Public Apology from Erwin

[Erwin]

Cuirrently,
I think the only thing that really needs to be changed is that when you are dealing with a situation that involves you and the Moderators, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes in which you cannot have any input on ..... I think this process needs to be changed.

I think we should be more included in the whole process.

Example....

You have an Appeal up .... you are having a discussion with the person that is making the decision.... but you are not privy whtsover to the discussions that are going on behind the scenes and considering that they directly involve YOU in this matter I think that YOU should be privy to them as well.... I mean they have full disclosure to everything you are saying in the appeal because they at anytime can come into your appeal and read what you have written but you do not have the same priveledge to see what is being said back .... So, therefore, as it stands now it is more like you are guilty until you can prove yourself innocent .....

If we have a system that allows us to appeal the decisions then make it so that it is fair on both ends of the spectrum .... allow full disclosure on both sides not just one, because then what happens is that then the questions that are asked of the member in the appeal can be geared towards the favor of the Moderator and upholding the decision and we would not even know it....

We have staff forums. These will remain private to staff. That's not going to change.

 

[Erwin]

I appreciate the feedback regarding reforms.

I suggest that members don't push for too much all at once - let's take things a step at a time. It's not as simple or as easy you might think.

 

[krstlros]

Slow and steady is sometimes the best method, even when we want everything done yesterday.

 

[SallyNow]

I haven't had any problems with mods so far, I am kind of like tulc: I've only got one pm from mods, not even an actual unofficial warning, when a topic discussion very personal to me got too heated. , and I like the civility of the forums. I've also seen some very quick action when someone has gone waaaay over the line (sexist/racist/bigoted attacks).

But, I've also seen some topics get closed when the discussion as a whole has not gone overboard, but only one or two posters have been, um, over-enthusiastic. So, I welcome reforms on overzealous editing/closing/censoring by staff, but I also appreciate that flaming and blatant, baseless, cruel insults are highly discouraged.

BTW, crumpets are yummy

 

[Illuminatus]

I suggest that members don't push for too much all at once - let's take things a step at a time. It's not as simple or as easy you might think.

I'm just waiting to see what happens. No point in kvetching about it until we see what changes are made.

 

[Debi1967]

We have staff forums. These will remain private to staff. That's not going to change.

Erwin I am not talking about going into the staff forum but adding another place where we can interact more freely with the staff on these issues, as in having a committee ...

We do not want to be privy to what goes on in the Staff forums... We realize that you do need an area for this and that you need to be able to have dicussions about the forum solely with the Staff ....

All we are asking for is more input and more disclosure to things when they are happening and are directly related to us ... that is all

 

[Debi1967]

I appreciate the feedback regarding reforms.

I suggest that members don't push for too much all at once - let's take things a step at a time. It's not as simple or as easy you might think.

And I know it is not as easy as it seems .... it is not easy for me I can only imagine with a place your size what it is like .... and I only have little wee forums but there is always something that is a problem with them that I have to either fix or I have a member that is causing a fuss...

 

[loribee59]

Erwin I am not talking about going into the staff forum but adding another place where we can interact more freely with the staff on these issues, as in having a committee ...

We do not want to be privy to what goes on in the Staff forums... We realize that you do need an area for this and that you need to be able to have dicussions about the forum solely with the Staff ....

All we are asking for is more input and more disclosure to things when they are happening and are directly related to us ... that is all

I've seen such a room in one of the Christian forums while browsing around one time where both parties can hash things out in private. Called the "mediation room" where only the people involved are allowed into that room, and you'll have to ask the staff for a "key" to get in. And, this forum I bumped into also have the same format and coding like ours.

something to think about...

 

[Avatar]

Mea culpa. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.

The older Catholics will recognize that

But... everyone, I come holding my hat. I'm guility of this... And I'm sorry. Me, personally... I won't speak for anyone else. But I'm making my apology to all of you. I can't get into particulars, due to confidentality, of course, but... I've been guility of a lot of what Erwin said.

If I have done anything against you... please accept my apologies. And I promise to try and be better.

The one official warning I have is from you, Bradford. But you owe me no apology. I was in clear violation of the rules at the time.

I know you as a tireless moderator, who tries his utmost best to promote forum harmony. As such, there are probably more folk who disagree with your moderation than other moderators who do fairly little. Its to be expected.

But in my opinion you deserve kudos for your efforts here!

God Bless You!

 

[A4C]

A major problem exists when a moderator is zealous about an issue which conflicts with the Word of God and "discusses" the issue with an equal zealous believer who lines up with the Word of God. It is not who is right that settles the issue but who has the control of the hangmans rope.

 

[Plan 9]

Uhm ... like providing crumpets & tea to them?

Would they actually get any?
If I sometimes feel much like I've gone down Alice's rabbithole when I'm here, how must they feel?
If we offered them a tea party would they accept, or would they be afraid of ending up being stuffed in the teapot?
What about Dr. Loh? Does he see us as his children, or as in-patients in his madhouse?
Of course, we all like to think of ourselves as adults, clothed and in our right minds, but I can't help but wonder, when viewed collectively, how we really come across to Erwin and our staff.

 

[thereselittleflower]

A major problem exists when a moderator is zealous about an issue which conflicts with the Word of God and "discusses" the issue with an equal zealous believer who lines up with the Word of God. It is not who is right that settles the issue but who has the control of the hangmans rope.

