Open letter to 996 Moderators re: MBMotorsports
08-31-2016, 04:08 AM
#1
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
Open letter to 996 Moderators re: MBMotorsports
Non-Mods,
This is about how Martin is being moderated, not Martin himself or the things he says/does. If you want to contribute your thoughts on the topic of the moderation, please provide your views by all means. If you just want to bash Martin or dredge up particular things he has said, we do that in enough other places already so please do not do that here.
Mods,
I appreciate the effort you all put into keeping some semblance of order around here, but the I feel the need to register a probably opposing view of how Martin is being handled.
I'm no fan of Martin and recognize he has a knack for turning any thread sour, but I think the outright deletion of his posts (sans when he wants to post personal information about other members) does the community a disservice.
My issue is that by deleting his posts you are in effect changing history and this has two significant side effects.
The first is that the conversation in threads become weird after the fact (JI's engine replacement thread is a good example) as there are clearly references to Martin having been there, but his post(s) are now gone and context is broken.
The second is that you are effectively cleaning up his image for him by hiding his true personality. Sponsor or not, he doesn't deserve to essentially get a free pass to say what he wants and have the slate wiped clean for him.
It is clear that Martin wants no part of being a contributing and useful member of the community and clearly doesn't respect whatever warnings he has been given. It is also clear that we can't just ignore him and not engage with his destructive posts.
I don't envy the challenge you have as I know leaving his posts just leaves the door open for the seemingly never ending back and forth that he incites, but I would ask that keep the above in mind when you are faced with another of his posts.
This is about how Martin is being moderated, not Martin himself or the things he says/does. If you want to contribute your thoughts on the topic of the moderation, please provide your views by all means. If you just want to bash Martin or dredge up particular things he has said, we do that in enough other places already so please do not do that here.
Mods,
I appreciate the effort you all put into keeping some semblance of order around here, but the I feel the need to register a probably opposing view of how Martin is being handled.
I'm no fan of Martin and recognize he has a knack for turning any thread sour, but I think the outright deletion of his posts (sans when he wants to post personal information about other members) does the community a disservice.
My issue is that by deleting his posts you are in effect changing history and this has two significant side effects.
The first is that the conversation in threads become weird after the fact (JI's engine replacement thread is a good example) as there are clearly references to Martin having been there, but his post(s) are now gone and context is broken.
The second is that you are effectively cleaning up his image for him by hiding his true personality. Sponsor or not, he doesn't deserve to essentially get a free pass to say what he wants and have the slate wiped clean for him.
It is clear that Martin wants no part of being a contributing and useful member of the community and clearly doesn't respect whatever warnings he has been given. It is also clear that we can't just ignore him and not engage with his destructive posts.
I don't envy the challenge you have as I know leaving his posts just leaves the door open for the seemingly never ending back and forth that he incites, but I would ask that keep the above in mind when you are faced with another of his posts.
08-31-2016, 11:43 AM
#4
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicagoland Area
Posts: 26,141
Likes: 0
Received 5,402 Likes
on
2,513 Posts
Keep in mind, in places where Martin was "quoted" those records will always be part on the Rennlist record.
08-31-2016, 11:57 AM
#5
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
I've had a few such posts removed that while they were dealing with Martin rather than the thread topic were not, I feel, worthy of deletion or even a stern finger wag. I get why they do it though so other than my above concerns I don't really object.
08-31-2016, 01:33 PM
#6
Three Wheelin'
I actually don't know that much about Martin or his posts. I've read a lot of the criticism and have read some of his posts, which seem to justify that criticism, but I've never interacted with him directly. I get the whole "censorship is bad" sentiment and I was mostly following you (gnat) until you wrote the following:
Let's take Martin out of this and, instead, talk generally about someone who...
- doesn't care about being a contributing member;
- doesn't care about being a useful member;
- disregards warnings they've received from mods; and
- posts only destructive content.
Just freaking ban them; even temporarily. Refund their sponsorship or membership if that's an concern. This is a private forum. The mods are people who volunteer their time and have better things to do than babysit an adult who, based on your description, is here for the sole purpose of being destructive. If that member behaves like a petulant child and disregards warnings, then send them to their room. If they never reform their ways after repeat violations, make the ban permanent.
There's a material difference between taking contrarian positions; even frequently and unreasonably versus simply being destructive. I don't think moderators should have to assess the value of an individual's posts to determine whether they are appropriate for the forum. This isn't Wikipedia. Countless threads are riddled with inane, useless comments and I don't think they should be removed. People can sometimes be inflammatory, too, but poking the bear isn't the same as being the bear. The role of the moderator isn't (in my opinion) to ensure that all content meets a certain value quotient. What a bear that would be (pun intended). I believe their role is, generally, to keep things in context (which can be very broad in a forum like this, where members seem to treat the forum as a brotherhood of sorts, welcoming even non-996 content) and, most importantly, ensure that people are acting reasonably toward one another. As volunteers, moderators shouldn't have to waste their time ensuring every post meets some Puritanical standard but they also shouldn't have to waste their time chasing down members who are only here to troll. What's the difference between posting spam and trolling? Neither is constructive or interesting to members. Spammers get banned. So...?
-Eric
Originally Posted by gnat
It is clear that Martin wants no part of being a contributing and useful member of the community and clearly doesn't respect whatever warnings he has been given. It is also clear that we can't just ignore him and not engage with his destructive posts.
- doesn't care about being a contributing member;
- doesn't care about being a useful member;
- disregards warnings they've received from mods; and
- posts only destructive content.
Just freaking ban them; even temporarily. Refund their sponsorship or membership if that's an concern. This is a private forum. The mods are people who volunteer their time and have better things to do than babysit an adult who, based on your description, is here for the sole purpose of being destructive. If that member behaves like a petulant child and disregards warnings, then send them to their room. If they never reform their ways after repeat violations, make the ban permanent.
There's a material difference between taking contrarian positions; even frequently and unreasonably versus simply being destructive. I don't think moderators should have to assess the value of an individual's posts to determine whether they are appropriate for the forum. This isn't Wikipedia. Countless threads are riddled with inane, useless comments and I don't think they should be removed. People can sometimes be inflammatory, too, but poking the bear isn't the same as being the bear. The role of the moderator isn't (in my opinion) to ensure that all content meets a certain value quotient. What a bear that would be (pun intended). I believe their role is, generally, to keep things in context (which can be very broad in a forum like this, where members seem to treat the forum as a brotherhood of sorts, welcoming even non-996 content) and, most importantly, ensure that people are acting reasonably toward one another. As volunteers, moderators shouldn't have to waste their time ensuring every post meets some Puritanical standard but they also shouldn't have to waste their time chasing down members who are only here to troll. What's the difference between posting spam and trolling? Neither is constructive or interesting to members. Spammers get banned. So...?
-Eric
08-31-2016, 01:54 PM
#7
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
He did recently have an enforced temporary vacation which is why I say he continues regardless of any warnings he has received.
I'm not trying to advocate it with this thread, but I wouldn't argue an outright banning.
The Mods are just forum members like the rest of us and Sponsors are paying money (presumably more than our Member fees, but I don't know) to the site owners (IB) so I expect there may be additional steps that have to be followed before a Sponsor can be permanently banned. I also suspect they don't have the ability to refund/cancel a sponsorship.
Yeap I agree 100% all things being equal (e.g. I recognize that dealing with a Sponsor may carry some additional weeds to work through).
I agree and I personally think Martin straddles that line.
In his latest "I'm leaving and never coming back" post (since removed) he couldn't help making digs at Jake and his customers. That post, however, is a good example of what I'm complaining about here. He didn't mention Jake by name, but we all knew who/what he was talking about. It also wasn't done in such a manner that violates any forum rules (at least none that I've seen enforced and I've made far more incendiary posts myself).
Personally if we never see the guy again I won't be upset, but I do think the Mods have been a bit heavy handed on the delete button (though since we can't seem to just ignore him I really don't know a better option for them especially since I only know of one post that I think was ban worthy by itself).
I'm not trying to advocate it with this thread, but I wouldn't argue an outright banning.
The Mods are just forum members like the rest of us and Sponsors are paying money (presumably more than our Member fees, but I don't know) to the site owners (IB) so I expect there may be additional steps that have to be followed before a Sponsor can be permanently banned. I also suspect they don't have the ability to refund/cancel a sponsorship.
If they never reform their ways after repeat violations, make the ban permanent.
There's a material difference between taking contrarian positions; even frequently and unreasonably versus simply being destructive.
In his latest "I'm leaving and never coming back" post (since removed) he couldn't help making digs at Jake and his customers. That post, however, is a good example of what I'm complaining about here. He didn't mention Jake by name, but we all knew who/what he was talking about. It also wasn't done in such a manner that violates any forum rules (at least none that I've seen enforced and I've made far more incendiary posts myself).
Personally if we never see the guy again I won't be upset, but I do think the Mods have been a bit heavy handed on the delete button (though since we can't seem to just ignore him I really don't know a better option for them especially since I only know of one post that I think was ban worthy by itself).
Trending Topics
08-31-2016, 03:25 PM
#10
Rennlist Member
Just freaking ban them; even temporarily. Refund their sponsorship or membership if that's an concern. This is a private forum. The mods are people who volunteer their time and have better things to do than babysit an adult who, based on your description, is here for the sole purpose of being destructive. If that member behaves like a petulant child and disregards warnings, then send them to their room. If they never reform their ways after repeat violations, make the ban permanent.
There's a material difference between taking contrarian positions; even frequently and unreasonably versus simply being destructive. I don't think moderators should have to assess the value of an individual's posts to determine whether they are appropriate for the forum. This isn't Wikipedia. Countless threads are riddled with inane, useless comments and I don't think they should be removed. People can sometimes be inflammatory, too, but poking the bear isn't the same as being the bear. The role of the moderator isn't (in my opinion) to ensure that all content meets a certain value quotient. What a bear that would be (pun intended). I believe their role is, generally, to keep things in context (which can be very broad in a forum like this, where members seem to treat the forum as a brotherhood of sorts, welcoming even non-996 content) and, most importantly, ensure that people are acting reasonably toward one another. As volunteers, moderators shouldn't have to waste their time ensuring every post meets some Puritanical standard but they also shouldn't have to waste their time chasing down members who are only here to troll. What's the difference between posting spam and trolling? Neither is constructive or interesting to members. Spammers get banned. So...?
-Eric
Martin's basic actions and posts over time should be clear. Although I wasn't involved in the last issue, the mod or mods who did take action probably had a day job to deal with and did the best they could.
If anyone feels compelled to have Martin's post record be undeleted, shoot a mass PM to the admin, Bob Rouleau, and the super mods like Hacker-Pschorr, 911SLOW, IB Nolan, etc. and see if they will resume his old posts. Since I didn't delete Martin's posts, it's not correct for me to undo another mod's work.
08-31-2016, 03:32 PM
#11
When I was newer to Rennlist, I commented on a thread that was discussing how someone had hit a deer while driving. Page after page of posts about the cars condition and the drivers condition post crash, as would be expected...
Then I simply posted how the deer made out in the crash and if it was hurt or killed. The Mods gave me a warning for that.
Mods = God....it's their world. we're just living in it.....
by the way the deer died....
Then I simply posted how the deer made out in the crash and if it was hurt or killed. The Mods gave me a warning for that.
Mods = God....it's their world. we're just living in it.....
by the way the deer died....
08-31-2016, 03:40 PM
#12
Actually, I re read the post, and I commented that the OP stated that no one was hurt in the accident, and I pointed out that the deer was actually most likely hurt. So the OP's statement that no one was hurt was quite inaccurate...
anyway.....moving on....
anyway.....moving on....
08-31-2016, 03:42 PM
#13
Rennlist Member
When I was newer to Rennlist, I commented on a thread that was discussing how someone had hit a deer while driving. Page after page of posts about the cars condition and the drivers condition post crash, as would be expected...
Then I simply posted how the deer made out in the crash and if it was hurt or killed. The Mods gave me a warning for that.
Mods = God....it's their world. we're just living in it.....
by the way the deer died....
Then I simply posted how the deer made out in the crash and if it was hurt or killed. The Mods gave me a warning for that.
Mods = God....it's their world. we're just living in it.....
by the way the deer died....
08-31-2016, 03:43 PM
#14
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
This was pretty much what I was going to state. I know that, no matter what I do here, some will say that I don't reign things in enough, whereas others feel that I'm too heavy-handed. We are volunteers and not everything is going to be 100% perfect, 100% of the time. Mods have discretion to take action based on judgment (and sometimes based on a consensus).
Martin's basic actions and posts over time should be clear. Although I wasn't involved in the last issue, the mod or mods who did take action probably had a day job to deal with and did the best they could.
If anyone feels compelled to have Martin's post record to be undeleted, shoot a mass PM to the admin, Bob Rouleau, and the super mods like Hacker-Pschorr, 911SLOW, IB Nolan, etc. and see if they will resume his old posts. Since I didn't delete Martin's posts, it's not correct for me to undo another mod's work.
Martin's basic actions and posts over time should be clear. Although I wasn't involved in the last issue, the mod or mods who did take action probably had a day job to deal with and did the best they could.
If anyone feels compelled to have Martin's post record to be undeleted, shoot a mass PM to the admin, Bob Rouleau, and the super mods like Hacker-Pschorr, 911SLOW, IB Nolan, etc. and see if they will resume his old posts. Since I didn't delete Martin's posts, it's not correct for me to undo another mod's work.
I'm not sure it's worth restoring any of his posts (honestly didn't even know it was an option) as there was nothing earth shattering that was lost (at least in the ones I saw before they got nuked). I just wanted to bring up some potentially unintended consequences for you guys to keep in mind down the road.
08-31-2016, 03:47 PM
#15