RevLeft Administration- poll

[ComradeMan]

We've all probably had our little disagreements with Admin and Mods and our arguments but I've noticed lately that there is a constant undercurrent from some members of hostility towards the Admin and Mod team.

What's your opinion? OI-ers can't post in the Community Central- hence a RevLeft wide poll here and surely it's the most honest and democratic way to gauge overall opinion.


Please- no flaming!

[#FF0000]

I'm a fan of the mods, generally. The boardadmin need some definite improvement in a lot of areas (nothing personal)

[ComradeMan]

I'm a fan of the mods, generally. The boardadmin need some definite improvement in a lot of areas (nothing personal)

In what way?

[Nox]

They make some mistakes/bad decisions but overall they do a good job.

[Bud Struggle]

I am very happy with the Admins and Mods on RevLeft. They are exactly what I would expect from a Communist organization. They do what they have to do to keep the place running efficiently. Personally, they are all pretty nice people.

[#FF0000]

In what way?


way, way, way too banhappy and way to hostile to criticism.

[Column No.4]

I said i had confidence in them, however im a fairly new member. The only people ive had a problem with are some of the general members and their decent into insults when debated.

[ComradeMan]

I said i had confidence in them, however im a fairly new member. The only people ive had a problem with are some of the general members and their regression into blasphemy when debated.

Blasphemy?

[Kamos]

I voted "needs to be improved". I've criticised them pretty harshly at times, and yet at other times they really do better than other boards' admins and mods. Weird. And there are some people in the staff who are just completely unsuitable, but that's a problem that the admins will never solve either way.

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

No one is perfect, but damn it, they are pretty damn close. I voted second from the top

[Dumb]

I'd liken our mod system to the U.S. health care system - most people are happy with their doctors, but the system fails those who need it most (20-80 rule: about 20% of people account for 80% of medical care). Likewise, if you're a casual user, the mods are probably doing a good enough job for your purposes; if you're a new or serious user, though, then you pretty much have to toe the BA party line.

And, again, the admins are too quick to ban once you do something, but don't do a good job beforehand defining in black-and-white what's not considered kosher. (E.g. I recall a user was banned for asking why we don't let fascists post). The BA really ought to put together a list of terms, phrases, behaviors (and selective-use threads (http://www.revleft.com/vb/unfair-infractions-thread-t125537/index.html)) that will lead to restrictions, infractions, and bans.

For example, to discipline somebody for sexist language, have a set list of terms (e.g. "****"), arguments (e.g. rape apologism), and constructions (e.g. sexual humor about women as whores) that are considered sexist, and then cite members for posting something that is on the Forbidden List. (And, if the BA deems something sexist that isn't on the list, the BA can issue a verbal warning while adding the offending content to that list). Sure, people will complain about "political correctness," and trolls (who will get banned soon enough anyway) will capitalize on the list - but it's so much easier to toe the line when one knows what the line is. I don't want to see any more users - female or male - asking to get banned because they're afraid they'll say something wrong on such-and-such day.

This also goes for prejudicial language, spamming, or insubordination, etc., by the way.

[ComradeMan]

^^^^^ Did you read the FAQ?

Anyway, it's good to see we can have a polite and civilised discussion and a democratic debate.

It would be cool if more people would vote--- if you don't then don't complain!!!

[NGNM85]

My feelings are mixed; some of them are alright, some of them are assholes, some of them are, intermittently, assholes. That's kind of an epidemic, actually. My biggest gripe is not with specific individuals, but with a number of the forum policies.

[ComradeMan]

My feelings are mixed; some of them are alright, some of them are assholes, some of them are, intermittently, assholes. That's kind of an epidemic, actually. My biggest gripe is not with specific individuals, but with a number of the forum policies.

But do you help matters when you take that tone and approach?

Come on- if your biggest issue is with a number of forum policies and not specific individuals how come you don't talk about those said policies instead of calling people assholes. :thumbup1:

[DarkPast]

This forum is very vulnerable to trolling (all the tendencies and whatnot) so I understand if the mods and admins must sometimes use a firm hand. However, I think too many people get restricted, and sometimes I feel this is simply because they don't tow the "party line". It's rather worrying that the OI forum is the most popular sub-forum on the site...

[ComradeMan]

This forum is very vulnerable to trolling (all the tendencies and whatnot) so I understand if the mods and admins must sometimes use a firm hand. However, I think too many people get restricted, and sometimes I feel this is simply because they don't tow the "party line". It's rather worrying that the OI forum is the most popular sub-forum on the site...

Well I personally would favour a softer form of restriction perhaps, according to the subject, i.e. excluded from Politics for political reasons etc. On the other hand a lot of forums just ban people and that's that. Remember there is no RevLeft party line as such... I think it's better to think in terms of community rules. I do think OI-ers should be allowed to post in the Community Central- regardless of the other issues.

[Ele'ill]

Improvement is always possible. I think a system that would work better than the one we have is that the 'admins' who 'own' the site or have been given 'temp owner powers' should not be involved in any way shape or form with personally handing out infractions/warnings/etc. Those admins should never even participate in discussion. Their purpose is as an emergency back up, implementation of new physical operations to the forum, maybe bot removal etc,. There will only be global mods doing the actual dirty work. Why? Because decisions could be made more democratically and the time/emotional pain it takes to reverse actions from an isolated and minority position of power would be cut in half. Just an idea. No need for three tiers of administration.

Edit- I want to clarify that this is not in light of current complaints against the Board Administration (the admins). If there were allegedly bad decisions being made mainly by the global or local mods and the Administrators were the 'good guys' stepping in to challenge those questionable decisions- I don't think it would make a difference. I think it has to do with the three tiers.

[PhoenixAsh]

(I see what you did there)

Ok...sounds honest enough....couple of questions:

So what do you think are the reasons for why the admins are handing out infractions and warnings instead of the global mods in the current situation?

And when you say reversing actions from minority positions...what actual situations are you refering to?

And what minority decisions are you refering to?

And when you say decisions would be made more democratically what do you mean in practice? Because it all sounds to me that more democratically within the confines of a more flattened BA means in this case...simply more votes instead of actual democracy with the added difficulty that votes take much longer. So I have some trouble understanding this specific point. Could you clarify this?

I can understand your argument against three tier layers...but why not simply cut out the mods and expand the admin team? Wouldn't that work equally well in getting rid of the third tier? And if not...how come?

[Dumb]

^^^^^ Did you read the FAQ?


Yes, I have - multiple times. The problem with the FAQ is that it gives us some categories of what's not tolerated (sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.) without giving a black-and-white definition of what's considered to fall under those categories. We can't just assume that every well-meaning person has the same definition of prejudicial language, and there is plenty of legitimate gray area (e.g. I consider "gip" to be a slur against the Roma, while there's controversy over whether "trifilin'" is a slur at all).

The point I'm trying to make is that, given how strictly the BA has enforced its policies from time to time, the BA implicitly assumes an obligation to members to tell us exactly what's not allowed. The BA is perfectly within its rights to use whatever standard it pleases, at any time it pleases, as long as that standard is spelled out word for word (which it currently is not).

[Le Libérer]

Improvement is always possible. I think a system that would work better than the one we have is that the 'admins' who 'own' the site or have been given 'temp owner powers' should not be involved in any way shape or form with personally handing out infractions/warnings/etc. Those admins should never even participate in discussion. Their purpose is as an emergency back up, implementation of new physical operations to the forum, maybe bot removal etc,. There will only be global mods doing the actual dirty work. Why? Because decisions could be made more democratically and the time/emotional pain it takes to reverse actions from an isolated and minority position of power would be cut in half. Just an idea. No need for three tiers of administration.



:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
I'm sure the owner of this board would love being told he shouldnt post on revleft. He pays for this site, puts a heap of time into keeping it up for 9 years, is legal liability for everything posted here, but hey, Just crank the machine! We dont want you to post here or have any say what so ever!!!

Thanks for the laugh. You made my day.

Remove one tier huh? Humm..... now theres an idea that just might work!

[Tablo]

They do a good job for the most part, but have, at time, made some mistakes. I'm happy with the admins and mods.

[Devrim]

I think most people who have been here for any sort of time know that I think it is absolutely appalling.

Devrim

[Bronco]

I'd say it's pretty good generally, only thing I would say is that I have seen a couple of cases where they've reacted badly to criticism and don't seem willing to swallow their pride and admit the possibility a mistake might have been made and instead just stick to their guns

Although, having not been here long, I can't really give a fully informed opinion

[NGNM85]

But do you help matters when you take that tone and approach?

Come on- if your biggest issue is with a number of forum policies and not specific individuals how come you don't talk about those said policies instead of calling people assholes. :thumbup1:

Honesty attack. In my defense; I specified that this phenomena is exhibited across the board, not merely Mods or Admins.

Ok. I don't think we should be Restricting, certainly not Banning anybody, based on ideology, at all. I think infractions should be limited to issues of conduct; flaming, spamming, trolling, sockpuppet accounts, etc. At the very least; when committed, consistent Marxists and Anarchists are being Restricted, or whatever, we definitely have a problem. I specifically object the the official Abortion policy, which is philosophically problematic, to say the least, and has no connection to Anarchism or Marxism.

[Aspiring Humanist]

Down with all hierarchy
I dont need anyone to moderate me or my views

[F9]

one word? loool

more words? sports mod is total rubbish

[thefinalmarch]

Down with all hierarchy
I dont need anyone to moderate me or my views
not sure if serious...

[ellipsis]

Down with all hierarchy
I dont need anyone to moderate me or my views

Then don't post on this forum, or any others, maybe 4chan will let you be not moderated.:rolleyes:

Don't use the internet. The information access hierarchy allows you, as a computer user to publish more things, more broadly than non computer users.

[Sam_b]

Can this be closed?

[MarxSchmarx]

obviously, comrademan, you do not give two shits about your unrestriction.

[ComradePonov]

I have no confidence in the forum moderators. With the exception of a few, their maturity and ability to debate is nonexistent.

Notice that a couple are already trying to close this poll down.

No complaints when it comes to the admins though.

[Sam_b]

Notice that a couple are already trying to close this poll down.

Yeah, as if it is some big fucking deal and there's a conspiracy out there (obviously only stemming from your whining and debating in the Unfair Restrictions thread).

Why do I want this sorry excuse for a thread closed? Because nothing good will come of it. I can see it now - twenty or so pages of shitslinging and flaming that will end in the inevitable anyway. If you have gripes, there's a forum for that. This thread is almost solely designed to erupt into a flame-fest. Don't like it? Well go and play your victim card somewhere else. Nobody is stopping you from leaving.

[ComradePonov]

Yeah, as if it is some big fucking deal and there's a conspiracy out there (obviously only stemming from your whining and debating in the Unfair Restrictions thread).

Why do I want this sorry excuse for a thread closed? Because nothing good will come of it. I can see it now - twenty or so pages of shitslinging and flaming that will end in the inevitable anyway. If you have gripes, there's a forum for that. This thread is almost solely designed to erupt into a flame-fest. Don't like it? Well go and play your victim card somewhere else. Nobody is stopping you from leaving.

Yes, that's because I specifically stated that there's a "big conspiracy out there." Why are you throwing strawmen arguments at me?

This is exactly what I meant.

[ComradePonov]

Yeah, as if it is some big fucking deal and there's a conspiracy out there (obviously only stemming from your whining and debating in the Unfair Restrictions thread).

Why do I want this sorry excuse for a thread closed? Because nothing good will come of it. I can see it now - twenty or so pages of shitslinging and flaming that will end in the inevitable anyway. If you have gripes, there's a forum for that. This thread is almost solely designed to erupt into a flame-fest. Don't like it? Well go and play your victim card somewhere else. Nobody is stopping you from leaving.


Yes, because out of the haundreds and haundreds of useless threads in this board, this is the only one you want closed.

Feeling very anti-democratic, aren't we?

Call me back when "some thing good" comes out of a thread discussing the "greek-ness" of Macedonia, or a thread discussing if "anarhcists" are leftists.

[Sam_b]

Because it's pretty clear your gripes solely come from your own predicament. This then skews your opinion to then paint all mods as power-hungry autocrats who are solely there to hang on to their positions.


this is the only one that you want to close down

You've obviously not been around long enough to know where I stand on these things, and besides you cannot see the main boards so allow me to take this with a pinch of salt.

[ComradePonov]

Because it's pretty clear your gripes solely come from your own predicament. This then skews your opinion to then paint all mods as power-hungry autocrats who are solely there to hang on to their positions.



You've obviously not been around long enough to know where I stand on these things, and besides you cannot see the main boards so allow me to take this with a pinch of salt.

At what point did I state this? do you specialize in posting easily-destroyable strawmen arguments?

Dismissing my point of view because of something that may or may not be related... logical fallacies are a *****.

[ComradePonov]

Because it's pretty clear your gripes solely come from your own predicament. This then skews your opinion to then paint all mods as power-hungry autocrats who are solely there to hang on to their positions.



You've obviously not been around long enough to know where I stand on these things, and besides you cannot see the main boards so allow me to take this with a pinch of salt.

That's exactly why one of the first threads I ever created, before I was even restricted, was regarding the irresponsible behaviour of some mods on this board...

[Dumb]

It's a little bit too perfect that the first person to use a direct, personal attack in this thread is also the one person wanting to close this thread down to prevent flaming.

All I can say to other users out there...don't do anything stupid. We've had a productive discussion so far, and let's not give anybody any reason to close it down.

[ellipsis]

Can this be closed?

Aye. It was going ok but now its on fire.