And this is not limited to discussions of theology either . .



Peace

 

[mrs.wilde]

Erwin, i wish i hear your kind of comment from the church leaders to do somthing about wide spread of luke warmness. thanks

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

A major problem exists when a moderator is zealous about an issue which conflicts with the Word of God and "discusses" the issue with an equal zealous believer who lines up with the Word of God. It is not who is right that settles the issue but who has the control of the hangmans rope.

Exactly. I'm glad you posted about this and I hope and pray that this becomes a top priority in CF reform. When these things happen it is a disgrace and reflects poorly on the entire site. There is something extremely hurtful about the accusation of BLASPHAMY simply because you/your church holds different understandings of biblical scripture than an orthodox moderator(s).

 

[cameocat]

Praying for Christian Forums.

 

[MikeMcK]

I've seen such a room in one of the Christian forums while browsing around one time where both parties can hash things out in private. Called the "mediation room" where only the people involved are allowed into that room, and you'll have to ask the staff for a "key" to get in. And, this forum I bumped into also have the same format and coding like ours.

something to think about...

We have a forum on another board I post on (http://www.keylife.org) and there is a whole forum just for handling such disputes.

 

[Erwin]

I've seen such a room in one of the Christian forums while browsing around one time where both parties can hash things out in private. Called the "mediation room" where only the people involved are allowed into that room, and you'll have to ask the staff for a "key" to get in. And, this forum I bumped into also have the same format and coding like ours.

something to think about...

That's currently what our Appeals is set up to be... the member and the mods involved...

 

[Matrona]

That's currently what our Appeals is set up to be... the member and the mods involved...

In practice, it turns into this:

Lowly Member: I got a warning for such and such from this this moderator, I don't think I deserve it and here's why, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Overworked Senior Moderator: I'll have a look at this when I have time.

[a few days later]

Overworked Senior Moderator: Okay, I've looked this over. Appeal Granted/Denied.

[Moderator locks thread]

As you can see, this doesn't really fit that bill, the member gets to say her bit but the moderator doesn't really discuss anything with the member, they just acknowledge it, then grant or deny the appeal.

I've tried to circumvent this by writing especially long and detailed appeals, but I think all I've managed to do by that is annoy the moderators I'm appealing to. Sometimes, in their responses, they've asked questions I answered in the original appeal, leading me to believe they didn't even read the darned thing, which is very disheartening.

It would be really nice if there were Appeal-Writing Guidelines set up so that we could know what the moderators want/need to hear about and what they don't.

 

[loribee59]

In practice, it turns into this:

Lowly Member: I got a warning for such and such from this this moderator, I don't think I deserve it and here's why, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Overworked Senior Moderator: I'll have a look at this when I have time.

[a few days later]

Overworked Senior Moderator: Okay, I've looked this over. Appeal Granted/Denied.

[Moderator locks thread]

As you can see, this doesn't really fit that bill, the member gets to say her bit but the moderator doesn't really discuss anything with the member, they just acknowledge it, then grant or deny the appeal.

That's the problem...there's no discussion to reach some kind of an agreement between the mod and member. Not every rule that's broken is cut & dried. Not everyone is the same. And the mods seem to have forgotten that every report, issues and situation is UNIQUE. To me, I get the impression that the mods just stamp "granted" or "denied" and their attitude is blase and lazy. They don't care about the feelings, or about what's really fair, nor are they interested in hearing the OTHER side of the story. Here's a quote from one of the members that showed how callous the mods were to her:

I don't like the appeals...I have appealed things in the past and came back a few hours later to check on something to find my thread closed and a bunch of replies...and what bothers me about that is that I don't get to have a say so in anything or voice my opinion

I dunno what anyone would call it, but to cut off the chance for additional input from the member-- speaks VOLUMES about the moderators. That's just plain WRONG.

I've tried to circumvent this by writing especially long and detailed appeals, but I think all I've managed to do by that is annoy the moderators I'm appealing to. Sometimes, in their responses, they've asked questions I answered in the original appeal, leading me to believe they didn't even read the darned thing, which is very disheartening.

It would be really nice if there were Appeal-Writing Guidelines set up so that we could know what the moderators want/need to hear about and what they don't.

That may be a good idea, but even if the member follow the guidelines to the letter, it's likely that the guidelines would be subjected to interpretation and/or abuse by the moderators, who could circumvent the guidelines, to annoy or frustrate the members who are trying to do what's right.

 

[Debi1967]

I've tried to circumvent this by writing especially long and detailed appeals, but I think all I've managed to do by that is annoy the moderators I'm appealing to. Sometimes, in their responses, they've asked questions I answered in the original appeal, leading me to believe they didn't even read the darned thing, which is very disheartening.

It would be really nice if there were Appeal-Writing Guidelines set up so that we could know what the moderators want/need to hear about and what they don't.

Yeah I know, you go through all the trouble of trying to provide them with all you can at their fingertips and then all they do is come back into the thread and ask a couple of questions that have already been answered either numerous ways in your wording already if they took the time to look or they ask you to make a brief synopsis of it when sometimes the problem is complex and it requires more than a brief synopsis.... It would be nice if they acknowledged all the work you just did to present your case....Very few of them do, most of them just seem annoyed at it ...It appears as though that they just do not want to be bothered with what we have siad in the first place....