Sapphie 
Senior Moderator
Unavailable
@Anonymous #08E7
Pretty sure I’ve seen them around the site. As far as I know, they’re allowed
Pretty sure I’ve seen them around the site. As far as I know, they’re allowed
Ponybooru Moderation Feedback
FeatherTrap 
Knight of Boops
@Napsack
But the jackboot response is the most exciting part of an uprising! We can’t have a proper one unless the mod team goes full “Fuck the Fans!” D:
Notice us, dammit!!
But the jackboot response is the most exciting part of an uprising! We can’t have a proper one unless the mod team goes full “Fuck the Fans!” D:
Notice us, dammit!!
Luzion 
Senior Moderator
pingus
Ok so here is a link to the current draft of the rule rewrite. Please note, if you are reading this days or weeks from now, the page may have changed. https://ponybooru.org/pages/styletest
Because of that, I will be posting a screen shot here as well.
So whats changed? All rules have been formatted to be a little easier to skim with bullet points and keywords bolded, the exact formatting is subject to change.
Golden Rule #0 has been renamed to Global Rules
Its been slimmed down a bit, and needs some things added to it, havent decided what yet
Rule #1 - Moderation policy was removed as it should have its on page, or at least be moved to the About page, with its own section for moderation policy
Rule #2 - Respect artists and their art, has been slimmed slightly. More changes likely to come.
Rule #3 Now reads “Meta Data” and some small changes have been made but remains mostly the same as of now. Id like to significantly slim this section down more a its one of the most wordy rules we have, like removing some of the guidelines and moving them to the tagging guidelines page . Not knowing an artist tag, or failing to properly tag innocuous material wont typically result in any moderator actions. The subsection about DNP policy has been removed and will likely be relocated to tagging guidelines and The DNP page if any subjects are not already covered there.
Rule #4 - Unrelated content, remains unchanged as of now.
Rule #5 - Use filters…, is mostly covered by rule 0, can be slimmed down and guidelines moved to appropriate locations
Rule #6 - Do not post forbidden content, has been renamed to “Illegal and Legally questionable content” slight rewrite so far, needs a little more work.
Rule #7 - Do not abuse site functionality, title shortened. Rewritten slightly but effectively the same.
Rule #8 - Unfilterable content must be shown with care, title shortened. Slight rewrite. Effectively the same
Rule #9 - Privacy, Expanded upon slightly, with more clarification. This one might need a few more reviews before im happy with it.
Rule #10 Commissions, added some disclaimers, effectively the same.
Rule #11 -Be nice to others, title changed, Slimmed signifigantly, clarification added. Not sure im happy with the exact wording of the title but I think the rules are clarification are well put.
Rule #12 - Terms of Use, removed, moved to about page
Rule #13 - Takedown Process, moved to takedown requests page
thoughts, opinions, critique all welcome.
edit: Mightve missed some details on whats changed. feel free to tell me im wrong.
Because of that, I will be posting a screen shot here as well.
So whats changed? All rules have been formatted to be a little easier to skim with bullet points and keywords bolded, the exact formatting is subject to change.
Golden Rule #0 has been renamed to Global Rules
Its been slimmed down a bit, and needs some things added to it, havent decided what yet
Rule #1 - Moderation policy was removed as it should have its on page, or at least be moved to the About page, with its own section for moderation policy
Rule #2 - Respect artists and their art, has been slimmed slightly. More changes likely to come.
Rule #3 Now reads “Meta Data” and some small changes have been made but remains mostly the same as of now. Id like to significantly slim this section down more a its one of the most wordy rules we have, like removing some of the guidelines and moving them to the tagging guidelines page . Not knowing an artist tag, or failing to properly tag innocuous material wont typically result in any moderator actions. The subsection about DNP policy has been removed and will likely be relocated to tagging guidelines and The DNP page if any subjects are not already covered there.
Rule #4 - Unrelated content, remains unchanged as of now.
Rule #5 - Use filters…, is mostly covered by rule 0, can be slimmed down and guidelines moved to appropriate locations
Rule #6 - Do not post forbidden content, has been renamed to “Illegal and Legally questionable content” slight rewrite so far, needs a little more work.
Rule #7 - Do not abuse site functionality, title shortened. Rewritten slightly but effectively the same.
Rule #8 - Unfilterable content must be shown with care, title shortened. Slight rewrite. Effectively the same
Rule #9 - Privacy, Expanded upon slightly, with more clarification. This one might need a few more reviews before im happy with it.
Rule #10 Commissions, added some disclaimers, effectively the same.
Rule #11 -Be nice to others, title changed, Slimmed signifigantly, clarification added. Not sure im happy with the exact wording of the title but I think the rules are clarification are well put.
Rule #12 - Terms of Use, removed, moved to about page
Rule #13 - Takedown Process, moved to takedown requests page
thoughts, opinions, critique all welcome.
edit: Mightve missed some details on whats changed. feel free to tell me im wrong.
Anonymous #B8DB
@Luzion
As a suggestion, it may be a good idea to note the difference between “artist:anonymous” and “anonymous artist” in the tagging guidelines or rules if you keep it listed there. Or at the very least add “anonymous artist”, since it breaks the norm.
As a suggestion, it may be a good idea to note the difference between “artist:anonymous” and “anonymous artist” in the tagging guidelines or rules if you keep it listed there. Or at the very least add “anonymous artist”, since it breaks the norm.
Luzion
Senior Moderator
pingus
@Anonymous #6039
What would you like to see changed?
This is only the first pass on the rule rewrite which was mostly just a clean up job. And I haven’t heard to much on the specifics of what people dislike.
What would you like to see changed?
This is only the first pass on the rule rewrite which was mostly just a clean up job. And I haven’t heard to much on the specifics of what people dislike.
Boxless
Mmm, Warcrimes
@Luzion
Global Rules: Announce all rule changes, no matter how seemingly minor. This avoids wordmincing to try and justify things mid-argument and leaves less chance of some fucktard changing them at random without notice.
Rule 1: Edit protection and exceptions to DNP for those that are purging content outright would be nice, but we already know you’re not going to even pretend to be an archive like Derpi tried, so w/e. At least you aren’t pretending.
Rule 3: It’s probably a good idea to note pony merch in otherwise non-pony image doesn’t count as pony related either. Too many furniggers do that shit.
Rule 4: Turn the opener summary into a note before the rules. Should be the first fucking thing you read on the whole list. Tired of this shit, it’s why it even made it on Derpi’s rulelist anyways. Still no fucking clue why you copied said rule list verbatim.
Everything else is either fine as it is/where it’s heading or completely dependent on enforcement without any way to trim down wiggle room (that the ‘mods do what mods will’ doesn’t already cause, anyways).
It’s an improvement, however minor, but once again comes down to enforcement.
Don’t become Derpi 2.0.
Global Rules: Announce all rule changes, no matter how seemingly minor. This avoids wordmincing to try and justify things mid-argument and leaves less chance of some fucktard changing them at random without notice.
Rule 1: Edit protection and exceptions to DNP for those that are purging content outright would be nice, but we already know you’re not going to even pretend to be an archive like Derpi tried, so w/e. At least you aren’t pretending.
Rule 3: It’s probably a good idea to note pony merch in otherwise non-pony image doesn’t count as pony related either. Too many furniggers do that shit.
Rule 4: Turn the opener summary into a note before the rules. Should be the first fucking thing you read on the whole list. Tired of this shit, it’s why it even made it on Derpi’s rulelist anyways. Still no fucking clue why you copied said rule list verbatim.
Everything else is either fine as it is/where it’s heading or completely dependent on enforcement without any way to trim down wiggle room (that the ‘mods do what mods will’ doesn’t already cause, anyways).
It’s an improvement, however minor, but once again comes down to enforcement.
Don’t become Derpi 2.0.
Humble Oriathan
Wally Worshiper
@Boxless
>don’t become Derpi 2.0
It never was, and Barhandar already explained why. You hardly even participate in any forum discussions, so why are you so autistic with the idea that PB will start banhammering people for cussing or wrongthink?
>don’t become Derpi 2.0
It never was, and Barhandar already explained why. You hardly even participate in any forum discussions, so why are you so autistic with the idea that PB will start banhammering people for cussing or wrongthink?
Zaknel
I do agree with the latter part of this, absolutely. The rules were fine for me. The problem was when Ciaran would accuse me of breaking them whenever he did not like me.
But the former part of that quote… Well, how should I explain this?
I meant what I said at the start of this post. People do not HAVE to be vitriolic when they criticize you, regardless of how much they say that they do. And I agree that calling staff “retards” is uncalled for. But this is not a one-way ticket to ignoring the feedback that is presented. And if it was not clear already, part of the reason that I do not like the idea of always being vitriolic when providing criticism is because you are not supposed to repay evil with evil. And that goes for you, as well. Calling him names for calling you names does not nullify the ideas he has or the feelings he feels. It just makes you look vitriolic. At best. At worst, it makes it look like you really do not care that he is trying to give you criticisms.
So, maybe, even if someone is vitriolic, you can be calm with them, please?
This is a beautiful display of behavior from staff. No snarkiness. No vitriol. No brushing user concerns out of perceived sight. You just addressed the issue in a meaningful way that explains its purpose, and informs the user of how it truly works in detail.
I have nothing further to say on this post.
@WhyWhyWhyWhy
That was so much to type. If you wanna take a break now, feel free.
Okay, you’re back? Let’s continue then.
You might have noticed that in my providing criticism against the moderation team here, I have not commented on them having inconsistent rule enforcement. And, given my experience on Derpibooru, this is primarily why: We don’t have a good way of knowing if you are truly consistent about how you all handle your users or not.
@Boxless
As Boxless said here, we don’t really know for sure how you all handle your users. In fact, let me take an example from Derpibooru that really, really started disillusioning me with it, and try to paint the idea of what this really means.
I argued that LyraBon is not canon, and therefore unedited screencaps of the two should not have
And that is kind of the same vibe that we get from you guys, sometimes. It seems like we are just supposed to trust that @ZizzyDizzyMC is being honest and true when he calls threads obvious bait. It makes it sound like he truly believes that there is not much more than that, and that we are supposed to believe him on that.
If we are supposed to just trust you all to be true and fair without seeing it, how do we know you don’t have your fingers crossed.
That being said, do I think ANYONE on staff here is as bad as Ciaran?
Not even close.
Thing is, I think that the root of Ciaran’s problems, which I have gone on and on about in the PTSD Thread can all (or very nearly all) be rooted in two causes:
Ezekiel 33:11
I’m going to state that a lot of people seem to forget that providing blunt and honest feedback does not necessarily mean being vitriolic. I could tell my foreman that asking me to insert testicles into my work every time he sees how weak I am doesn’t make me stronger, but that really wouldn’t address the issue of him yelling at me for being physically weak. It would just be nasty. Or it might also happen to get the message, but I could just as easily say to him that he isn’t making me stronger by yelling at me.
It’s the same concept here. You can just as easily say what’s wrong with the site without being condescending or vitriolic about it. Especially given that if at any point at all, even just once, you are the one in the wrong, then suddenly you look pretty insufferable because it looks like you’re the kind of people that I give a hard time to in the PTSD thread.
So, with that being said, what am I would like to comment on his more so with the general attitude of the staff that I’ve seen in this thread.
@ZizzyDizzyMC
It’s the same concept here. You can just as easily say what’s wrong with the site without being condescending or vitriolic about it. Especially given that if at any point at all, even just once, you are the one in the wrong, then suddenly you look pretty insufferable because it looks like you’re the kind of people that I give a hard time to in the PTSD thread.
So, with that being said, what am I would like to comment on his more so with the general attitude of the staff that I’ve seen in this thread.
@ZizzyDizzyMC
Your words are meaningless when ending with threats. Additionally you ought to know the real difference when your message isn’t deleted for such threats as would be provided under our rules. You have every right to make yourself out to be the ass you are.We both know that the real issue was how the rules were enforced rather than what the rules were / are. I agree there are a few extraneous rules that still need reworked or that probably don’t make sense for most people but they’re there for a reason.
I do agree with the latter part of this, absolutely. The rules were fine for me. The problem was when Ciaran would accuse me of breaking them whenever he did not like me.
But the former part of that quote… Well, how should I explain this?
I meant what I said at the start of this post. People do not HAVE to be vitriolic when they criticize you, regardless of how much they say that they do. And I agree that calling staff “retards” is uncalled for. But this is not a one-way ticket to ignoring the feedback that is presented. And if it was not clear already, part of the reason that I do not like the idea of always being vitriolic when providing criticism is because you are not supposed to repay evil with evil. And that goes for you, as well. Calling him names for calling you names does not nullify the ideas he has or the feelings he feels. It just makes you look vitriolic. At best. At worst, it makes it look like you really do not care that he is trying to give you criticisms.
So, maybe, even if someone is vitriolic, you can be calm with them, please?
@Anonymous #6B8B
Yes. Though I’d like to ask why you’ve lost all goodwill. I don’t recall anything particularly interesting happening that would elicit such a reaction from most people. The only thing I did was setup an alternative website so you can actually have the freedom to speak your mind and have pony art without strings or disclaimers attached.
This right here. This is the kind of behavior I would like to see. No vitriol given in return for vitriol. Just addressing a user a calmly and rationally, while keeping open the possibility to further the discussion.
@Anonymous #4AFE
You can either provide feedback or not provide feedback, your words were not feedback. You are clearly not interested in providing feedback as your previous statements show.Saying “Everything is SHIT! I hate this site!” isn’t feedback, that’s the saying of someone who clearly isn’t a user and doesn’t want anything to do with it and just needs a place to scream because they can’t do so elsewhere.
Not quite, Zizzy. This is the attitude of someone who does not think that there is any point in trying to reason with that person in power, and so they lash out at you. That does not mean that they do not want Ponybooru to be a successful community, and it is wrong to insinuate that that is how they feel.
I’m happy to provide that place to scream, but why don’t you provide something useful that we can work on or talk about so you can have a part in this place?
Kinda have mixed feelings on this quote.
On one hand, you areencouraging constructive discussion, which is good. But on the other hand, you are also continuing with the problem of the previous quote: Asserting that someone’s vitriol does not have some sort of root cause. And that is not good.
@ZizzyDizzyMC
On one hand, you areencouraging constructive discussion, which is good. But on the other hand, you are also continuing with the problem of the previous quote: Asserting that someone’s vitriol does not have some sort of root cause. And that is not good.
@ZizzyDizzyMC
@Anonymous #6B8B
I personally am not thrilled with how I’m treated on the threads either. I often feel that I’m treated as a subhuman over there for simply making a site for others to have a place to be. I kind of just have to overlook it and keep making progress because that’s what you do when you care about others. Some people notify me if the thread has legitimate questions or concerns regarding PB , I let them know what to respond with if needed / fix the issue if it’s fixable by me.
But, as I stated earlier in this post, that is not an excuse to not try and be approachable with people.
I’d recommend trying the site out instead of going by the impression gleamed on the thread. You’ll probably be quite surprised about what actually happens here on Ponybooru.
Again, your problem is that you are assuming that people’s issues with you do not have some sort of root. Even if you hear their reasons for disliking you and are thoroughly, thoroughly convinced it’s ludicrous that they feel this way for that reason, that is a far, far better attitude to have towards them because you are acknowledging that they have some reason to dislike you. Instead, you are assuming that it is all baseless hatred of you.
@ZizzyDizzyMC
@ZizzyDizzyMC
You, X, and Luzion contributed as well.Considering Luzion has arguably done more administrative work maintaining the site than I have when I was on a break I fail to see what he could have possibly said that draws the ire of 4chan. Considering I stopped replying to obvious bait in the threads early on I also fail to see what I could have possibly said that was “negative” regarding an alt booru or discussion of alt boorus.
Again, Zizzy, you are asserting that stuff is bait. But, to be fair, I have never really used 4chan, and I barely even understand the basics of what the site looks like. So you know what? For all I know, there are a ton of bait threads on there targeted at you.
But that does not change the fact that you keep dismissing the criticism on this site as bait.
But that does not change the fact that you keep dismissing the criticism on this site as bait.
Is it just the brand of humor that’s negative?
No. It’s not.
I do remember us shitposting real hard about bronies being diet furries that just like one animal over others. Granted this is more of a tongue in cheek joke because we all know there’s a major difference in community and types of people between such broad fandom terms. I really hope people aren’t still mad at this.I also understand people didn’t like my original plan - that’s fine. Ponybooru’s here now and here to stay thanks to the valuable input of the original threads.
Good. It sounds like you have, at times, stopped doing things that you believe make people upset. Please, hold onto this attitude. It will take you so far.
Adamance to become as close of an imitation of derpibooru as possibleAs far as I see I just set up an alt booru where you don’t have to worry about getting banned without recourse or being told what’s wrong / given opportunities to resolve issues.
Derpi worked mostly OK for a long time till the moderation went out of control and started dragging ideals into moderation considerations. They were not without issues mind you, but they didn’t cause anything bad enough up to the point the altboorus were spawned.
Yes. That is true. Derpi did work out well. The rules were fine. The staff were the problem. And one of the biggest problems, especially with Ciaran, is that when confronted with their issues, they dismiss the criticisms as trolls, arrogance, and/or vehemence. While sometimes that may be the case, they apply it as a blanket rule to criticism.
What Surprise? It’s just derpi with two rules changed slightly and less chance of a ban or comment block.Welcome to being able to speak your mind without being told that you’re unwelcome and to get lost.I appreciate being able to actually talk with you and apologize if shit was said in our early days that no longer apply now. Thank you for your time.
@Anonymous #08E7
Rule 2 in discord is basically saying don’t type one word at a time, like a teenage girl who cant keep her finger off the enter key or something.As
long
as
you
dont
talk
like
thisin individual messages, no one cares about sending multiple messages back to back. As the rule says, just avoid anything that would be considered actually ‘spamming’ the server like the example above and you’re good.Besides, its not like staff will ban you without letting you know if you’re doing something wrong first - We’ll always let you know, and ask you to stop if you’re doing anything against the rules.
This is a beautiful display of behavior from staff. No snarkiness. No vitriol. No brushing user concerns out of perceived sight. You just addressed the issue in a meaningful way that explains its purpose, and informs the user of how it truly works in detail.
I have nothing further to say on this post.
@WhyWhyWhyWhy
Deletion reason: Spam, there is no need to spam multiple threads with the same request. Your original cmment in tag discussion has been left up and addressed by a moderator.
Again, this is another example of you all being thoughtful and meaningful with your users. This is honest and true, but not insult and condescending.
No further comment.
@Luzion
No further comment.
@Luzion
There is also consideration for automated moderation logging, though not decided on or finalized. We’re only in the discussion phase that the moment.
Well, that is good that you are discussing this. This is a good idea for you to implement.
That was so much to type. If you wanna take a break now, feel free.
Okay, you’re back? Let’s continue then.
You might have noticed that in my providing criticism against the moderation team here, I have not commented on them having inconsistent rule enforcement. And, given my experience on Derpibooru, this is primarily why: We don’t have a good way of knowing if you are truly consistent about how you all handle your users or not.
@Boxless
@Sapphie
As it is i trust this thread being an accurate audit log less than derpistan’s lack of one. They at least are open about being opaque. Here? You could just do staff actions and not log them to cover your tracks.
As Boxless said here, we don’t really know for sure how you all handle your users. In fact, let me take an example from Derpibooru that really, really started disillusioning me with it, and try to paint the idea of what this really means.
I argued that LyraBon is not canon, and therefore unedited screencaps of the two should not have
lesbian tags on them. And Ciaran locked the tagging thread in which this happens right before insisting that I was only saying that to try and exclude LGBT people from the site, based on absolutely nothing I said in the thread. This meant I could not counter him with anything. And anyone who does not know me and who saw that would have no reason to assume that it was not true. Because users have no frame of reference for how the moderation team ought to treat people. We are just supposed to trust them.And that is kind of the same vibe that we get from you guys, sometimes. It seems like we are just supposed to trust that @ZizzyDizzyMC is being honest and true when he calls threads obvious bait. It makes it sound like he truly believes that there is not much more than that, and that we are supposed to believe him on that.
If we are supposed to just trust you all to be true and fair without seeing it, how do we know you don’t have your fingers crossed.
That being said, do I think ANYONE on staff here is as bad as Ciaran?
Not even close.
Thing is, I think that the root of Ciaran’s problems, which I have gone on and on about in the PTSD Thread can all (or very nearly all) be rooted in two causes:
- He does not think that he makes mistakes, and that anyone who says he does is just an irrational hater.
- He is not transparent with people, as evidenced by him hiding under the Derpy Whooves account for so many years.
And these are the two problems that I see right now. And, as far as I can see, those are not big problems YET. but if left unchecked they will grow into bigger problems. And that would be a very sad thing to see happen.
So please, I implore you, learn to treat people with respect. Learn to give people the benefit of a doubt. And try to be transparent.
If you do these things, good behavior is hard to avoid.
Anonymous #B8DB
@Humble Oriathan
I don’t entirely trust Zizzy and Curtained not to unwittingly go full derpitarian, but I doubt a reworked rule list would stop them in any case.
I don’t entirely trust Zizzy and Curtained not to unwittingly go full derpitarian, but I doubt a reworked rule list would stop them in any case.
Havoc
Half Dragon, Half Meme
@Luzion
After reading through them, I find nothing I really object to. Best part to me is the complete removal “don’t be sexist, racist, etc”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of any of those things. Rather I find talking with those kinds of people to be hundreds of times more informative of their beliefs then being told by others. It also lets me expand my world view and escape echo chambers. As long as they don’t harass other users with their beliefs, they have as much right as us to speak their minds and should be allowed to do so. I very much believe in “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
After reading through them, I find nothing I really object to. Best part to me is the complete removal “don’t be sexist, racist, etc”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of any of those things. Rather I find talking with those kinds of people to be hundreds of times more informative of their beliefs then being told by others. It also lets me expand my world view and escape echo chambers. As long as they don’t harass other users with their beliefs, they have as much right as us to speak their minds and should be allowed to do so. I very much believe in “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
Luzion
Agreed, I’ll look to change that
Senior Moderator
pingus
@Luzion
Global Rules: Announce all rule changes, no matter how seemingly minor. This avoids wordmincing to try and justify things mid-argument and leaves less chance of some fucktard changing them at random without notice.
Agreed, I’ll look to change that
Rule 1: Edit protection and exceptions to DNP for those that are purging content outright would be nice, but we already know you’re not going to even pretend to be an archive like Derpi tried, so w/e. At least you aren’t pretending.
We are, as it stands, not an archive, but I understand your frustration.
Rule 3: It’s probably a good idea to note pony merch in otherwise non-pony image doesn’t count as pony related either. Too many furniggers do that shit.
I agree, I had thought I wrote explanation going into further detail about that already. I’ll see that it makes it into the next draft.
Rule 4: Turn the opener summary into a note before the rules. Should be the first fucking thing you read on the whole list. Tired of this shit, it’s why it even made it on Derpi’s rulelist anyways. Still no fucking clue why you copied said rule list verbatim.
This is actually addressed in our FAQ page and rule 0, so im not against removing it. In fact Rule 4 can likely be completely removed as it serves very little purpose in terms of moderation. I’ll work on distributing the applicable information, I’ll think on it and see if anything needs to remain or if that rule can be completely removed.
Luzion
Put on the back burner for the time being. What I’d like to achieve is a mix between automation and what we have now. Logs being generated automatically, but with required information being filled in manually. Logs would auto populate in a forum thread so users could still interact with said log. That will require a significant amount of time and major rewriting to the mod tools and the software in general and just isnt possible right now. For now the system we have worksm but relies on our team to remember to log things.
I want to really set a good moderation policy, starting first with something along the lines of “Users will never be punished for calling out/questioning/disputing/discussing moderator actions, or reminding the team that a log for an action has not been written.” And that will further devolve into users rights to appeal bans, actions etc… I want to focus on the rules first and once its at an acceptable place, move on to a fully fledged out moderation policy.
The staff and I do our best to ensure that moderation is done fairly and equally, but some cases require more discussion and rely on specific circumstances. We make every effort to reflect on previous instances of similar nature, but again there are a lot of variables in place. Ive recently been in a group who has an interesting take on how they handle moderation discussion, but I havent brought it up with the team yet. I dont wont go into the specifics until Ive discussed it with the team, but it would make every single decision we made very very transparent and would be very easy to implement.More on that later I think. EDIT: discussed with the team. Not viable due to the sensitive information we have to be able to share among us. Making those discussions public would just make us retreat somewhere else when dealing with sensitive information. Transparency is a double edge sword, we still actively working to make changes in areas we can to allow for more transparency where possible.
Senior Moderator
pingus
@Zaknel
There is quiet a lot to process but I’ll try to address whats been directed at me or the team in general.
There is quiet a lot to process but I’ll try to address whats been directed at me or the team in general.
@LuzionThere is also consideration for automated moderation logging, though not decided on or finalized. We’re only in the discussion phase that the moment.Well, that is good that you are discussing this. This is a good idea for you to implement.
Put on the back burner for the time being. What I’d like to achieve is a mix between automation and what we have now. Logs being generated automatically, but with required information being filled in manually. Logs would auto populate in a forum thread so users could still interact with said log. That will require a significant amount of time and major rewriting to the mod tools and the software in general and just isnt possible right now. For now the system we have worksm but relies on our team to remember to log things.
I want to really set a good moderation policy, starting first with something along the lines of “Users will never be punished for calling out/questioning/disputing/discussing moderator actions, or reminding the team that a log for an action has not been written.” And that will further devolve into users rights to appeal bans, actions etc… I want to focus on the rules first and once its at an acceptable place, move on to a fully fledged out moderation policy.
You might have noticed that in my providing criticism against the moderation team here, I have not commented on them having inconsistent rule enforcement. And, given my experience on Derpibooru, this is primarily why: We don’t have a good way of knowing if you are truly consistent about how you all handle your users or not.
The staff and I do our best to ensure that moderation is done fairly and equally, but some cases require more discussion and rely on specific circumstances. We make every effort to reflect on previous instances of similar nature, but again there are a lot of variables in place. Ive recently been in a group who has an interesting take on how they handle moderation discussion, but I havent brought it up with the team yet. I dont wont go into the specifics until Ive discussed it with the team, but it would make every single decision we made very very transparent and would be very easy to implement.
Zaknel
Ezekiel 33:11
@Zaknel
There is quiet a lot to process but I’ll try to address whats been directed at me or the team in general.
Dude, I feel you.
I had been thinking on whether or not I should even have made that post since this thread was made. But, I decided today that I should make it. Honest, true and fair.
I had been thinking on whether or not I should even have made that post since this thread was made. But, I decided today that I should make it. Honest, true and fair.
Luzion
Curtained is no longer with the staff. To address your concerns regarding staff decisions in general, ALL decision are not final and 99% of moderation action is discussed by at least 2 members before any decision is made. We are not afraid to address an issue or reverse a decision if that action taken was deemed incorrect and ive been actively encouraging my staff members to review actions made, even if they were not present for it. Second, third,fourth, etc… opinions help prevent tunnel vision. Users are also always welcome to oppose/counter/appeal a decision without fear of action or additional action taken against them, so long as they abide by site rules. For example, spamming the N word while also ban evading because you are unhappy wont get you anything, you’ll be ignored and banned again.
edit: I believe at one point I made a post in the mod audit log stating a ban was made against a user and that it was unappealable. That was a reactionary decision and im not fully onboard with that decision I made, though I’d have to review exactly what transpired as I dont remember off the top of my head. Once I begin work on a more thorough moderation policy, I will address more specifically the circumstances in which some bans may possibly be unappealable if such policy for appeals is made.
Senior Moderator
pingus
@Humble Oriathan
I don’t entirely trust Zizzy and Curtained not to unwittingly go full derpitarian, but I doubt a reworked rule list would stop them in any case.
Curtained is no longer with the staff. To address your concerns regarding staff decisions in general, ALL decision are not final and 99% of moderation action is discussed by at least 2 members before any decision is made. We are not afraid to address an issue or reverse a decision if that action taken was deemed incorrect and ive been actively encouraging my staff members to review actions made, even if they were not present for it. Second, third,fourth, etc… opinions help prevent tunnel vision. Users are also always welcome to oppose/counter/appeal a decision without fear of action or additional action taken against them, so long as they abide by site rules. For example, spamming the N word while also ban evading because you are unhappy wont get you anything, you’ll be ignored and banned again.
edit: I believe at one point I made a post in the mod audit log stating a ban was made against a user and that it was unappealable. That was a reactionary decision and im not fully onboard with that decision I made, though I’d have to review exactly what transpired as I dont remember off the top of my head. Once I begin work on a more thorough moderation policy, I will address more specifically the circumstances in which some bans may possibly be unappealable if such policy for appeals is made.
Luzion
Senior Moderator
pingus
It was brought to my attention by Zaknel (who we both agreed this topic should be made public), that two members of my staff had answered a report on another users comment. They both messaged zaknel to inform they would be deciding on a course of action polar opposite of the other only a few minutes apart. This goes against what I had said previously about 99% of issues being discussed by 2 or more staff members. While the report was low hanging fruit (something that wouldnt require deletion or ban) A line of communication was broken, and the action taken was logged by one staff member while the other did not log the issue. Essentially one staff member agreed the comment deserved a reply redirecting the user to use the feedback thread while the other did not. Not a total catastrophic break down in our moderation practices, but one that will be addressed to the entire staff about checking lines of communication if available.
With our staff team being international, its easy to forget that while some of the team may be asleep, there’s usually 2 or more always online. Making decisions, even on low hanging offenses is bad practice and we’ll make efforts to prevent similar occurrences in the future. We dont have policy stating a staff member can only work on this type of report or that type, so stepping on each others toes can happen but its something that should occur as infrequently as possible.
With our staff team being international, its easy to forget that while some of the team may be asleep, there’s usually 2 or more always online. Making decisions, even on low hanging offenses is bad practice and we’ll make efforts to prevent similar occurrences in the future. We dont have policy stating a staff member can only work on this type of report or that type, so stepping on each others toes can happen but its something that should occur as infrequently as possible.