UESP Forums

Yep going in circles. So far, I see that Airos is on point, about everything I agree with. (so, not an attack, just an opinion, which I am entitled to. Like it or not)
Everyone has the same responsiblity of maintaining rapport, and moderating the rules is a separate issue. That is what you call civilized behavior.

Splitting hairs while wanting the same thing is all I see here.

That's right, Airos; it IS unbalanced. Purposely, and for good reason. It is unbalanced because one group of users could ban everyone but themselves right now if they wanted to, and the other group couldn't remove a single mod if they all rallied together as one and demanded it. Exaggerated for effect, obviously; but with that in mind, what's worse: a user who refuses to build rapport or a mod who refuses to build rapport?

I'm struggling to find anything to say other than ^^THIS^^, because it's the truth. We all want unbiased, friendly moderators who are both entirely strict on the rules, and yet loose on their enforcement when they don't necessarily need to be followed.... i.e. a completely impossible situation. The biggest problem with this thread is the "responsibilities" of moderators are responsibilities they've voluntarily taken on to help the community they love run a little smoother. They're not ruling from divine right, they're going to make mistakes, and when they do they get crucified for them.

Moderators have a responsibility to do what they think is right based on the situation. It's not a perfect system, but it's the only one we've got besides no rules (which isn't going to happen), and completely strict enforcement (equally unlikely). And I think in fairness to the current team, and any team before them, that's all they've ever done.

Looks like what you REALLY wanted to do here is raise an issue about Rapport AND enact some way to BAN the MODs when we do not like what they are doing. Is this right?
(personally I do not think it should be EASY to ban anyone remotely reasonable) This is an idea worth considering for sure. There may already be a rule about it??

I hold moderators to be above non-moderators - defining moderators here to be the users with the coloured-y coins.

My reasoning is quite simple. The moderation team is supposed to be - from what I gathered; I had the selection process outlined to me and it seem quite rigorous - compiled of users who have proven their merit during their on-board conduct. The moderation team is supposed to be compiled of those users who are deemed - how shall I say it - above the rest in their conduct; the model user, if I may. That's not to say the moderators are perfect. They're not; nobody is. That's not to say the moderators don't make mistakes. They do; everybody does. That's not to say I won't disagree with them from time-to-time. I do; as with everybody. That is to say however that as a user I do look up at their actions and assess the conditions of the board based on what I'm witnessing. It's why I feel it is important that moderators always attempt the extra effort in everything they do here. I recognise that some people are [&@%!] - I certainly have my moments - but I don't believe that ones unwillingness to conform or engage in equal-efforts to build a rapport should ever get in the way of the moderations best efforts to construct a rapport themselves. If it doesn't happen then it doesn't happen. I'm not going to blame the moderation for failing at the impossible. I will however blame them if they label a user 'impossible' - I was actually on during the discussion in chat when that term was used - and discontinue their best efforts.


This, too.

Everything being said here is in the form of a hypothetical, and thus there seems to be no real point other than to find fault in the moderating team. Even then nothing has come up that warrants action. The moderating team builds rapport with the community on a daily basis by posting and responding to posts. How else would you know that I didn't shave for the month of November, or that Dohva is on vacation in Seattle, or Alarra is working on finals? The moderating team is quite open with the forums, because as has been stated in this very thread, we consider ourselves users first. We were selected and agreed to be volunteers to help a community that we had grown attached to. Do we have rules? Of course. Do we enforce those rules for the common good of the forum? Yes. Do we enjoy taking disciplinary action? Never.

If any of you feel you do not have a strong rapport with a moderator, let us know! We're humans who deal with hundreds if not thousands of posts a day, so subtleties can sometimes be lost on us.

We're going to lock this thread now, but not for the reasons some of you may think. We're locking it because it serves no real purpose other than to try and cause division. If you have a concern, you are welcome to PM any of the mods. Thank you.