Timeline for 2016 Moderator Election Q&A - Question Collection
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2016 at 11:40 | comment | added | Rinzwind | ... "could mean they leave the site forever." I do not believe that to be a problem. People always leave and re-appear or don't. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 11:40 | comment | added | Rinzwind | IMO the mods should just talk with these users. And not just once and not just 1 mod and also not only with all those users at the same time. Get them to make contradicting statements. -action- should be taken by (I assume) shog9 or a colleague of shog9. From what I got from this I believe the mods did a pretty good job. Maybe the feedback to the other users could be better (most (like Jacob Vlijm) didn't see it comming and for some this was pretty harsh. We all know lots of people made lots of good answers and even if it was an upvote-ring that does not make those answers bad). ... | |
| Jun 15, 2016 at 9:10 | comment | added | Oli Mod | @WildMan In practice, you'd almost certainly discuss this with the other mods before doing anything, yes. This scenario is just asking for your opinion, what you would suggest doing with the other mods. | |
| Jun 15, 2016 at 1:55 | comment | added | Wild Man | @Oli I answered my questions last night after a long day and having read this post and question and comments. My question is in this particular case are we all a lone for the duration of this issue or say the next day or two we would be able to discuss what should be done with the other moderators? I assumed you wanted us to answer it like no one else was going to get involved. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 19:59 | comment | added | terdon | Ha! I knew there was something fishy about that Oli character. Nobody gets that much rep cleanly. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 15:17 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 15:10 | comment | added | Oli Mod | Too hard? That's moderating :) It's all good finding out when new mods will be around, or what they think is most important, or what they think they can bring to the table... But striking the line between discipline and constrictive progress is something I think we all struggle with occasionally. It's also not a widely known problem as we usually do it behind closed doors. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 15:00 | comment | added | Pilot6 | ))) This revision is a way too hard to answer something. ;-) | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 14:43 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 13:59 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 13:25 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 424 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 13:06 | comment | added | Oli Mod | This question wasn't really about the recent vote recalculations. I've changed it to point to a hypothetical situation that is different to that but is still asking for the same sort of opinion. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 13:05 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 23 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 12:59 | comment | added | Pilot6 | And the upmentioned case is not that simple to be just cheating. I see it from another angle. Those users wrote perfect answers, but they appeared to be "too nice". Thy tried to "thank" other users for upvotes by upvoting other users. The intention mas not that bad IMO. Still it is harmful for the site. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 12:50 | history | edited | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 73 characters in body
|
| Jun 13, 2016 at 12:46 | comment | added | Pilot6 | Moderators can try to talk to these people. I do not see what else moderators can do without escalating the issue. Banning of good users (in other aspects) is not an option. Votes are not worth it. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 12:43 | comment | added | Pilot6 | "only a couple of people admit to doing anything wrong". We all know that there was 2 or 3 people doing that. Others were kind of objects of this activity. I think that what has been done was fair enough to give a good example that this kind of activities is harmful for the site. The side affect is that some good votes has been reverted, but IMO it was worth it. I can't invent anything better, unless revert votes manually that is not an option. | |
| Jun 13, 2016 at 12:33 | history | answered | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |