4 ms·

I moderated a moderately sized gaming community forum during 2010-2015 as the "head admin". It is a very thankless job, but harder than moderating the forum wa

I moderated a moderately sized gaming community forum during 2010-2015 as the "head admin". It is a very thankless job, but harder than moderating the forum was moderating the mods themselves. Power corrupts, but the tiniest bit of lame internet power corrupts absolutely, and the only people that ever apply to be moderators are those that seek this lame power. It starts off with reasonable people but slowly becomes a cabal of knobs with unquestionable authority who hire more of the same people until you've got an insular group of narcissistic, condescending mods that are just there to defend their own power.

boomskats 3y ago
> It starts off with reasonable people but slowly becomes a cabal of knobs with unquestionable authority who hire more of the same people until you've got an insular group of narcissistic, condescending mods that are just there to defend their own power. As a Serb living in the UK this hit me pretty hard.
account42 3y ago
Do you think anything could be done to keep moderators from going off the rails? Would making mod actions as transparent as possible help? How about user feedback that could see mods. Obviously you'd still need the dictator at the top to be benevolent but that seems to be more likely at least until the community gets big enough that selling out would actually pay.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  They have to be paid, so that people other then the petty power seekers with their race-to-the-bottom dynamic apply to become mods.
- zamnos 3y ago
  Do you? What if, instead the system promoted a random active user to moderator status, with a strict term limit, with the possibility of being kicked out if too unpopular. Power shouldn't be given to those who seek it, and kind of low stakes Internet forum seems like a way to thrust power unto those that aren't.
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    The problem with that is a lot of communities are work to mod, and most people wouldn't bother.
  - r00fus 3y ago
    This sounds very similar to slashdot and "meta-mod". Moderation was done through an infrequent escalation of privileges (sometimes this was weekly for me but sometimes I didn't get it for a month+), but everyone past a certain level could meta-mod every day. Both operations were limited in scope for a prescribed number of moderations each time.
  - Lammy 3y ago
    That's kinda how FYAD used to do it with regular election of a new "Idiot King" https://web.archive.org/web/20031023125845/http://www.stateog.com:80/index.pl?node=Idiot+King https://web.archive.org/web/20031023125845/http://www.stateo... “Originally FYAD was a complete anarchy. Nobody moderated it, and it was good. When it started to become more popular, however, certain users did stuff that was just annoying (spamming huge images that broke the tables and made threads impossible to read, posting a billion threads, posting illegal porn, that sort of thing) so certain people called for some kind of moderation. Others said that a moderator would ruin FYAD. Fistgrrl, in her infinite wisdom, proposed the Idiot King contest. Once a week, she (or another admin) posts a thread. The admin has already two numbers, one for the Idiot King and one for the Loser King. Everyone who wants to enter the contest posts under that thread, and chooses a number between 1 and 100. When the contest is over (Usually 20 minutes or so), the person who posted closest to the Idiot King number becomes the Idiot King for a week, with most of the powers of a moderator and a ceremonial title. The person who posted the number closest to the Loser King number is banned for a week. Anyone who posts a duplicate number, a number that is not between 1 and 100, or posts in the IK thread but has not posted in FYAD in the last 24 hours is also banned for a week. UPDATE: April 30, 2003: Lowtax did the IK contest this week, and instead of numbers he asked people to post states. What a crazy guy!” I never read actual confirmation for this but I assume the position was named for the Soul Coughing song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qAxjmvvtOk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qAxjmvvtOk
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- sdflhasjd 3y ago
  I certainly think it's not a simple thing to solve. One thing, and alluding to the other reply, is the "benevolent dictator", they need to be keeping the mods in shape - not doing any moderating themselves, but to keep them from running amok. This is how I ran thing until I didn't have time any more, at which point things deteriorated (not in some dramatic way, mind you.) The other thing is that mod selection is really, really difficult. Maybe 100% of people that "apply" or show any desire to be a mod are mostly just thirsty for some of that banhammer power. Additionally, on a gaming forum, the general age and maturity of these applicants leaves much to be desired. Generally I handled this by throwing mod responsibilities as a burden of those that were generally already community contributors in other ways (devs, etc) and they seemed mature enough. I think this made a difference compared to other communities that I saw around that time. In retrospect one other thing that should have been done would be to separate the mod identity from the community identity as a way of tempering the ego that sometimes causes issues. Lots of forums and whatnot slap a load of badges and medals on mods that gives the role an air of privilege that isn't deserved. ...and none of this really applies to the context of reddit, and especially not for the larger communities of millions of users. The structure just doesn't scale since your dictator just can't see what all the mods are doing.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
voicedYoda 3y ago
I'm mod of a medium sized group (10k+), and not because i wanted it. I simply asked the mods why someone was being ignored, so they made me one...i don't go back with enough frequency to handle all situations, but as everyone else is asleep at the wheel, I've done what i can to make sure the group doesn't get bombarded with crap posts. It is very thankless, but i do think it's neat what tools reddit tried to give us. Just my .02
BeFlatXIII 3y ago
IMO, the healthiest way to run a community is for the head admin (and top lieutenants) to be inactive. Let the deputy admin and mods handle the site. When they start power-tripping, it's time for the head to step in and clear the house. This model is dangerous when no worthwhile applicants arrive after the call for new mods. Then the forum either stagnates, is overrun with spam, or the head admin starts becoming active (therefore putting them on the path to petty power trips that they just cleared the leadership board to be rid of).
- xeromal 3y ago
  This sounds a lot like a dictator in the Roman Republic. He was called upon to clean house for a period of time with absolute power when the Republic was threatened from the inside or out. Cincinnatus is one of the good examples I'm aware of.
  - zpeti 3y ago
    Theoretically isn't this was the head of state should do in many country's setups? They are the ultimate arbiter of power, and have the power to nominate prime ministers, but don't have real legislative power themselves.
    - xeromal 3y ago
      Theoretically. I do believe that a country run by a benevolent king or dictator is probably the most effectively run. That role is just mired for 10 bad ones for every good one.
    - BeFlatXIII 3y ago
      They also have the sword over their head that should they ever use that power, they will be listened to and promptly have their office abolished after. [Or at least that's how I understand the modern British monarchy]
jredwards 3y ago
Same. One by one the reasonable mods dropped off, until finally I couldn't take it anymore and I left too.
zaphirplane 3y ago
Sounds exactly like a software engineering hiring committee :)

boomskats 3y ago

> It starts off with reasonable people but slowly becomes a cabal of knobs with unquestionable authority who hire more of the same people until you've got an insular group of narcissistic, condescending mods that are just there to defend their own power. As a Serb living in the UK this hit me pretty hard.

account42 3y ago

Do you think anything could be done to keep moderators from going off the rails? Would making mod actions as transparent as possible help? How about user feedback that could see mods. Obviously you'd still need the dictator at the top to be benevolent but that seems to be more likely at least until the community gets big enough that selling out would actually pay.

MichaelZuo 3y ago
They have to be paid, so that people other then the petty power seekers with their race-to-the-bottom dynamic apply to become mods.
zamnos 3y ago
Do you? What if, instead the system promoted a random active user to moderator status, with a strict term limit, with the possibility of being kicked out if too unpopular. Power shouldn't be given to those who seek it, and kind of low stakes Internet forum seems like a way to thrust power unto those that aren't.
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  The problem with that is a lot of communities are work to mod, and most people wouldn't bother.
- r00fus 3y ago
  This sounds very similar to slashdot and "meta-mod". Moderation was done through an infrequent escalation of privileges (sometimes this was weekly for me but sometimes I didn't get it for a month+), but everyone past a certain level could meta-mod every day. Both operations were limited in scope for a prescribed number of moderations each time.
- Lammy 3y ago
  That's kinda how FYAD used to do it with regular election of a new "Idiot King" https://web.archive.org/web/20031023125845/http://www.stateog.com:80/index.pl?node=Idiot+King https://web.archive.org/web/20031023125845/http://www.stateo... “Originally FYAD was a complete anarchy. Nobody moderated it, and it was good. When it started to become more popular, however, certain users did stuff that was just annoying (spamming huge images that broke the tables and made threads impossible to read, posting a billion threads, posting illegal porn, that sort of thing) so certain people called for some kind of moderation. Others said that a moderator would ruin FYAD. Fistgrrl, in her infinite wisdom, proposed the Idiot King contest. Once a week, she (or another admin) posts a thread. The admin has already two numbers, one for the Idiot King and one for the Loser King. Everyone who wants to enter the contest posts under that thread, and chooses a number between 1 and 100. When the contest is over (Usually 20 minutes or so), the person who posted closest to the Idiot King number becomes the Idiot King for a week, with most of the powers of a moderator and a ceremonial title. The person who posted the number closest to the Loser King number is banned for a week. Anyone who posts a duplicate number, a number that is not between 1 and 100, or posts in the IK thread but has not posted in FYAD in the last 24 hours is also banned for a week. UPDATE: April 30, 2003: Lowtax did the IK contest this week, and instead of numbers he asked people to post states. What a crazy guy!” I never read actual confirmation for this but I assume the position was named for the Soul Coughing song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qAxjmvvtOk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qAxjmvvtOk
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
sdflhasjd 3y ago
I certainly think it's not a simple thing to solve. One thing, and alluding to the other reply, is the "benevolent dictator", they need to be keeping the mods in shape - not doing any moderating themselves, but to keep them from running amok. This is how I ran thing until I didn't have time any more, at which point things deteriorated (not in some dramatic way, mind you.) The other thing is that mod selection is really, really difficult. Maybe 100% of people that "apply" or show any desire to be a mod are mostly just thirsty for some of that banhammer power. Additionally, on a gaming forum, the general age and maturity of these applicants leaves much to be desired. Generally I handled this by throwing mod responsibilities as a burden of those that were generally already community contributors in other ways (devs, etc) and they seemed mature enough. I think this made a difference compared to other communities that I saw around that time. In retrospect one other thing that should have been done would be to separate the mod identity from the community identity as a way of tempering the ego that sometimes causes issues. Lots of forums and whatnot slap a load of badges and medals on mods that gives the role an air of privilege that isn't deserved. ...and none of this really applies to the context of reddit, and especially not for the larger communities of millions of users. The structure just doesn't scale since your dictator just can't see what all the mods are doing.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

voicedYoda 3y ago

I'm mod of a medium sized group (10k+), and not because i wanted it. I simply asked the mods why someone was being ignored, so they made me one...i don't go back with enough frequency to handle all situations, but as everyone else is asleep at the wheel, I've done what i can to make sure the group doesn't get bombarded with crap posts. It is very thankless, but i do think it's neat what tools reddit tried to give us. Just my .02

BeFlatXIII 3y ago

IMO, the healthiest way to run a community is for the head admin (and top lieutenants) to be inactive. Let the deputy admin and mods handle the site. When they start power-tripping, it's time for the head to step in and clear the house. This model is dangerous when no worthwhile applicants arrive after the call for new mods. Then the forum either stagnates, is overrun with spam, or the head admin starts becoming active (therefore putting them on the path to petty power trips that they just cleared the leadership board to be rid of).

xeromal 3y ago
This sounds a lot like a dictator in the Roman Republic. He was called upon to clean house for a period of time with absolute power when the Republic was threatened from the inside or out. Cincinnatus is one of the good examples I'm aware of.
- zpeti 3y ago
  Theoretically isn't this was the head of state should do in many country's setups? They are the ultimate arbiter of power, and have the power to nominate prime ministers, but don't have real legislative power themselves.
  - xeromal 3y ago
    Theoretically. I do believe that a country run by a benevolent king or dictator is probably the most effectively run. That role is just mired for 10 bad ones for every good one.
  - BeFlatXIII 3y ago
    They also have the sword over their head that should they ever use that power, they will be listened to and promptly have their office abolished after. [Or at least that's how I understand the modern British monarchy]

jredwards 3y ago

Same. One by one the reasonable mods dropped off, until finally I couldn't take it anymore and I left too.

zaphirplane 3y ago

Sounds exactly like a software engineering hiring committee :)