Do you find the Fluther "question police" too heavy handed?

I haven’t been here all that long, but I have yet to see any censorship. So, I’d have to say that I don’t find the moderators to be heavy handed at all. I guess that could change, but so far I haven’t seen any censorship. I do avoid a lot of controversial topics though, such as politics.

No I do not find the mods to be heavy handed. The few times I’ve been modded, I knew when I answered that I would be. I think the mods here do a great job and they are not appreciated enough.

It’s voluntary. If you want banter and casual quips, post your question in social. If you want serious answers, post it in general. Nobody is making anyone post their questions in any specific section.

They aren’t in the social section. I like the system. When I want only real answers to my questions and not a bunch of jokes, I list it in the general category for just that reason. I usually only get modded if I’m off topic in the general section.

I sort of feel guilty when I get modded.

BTW, this question will get moved to the meta section.

I like the current guidelines. I like the differences between general, social and meta. I also think that the mods are very fair.

No, certain questions belong in certain catergories. Such as, General: if you want fast accurate answers you would ask your question in the Genereal section. If you want it in the Meta section you would ask a question that had to do with Fluther. And so on.

No.

Like she said ^ ^

I have to admit that I do like comprehensible questions, so I don’t have any problem with constructive moderation on questions so that we can all at least understand them. (On the other hand, I don’t ask many questions.)

And on the other other hand, I still don’t like the too-strict-for-my-comfort emphasis placed on “serious and totally on-topic” moderation in General, but I’m learning to live with it.

Oh goody – a riot.

I am curious as to what “inspired” this question, @GeorgeGee

I hate the moderators. They suck. ~

fuckin mods ~

The main thing I’ve come to dislike is when a question is put into the ‘wrong’ section by the OP.

A perfect example would be the recent thread about gay acceptance. Because it was put into General a shit ton of responses were moderated, resulting in a severely gutted thread.

So many times I’ve wanted to PM people to ask why they put what are essentially discussion questions into the “just the facts, ma’am” General section.

^ True, dat.

I don’t know about the question police. Are they the same as the moderators?

You are free to start your own site and run it how you like. I did (with some help). It isn’t hard.

It isn’t about censorship, it’s about maintaining site standards. There are plenty of places on the web for anyone to post about anything, and we are not stopping anyone from doing so… therefore, no censorship. This just happens to not be one of those places.

If this site didn’t delete nonsense I would never visit. Tumblr questions would never be solved sigh

Imagine you’re at a dinner party with a group of intelligent friends. If you ask what should be done about the problems of Greece and Turkey, you can bet at least one of them will make a wisecrack about using a gravy separator to remove the grease before serving. Personally I think that’s built into intelligent discourse, yet I think that if Fluther mods went to parties, they’d be putting pieces of duct tape over the mouths of anyone with a sense of humor, or turning on the questioner saying “why don’t you leave and take your question down to Casey’s bar where it belongs?”

As much as I love it here, I still don’t liken it to a dinner party, @GeorgeGee ! Quips have their place in General if accompanied by a reasoned, on topic answer, but a conversation around the dinner table is just that, a conversation in a social get it? Huh? :-) setting.

But now that you mention it, my daughter mod does have a fondness for duct ta…mmmpf…mmmpff

@GeorgeGee I totally understand what you are saying.

That is the way Fluther was set up at first. One section and a group of educated, interesting individuals sharing knowledge and humor. The problem is that the Fluther dinner party was crashed by those who value wit over meaningful dialogue.

When a user would ask a serious question like “What should I do about my cats behavior?” a barrage of unhelpful responses such as “toss it out the window” and “cats suck” would result. Questions were hijacked for personal discussion and derailed on tangents. It was not uncommon to have several quips without actually answering the question at all.
The intelligent users were leaving in frustration.

While I had very mixed feelings about adding social I think it really allowed general to be a venue for learning that had been smothered in wit before.

Social is not punishment, it is not the pub down the street- it is as active as General.
Asking a user if they would rather have a question moved over gutting off-topic quips is working well when we have time to do so. When we are busy though we mods have to assume that the user, by posting in general, wishes to have us keep the question strictly on topic.
This is our job- to respect the wishes of the user.

I like the separation of General and Social. Two of my responses in the General section have been removed and rightfully so. No grudge is held with the moderators. In fact, if I had gotten back to it before they did, I probably would have flagged my own answers asking them to delete it.

Yes

I’m not sure how the moding system works – and if a mod could explain if I’m wrong or right in the below assumptions, it would be appreciated.

I’m working under the assumptions that it’s overwhelmingly not the moderators maintaining the standards when it comes to answers from users – but the users themselves. The user flags the question, giving a reason why, and then the mods review. I doubt that very often, or at least in the majority of the cases, mods start taking out responses without the response being flagged.

Therefore, the moderated responses are subject to two or perhaps three levels of review – the flagger (or flaggers) and the moderator. If it is in the general section, in essence, the user has limited the responses considered acceptable already – the initial level of “review” there. A response is not moderated unless the mods agree. And they are not taken out for the reason listed unless the moderators agree. More often a response will be flagged and not removed. And I have flagged answers and characterized them one way, and the mod has chosen a more neutral reason to list as the reason for the removal. I have begged, in fact, to have certain of my answers modded – but if they were in social, that was often refused based on a concern for the overall consistency of the thread. One time I remember asking another be removed as it referred to me and suggested something about me that actually could have been interpreted as characterizing me as a terrorist with nuclear capabilities. Although it was clearly a jab, I was applying for a federal job at the time, and didn’t want anything to get in the way – the mods refused my request because it was in social, privileging the integrity of the thread over my personal concerns. I think that to accuse the mods of being akin to censors is reactionary, therefore.

Posts on the general section, in fact, much of the time have off-topic answers, or quips, that I’ve seen that are not removed – likely because the user didn’t flag the answer, and no one else did. Therefore, I think the mods get flack where none is deserved.

What I don’t understand is when people get riled because of a moderated response. I’m with @Pied_Pfeffer on this. I don’t care, but sometimes am confused. I posted a thread in the general section that asked something very specific. Some responses were given that didn’t respond to the information requested. I flagged them, and they were removed. Prior to them being removed, I immediately sent the users PMs explaining why I had flagged it so they wouldn’t be surprised. In both cases…I was sent messages that included personal attacks on how I was wrong to do so – and both repeated their posts or comments about the mods thereafter on the same thread. I sent the messages so the mods wouldn’t be blamed, and so the users wouldn’t be surprised and know why – and if they wanted to post could include the information they wanted, as well as the information requested.

I would say that, in the cases I’ve seen, those who are complaining about the moderation aren’t paying attention to how they’re responding, or reading the question thoroughly. If you want your answer respected and left, know the section, and read the question, including the details. Then, I doubt anyone would have a response moderated. Have the respect, I say, to deal with the issue in the way the OP requests – or start your own thread, site, etc. to deal with the issues as you’d like them dealt with.

Follow up- