When a moderator gets blocked by a member

[SofaJockey]

Retread suggested this might be an amusing discussion.
The technical element of the query has been resolved, but it leaves the question of how do you deal with 'special' forum members short of banning?

The case I've been involved in as moderator is with a member who decided to block the moderators!
Have you had any challenging members like this?

---

Original post content:

Long story short: a member has 'blocked' a moderator who was moderating them for aggressive behavior.
Obviously, the moderator could ban them, but moderator action short of that action would seem a more responsible tactic and having moderator tags and replies blocked seems rather counter-productive.

This is not a 1-vs-1 situation, the whole of the moderation team is united in its puzzlement.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

---

[Retread]

This issue is a wonderful onion. So many layers to explore.

Clearly stated policies.
Staff behavior when enforcing rules.
Mechanisms for conflict resolution.
etc.

But first and foremost, there's the issue of how blocking a Staff member complicates the moderation process. It simply can't be allowed to stand. Let's toss this around first and get to the other layers later.

---

My first reaction to this: Perhaps a polite but assertive PM to the member who has blocked the Moderator? The contents need to hit the following points:

• Blocking a Staff member creates a communication problem which inhibits the Staff from performing their necessary duties.  Blocking Staff will not be permitted on this forum.
  
• You have a limited time (be specific, either certain number of log-ins or number of posts) to correct your block list and remove any staff members from your block list.  Failure to comply will result in a permanent ban.
  
• If you feel the Staff member's behavior warrants blocking, or that you have been treated unfairly, we can discuss this privately.  But only after you have removed all staff members from your block list, not before.
  

---

Anyway, that's my first thought which is subject to tweaking if considered.

[Retread]

SofaJockey I see you've thrown a like on my post and that's fine. But I would like to see someone take an alternate point of view here. If none is presented, I'll play Devil's Advocate tomorrow in rebuttal to my first reply.

There's something to be said about why a member might rightfully choose to block a staff member. We need to consider the participation of staff on the forum, outside their duties. Participation like any other members, which might include opinions which an individual might find unpalatable.

[SofaJockey]

So far we've been fairly open to allow speech that even as moderators we don't like, so long as it's within the rules.

The whole thing about power corrupting is part of that.

Forums have to believe the moderators are 'of the people, and the moderators have to remember that.

[Mandoli]

Jul 3, 2018 11:42:38 GMT -8 Retread said:

Blocking Staff will not be permitted on this forum.

I'm honestly not sure why this is allowed to begin with. Nobody should be blocking/ignoring staff members. PB doesn't let forum creators disable this, and it's painfully sad.

Honestly, I haven't had people block me yet on my own forum, but I had a guy play mini-Mod before. Such a pain, really. He told others to not use certain words to describe people, and some of the words were tame. I can't ever recall someone telling me to not use "stupid" or "loser" before this guy.

He seemed to take an extreme liking towards critiquing my posts, though. One time, he called me out in the little shoutbox... All because I used the Caps Lock key in one of the shouts. Suddenly, that's not allowed?

We had to ban him. I know, that's a last resort. But we used up the entire warning system on him. We sent PMs to him, asking him to stop doing what he was doing (which didn't help, because he actually denied acting like a moderator to me), but nothing worked.

[Retread]

Jul 4, 2018 10:15:07 GMT -8 Mandoli said:

I'm honestly not sure why this is allowed to begin with.

That's the challenge placed before you, and to everyone else reading this thread. To open your minds and look at it from the other point of view. And I firmly believe you are capable of meeting the challenge if you're so inclined.

I apologize for taking the easy and obvious (and woefully incomplete) side in my first reply. There's far more to be learned if we take a deeper look. I'm still hoping someone will stand tall and present the other side of the story here.

[Mandoli]

Jul 4, 2018 11:06:02 GMT -8 Retread said:

That's the challenge placed before you, and to everyone else reading this thread. To open your minds and look at it from the other point of view. And I firmly believe you are capable of meeting the challenge if you're so inclined.

I don't think people should need to block staff members, regardless of how "aggressive" they're perceived to be. But let me see if I can push this further: SofaJockey, got some questions for you!

1. How many staff members are on your forum? Did this member block all of them?
2. You guys, as a group, had to have sat down and come up with this moderation. Did you?

Just want to start throwing stuff out there.

[Kami]

Speaking in general terms, I don't think it needs to go to either extreme. There are several levels of blocking, so a one-size-fits-all approach of 'no blocking' or 'yes blocking' doesn't really work. Perhaps the member just doesn't want to see the mod's posts. Perhaps the moderator hasn't been entirely a good role model and the member doesn't feel safe discussing it with the staff team. Whatever the reason, imo the actual answer here is that there needs to be an open method of communication.

If this were me in the position of the administrator, I'd want a few answers.

1. Why did the member feel the need to block the moderator? Is it JUST because they were being disciplined, or is it because there's underlying sense of injustice this person is feeling because of the moderator in question? Is there negative history between them, perhaps the member doesn't feel that the moderator is an effective member of the moderation team and is lashing out at what they perceive is an unfair retaliation against them for a behaviour they personally feel is in line with the rules? I've had a few experiences where someone has had negative interactions with a moderator on the forum, and when that moderator has tried to communicate to them privately that their behaviour is getting too aggressive, the member viewed it as a further escalation rather than attempts at de-escalation. So, can any other moderator speak with this individual to get their side of the story?

2. If the situation is, in fact, that the moderator and the member have bad blood, look to see if this moderator is going to be an effective moderator on your team. In the past, even if a moderator has done their job well, I've removed them from their post when they cease being effective as a voice of authority. It's not necessarily their fault, but it could be that the line between 'member' and 'staff' got blurred a bit too heavily and they've lost credibility. It's not always fair, but that does happen. Alternatively, perhaps the moderator has behaved unscrupulously and has managed to hide it from the rest of the staff team. Don't always presume that the member in question is being belligerent for no reason. Or perhaps there was a misunderstanding in tone or intent, as voiceless text can often get misconstrued.

3. If after all your examination, this member is simply being difficult, first determine if they are an otherwise overall asset to the community aside from this specific instance. Do they contribute, and have had little to no behavioural problems in the past? Or are they a repeat problem case?

4. Regardless of the outcome and decision, re-examine your methods of communication with your members and see if they feel that the staff are open and approachable for any problems concerning the forum, including other staff members.

Ultimately, the block feature exists for a reason. I don't think that it's appropriate to have the knee-jerk reaction that staff members should be unblockable, but rather it deserves a thorough examination of both the member and the moderator to figure out why. Perhaps in this case it's simple belligerance, but you never know if in the future someone you trust has a different side to them that they take care not to show you, or if a member winds up having some sort of moral opposition to the contents of their posts (I know I've had several disagreements on a fundamental ethical level with moderators in my day, and a block feature for their posts at the least would have been much appreciated back then). I don't think automatically presuming that the staff member cannot have done anything to warrant being blocked is a healthy attitude to take if you want to foster trust between yourself and your members.

In this particular case, on the surface I'd first see if the member (presuming they had been in good standing before this) would be open to communication from another member of the staff team. If they aren't, then that's counter productive to actually being a functioning and productive member of the forum, so I would simply, and very quietly with no fuss, ban them. If they are, then I would just ask that the moderator leave that particular member to someone else on the team.

Or, alternatively, if they had been a problem before, I'd let someone else (myself, or another member of the team) let the member know in no uncertain terms that blocking a member of staff does not give them a free pass from any disciplinary actions for negative behaviour on the forum and take action based on their response.

[Chris]

If my memory serves, when someone is blocking a staff member then the option to block personal messages is missing from that checklist of options, the user cannot sever communication with a staff member in this manner.

[stevecureboi]

Been reading this thread with much interest.
But I do have a (possibly a daft) question.
How does the moderator in question know he/ she has been blocked by the user in question?

[Retread]

Jul 5, 2018 4:21:53 GMT -8 stevecureboi said:

How does the moderator in question know he/ she has been blocked by the user in question?

If the member blocked the Moderator's ability to follow, that would show up when the Moderator looked at the member's profile. The Follow button would not be present.

As to the other blocking functions, I don't know.

[Retread]

Jul 4, 2018 19:20:59 GMT -8 Chris said:

If my memory serves, when someone is blocking a staff member then the option to block personal messages is missing from that checklist of options, the user cannot sever communication with a staff member in this manner.

Memory serves you well. I just tested this and can confirm.

Only three items remain on the checklist when blocking a staff member.

• Hide this member's posts.
  
• Do not let this member follow me or my activities.
• Block notifications from this member.

The 'Do not let this member start new conversations with me.' (PM) is not on the list.

However I haven't yet tested to see what would happen if member Joe fully blocked member Todd before Todd became a Mod.

EDIT:
If Joe blocked Todd from starting new conversations, then Todd became a Mod, Todd would be able to send new PMs to Joe.

---

The result of other blocking functions shouldn't affect forum operations.

If Joe hides Todd's posts and Todd makes a thread on policy on one of the Boards, and Joe can't read that post, Joe can't claim he isn't responsible for violating the policy.  It's there for everyone to read.  It was Joe's choice to block.  Joe is still responsible.