Talk about stuff specific to the site -- bugs, suggestions, and of course praise welcome.
I see a huge problem here with Daifne's (and later Dartman's) attitude here. Regardless of who's right in the "should users be advised to e-mail someone" issue, moderators should be above the territoriality and venom expressed in this thread. Whether someone's "from" the forum or IRC or Mozilla itself, or even if people are disruptive or trolls (not saying anyone is), they should be treated with respect by the moderators. Furthermore, it appears as though Daifne was more interested in arguing with Lucy than helping the user. Civil arguments about forum policy are fine, but there's a place for them, and it's not in some user's support thread.
It seems like it's been overlooked, but the user did get the help needed from Lucy.
I'm surprised a mod didn't reprimand malliz for the personal attacks (that still is against MozillaZine policy, right?).
Do we have double standards here? I'd certainly hope not.
The post np highlighted in his second post is really disturbing. That seems to indicate that the moderator already, for the lack of a better phrase, had it out for Lucy.
EDIT: grammar error in first sentence.
Yeah, and I saw a huge problem with Lucy's attitude there ....just like every other time she comes here.
I also see a huge problem with you trying to stir things up, on this thread. It's a bit of an insult to Lucy, isn't it? 'Hi, I'm Lucy, and I am so lame and incapable of expressing myself in a normal fashion,that I need my husband and every contact I've got to wade in and bail me out'...errr, like you are trying to do.
Back off, np, and stop stirring it.
Er, yeah right...but it wasn't exactly decrypting the Dead Sea Scrolls type stuff, now was it now?
Honestly, moderating big forums is a pain in the ass and you guys should cut the mods here some slack. If they ask someone not to post their email address and for people to post their replies in the forums so that others can actually follow the results that is perfectly within their right. It doesn't matter who the person is. Sure, if they know who the person is they might be less likely to call them out on it but that isn't really the issue here. If the mods ask you to do something just go along with it or take it to private messages. Lucy, mconnor, etc: Trying to argue with the moderators in public just makes you look bad imho. If you don't like their decisions go over their head and talk to an admin.
pav - No one was arguing whether or not replies *should* happen on the forum. I explicitly said in my original post "Please reply here *or*" and then "if I get an email response I'll update the thread with findings." I think this should show that I also had keeping it open in mind and was providing my email incase that's what the user (who was posting as guest, no way to poke them if something I suggested fixed the issue and they chose not to report back) would prefer to do rather than bookmark and post back in the thread.
So far no one has actually come out with any policy on whether or not it's ok to post email addresses other than "you shouldn't do it cuz you'll get spammed," which is what I was told a while ago (I can no longer find the thread) when I was troubleshooting I believe one of the bookmarks issues. I said "it's my bugmail and has already been farmed, so it's fine by me" and that's the last anyone said to me about it. So this time, I added a message to the mods that I was already aware of the risks and that it was fine by me.
The response I got was to tell me to stop "telling" people to email me. This, to me, is quite different from "it's not ok to share your email if the users prefers." The "stop" also had me puzzled as the use of "stop" instead of "don't" implies that I'd been going thread to thread saying "email me for the answer." I've asked people to email me if they chose 3 times, only 2 of which can still be found by searching the forums. The first time, which I couldn't find, was as an option to people registering their own bugzilla accounts to attach files to a particular bug. It was "could you please attach said files to bug x, or you can email them to me and I'll attach it for you." So, not understanding the response I was given, I explained myself "it is an option I provide to people that I want to be certain I follow up with, and get their info to the devs."
Had I been told at this point that it's still not ok and that I should refer people to the devs by some other method, I would have gladly accepted. The three posts that followed certainly didn't imply anything about policy and only that they didn't know me (which I still wasn't sure how it applied, can I leave my email if they know me?) I thought I understood that Daifne was saying she didn't know me so it didn't matter what she would do for someone she *did* know. I was frustrated that I was getting that attitude from a moderator rather than a "who are you and why do you want it?" and I said so.
Daifne's next response was heated and so I thought maybe I had completely misunderstood what she meant, and I asked if I had, but I missed what she quoted from my original post. Her response didn't clear anything up for me about what was moot, but I DID catch the reference to my completely wrong use of "personal info" and thanked her for pointing it out and edited my post (although I left the original in so people could see I made a mistake rather than pretending I hadn't said it at all).
At this point mconnor, who I had already told about my concerns with profiles.ini corruption with 188.8.131.52 (saw it 3 times in IRC today and don't recall seeing it before) and had shown that thread to, felt compelled to comment in favor of checking someone out before treating them like a troll (and he rarely backs me up the rare times this happens - you should know that, pav - he'll either tell me he thinks I'm being too much, or he'll leave me to handle it myself).
Now we're at the point where the user is saying no big deal, and Daifne is now saying rather than don't post your email, that I should have presented credentials. At this point, I still had the impression it was because Daifne *personally* didn't know who I was, and when she said "this Lucy" it made me laugh. I'm thinking, we're still talking about she doesn't know me, but I've already supplied my bugzilla email and I'm pretty much *the* Lucy. This is the point where I linked the thread in one of the IRC channels I frequent simply to make that joke and blow off some of the tension.
At this point Daifne has solidly taken the stance that if I'm going to request info from users, I need to prove who I am. To which I replied "Shouldn't you as a moderator be *asking* for them rather than just telling me I don't run the forums or telling me not to give out my email?" You know, if that's really the problem, clue me in. This is where Daifne plays what is www-wide known as "the moderator card." I'm a mod and I don't know you, how dare you question me?
mconnor and I both simultaneously point out that I could just *say* anything and at some point if she's to be satisfied I am who I say I am, she's going to have to check into it. Yes, posting the same thing at the same time comes across as heavy-handed and is usually counter-productive. mconnor and I both know this, we weren't coordinating our responses in any way.
At this point, even though things have gotten heated on both sides, I'm still trying to find out what I'm actually supposed to do. I don't need the user's info, so I'm not going back and editing the first post to describe who I am, and neither is Daifne expressing that she wants said credentials, nor what specifically is acceptable. The discussion starts to get circular at this point, although mconnor stays quite civil (and I try to, I think I achieved so). I don't post again except to explain how I would have proceeded in the request for information and to make it clear that I didn't ask anyone who joined the thread to join.
That's what happened on my end in that thread anyway. Although after that all happened, someone showed me the Moderation thread where malliz and Daifne obviously had preconceived notions about me *before* the thread got hostile and where Daifne makes it clear that she might not know exactly who I am, but she remembers me well from past threads where it's obvious I'm a contributor.
From malliz: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=533908
Can Lucy be given a reminder about keeping things on the board? And remove her email address whether she wants it gone or not? As far as I know Kerz runs these Forums not Lucy
From Daifne: Who knows, she could be doing that to collect addresses to spam to... Wink
From malliz: It annoys me because half the time they can't be bothered to scan the KB and they come up with some tinfiol hat type theory and because it's done in private we have no way of heading trouble off at the pass. [/rant]
All of which appear in the Moderation thread before I made this post http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... 41#2811941
Honestly the worst of it all, in either place, comes from malliz IMO, but Daifne was joining in long before it turned into an arugment (and while I was helping the user solve their issue).
malliz had it pegged wrong. Maybe it wasn't difficult, but *I* think it's worth noting that while I was being made fun of behind my back for having "tinfiol[sic]" theories, I actually knew what I was talking about.
Now I've said what happened on my end, I'll stay out of it unless someone asks me something directly.
Actually, I've gone over the logs, since I wanted to exactly what was said when between the two threads, and I think what *really* happened here is that malliz was allowed free reign. He seems to be allowed some of the authority of a mod
and was allowed to take a "guard dog" stance within the moderation thread and the support thread. I think Daifne and I would have actually been able to sort out what I should or shouldn't have done, and what I did or didn't mean if malliz hadn't been allowed (dare I say encouraged?) to add fuel to the fire. Not only did none of the mods ask him to stop,
but Daifne told him it was ok
And they both did seem to be enjoying it.
Dartman's admonition was only directed at myself, mconnor and jesusX. The last part *seems* to apply to everyone, but 2 minutes later, malliz attacks jesusX and I still see no warning (maybe it happened in private?). On my boards the regulars are the first to be placed on "forced vacation" for breaking the rules, they're the ones that should know them. So much as a peep after a warning and it was done. They learned quite quickly to simply let the mods handle any situations (most of which were resolved through an open discussion via private message with the person at hand, less often ending in a ban).
