Closing threads (DynamicDylan)

[Deleted member 300094]

I have a recommendation how to piss off much less users. I will talk from my personal experience, even when I know that happened to many.

issue 1:
Threads are mostly closed without reaction from room admin. @Samwise is cool guy, he had no problem to re-open the issue when I asked him - but I think we should make it more clear about the process. I think it makes no sense to close mod complaint - just with the reply of that specific mod on which is the complaint aiming, or with message "it is a long time after your punishment". I think admin should always reply, even with simple answer like "complaint rejected - or complaint has been actioned this way...". But always being clear that it is closed and how.

issue 2:
When mod complaint is made, even well addressed and verbalized, it always happens that trolls like @Screem @Princessa @Camp Real etc. attack the thread with BS, completely de-rail it. Often happens that @DynamicDylan come into that saying some nonsense like "Thread is de-railed, contact me in DM, pls close." I don't see reason, why admin can't read original thread post + mod answer -> and make a judgement. Nobody is forcing him to read all the sh!tstorm.

issue 3:
Admin is not reacting, or completely de-railing the problem himself. It is happening repeatedly. He will ignore the most valid arguments, and twist some out of topic sentence you used. Many threads are the evidence of that. This is something I would consider as gaslighting. I don't think it would cost him much energy to stay on topic and be brief.

Summary:
@DynamicDylan is not good with communication with users. Therefore I think rules should be re-thinked and edited. He often write there "PM me and we will deal with it" and stuff like that. I will give you example what happened, when I was trying to reach him for weeks. Ignored or he was changing topic, blaming me for rumors.

23_06-convo_with_dylan

23_06-convo_with_dylan album hosted in ImgBB

ibb.co

@DynamicDylan these are my things which are in my opinion frustrating. I am not even getting here into a problem with your power tripping moderator @Chaos_NoPMs . This thread is specially for you. <3 Take from it whatever you find useful. View from the other side could be good for improvements, if you don't have your own head sticked in your ass.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

one of the main issues is true complaint threads often get derailed with very unrelated things and arguing between people not even involved. so sometimes the easiest way to get things done is in private messages. i would usually direct them to my pms but wouldn't ask for a closure until i had it resolved in pm.

 

[Deleted member 300094]

one of the main issues is true complaint threads often get derailed with very unrelated things and arguing between people not even involved. so sometimes the easiest way to get things done is in private messages. i would usually direct them to my pms but wouldn't ask for a closure until i had it resolved in pm.

You should really re-read issue 2 paragraph.

 

[purplerose]

You should really re-read issue 2 paragraph.

when the derailment has occurred sometimes reading op and answering is moot. derailing should/could be dealt with 1 of 2 ways. 1) delete the posts 2) if significant amount move to their own thread in EE. even with that users have to understand that there will be some off topic posts to scroll through, as thats one of the consequences of posting in an open forum.

rapi has a valid good point in leaving them open but directing to pm. many times it occurred what was said in pm wasnt said in the thread and vice versa. sometimes users had other points of view & s/s that would be shared that shed a whole new light on the situation.

in all my time here and for as long as the kick/ban forum has been here ive only ever seen 1 room (until recently) whose mods answered kick/ban questions threads with actual events unbiased and backed it up as needed with s/s. and thats adults. they get in get the facts/events out many times open their pm box for further discussion/ refer to their admin and get the hell out many times without personal opinions and egging on behaviors. mods should not be answering kick/ban threads unless expressly directed by THEIR OWN admin. regardless of who tags them.

 

[LostCause.]

I'm going to add my input from both sides of this issue, even though you didn't ask for it.

On one side, I love me some good tea and love to see the drama unfold. I want to read the complaint, read the mod response, and read how the admin decided to resolve the issue. It personally gives me satisfaction to have closure by knowing how a complaint was put to bed. And I also enjoy a good people watch and like to see how different people respond to different issues.

On the other, it's none of my (or your) business how a complaint is resolved unless it is your complaint. You should absolutely be getting resolution on your own complaints. But how someone else's complaint was resolved only needs to be known by the complainer, the mod who performed the action, and the admin of the corresponding room. As long as that is fulfilled, publicly providing closure is not required.

Also mentioning that UMs have made it very clear that they only close kick/ban complaints by admin request/response, by original complainer request, or by a mod the admin designates. For admin closure, this can be done by either the admin replying publicly or by the admin having a standing request to close kick/ban complaint threads in favor of directing the complainer to their PMs. If they're closing threads for any reason outside of that, it tends to give a notion of inconsistency, hypocrisy, and favouritism – and that gets messy. As @purplerose said earlier, there are ways to navigate unrelated content in a kick/ban complaint, and admins also have the ability to skim the thread for relevant content and mentally ignore the rest.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

To carry on with the post(s) above from LC and others which I agree with,

Users sometimes complain that threads are not being handled or being closed by room admin(s) after a mod in question replies to a complaint about themselves. I can see why that optic is frustrating users-which is why room admins are supposed to address formal complaints here- even though as an neutral observer I can see that the mod(s) usually give full and clear replies. Some rooms have a defined "senior mod" who can help admin with closure requests.

How complaints are handled on forums are up the the room admin(s) In reference to OP the SC admin has told us that if his mods see complaints and answer before he does- they can request closing.

Users also need to accept that while they ought get an reply/answer to their issues, it might not be the answer they want or agree with, but they should get a reply. If unanswered/ignored or whatever, appealing to TheChatmaster like always is the final step.

 

[Akrta]

To carry on with the post(s) above from LC and others which I agree with,

Users sometimes complain that threads are not being handled or being closed by room admin(s) after a mod in question replies to a complaint about themselves. I can see why that optic is frustrating users-which is why room admins are supposed to address formal complaints here- even though as an neutral observer I can see that the mod(s) usually give full and clear replies. Some rooms have a defined "senior mod" who can help admin with closure requests.

How complaints are handled on forums are up the the room admin(s) In reference to OP the SC admin has told us that if his mods see complaints and answer before he does- they can request closing.

Users also need to accept that while they ought get an reply/answer to their issues, it might not be the answer they want or agree with, but they should get a reply. If unanswered/ignored or whatever, appealing to TheChatmaster like always is the final step.

Ok then I'm going to ask you a question. What happens if the complaint is on a mod? (Due to the mod course of action, of course) I would want the admin to look into it before the threads gets closed. Just saying.

 

[LostCause.]

Ok then I'm going to ask you a question.

I know this question wasn't directed towards me, but what exactly are you asking?

What happens if the complaint is on a mod?

The majority of kick complaints are regarding a kick placed by a mod. The process goes like this: A chatter is kicked. The chatter makes a thread to complain. The mod in question may or may not reply at the direction of the admin. The admin investigates the issue and replies to the chatter accordingly with a determination/resolution.

(Due to the mod course of action, of course)

If a mod kicked someone, that would logically be considered mod course of action.

I would want the admin to look into it before the threads gets closed.

Complaint threads are posted by ******** and the admin of the corresponding room investigates the complaint. The conversation between the complainer and the admin may continue through a public thread or a private message to bring about resolution.

Just saying.

I have no idea what you're saying.

 

[SouporMan]

This thread can be closed.

 

[VanHelsing]

I know this question wasn't directed towards me, but what exactly are you asking?

The majority of kick complaints are regarding a kick placed by a mod. The process goes like this: A chatter is kicked. The chatter makes a thread to complain. The mod in question may or may not reply at the direction of the admin. The admin investigates the issue and replies to the chatter accordingly with a determination/resolution.

If a mod kicked someone, that would logically be considered mod course of action.

Complaint threads are posted by ******** and the admin of the corresponding room investigates the complaint. The conversation between the complainer and the admin may continue through a public thread or a private message to bring about resolution.

I have no idea what you're saying.

🤔

 

[Akrta]

I know this question wasn't directed towards me, but what exactly are you asking?

The majority of kick complaints are regarding a kick placed by a mod. The process goes like this: A chatter is kicked. The chatter makes a thread to complain. The mod in question may or may not reply at the direction of the admin. The admin investigates the issue and replies to the chatter accordingly with a determination/resolution.

If a mod kicked someone, that would logically be considered mod course of action.

Complaint threads are posted by ******** and the admin of the corresponding room investigates the complaint. The conversation between the complainer and the admin may continue through a public thread or a private message to bring about resolution.

I have no idea what you're saying.

Thank you, I appreciate it.

 

[Bread.]

To carry on with the post(s) above from LC and others which I agree with,

Users sometimes complain that threads are not being handled or being closed by room admin(s) after a mod in question replies to a complaint about themselves. I can see why that optic is frustrating users-which is why room admins are supposed to address formal complaints here- even though as an neutral observer I can see that the mod(s) usually give full and clear replies. Some rooms have a defined "senior mod" who can help admin with closure requests.

How complaints are handled on forums are up the the room admin(s) In reference to OP the SC admin has told us that if his mods see complaints and answer before he does- they can request closing.

Users also need to accept that while they ought get an reply/answer to their issues, it might not be the answer they want or agree with, but they should get a reply. If unanswered/ignored or whatever, appealing to TheChatmaster like always is the final step.

The problem is admins dont need to reply or don't respond to PMs because they're

volunteers

.

They don't acknowledge reports or disclose what they're doing to handle the report. But apparently the community is supposed to trust that something is being done.

The whole purpose of making a complaint in the forum is for it to be addressed publically. That way there is transparency. There is literally no reason a thread needs to be removed unless it's to hide complaints. Mods are given authority and that authority is also given with trust. That's why mods should be held to some sort of standards when they breach that trust. More than half of the complaints under forums always critique the user posting the complaint as a means of addressing the mod himself breaking rules. There is no standard for a mod breaking rules. They can repeatedly keep breaching the communitys trust until the admin decides enough is enough. Which is never, because theyre always in the same circle of friends.

It should be a pre defined number of strikes before they are removed. Not infinite strikes. Thats why these issues need to be addressed publically not in PM.

If anyone can find 3 threads in the complaint forums where the admin actually agrees that their mod broke rules, I'd like to see them. I'll wait.