Moderation strategies?

[aastinky]

I had a recent debate with members of my forum about whether I should utilize my moderator powers more. I tend to try to persuade my forum members into being better community members rather than use arbitrary rules and consequences to enforce it. Still people tend to skirt the rules in creative ways, and do uncool things in a way that maintains plausible deniability. Or they are just plain mean and unpleasant to be around. Sometimes these are people I've known for a long time, and have been extremely helpful in other ways, so it's hard to make a clear decision about what to do about them.

I tend to be pretty lenient towards bannings, particularly because my forum is a pretty niche topic from an ancient community, and it does not have many new members coming into it. Its rife with with latent internet drama and the longest grudges I've ever seen. Some of my forum members nearly have PTSD from power-tripping moderators in past forums, and I think many of them are on the autism spectrum. I've personally been in the crosshairs of an abusive moderator in a community I really enjoy, so I know the feeling of being wrongfully kicked out of a community I can't replace.

One strategy I've employed in my forum as an alternative to bannings, was creating two member groups: one group that reduces visibility to the rest of the forum, and only allows them to post in one subforum. And a second group that removes their posting permissions to post on the forum, but still allows them to send private messages. It doesn't happen very often, but I will sometimes move a member to these groups when a member is being particularly combative and posting repeatedly. This puts them in a type of "time-out" so that they can still have a chance to say what they need to say before they try to be nice again or if they decide to announce their departure.

Additionally, I've implemented a system where I can assign people to be anonymous unofficial moderators. They don't get to edit posts, ban members, or lock threads, but if they agree to it, I have them create an alternate account that I assign as a leader of the above groups. If they need to "mute" someone's posting or put them in time out, these pseudo-moderators switch accounts to their group leader account, add the offending member into the group, then switch back to their personal account. Since these moderators create new accounts with names that I assign to them, only I know who the moderators are. This makes it easier to select moderators since I don't have to be concerned about moderators colluding together to bully a particular user with their moderator powers, since none of them know who the other moderators are. They use their own discretion only to decide who gets muted or not. Other moderators can also anonymously undo the actions of another by adding/removing people from the groups.

Due to the aforementioned grudges, I think this should reduce the likelihood of moderators being targeted or harassed for being seen as someone who abuses their power, without me needing to ban them. The accountability for moderator action is diffused to everyone on the forum since the moderators are anonymous. I did a trial run of this a few years ago with three different moderators. All three almost never used this power -- I think because they understand the kind of responsibility this entails, but recently, seeing my forum evolve with more members and some more creative rule-breakers, I'm going to take a stab at having a few dozen moderators to see how it goes, because I'd like to see a little more accountability for the members that tend to be a little too mean but without breaking the rules. It actually kinda makes me wonder what would happen if I made EVERYONE a moderator...? Would the forum be able to keep itself afloat if everyone had to use their power responsibly?

I deliberately vet out people to be leaders that have been on the forum long enough to have some stake in the way the forum culture moves forward. I'll soon see if these moderators find a way to abuse the power, but I think this might be a cool way to penalize members who are stepping over the lines without any kind of permanent or triggering experience with being banned. I've even chosen people with conflicting political opinions to reduce the likelihood of members feeling that penalties have a political bias.

Some might think I'm being overly complicated in this but you have to understand how sensitive my members are to bannings and rules being unfairly enforced lol

[Kami]

I'm just gonna be real blunt here; I spent about an hour and a half writing a long af post trying to break down what you've said in your post, then deleted it because one question is making my brain itch:

What do you want out of a response to this thread? Your thread title makes it seem you're asking for opinions regarding how to moderate your forum, but the contents of your post is predominantly an explanation of why you don't have a more robust moderation system, have only recently added mods with virtually zero moderation functionality, and the only question asked is whether or not the forum would run itself if everyone was made into a secret, hidden mod.

Is that the question you want answered? Is there anything else you're looking to get out of our responses? I just want to make sure I understand the scope of what you're looking for, so I don't reply with anything that winds up going outside that.

[aastinky]

I appreciate the directness. Sorry you ended up deleting all of your post. It would be cool if you could recover it somehow. Didn't mean to make you waste all that time.

I'm ok with you or anyone going outside of the scope of my expectations.

There's no one specific way for one to moderate their forum. Everyone kinda does it at their own discretion. My only expectations were to open up the floor for any moderators/administrators to talk about strategies they use on their forums and whether or not you feel confident they are getting the results you want.

I don't really talk to other forum administrators or even participate in forums very much outside of my own, so I just wanna get an idea of how others operate.

[Kami]

May 31, 2024 16:08:53 GMT -8 aastinky said:

I appreciate the directness. Sorry you ended up deleting all of your post. It would be cool if you could recover it somehow. Didn't mean to make you waste all that time.

I'm ok with you or anyone going outside of the scope of my expectations.

There's no one specific way for one to moderate their forum. Everyone kinda does it at their own discretion. My only expectations were to open up the floor for any moderators/administrators to talk about strategies they use on their forums and whether or not you feel confident they are getting the results you want.

I don't really talk to other forum administrators or even participate in forums very much outside of my own, so I just wanna get an idea of how others operate.

No need to apologise, I also have the autism lmao so my bluntness was a neutral tone rather than anything negative. I deleted my post because I wanted to clarify first not because I was upset in any way — I remember what I said and tbh it wasn't particularly eloquent and I had only recently woken up. Maybe this time will be easier for me to get the words out.

I used to have a very heavy moderation hand, personally. But while it worked, it did mean that a few folks churned out when they probably didn't need to if I had been more willing to be flexible in my judgement. But I was young and stupid, as many of us are then. Since then, I have hit what I feel is a happy balance between making sure that community / forum purpose is healthy + using a more discerning and nuanced approach to enforcing behavioural expectations. Twenty years is, after all, a quite a bit of time to experiment, gather data, adjust, and grow as a forum admin / community manager.

For example, I renamed my list of behavioural expectations from "Rules & Guidelines" to "User Handbook" to adjust for a bit more of a casual vibe. Within the handbook itself, most of the things listed are positive directives: instead of "don't be a jerk", as a for instance, I say "Treat others with respect, kindness, and empathy". And so on.

Barring any extreme circumstance (like anything TOS-breaking, bullying, plagiarism, etc) I try to keep my actions in a manner that in my profession is referred to as "leading without authority". While I do have authority from a functional perspective because I am physically able to deny access to the forum, I don't have any real power to make someone behave — I can't fire them or anything. In light of that, I prefer to say things in a way that gets the user's "buy in"; in other words, involving them in the process of the reprimand for their behaviour. This tends to help the ones who have good intentions but may be missing the mark.

Instead of saying something like, "You keep calling people names which is against the rules so if you do it again I am gonna ban you!" a gentler, but still authoritative and direct approach often works better:

"Hey [name]! I just wanted to touch base about some posts you have made recently. Just a reminder, everyone on the forum should treat each other with respect, kindness, and empathy. Some of the posts you've made recently raised a flag, so I wanted to check in and see if everything is okay, and if not, if there's anything I can do to help."

HOWEVER.

Part of the reason I kept trying to figure out how to respond initially is while I'm totally aligned with you on not wielding your mod abilities / admin position like a cudgel against your members, I just really get the vibe that you've avoided this so hard that it's ended up that they run your forum, not you (at least from a practical perspective).

Sure, some folks may be behaving out of pocket unintentionally. But by your own admission there are people who are simply unpleasant.

Past trauma and/or potentially autism, a bad day, etc provides a reason for someone's behaviour but does not absolve them of the responsibility of, and accountability for, their behaviour and actions. If I roll over someone's foot when I am in my wheelchair and hurt them, and my response to them telling me I hurt them is "I'm in a wheelchair so that's not my problem", I'm still disabled and in a wheelchair but it does make me an a-hole. Similarly, reacting in a way that harms others if you have PTSD, autism, bipolar, a really bad day at work, feel upsetti spaghetti because the store ran out of milk, whatever, is still your responsibility to address and make amends for the impact your actions had on others.

There is a pretty big line between being understanding and empathetic of peoples' circumstances and histories, and rolling over so you avoid conflict. Quite frankly I think that some of these people are taking advantage of your non-confrontational nature and your kindness to get away with being jerks.

You're right that everyone runs their forums their own way, but if some of your members think you should be stricter, that's generally a sign that you've developed an unhealthy community environment and the ones that are asking/suggesting that are in desperate need for someone who will advocate for their needs too.

I don't mean to make this a lecture, exactly, but let me end this with an analogy; I don't mean to make you feel badly, but it's more so you can hopefully understand my perspective.

Let's say I own a private lot and in that lot I create a wonderful garden. I invest a lot in making this garden a beautiful and inviting place, and when it's where I want it, I start inviting people to come join me. Maybe we just hang out. Maybe we have parties. Who knows! It's just a nice place to hang out and socialise.

Over time, some of the people I invite start destroying the garden. It's little things at first, like plucking flowers before they have a chance to fully bloom or leaving a little graffiti scribble on a bench. The garden is still beautiful for the most part, but the wear and tear is becoming obvious.

The other people who come to my garden tell me I should talk to the people who are messing things up and tell them to stop. But the people who are messing things up are like, well if you tell me to stop doing this then you're just like this terrible person I know who did the exact same thing to me for no reason. You don't want to be like that terrible person, so you back off and they keep doing these little acts of vandalism.

Eventually, that garden is going to be completely destroyed. The people who came to the garden to enjoy its beauty with other garden-enjoyers no longer feel it's worth it to come, because the people vandalising the place are still doing it and have made it an unpleasant place to spend time in.

What would be the right thing to do here? Do you allow your garden — the community you have built — to continue deteriorating due to a handful of people making it unpleasant? Or do you kick them out until / unless they can learn to enjoy the garden without destroying it or being jerks to other visitors?

Just food for thought.

[yogibearbull]

I once thought about this - move posters to group(s) with restricted privileges. But ProBoards allows posters to leave such restricted group(s) from the Profiles. The only way around it is to designate the group(s) as Hidden - see old link below. I didn't see this aspect mentioned and may be this was your intent.

Anyway, the effect is almost similar to timeouts - short or long. So, why not use readily available PB functions. It's more important to use moderation consistently.

support.proboards.com/thread/668975/restricted-groups

[aastinky]

May 31, 2024 23:16:54 GMT -8 Kami said:

Part of the reason I kept trying to figure out how to respond initially is while I'm totally aligned with you on not wielding your mod abilities / admin position like a cudgel against your members, I just really get the vibe that you've avoided this so hard that it's ended up that they run your forum, not you (at least from a practical perspective).

Thanks for your kind post.

Wow this was a very insightful way to put it. I do kinda feel this way because there have been times where I've taken long mental health breaks and I kinda left the forum to its own devices for sometimes months at a time. As such, the community members are a little divided about how I can't just come back and start telling people what the correct behavior on my forum is because they had to manage it without me, and whether I should come down on them harder. I empathize with their feelings of being abandoned.

Sometimes the other members get more out of the community than what I have directly facilitated on my own, so I feel like its best to distribute some of the responsibility to decide how things are done to the members that have stuck around.

I don't know if this changes your opinion, but an element of my forum involves the creation of content, whether its creating art, videos, music, code, or game modifications. In the question of 'can you separate the art from the artist,' it's been agreed upon with the founding members at the start of the forum that they can. As such, some of the content creators on the forum create very cool and valuable content while carrying a generally negative outlook on life that manifests itself sometimes in arguments or bullying or just unpleasant words to read. As the forum has expanded over the years, and the founding members are outnumbered by others, the answer to 'separate the art from the artist' isn't so clear.

[Kami]

Jun 2, 2024 13:12:56 GMT -8 aastinky said:

May 31, 2024 23:16:54 GMT -8 Kami said:

[snipped for length]

Thanks for your kind post.

Wow this was a very insightful way to put it. I do kinda feel this way because there have been times where I've taken long mental health breaks and I kinda left the forum to its own devices for sometimes months at a time. As such, the community members are a little divided about how I can't just come back and start telling people what the correct behavior on my forum is because they had to manage it without me, and whether I should come down on them harder. I empathize with their feelings of being abandoned.

Sometimes the other members get more out of the community than what I have directly facilitated on my own, so I feel like its best to distribute some of the responsibility to decide how things are done to the members that have stuck around.

I don't know if this changes your opinion, but an element of my forum involves the creation of content, whether it's creating art, videos, music, code, or game modifications. In the question of 'can you separate the art from the artist,' it's been agreed upon with the founding members at the start of the forum that they can. As such, some of the content creators on the forum create very cool and valuable content while carrying a generally negative outlook on life that manifests itself sometimes in arguments or bullying or just unpleasant words to read. As the forum has expanded over the years, and the founding members are outnumbered by others, the answer to 'separate the art from the artist' isn't so clear.

To be honest, this is why you SHOULD have visible, well known staff: if you need to take a break, you need a team of people you can trust to hold your standards, and that your community can trust to do the same as an extension of your authority. At minimum you should appoint a deputy to do so, even if it's only when you're absent for a long period of time.

Sharing responsibilities in decisions doesn't mean letting them set their own vibes individually; ultimately you should be taking a leadership position. Let me put it this way: let's say something bad happens on the forum and you for whatever reason are being held accountable for that event. These sometimes-mods, do you think they'd stand in the fire with you? Would they take equal responsibility for the fall out? Or would they step away and say that it isn't their forum, they just helped out sometimes?

I understand where you're coming from, but "Separate Art from Artist" doesn't mean avoiding calling them out for bad social behaviour; it means that you can separate their behaviour from your enjoyment of their work. It's not a get out of jail card they can use to avoid responsibility for their behaviour.

At the end of the day, it's your forum. Ultimately, you are responsible for the kind of community atmosphere you build. Personally, I have a very low tolerance for repeat offenders. People who make art or important contributions should be held to the same standards as those who don't — if they're long term members then they should tbh be held to a higher standard to show new members how they should behave.

More food for thought: do you want their contributions at the price of being a toxic atmosphere? Maybe it's not too toxic, but even though I would probably like the subject of your forum, hearing this would put me off from joining.

When was the last time you were an active member of a forum with a good vibe and active, engaged, and friendly staff? If it's been a while or if you've only had bad experiences, it might be good to join one so you can feel what it's like and then go back to your forum with fresh eyes and try to look at the situation from the perspective of your members.

Of course none of what I say really matters in the long run; it's your decision and your decision alone. But I hope I've offered something to consider in the future. Happy to answer any more questions — I alluded to my main job earlier, but in light of your context I feel I should mention that I am a retired illustrator/designer (still do it as a hobby sometimes) that currently is a game developer and i've worked on some pretty big titles. If my experience, broadly speaking, can be of use to you, please let me know.