I *still* don't know if I'm supposed to give credentials when asking users for info, or if I'm not supposed to share my email address at all
So it's wrong to question the action(s) of a/the moderator(s) in an open community?
You seem to have made an invalid assumption. There were a few people, np included, that saw that thread first, and then went online wondering what the hell was going on.
However, the <a href="http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=2811904#2811904">diagnosis by malliz</a> was incorrect, so perhaps it's more like that than you'd like to admit. Lucy specifically stated that this problem had come up a few times recently, and was suspecting something else might have been wrong.
I'm sorry, but I can't cut them some slack. With great power comes great responsibility. Yes, that phrase is probably overused, but it still applies here. If I see a moderator correct one person for violating the rules (email in thread), then let another person freely violate the rules (personal insults) in the same thread, one that the moderator is actively posting in, I'm going to call that moderator out. What gives malliz the right the right to violate the rules? I see no "Moderator" under his/her name - just "Folding Team Member". What's even sadder is that another moderator came into the thread and still didn't address the personal insults.
I'm not so concerned so much about the Lucy/daifne issue as I am with malliz apparently having free reign to say/do whatever he/she pleases. That's wrong, and nobody seems to want to address it. If this is how this community has gotten, I'm going to stop recommending friends to come here for help because I don't want to refer them to a place where they might be personally insulted.
For accuracy, this:
referred to this:
which the ^ made clear.
I side with Daifne, and thx to Dartman locking the original thread.
In other cases, where no great names are seen in a thread, such a off topic-discussion caused by offended reactions was three times split an dropped to forum basked "locked post".
Daifne makes great work here with 66.000 postings within 18 months. Thanks for yr great support here!
The fact that Lucy may or may not have an attitude problem has no bearing on whether Daifne is acting appropriately for a moderator.
I've not been around much recently but I'm going to weigh in anyway.
Moderators should go about their duties with friendliness, patience and an assumption of good faith unless there is strong evidence to the contrary. They should under no circumstances get dragged down into petty debates or flame wars (though a reasoned exchange aimed at clarifying the rules would be acceptable). These expectations were not met here.
Firstly, Lucy's request that the user email her the profile files was not malicious and was almost certainly preferable to suggesting that the user post their files on the forum. At this point, it would have been appropriate for a moderator to step in and encourage the participants to keep discussion on the forum where possible and to issue a general (not specifically aimed at anyone) caution of the dangers of emailing files containing privacy-sensitive information to another forum member.
Secondly, regardless of the conduct of any member, a moderator should always remain professional and courteous. (Consider the parallel of a police officer who must remain polite even in the face of strong verbal assaults from citizens.) It is clear in this instance that the heated exchange led to a degeneration of the discussion and that this practically eliminated the possibility of an amicable resolution. I'm not saying that Lucy's conduct was perfect here but it was clearly influenced by the earlier responses from moderators directed to her. Lucy isn't a moderator; the standards for moderators are higher.
We have a problem here and I'm not just referring to this specific incident. Too many users say that they are leaving due to the moderators. Moderators should never become visible enough for this to be an issue. It seems that some of the moderators (and other regulars) frequently close ranks in a way that makes them seem unrepresentative and sometimes hostile, a kind of arrogant clique. Frankly, the behaviour of the moderators as a whole sometimes reminds me of some sort of elite security service, drunk on power. Far too often have I seen moderators abuse their position to score points or stifle debate (even when a poster is clearly factually wrong, the response should be vigorous debate not harsh moderation). The opinions of moderators are not automatically correct and their decisions are never above criticism or debate.
Now we have weblog posts strongly criticising the conduct of the moderators and calls for the Mozilla Foundation to publicly distance itself from the forums. If this continues, real damage will be done to both MozillaZine and the Mozilla community as a whole. MozillaZine has earned its place at the heart of the Mozilla community over the years but this position is by no means guaranteed in the future. If we are not careful, these forums could one day become a ghost-town, surpassed by a community that responds better to the needs of the community.
Let's not let that happen.
worse, it's getting scary. let's just answer questions and stuff and let the brainy people figure it out.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest