[Discuss] time to scrap the moderated list

[Robert Croson, Jr]

On 11 Dec 2007 at 14:57, John P. Murphy wrote:

> On Dec 6, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Robert Croson, Jr wrote:
> 
> > There are many reasons that a message may not make it to the modded  
> > list.
> > For example:
> >
> > <snipped examples>
> 
> OK, so why am I getting your message 5 days late?  You know, having  
> written it, that it doesn't violate any of those rules.

Because I waited for a long time for one of the other mods to get around to it, 
but none did. So I decided that *someone* had to drain the mod queue, and I 
engaged in the cardinal sin of self-moderation. (And in the process I dropped 
about 10 of my own messages in the crapper. Moderators do post stuff that 
shouldn't make it to the modded list, too.)

> This is a problem.  If your unwillingness to approve your own posts  
> is crippling the moderated list, then you need to change your  
> policy.  Or are you saying that you don't know whether your own posts  
> follow the "fairly loose" guidelines?

I quite often post garbage to the unmoderated list that I know will never make 
it to the modded list. Like this post, for example. (That's why I am copying it 
directly to you, since it appears that you are on the modded list only.)

> But it's obvious that Tom is reading the *un*moderated list -- I  
> frequently get whole blocks of messages from Tom before I get the  
> messages he's responding to.

No, I don't believe that he reads the unmodded list. Messages from Tom are 
almost always passed directly through by the moderators, as are replies to 
messages from Tom. Some mods may inadvertantly pass along Tom's 
messages out of sequence. Or when a bunch of messages are modded all at 
once, you may get them out of sequence.

> > But if the modded list doesn't contain the posts you want, then  
> > join the
> > unmodded list. The mere presence of a modded list doesn't hurt anyone.
> 
> Except that the game strongly recommends people to use the moderated  
> list.  The moderated list is plainly broken.  Ergo, it needs to  
> either not be broken, or the game needs to not recommend it.  I don't  
> actually care which at this point.

That's something you will have to take up with Tom. The first several messages 
of this thread, including the idea to change the recommendation from modded 
to unmodded list, were passed through, and Tom will see them.

> > Note that moderators do not filter posts based on what ideas they  
> > personally
> > like or dislike. So long as the post does meets the (fairly loose)  
> > requirements, it
> > will get passed through. It's not like the mods control access to  
> > Tom. Anyone
> > can contact him directly, if they want.
> 
> This is a straw man argument.  I'm not accusing the moderators of any  
> wrongdoing or manipulation.  I'm saying that the moderation system is  
> not working properly.  Based on your message, I am not convinced  
> otherwise.

It works well enough when the mods don't all get embroiled in some long 
argument. That's what happened at the end of November/beginning of 
December period. All the mods got involved in a discussion, so no one was 
available to mod the queue, so it backed up *very* badly. This is, believe it or 
not, a rare occurence. I am working on draining the queue. It just takes a while 
to chase down some of the parents of some of the messages in the queue.


-- 
Rob

An intelligent man is sometimes forced
to be drunk to spend time with his fools.
-- Ernest Hemmingway 'For Whom the Bell Tolls'




-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss