk down to users who say "stupid" things. Then disguise the fact that you need to fit-in to be respected, by saying you "need to be mature" and "have social etiquette". (Which by the way, insults and "we're older/been here longer" remarks are not mature at all.) Also, those with lower post counts are quicker to get jumped on for any little thing.
5)I can't tell people how to think but:
Mods/Regs need to realize that this is a PUBLIC messageboard and they do not own it. All kinds of people will post. They should not have to post what mods/regs like and agree with, to be respected. If they want people to all think, talk and behave the same way, they need to make a membership by approval cult. Js
6)The rules for all users should be tweaked and more specific.
There are many inconsistencies that allow for loop holes and also force mods to use their discretion to decide if something is breaking a rule. Different mod=Different discretion=Inconsistencies=Unavoidable bias= I've also seen mods that twist a rule or bring it up to administer a warning only when they find it convenient (or want to shut someone up).
I truly believe that if these were enforced, the messageboard and overall site could improve and be more active. More members would feel welcome and less intimidated. And it could even bring down the “vf is full of pretentious assholes and so-called elites” reputation.
I've only been in one 'flaming' discussion, a few run ins with some trolls and haven't had a problem with a single mod. Anyway, I propped your post because punishment by public humiliation (the badges of honor) is kind of crass.
If you tend to have the same views on things as they do and never say anything they consider ”stupid”, chances are, you will never have a problem with them.
Being that 90% of the time in any debate, I'm that one person everyone disagrees with, I constantly have problems with mods. Usually because a reg insults me and its fine, but when someone defends me, it isn't. And I have seen this happen with other people as well. It just always ends badly when people disagree with them.
You need to fit in. no matter how much they deny it, its true. If you don't think, talk and behave the way they like, there will always be a problem. And it shouldn't be that way in a PUBLIC messageboard.
I've noticed it on some threads. I know what you are talking about, but I can't really call them out for it. Not too long ago there was some neo-nazi troll in the punk forum and called him ignorant etc. I guess what I'm saying is everyone has their moments of 'immaturity' including my-self. So the insults are hard for me to speak against. However, if there's someone that does nothing more than insult others, then I see a problem with it.
But yeah, the 'name tags' can be all in good fun, but for the most part they're petty.
If a user starts trolling and throwing out insults, I can totally see why people would want to start insulting them in return. However, moderators should respond calmly and professionally to address the issue and enforce the rules when necessary. (It solves the issue quicker and promotes consistency/objectivity.) Not stoop to that level and add to the problem. Just like at work: when an employee deals with an angry customer, they calmly deal with that person-not lash out, stretch out the problem, cause a big scene, get others involved and get in everyone's way.
The badges can be all in good fun when the person with it is fine with it. Which is rarely the case. Totally petty and immature for people that claim they value maturity
I admit I've seen a few instances were a mod and members with crazy high post counts, come off as elitist or seem to get off on causing some kind of grief. But at the end of the day we are all 'complex' and cliched beings, called humans. With that being said I think you have every right to 'speak' out. After all this is a public message board.
Totally agree. But mods are supposed to remain as objective as possible and solve problems. Not cause more. Which is why I believe they should be given specific rules and guidelines for how to respond to a situation in a way that would cause the least amount of problems and keep things running as smoothly as possible.
You need to fit in. no matter how much they deny it, its true. If you don't think, talk and behave the way they like, there will always be a problem
I think that the reason why this claim is not backed up by any form of evidence is because it's arrant nonsense. There is a wild mix of personalities and viewpoints among the staff and they're light years away from homogeneity among themselves, let alone inflicting it on others.
Now let's address some points-
I expect you'll see fewer of these in future because the staff now have access to time-restricted bans and forum specific bans. Yay, progress. Anyway, badges have their place.
2- Public warnings.
Do you know what happens when all warnings take place privately? We get big threads going "OMG THE MODS DO NOTHING!!" or "OMG THE MODS ARE EXERCISING FAVOURTISM!!" because people get a skewed view of the overall picture. Personally speaking, if I think someone's public messages on a public forum require words, it'll be done in public.
When mods do it on the board, 9 times out of 10, the person being warned WILL become defensive.
Nope. Certainly not when it's handled by a master of tact and charm. You'd be amazed how easy it is.
3- Post count blah blah
Some of the people most unpopular with the staff have the largest post counts. Whoa, minds blown there. Go check out Sofie on RT. She's an almighty pain in the arse. And yet she remains. That's quietly noble, in a way.
Well, you're posting on a site called "Vampirefreaks" run by a bloke fond of "Show me your tits for Premium!" competitions. So textbook collar'n'tie professionalism is always going to be thin on the ground. However there is certainly room for ethical behaviour, so maybe there are just differing standards in play as to what "professionalism" is?
If I'm not mistaken, both of these people are mods.
you have to be liked=you have to fit in.
This was definitely a mod, cropped out the post count by accident >.<
1.Become accustomed to a new climate or to new conditions.
2.Respond physiologically or behaviorally to a change in a single environmental factor.
1.Make (something) suitable for a new use or purpose; modify.
2.Become adjusted to new conditions.
adjust - fit - accommodate -
People will always think favoritism is involved when some mods warn in the inbox and others warn publicly. That is why I think all warnings should be administered the same way. And I think privately would just reduce the amount of drama and flaming on the board.
I agree that a warning could be administered publicly without a person being defensive. But, that's when the warning does not contain insults and sarcasm. From what I've seen, most mods are incapable of keeping a calm, neutral attitude when giving out warnings. Which is why I suggested everyone does it privately.
I know about sofie. My suggestions were in regards to things I see most often. I know that not all regs are loved, not all mods abuse their powers and not all users with high post counts are dicks.
In this context, I'm using ”professionalism” to refer to being calm and neutral. I'm aware things most likely never will work this way on this site but of course, I still wanted to make suggestions.
Why are you quoting dictionary definitions of words which absolutely nobody appears to be misusing?
Secondly, there's really no need to try concealing Kelly's identity- she's the mod you are quoting. However you're taking her somewhat out of context. It's worth considering that I was once new here myself, as was Kelly. I certainly didn't feel any need to conform or sycophantically attach myself to any regulars - and here I am now.
I know. they aren't misusing them at all. Just showing you that, with their own words, they say you do need to fit in.
Yup, kelly. She said it herself that she was bitched at when she was new in the RT. Using the phrase ”then maybe ppl will like me” shows that people feel the need to be liked. When you want to be liked, you want to fit in. n that's kool. I don't care about fitting in or being like, but i deserve respect. Just like anyone else.
I don't even understand what you're trying to say about my post. I thought it was pretty clear the second half was sarcasm.
It's a sad point in conversation if we can't distinguish being likable from fitting in. Equating the two simply to fit an argument won't hold.
As a side note- there is absolutely no need to try and "conceal" my "identity" when you're choosing to discuss something I posted. It would be more polite to discuss matters with me, if you're actually concerned about my opinion. If, however, you're only concerned because you care to take my point out of context and use it for an argument I'm not involved in, I personally find that a little rude. I'm quite sure that was not your intention, but I might suggest a little forethought in the future.
Lastly, as this seems to not have been directly addressed, there's many reasons why I might warn someone on the boards versus when I warn them via inbox. If it's information that is useful to other posters, if the severity of the warning warrants being visible to all, if they're new and I think they deserve a little one on one- that's a call I make as a moderator, and do so as fairly as I can.
What I'm trying to say about your post is that ppl bitched at you when you first started talking. Then when you went elsewhere, became ”mature” enough for them, and came back, you met their standards and they liked you. Meeting the standards of a group to be liked is fitting in. The first part of that last sentence was sarcastic but was still in regards to being liked. If I interpreted it wrong, then I apologize for that.
I'm not even saying everyone has to like each other. I'm saying everyone deserves to be respected regardless. And I still see that not fitting in or disagreeing with the majority is the easiest thing to get someone disrespected.
I'm not concerned about your opinion. I was using it as an example to prove my point. I don't really think its out of context being that its completely what you said. The surrounding conversation is pretty obvious but I see how using it without including you in the conversation can come off as rude. It wasn't my intent. And I thought ” concealing your identity” was polite. But if you are offended, then I apologize.
like I said, public warnings CAN be useful. But when they involve insults and sarcasm, it can look like favoritism, being flamed, ganged up on, etc. which causes more drama. many mods seem incapable of calmly and objectively handling a situation, which is why I gave inboxing as a suggestion. I feel like it's a step up from publicly embarrassing a person and making things worse.
I'm aware that these are all my opinions, interpretations and suggestions.
'course not. But you still haven't said what you actually meant. The only thing you said is that likability and fitting in are 2 different things. In this case specifically, I disagree. So my interpretation remains the same.
Anything anyone says is always up for interpretation or analyzation. The statement and the interpretation are equally as important. That's why people say things a certain way:so that people receive/understands it a certain way.
True. That's why I think if mods were calm and neutral, a warning on the board shouldn't be a big deal. The inbox suggestion was directed towards mods that insist on using insults/sarcasm/rudeness, as doing this in public will more than likely cause more problems and traffic.
though I think all mods should use the same method for warning to avoid accusations of favoritism and abuse of power.
At this point, I'd like to say it's not that we are not taking your points on board- however, that does not mean I feel a personal obligation to explain to you why I think you're wrong. Quite frankly it would be petty to start a long debate over your word choice and implications about my post.
This thread is for suggestions, which is why a personal back and forth over what I actually said isn't relevant. Your suggestions will continue to be, so if I could suggest that we forgo any further discussion about the specifics and stick to positive points, goals, or general wishes for the boards; that would be far more constructive.
If for whatever reason you don't feel you're getting the audience you want in this thread, feel free to inbox any of us mods to talk about what you feel would make this a better place.
As long as we continue to work in a constructive/optimistic manner, rather than an argumentative/negative one, I have no problem helping your points translate into action.