Forum etiquette

[Strawberry Crocodile]

I'm sympathetic to your situation and happy to respect your wishes but I'm not entirely sure what they are in this example. To clarify, are you asking that forum members never ask another member what their gender is in case that member takes it as an insult or threat? I'd personally never ask that anyway, in real life or on the forum as its kind of irrelevant and none of my business, but is that what you're asking? Or have I misunderstood. I ask because, while I fully understand the problem with that in a 'real world' situation, it seems like an odd thing to request on a forum where members are as anonymous or visible as they choose to be, and where no member is obliged to reveal any personal information about themselves. I'm happy to learn and change my ways, and I'm sure I have a lot to learn, so I hope you don't mind my questions. If we don't ask we never learn.

No that's a perfectly valid question! To be honest I was more thing about interacting irl, where someone asking your gender means they've identified you as trans and feel the need to approach you about it. On a forum, you can kinda just assume what you want about someone or dont; if they see a need to tell you their gender or pronouns they'll inform you. If it's relevant to the topic you can maybe ask "wait, are you a girl?" or "how should i refer to you?". Just generally handle such subjects with care and respect and it should be fine.

Also, well, it's a bit crass to see someone upset about being oppressed and declare that as "cancel culture". It's a bit belittling and very plainly states "I'm not going to do what you ask of me" and puts the blame on the victim.

[stargatedalek]

Typically in person you wouldn't need to ask someone their pronouns, because even if they don't clearly pass you can go by how they present themselves. But online, and especially in a forum environment where people don't typically use photos of themselves as their avatars, it just isn't generally possible to make safe assumptions, hence people ask instead.

But at the same time it's a fair question for someone to be bothered by or suspicious of. I'm not bothered by being asked but a lot of trans people are if frequent asking has been used to harass them or even just if its frequent enough that it can be a genuine nuisance. While the question is perfectly normal in context it's absolutely fair for someone to be bothered by it too.

[Libraraptor]

This has become mined territory.
With every word of my post I intended to encourage LGBTQ people and to make clear I support their concerns. Not only in a descending  but in a truly understanding way.
Maybe I do this a little clumsily.  I am just a straight, gawky white male. And I do have my struggles,  too.

[DinoToyForum]

To help redefine the line of what is and isn't acceptable to post on the DTF, here is a post by @suspsy that I regard as mildly crossing the line as a provocative and a veiled personal attack: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=8807.msg273967#msg273967
Posts like this will no longer be tolerated.

[SidB]

I'm not surprised by this action and find it an appropriate defence of an apparently vulnerable individual. One one hand I can appreciate that Admin is not omnipresent and cannot survey every single post at a given time, so these things sometimes go unnoticed, except by the injured parties, apparently. I myself am still smarting from two nasty jabs from two individuals responding to a couple of innocuous comments that I made on recent topics, neither comment controversial (IMO) nor directed at them. Should I have reported them? I don't like doing this, I prefer to give people a break and not over-react. Sometimes the problem fixes itself - the culprit in one of these incidents has had a long history of these oblique attacks on others, followed by abject apologies, then followed by another attack, apology, etc., but now has left the forum.

Here is my concern - granted that Admin simply cannot be everywhere, what is the job of the moderators? As a simple member, I don't see a whole lot of evidence of positive intervention on their part. Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe it's going on behind the scenes. The episode that particularly sticks in my throat is the terrible deconstruction of @Killekor last summer, where his older sister had to step in to protect him. Nothing was openly and transparently done to defend him, who by definition was a child, not an adult by any means. Only an intervention by Doug Watson and later myself (of all people) got the attacker to back down.

It's not the job of ordinary members like myself to "back seat moderate" and I don't want to be a "gatekeeper." But the episode was egregious enough to demand intervention. Likely I should have reported it, but didn't. My fault, for sure. Since this verbal attack was repeated later in the summer (in a different context) on another individual, perhaps I should have gone through channels, but my suspicion is that the offending member was in a position of invulnerability (IMO) and above correction, since that person had a history of conflict, sometimes on the attack, sometimes in defence, perhaps justified. I'm likely wrong to suspect this, but, and here is my point, I believe that the moderating should have caught these incidents. I simply don't believe Admin is and was aware of them, but surely a moderator or two was and needs to step up.

Like a few other members, I've considered withdrawing from the forum, but have refrained. preferring to be patient and trust that justice and fairness will prevail. The DTB/DTF is a wonderful resource full of terrific people and it is well worth riding out the few speed bumps that sometimes occur along the road. The four years of so that I've been here have been great. My own bias is that I really, really hate to see bullying and I am always tempted to be a bit of a vigilante in this matter, but very seldom overstep the bounds and intervene (the @Killekor  incident was the one and only time). My plea is for the moderators to be more helpful (IMO) and not leave everything to Admin.

[PumperKrickel]

Here is my concern - granted that Admin simply cannot be everywhere, what is the job of the moderators? As a simple member, I don't see a whole lot of evidence of positive intervention on their part. Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe it's going on behind the scenes.

This is such an important post, in my opinion. The DTF is very unique to me in how hands-on the admin is in terms of moderating. Usually admins mostly tend to the technical and financial aspects of running a website, while every subforum has a small team of mods who monitor the discussions and intervene when necessary. Here we have 7 mods in total, 3 of which haven't even been active in weeks. Judging by their visibility, I could have sworn we had only two.

Maybe all of this is intended, but especially in the interest of future-proofing the Forum, I think it's imperative to make some structural changes in order to spread the workload more evenly on more shoulders.

[stargatedalek]

I'm not surprised by this action and find it an appropriate defence of an apparently vulnerable individual. One one hand I can appreciate that Admin is not omnipresent and cannot survey every single post at a given time, so these things sometimes go unnoticed, except by the injured parties, apparently. I myself am still smarting from two nasty jabs from two individuals responding to a couple of innocuous comments that I made on recent topics, neither comment controversial (IMO) nor directed at them. Should I have reported them? I don't like doing this, I prefer to give people a break and not over-react. Sometimes the problem fixes itself - the culprit in one of these incidents has had a long history of these oblique attacks on others, followed by abject apologies, then followed by another attack, apology, etc., but now has left the forum.

Here is my concern - granted that Admin simply cannot be everywhere, what is the job of the moderators? As a simple member, I don't see a whole lot of evidence of positive intervention on their part. Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe it's going on behind the scenes. The episode that particularly sticks in my throat is the terrible deconstruction of @Killekor last summer, where his older sister had to step in to protect him. Nothing was openly and transparently done to defend him, who by definition was a child, not an adult by any means. Only an intervention by Doug Watson and later myself (of all people) got the attacker to back down.

It's not the job of ordinary members like myself to "back seat moderate" and I don't want to be a "gatekeeper." But the episode was egregious enough to demand intervention. Likely I should have reported it, but didn't. My fault, for sure. Since this verbal attack was repeated later in the summer (in a different context) on another individual, perhaps I should have gone through channels, but my suspicion is that the offending member was in a position of invulnerability (IMO) and above correction, since that person had a history of conflict, sometimes on the attack, sometimes in defence, perhaps justified. I'm likely wrong to suspect this, but, and here is my point, I believe that the moderating should have caught these incidents. I simply don't believe Admin is and was aware of them, but surely a moderator or two was and needs to step up.

Like a few other members, I've considered withdrawing from the forum, but have refrained. preferring to be patient and trust that justice and fairness will prevail. The DTB/DTF is a wonderful resource full of terrific people and it is well worth riding out the few speed bumps that sometimes occur along the road. The four years of so that I've been here have been great. My own bias is that I really, really hate to see bullying and I am always tempted to be a bit of a vigilante in this matter, but very seldom overstep the bounds and intervene (the @Killekor  incident was the one and only time). My plea is for the moderators to be more helpful (IMO) and not leave everything to Admin.

And how was I supposed to know that Killekor was a kid? Profiles don't show ages (I could have sworn they used to?). So all I knew was that I had seen Killekor post a lot, and not infrequently about owning a lot of expensive things (early REBOR statues and the like).

I specifically avoided interacting with Killekor, because I knew there was no practical point. But I saw someone repeating politicized propaganda regarding a dangerous pandemic, so I tried to step in and say something because that information shouldn't just be left sitting around to confuse people. I also reported that before interacting, and ultimately nothing was done regarding it so I decided I should say something about those false claims and point people towards the W.H.O. information.

Should I have stepped on eggshells and tried harder not to come across so sternly? Probably yes. But I responded in that situation the way I would have responded to anyone making those claims, I had never interacted with Killekor before so in no way was it targeted bullying. I also should have backed off sooner rather than taking the bait from the "sister" post, and I acknowledged that soon after at the time.

If someone has issue with a particular thing I say or how I said it but don't consider it worth moderator intervention I would much rather they just say something about it at the time rather than bottle it up like this.

[Bokisaurus]

Here is my concern - granted that Admin simply cannot be everywhere, what is the job of the moderators? As a simple member, I don't see a whole lot of evidence of positive intervention on their part. Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe it's going on behind the scenes.

This is such an important post, in my opinion. The DTF is very unique to me in how hands-on the admin is in terms of moderating. Usually admins mostly tend to the technical and financial aspects of running a website, while every subforum has a small team of mods who monitor the discussions and intervene when necessary. Here we have 7 mods in total, 3 of which haven't even been active in weeks. Judging by their visibility, I could have sworn we had only two.

Maybe all of this is intended, but especially in the interest of future-proofing the Forum, I think it's imperative to make some structural changes in order to spread the workload more evenly on more shoulders.

Thank you S @SidB and P @PumperKrickel for your insightful thoughts, I guess this is as good a time to comment.
Before I say something, I just want to make sure that I am speaking only for myself and not for the other mods.

Both of your comments reminded me of some of my own questions way back before I was a mod, so I am sure many of our members have the same curious questions.
There is a lot of back-channel discussion that happens between the mods and Admin/Adam that is not public where we bring up concerns, suggestions, etc. and hopefully we can all agree on a consistent course of action.
So hopefully that answer one of the questions.

Now, for me, like everyone, I do have a personal life that goes through cycles that would ultimately dictate my level of participation here in the forum.
There is simply no humane way that I could keep up with all of the various threads and discussions going on.
I also don't read many of the thread that doesn't interest me on a regular basis.
The number of discussions going on at one time can be so overwhelming, that I have to choose which ones to follow and engage with.

Being a moderator can sometimes feel like a thankless job. We all volunteer our time.
Before I was recruited/ asked if I would want to be a part of the mod team, I had no idea what I was really getting myself into.
Through the years I have learned that if I am to last long, I will need to learn how to adjust or be burned out quickly.
Trust me, there are many time where I felt like just walking away.

The only true reward for me in being a mod is knowing that no matter how small my contributions are, that I am helping keep this forum that we all love going after all these years.
It's the love for this forum, the community, our shared passion and interests, and friends made that is what kept me going all these years.

Like a barnacle, I have seen so many changes through the years. I have lamented these changes and it's impact on me in my own thread as well as in some of my blog reviews.
As a moderator, I find myself navigating some minefield when deciding what to say or when to step in. Lately it has become so difficult to navigate that I personally find it hard to find the right words without feeling like throwing more gas on the fire.
I'm not a confrontational person by nature which makes it even harder.

I encourage people to report anything that they feel is crossing the line to a moderator, that is the only way it could ensure that it is brought to our attention.
We do try our very best to respond or take actions, I really wish you could all see the behind the scenes discussions.
But also know that each one of us have personal events happening in our daily lives that impact how and when we can respond.

Your moderators all are spread out across the world, in different times zones, so keep that in mind as well.
For some reason, it's doesn't show when I last logged in, it only shows when I'm active.
But that doesn't mean I'm never around 😃

So, I hope that this at least gives some of you an insight where I am at personally.
The whole episode that was brought up was unfortunate. And just to illustrate how personal situation affects engagement, I was battling what was then COVID like illness when the whole Killekor episode happened.
I m glad some of you step up to his defense.
Defending someone doesn't have to be confrontational or nasty, it can be done respectfully and with consideration.
Likewise, we need to always keep in mind the very real possibility of personal situations affecting ones behavior.

In the end, there is no easy or clear way to have round the clock monitoring.
And it's not easy recruiting new moderators either😂
I am great full to fellow mods @Patrx , @Blade-of-the-Moon  for their tireless efforts to be on top, I appreciate all of your work.

That's my few cents.
Bokisaurus

[Strawberry Crocodile]

I just want to say that it's really encouraging to see a space online where mods and admins are willing to use temp bans and rules to foster a welcoming and friendly environment. I firmly believe that moderation is vital to any online community larger than a group of personal friends; there are forums and discord servers and subreddits that show how bad lase-faire moderation can go.

[PumperKrickel]

Thank you for the detailed reply, Bokisaurus! Please understand that we definitely are thankful for the contributions every moderator makes, however small or invisible to members they might be. Nobody is asking any of ya'll to do more than they comfortably can.

Still, as a member it does sometimes feel like there are no authority figures around, which can escalate arguments further since people feel unsupervised. Especially in current covid-times when everyone is stressed and on-edge anyway. I can personally also say, that I have refrained from reporting posts in the past, for fear of bothering the team unneccessarily. It's silly, but a more visible mod team would make reporting easier and could help in avoiding escalations.

And it's not easy recruiting new moderators either😂

I'm sure it's not, but the number of members has more than quadrupled since 2012, while there have been no additions to the moderating team. It's not super surprising that you feel overwhelmed.

I hope that the team further discusses these specific concerns internally.

[Martwad]

In my opinion, one thing I would like to see changed, is editing posts that change the content of the original message.  I've seen extremely aggressive posts get edited later on, but all that does is manipulate the context of the original exchange.  To someone reading the posts after the fact, rather than while the exchange was going on, it comes across as one person being bullied, but in reality, they were a willing participant, at the time.

I would rather there not be any hostility at all, but if there is, I think the posters should have to own their actions, not have the ability to "hide" them.

[DinoToyForum]

In my opinion, one thing I would like to see changed, is editing posts that change the content of the original message.  I've seen extremely aggressive posts get edited later on, but all that does is manipulate the context of the original exchange.  To someone reading the posts after the fact, rather than while the exchange was going on, it comes across as one person being bullied, but in reality, they were a willing participant, at the time.

I would rather there not be any hostility at all, but if there is, I think the posters should have to own their actions, not have the ability to "hide" them.

That one has an easy fix. There is a forum setting 'Maximum time after posting to allow edit'. I have this set to unlimited. But I could reduce the time. I think it is important to allow members to edit their own posts - I do it all the time when I realise I've made a typo or want to add something extra that doesn't warrant a new post. But maybe an hour or so is enough to allow for that sort of edit, without allowing members to go back indefinitely and change their posts. Or spitefully delete the content of their posts - we had that happen once.

[Martwad]

@dinotoyforum , that would work out well.  It allows for the simple correction of mistakes, but takes away the ability to modify the content of the posts.

[DinoToyForum]

@dinotoyforum , that would work out well.  It allows for the simple correction of mistakes, but takes away the ability to modify the content of the posts.

Do you think an hour is about right? More? Less?

Before I change the setting, what do other members think?

[stargatedalek]

I've rarely changed something for more than grammar, but a few times I've gone and removed things that later I realized were more personal than I was ultimately comfortable with having shared in that context. And sometimes this has happened months or years later if I've stumbled across old posts.

I think removing the ability to edit posts after, say 3-5 hours, enough time for theoretically cooler heads to prevail or for someone to amend something without needing to double post is a good idea in general, but it should probably also come with an alternate way to remove old posts we no longer want shared.

Perhaps a delete option for our own posts assuming that's possible? Would serve the bonus feature of letting us remove our own accidental double posts due to technical error. This would allow people to remove old content they no longer want shared while also preventing them from actively misrepresenting events.

[BlueKrono]

Time is a hard thing to go by, especially in a forum format where one might only visit the site once a day. Then you might be out of luck if you reconsider your wording but you're past the 'hours since posting' mark. I like Facebook's edit option - it allows one to edit but still preserves the original in a dropdown tab. That way someone can change their post and present a better face to the world, but their original post won't be lost (and the reason for other people's subsequent responses).

[Gwangi]

The problem with this is that there are a lot of threads around here where people need to be able to edit their posts. Collection threads, sale/trade/want, top 10 polls, new releases, etc. All of these need to be edited periodically or are otherwise impossible to maintain for someone other than a moderator.

[ceratopsian]

The latter point is true. I edit the first post of my collection thread when I add new photos so that the date of the new post appears as part of the thread title. Some other people do this too. It's a really handy way of signalling something new has gone up (as opposed to someone has made a comment on photos).  I would miss this ability.

[Gwangi]

Can the ability to edit posts be turned off while still allowing the person who started the thread the ability to edit their own posts within it?

[stargatedalek]

Is it possible to remove the timer for editing posts specifically inside of a thread that one started themselves? So the OP can always update a given post in a thread with new information.

That ultimately doesn't prevent the theoretical concern of people maliciously editing posts to be misleading, but might still discourage it.

Alternatively, could this time limit be activated only in certain forum areas? IE no time limit in Collections/New For/Classifieds/Members.

*edit* I have been ninja'd.