New or more resilient moderators needed

In a couple of recent discussion forums I couldn't help but notice

the disdain and intolerance some of the moderators have for the vast

majority of image posters on the netsite. One participating party

dismissed 50% of the posted images as not worth bothering with. This

type of attitude doesn't reflect well on photo.net as a whole. I

can't recollect the last time I saw a moderator appear in any forum

outside of their own limited sphere of interest for any discussion

or input of any value.

Perhaps the managers of the site need to reflect on the need to turn

over moderators after they become jaded, or simply too good in their

own eyes for the netsite, or start setting a time limit of

participation as a moderator. What is needed is more participation,

more assistance and fewer putdowns.

I also think the moderators should be for a finite term only. To me it seems that good nature and interest in the development of skills and knowledge of the participants are primary considerations for choice as moderators, and many of the current ones just seem too narrow minded to act as moderators for the best interests of the community. Willing to be a bully is not an asset.

But what criteria should be used to choose new moderators, I'm sure it's not an easy task. Being elevated to moderator status doesn't look to be without negatives, personally I can't imagine wanting the ability to view who has left a low rating on any of my portfolio pictures - it would undoubtedly skew my perspective: could this partly be why the moderators don't appear to actively pursue portfolios?

 

It's a complicated issue from all sides, but I do have some sympathy with your views.

I think the current moderators are very resilient. Despite complaints and "suggestions" about how they should do their jobs (typically from people unwilling to take on the responsibilities and commit the effort to do that job), they generally maintain the focus of their forums without constantly shifting policy.

 

I've had a few of my posts deleted, so it's not like I agree with every decision a moderator makes, but I at least respect the difficulties they face and the jobs they're doing. There's plenty of free or cheap software and webspace out there if I wanted to set up my own forum and run it the way I wanted it run.

John- I have to agree whole-heartedly. I am sure it is difficult to remain positive & be a moderator, what with all the whining & belly aching that goes on about ratings. But....... that's life. Making members feel comfortable, instead of intimidated, is what I see as the key to harmony. I'm sure answering the same old questions becomes redundant & aggravating, but.....answering questions & providing support is what their mission should be. "It's not what you say, it's how you say it". The first law of effective communication.

Thanks. I'm sure all the moderators will be encouraged to find their volunteer efforts to keep the site running smoothly are so warmly appreciated.

I'll second John's request for some "new blood" in the moderator pool here at Pnet. Yes it's a thankless, non-paying job, but when disdain, intolerance, and a personal agenda become obstacles to effective moderating--it's time to go.

 

If Pnet wants people to pay for the privilege of using the forums here, IMHO a more "customer-friendly" attitude would go a long way towards that goal. As it is, there are more than a few moderators here who consistantly delete threads that meet the forum guidelines but that they happen to personally find "boring" or "uninteresting." In 15+ years of active websurfing and being a list owner and forum moderator myself, I've never seen such a level of personal bias in any other forums anywhere.

 

Lastly, a special thanks to those moderators here who don't let their personal preferences (and/or pet-peeves) and a jaded mentality interfere with their ability to objectively manage the forum they've been entrusted with--you're greatly appreciated! !

I believe that generally, given the difficult circumstances, the moderators here do a damned good job, even those who I've berated in the past.

 

My regret is that several moderators who used to be prolific posters on photo.net now take a back seat and rarely contribute to the forums and that this might be misinterpreted as them being jaded, distant and detached.

Oh Bob, why must you take everything so negatively? No one said anything bad about the moderators. In fact, all of us understand how difficult it can be. In fact, all of us understand how aggravating & redundant answering the same questions can be. The only thing being asked is to curb the intolerance & distain.

 

You are aggravating & exasperating. Why must you be that way? It's so much more fun to play nicely with the kids. Even John seems to be playing with others much better (he must be on drugs) Just kidding:) You know I love you both!

The reason I don't appoint new moderators, though this might be a kindness to the current moderators, is that I trust the current moderators and it is not all that easy to find people to replace them who I would also be willing to trust.

I too am concerned about the moderators in the forums here.

 

You really would have to be stark raving mad to voluntarily give up hours of your own time to moderate at photo net every day, all week.

 

And then get abused for your efforts.

 

They aint perfect and I don't care much for some of the online persona some of the team project from time to time. But I guess that street goes both ways. Everybody has a personality even the mugs that moderate and edit the tripe we are all guilty of typing now and again. Some more than others.

 

The system sucks but geeze some folk are thinned skinned.

 

John, its the internet not real life, chill and go out and make some images. When all said and done this place is supposed to be all about photography.

 

C.

Brian- why don't you just ask for a few more moderator volunteers, no need to get rid of any current moderators. They're all volunteer anyway. Maybe just add some new blood to the mix. "Variety is the spice of life". Might jazz things up a bit.

I get the impression that it is often assumed that forum moderation is an easy task that just anybody can pick up and run with. My guess is it is not so straight forward. An inexperienced moderator could make a few simple errors of judgment and a whole forum could blow up. A new loose cannon would be a disaster and could do a lot of long term damage in a short period of time.

 

Brian knows his team better than any of us and long term participants are familiar with the style of the moderation in the various forums.

 

The perception here is that there is a problem and that it needs to be fixed. Even if that were the case I doubt the presumed problem would be as easily fixed as is apparently assumed.

 

C.

Okay, I'm pretty new to the site so here's my naive perspective. Has the site considered mandatory paid membership for anyone who wants to upload photos? The way I see it, storage space is money so why shouldn't the site require people who take storage space to pay their dues?

 

The way I see it, being a moderator is a thankless job. It's probably time consuming and I might imagine that it gets old trying to play forum babysitter. So why not throw a few bucks at them that they the site generates from paid memberships.

 

I know money always makes me happy to work.

I would last less than a day as a moderator, dealing with all of the banal and boring complaints would push me over the edge in no time flat. How many times can the moderators listen to the same old thing: the rating system isn't fair!, someone gave me a 3/3!, why aren't the views updated more often?, why cant' you change the software so PN works better on my pocket PC?, why did the moderator eliminate my post?, why can non-paying members rate an image?, why isn't my image in the TRP when I recieved ten ratings?, the moderator is being nasty and mean!, why don't you make people post smaller images so I can see them on my monitor without scrolling?, why are many of the images in the TRP nudes?, why do the elves keep ignoring my photos for photo of the week? etc., etc. and on and on and on. I think the moderators deserve a raise or a free trip to the South Pacific, courtesy of PN.

Craig- I don't think anyone is assuming anything. Especially not assuming that being a forum moderator is an easy job! I've never seen anyone suggest that. I agree, Brian does know his moderators the best, but he also may be a little biased in their direction too. This also is understandable.

Tim- it seems obvious to me you're not a mother :) What time do we eat? What's for dinner? Why is my lucky shirt not clean? Why can't I stay up past bedtime? Are we there yet? :) Just to mention a few of the redundant & aggravating questions asked everyday by those we love & cherish.

 

Glad mine are grown! Another name for Moderator. Mother?

Maybe babysitter is a better word.

Not resilient?! I'd say they're very tolerant, flexible, fair, reflective, congenial, helpful, passionate, kind, long suffering, under appreciated, loyal, and the list could go on to what they allow to be posted and or that they choose to delete here on PN. They didn't delete THIS post did they John?! Enough said.

This thread is an indication that people take the website, (and it is just a website not a religeon) way to seriously.

Keith - You may be right :)

I forgot to add, on a cold, boring Sunday morning, I do find it more engaging than organized religion.

You mean to say this is NOT a religion? I was misinformed. I thought we were all here to

worship at the altar of the great god Nikon, ably assisted by his apostles Canon and Minolta!

 

I may have to find another web-church to attend...

Keith-:) I never thought of it that way, but then again, you forgot Fuji? Was that just an oversight? :) How about just worshipping the wonderful images PN has to offer each day. While I admit, I do look at the "details" usually for the lens & f-stop info & location. Sometimes I'm shocked by the actual camera manufacturer. Goes to prove, it's the photographer & not their equipment that makes the difference.

I meant DAVID! Sorry