The moderator is infact playing god!

[jOhO]

'Fox' refers to the UNbalanced viewpoints Fox News gives (bu tthen again, who of the big US news agencies does?? All controlled by 5 groups), and 'location' I think Roy is not currently in SG.......

HS

right... now i feel even more stupid. :sweat:

 

[Larry]

it is late. i will not respond till i have the opportunity of reading thru this and the other which was closed. btw, i do not have the patience of reading long or multiple paras posts.

are mods going to close this as well? playing god many times over?

ok. it's late for me as well. so i will keep it short too. you expect the mods and admins to not "play god" and close threads without reason, yet when we do give a detailed explanation of why we took that particular action, you don't have the courtesy nor "patience of reading long or multiple paras posts".

CS is not a battleground of mods/admins-vs-the-rest-of-the-world, but when I read posts like these, it makes me wonder why i even bother to voluntarily and without reward contribute my time, effort and judgment to making CS a better place for all.

A Moderator (and proud of it)

 

[szekiat]

OT: it is nice to see the return of da.photo. Welcome back mate. I recall u chickened out of the last argument after making a big deal about offering a reward? I look forward to putting your legal prowess to the test again

Larry, and all the mods, i think i speak on behalf of most of CS in that we appreciate what you guys do. I've known some of you for ages now and it never ceases to amaze me the amount of BS you guys have to put up with sometimes. The forum has grown since its conception as an offspring of HWZ. In the process so has the amount of BS. Guys, lets be honest and not wave right to know and all that around shall we. CS is about photography and networking, not about a public notice board for slamming people and complaining. If you have something to take up with someone, why not do it privately? There's enough problems with real questions for them to mod, give them a break lah...u wanna try the job go ahead. I'm sure larry and the rest are more than willing to let you help run the forum, if you take the **** with them.

 

[Deadpoet]

ok. it's late for me as well. so i will keep it short too. you expect the mods and admins to not "play god" and close threads without reason, yet when we do give a detailed explanation of why we took that particular action, you don't have the courtesy nor "patience of reading long or multiple paras posts".

CS is not a battleground of mods/admins-vs-the-rest-of-the-world, but when I read posts like these, it makes me wonder why i even bother to voluntarily and without reward contribute my time, effort and judgment to making CS a better place for all.

A Moderator (and proud of it)

To Larry and the rest of the moderators,

Thanks for volunteering to be moderators, and I will admit, can be a thankless job. I salut you guys for that.

To make CS a better place for all of us members, the responsibility is not only that of the moderators or admins, but of all of us. We all contributed to it, but some of us are entrusted with more responsibility and power in this process of making CS a better place, and hence, are hold to a higher level of standard. I am talking about the admins and moderators.

My original post that started this thread had nothing to do with the bride and the 2 photographers. They were of course the catalysts for the thousands of words that were written in the last 2 days. It had nothing to do with the exact reasons the moderator gave why the thread in question was closed. The key is to give a reason and explanantion. This was not provided until I posted this thread. The reasons and explanantions given for a particular "executive" action, may or may not be bought off by the rest of the members of this forum, but nonetheless, reasons and explanantions must be given for these kind of actions.

Again, to the admins and moderators, thank you for inviting us in and maintaining the forum. However, please do not forget that CS is today all because of not only the admins and moderators, but also the members. Since the moderators are entrusted with more "powers", they must be hold to a higher standard. A member can make comments without reading through the thread, but a moderator cannot, a member can psot something and the consequence is bared by one person, but a post by a moderator represents the forum administration.

This thread was started when I was totally fustrated by the action of the moderator. As it progressed, I not only saw a healthy dialog among the members, but also a beginning of a 2 way communication between the moderators and the members. This is very important, and I hope this is only the beginning of a growing trend.

 

[melnjes]

CS is not a battleground of mods/admins-vs-the-rest-of-the-world, but when I read posts like these, it makes me wonder why i even bother to voluntarily and without reward contribute my time, effort and judgment to making CS a better place for all.

A Moderator (and proud of it)

If it helps, I for one think that the moderators are doing a GREAT job! :thumbsup:

Having been a moderator in my school days and subsequently in another hobbyist forum, let me offer some views from the moderator perspective.

Moderators do what they do out of a sense of civic duty, and this level of responsibility is something you have to take on to understand. If moderators had their way, they would want a peaceful forum where everything is happy and the weather is sunny and they don't have to do anything. But this is not the case. Sometimes they have to step in and make decisions that are unpopular among some circles of users, at the same time enduring unkind remarks (such as "playing god") and needing to meet expectations that are nice to have but difficult to achieve (face it, roygoh must have taken hours to write his explanation, imagine doing that for every action and still get flak for it). And unlike us normal forum citizens, they have no one to complain to.

I would say that if you'd like to change the way moderation is done in a forum, the best way to do that is to work from within i.e. be a moderator yourself and influence the decision process. My two cents' worth, please read and forget.

 

[Goondu]

Deadpoet,

Your thread title says it all. And I am speaking as a member (not a moderator). That in my personal opinion, is a sweeping statement.

 

[eric69]

I supported the thread to be closed too. For those who's not happy about it, you can go somewhere else. For those not happy with my remarks, go jerk it off as well. Becos nobody owes anyone a living, and I'm certainly not give a sh*t of how you feel about the whole thing. Haha.

 

[roygoh]

To Larry and the rest of the moderators,

Thanks for volunteering to be moderators, and I will admit, can be a thankless job. I salut you guys for that.

To make CS a better place for all of us members, the responsibility is not only that of the moderators or admins, but of all of us. We all contributed to it, but some of us are entrusted with more responsibility and power in this process of making CS a better place, and hence, are hold to a higher level of standard. I am talking about the admins and moderators.

My original post that started this thread had nothing to do with the bride and the 2 photographers. They were of course the catalysts for the thousands of words that were written in the last 2 days. It had nothing to do with the exact reasons the moderator gave why the thread in question was closed. The key is to give a reason and explanantion. This was not provided until I posted this thread. The reasons and explanantions given for a particular "executive" action, may or may not be bought off by the rest of the members of this forum, but nonetheless, reasons and explanantions must be given for these kind of actions.

Again, to the admins and moderators, thank you for inviting us in and maintaining the forum. However, please do not forget that CS is today all because of not only the admins and moderators, but also the members. Since the moderators are entrusted with more "powers", they must be hold to a higher standard. A member can make comments without reading through the thread, but a moderator cannot, a member can psot something and the consequence is bared by one person, but a post by a moderator represents the forum administration.

This thread was started when I was totally fustrated by the action of the moderator. As it progressed, I not only saw a healthy dialog among the members, but also a beginning of a 2 way communication between the moderators and the members. This is very important, and I hope this is only the beginning of a growing trend.

Wolfgang provided an explanation when he closed the original thread. Though it was not as extensive and detailed as the one I have provided in this thread, I believe he has given enough justifications for his action in his closing post. That is not playing god, I believe.

Ladies & Gentlemen,

The thread has fulfilled it's purposes and now that the actual photographer has showed up, i suggest that both Kath & Chris take their dispute offline or in PM. For everyone else who think they have an axe to grind with anyone else, pls do so via PM.

The thread is hereby closed.

Thank you.

Not long after the original thread was closed, reachme2003 opened a new thread on the same topic. Further more, reachme2003 declared that he has only read the last 2 pages of the close thread.

As a moderator I am totally frustrated by such action, and see it as a direct challenge to a fellow moderator's job decision. However, please read my post in reachme2003's thread again:

I will close this thread now.

This is a private matter between the newly wed and the 2 photographers.

The original thread was closed for obvious reasons, and I don't agree to your probing here.

Please tell me how you could have interpretated my action as closing the thread without giving reasons or explanations but simply because I did not agree with it.

Were you expecting a full-length explanation like the one I have given in this thread everytime a mod closes a thread? If the reasons given are concise you would consider them as non-existent?

Can you justify your first statement in this thread that "There is absolutely no reason for the moderator to lock reachme's thread."?

By the way, I don't agree that with your statement that "a member can make comments without withtout reading through the thread." That is, in my opinion, plain irresponsible.

- Roy

 

[zaren]

first of all, i must also thank the moderators for all their hard work in moderating the forums in CS. i hope the discussions here will continue in a healthy manner.

However, I think those of us here not directly involved in the issue are simply not entitled to such information. It is up to the parties involved to offer that information to the members here, and if they choose to do so, they can alwasy start a new thread. I don't think the closing of the original thread should prevent or discourage them from doing so.

the parties involved (kat and chris) have offered that information to the members here, within the original thread. there really shouldn't be a need to start a new thread, just cleaning up the original thread by removing all OT posts would also work. IIRC, this has been done wrt some past threads. IMHO, closing the original thread may send a signal to ppl that further discussion of the topic is frowned upon. keeping the original thread open will also give roy wong a convenient avenue to tell his side of the story.

The fact that this matter should only be settled between the parties involved does not change even though one of them has chosen to broadcast the issue on this forum and it does not matter how interested we are in getting to the truth.

agreed. however, members should also not be deprived of the benefit of collective wisdom or advice from the CS community as a whole, especially when the member is new or inexperienced. for example, there is a new thread about a "cheating case" involving a CS member's friend's purchase of a sigma lens at a highly inflated price. true, the matter should ultimately be settled between the parties involved, but it is also very helpful to discuss what alternatives are available, e.g. going to CASE, accepting the partial refund etc. i am also sure CS members would also be interested to know the name of the shop so they can avoid it should it be proven that they are dishonest.

 

[StreetShooter]

Apart from closing threads by free-speech-loving bleeding heart liberals who constantly whine about not being able to express themselves while not granting that same liberty to others not of the same persuasion, let me say that, for me at least, most of the threads I have deleted are of the spamming links and dubious services variety. In other words, it's behind-the-scenes work which nobody gets to see, because these threads disappear within minutes of appearing, and the spammers are summarily banned. Ever wonder at how spam-free CS is?

 

[StreetShooter]

the parties involved (kat and chris) have offered that information to the members here, within the original thread. there really shouldn't be a need to start a new thread, just cleaning up the original thread by removing all OT posts would also work. IIRC, this has been done wrt some past threads. IMHO, closing the original thread may send a signal to ppl that further discussion of the topic is frowned upon. keeping the original thread open will also give roy wong a convenient avenue to tell his side of the story.

Ever played Jenga? Remove one piece and the whole thing collapses. It's the same with removing individual posts from a thread. We'll be busy explaining why we removed that particular post (which will be obvious from a follow up post referring to that post).

agreed. however, members should also not be deprived of the benefit of collective wisdom or advice from the CS community as a whole, especially when the member is new or inexperienced. for example, there is a new thread about a "cheating case" involving a CS member's friend's purchase of a sigma lens at a highly inflated price. true, the matter should ultimately be settled between the parties involved, but it is also very helpful to discuss what alternatives are available, e.g. going to CASE, accepting the partial refund etc. i am also sure CS members would also be interested to know the name of the shop so they can avoid it should it be proven that they are dishonest.

Absolutely. The reason for removing a thread from public view is not to deprive members of the collective wisdom of CS. It is to quench acrimonious debate and personal vendettas. CS is, in fact, one of the more civilized forums around (and that engenders free speech, rather than endangering it). The thread in question was getting out of hand with certain individuals of brusque persuasion making uncalled-for remarks, and others bristling at this (having, perhaps, taken a dislike to said brusque personality from previous encounters). It's called "putting a fire out", not "playing god". CS is no Sim City.

 

[Deadpoet]

Apart from closing threads by free-speech-loving bleeding heart liberals who constantly whine about not being able to express themselves while not granting that same liberty to others not of the same persuasion, let me say that, for me at least, most of the threads I have deleted are of the spamming links and dubious services variety. In other words, it's behind-the-scenes work which nobody gets to see, because these threads disappear within minutes of appearing, and the spammers are summarily banned. Ever wonder at how spam-free CS is?

Streetshooter, thanks much for keeping the board free of spam, and its a job very well done.

I am probably one of the most persistent proponent of free speech. Those who know me will never say I am a beeding heart liberal, some may even say I am very conservative, but is irrevelent. Free speech does not applies only to liberals. It's a fundamental right. I advocate free speech, and this applies to everyone, whether they are of the same persuasion or not.

 

[tOGGY]

Deadpoet,

Your thread title says it all. And I am speaking as a member (not a moderator). That in my personal opinion, is a sweeping statement.

I second. It can be painful for moderators for see such thread title as well. We must be all sensitive. Moderators are responsible and serious partners of the forum.
The powers assigned are for a healthy CS forum. This is currently well achieved maintained. Lets us all help this objective. Let us all not waste their time. If their decisions are 90 percent correct and balance, they are very good. When they ae wrong, they need kind words of support and encouragement to do better. Not name calling - Playing God etc.

If there are people like Larry who even go the extra mile to explain their decisions, then my kudos!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

But Mods, pse do not try too hard in this direction. Your job is to moderate and not explain. Good moderators we want. Burnt-out moderators will make me feel terribly guilty. Not every one is gifted with has super clear, and bright mind like Larry and some other mods here. Thanks for your services. :thumbsup:

 

[Adam Goi]

I am probably one of the most persistent proponent of free speech. Those who know me will never say I am a beeding heart liberal, some may even say I am very conservative, but is irrevelent. Free speech does not applies only to liberals. It's a fundamental right. I advocate free speech, and this applies to everyone, whether they are of the same persuasion or not.

Hi Deadpoet, just quoting you, not directing at you.

Unfortunately not everyone couples free speech with responsibility. As moderators of the forum, we have to step in as and when (if time permits) 'free' yet irresponsible statements are made. They have the potential to mislead and bring the discussion into more dispute, with more irresponsible and personal statements being made. Again, how often do those members (thankfully only a small handful) take and show responsibility?

Back to us playing the Alpha and Omega, how often do we moderate the threads and posts? How often do we ban members, even without justification? Then again, can our justifications satisfy all?

In general we don't have big issues with 'free speech' per se but we do take up issues with members who are not responsible, who do not think of the repercussions of their threads.

 

[yanyewkay]

actually the locking of thread 'wedding' thread may have caused some sense of 'suspense killer'. Where everyone wants to find out what happened ultimately and would like to hear both sides of the story.

However, the thread was locked and therefore everyone was left 'hanging'.

I guess the mod's stand point is to stop the spark before it turns into a fire. Since the appearance of the photog, the thread was locked. Everyone roughly has a sense of what will get locked when you start to see "+1 before lock" or when bush starts to say "you +1, I also +1".

There are other thread that were locked which made me puzzled. An example is the "do fish ever gets bored eating the same food" thread. It was locked with the reason given as wasting resources. It is not very 'bo liao' to me but there are other more bo liao thread that gets away with it which makes me wonder if there is any divine force in action.

I think that all the mods and admins have to sit down and discuss with what to lock and when to lock. Else each mod's interpretation to lock may differ and will be cited as having double standards.

 

[Deadpoet]

Wolfgang provided an explanation when he closed the original thread. Though it was not as extensive and detailed as the one I have provided in this thread, I believe he has given enough justifications for his action in his closing post. That is not playing god, I believe.

I did not raise the issue when Wolfgang closed the original thread. I did feel he should have allowed the 'saga" to play out, so that the members know what had actually transpired. Is this our problem, no, but as I had originally indicated, it is a subject dear to many of our hearts.

Not long after the original thread was closed, reachme2003 opened a new thread on the same topic. Further more, reachme2003 declared that he has only read the last 2 pages of the close thread.

reachme2003 opened a new thread exactly because of the reason I stated above. If he had not, someone else would have.

As a moderator I am totally frustrated by such action, and see it as a direct challenge to a fellow moderator's job decision. However, please read my post in reachme2003's thread again:

Is a moderator above the rest of the masses? Why can't we members, who is an integral part of this forum, challenge the action of a moderator? If the challenge is with merit, great, if not, it gets shot down. Is the moderator's decision sacrilegious, I don't think so, I hope not. I can understand that such challenges can be fustrating, but, that is part of the territory, for being a moderator.

Please tell me how you could have interpretated my action as closing the thread without giving reasons or explanations but simply because I did not agree with it.

Were you expecting a full-length explanation like the one I have given in this thread everytime a mod closes a thread? If the reasons given are concise you would consider them as non-existent?

Can you justify your first statement in this thread that "There is absolutely no reason for the moderator to lock reachme's thread."?

yes, I was expecting a complete, but can be concise explanation to the closing of the thread. Closing the thread, you denied the members something they want to know, you denied the bride, the 2 photogs, and 1 innocent by-stander their right to air their sides of the stories, and to set the record straight. Yes, the closure of reachme2003's thread deserve a full explanation, it demands a full explanation!

By the way, I don't agree that with your statement that "a member can make comments without withtout reading through the thread." That is, in my opinion, plain irresponsible.

- Roy

You are quoting me out of contect! I said if a member can make a comments without reading through the thread, but the action reflects only badly on said member, and I did not say its ok. (The word CAN means the person can do it, you have mistaken is with the word MAY!) On the contrary, a moderator's action reflects not only on the moderator, but the entire CS administration. That is what I said.

 

[sebastiansong]

The most amusing thing is when a moderator comments, "speaking as a member not as a moderator". Its like a fireman saying ohh I off-duty so I not fireman. If you are a moderator, you are expected to be one at all times regardless of which forum you are in charge of. If you feel the burden then don be a moderator.

I agree that being moderators are thankless and often you get flak from the members but if you are not happy, just quit. Similarly if the members are not happy about the place, just voice their concerns, evaluate the responses and quit if you like. Better yet, start your own blogs/forums and run things the way you feel it should be run. The power of the Internet is in the projection of the indiviaul voice.

Get out of your comfort zone.

 

[Deadpoet]

Hi Deadpoet, just quoting you, not directing at you.

Unfortunately not everyone couples free speech with responsibility. As moderators of the forum, we have to step in as and when (if time permits) 'free' yet irresponsible statements are made. They have the potential to mislead and bring the discussion into more dispute, with more irresponsible and personal statements being made. Again, how often do those members (thankfully only a small handful) take and show responsibility?

Back to us playing the Alpha and Omega, how often do we moderate the threads and posts? How often do we ban members, even without justification? Then again, can our justifications satisfy all?

In general we don't have big issues with 'free speech' per se but we do take up issues with members who are not responsible, who do not think of the repercussions of their threads.

Adam,

Isn't what we all are doing now, expressing our views, a good example of free speach? There are different opinions and believes abound here, but we are talking about this with some thoughts behind what we said and not yelling at anyone. Just expressing ourself.

 

[Deadpoet]

I agree that being moderators are thankless and often you get flak from the members but if you are not happy, just quit. Similarly if the members are not happy about the place, just voice their concerns, evaluate the responses and quit if you like. Better yet, start your own blogs/forums and run things the way you feel it should be run. The power of the Internet is in the projection of the indiviaul voice.

Get out of your comfort zone.

I guess that is what we are doing all the time. We evaluate things around us and make decisions base on our evaluation.

I have benefit a lot since joining CS, I like this forum, and I want it to be better. As you said, if the forum deterrioates, at some point some of us will strike out on our own. Meanwhile, I believe if the members can and are encourage to express themselves freely, CS will benefit.

 

[Zerstorer]

it is late. i will not respond till i have the opportunity of reading thru this and the other which was closed. btw, i do not have the patience of reading long or multiple paras posts.

No patient to read multiple paragraph posts? That's quite an irony isn't if? Coz that's the case how will you comprehend anything?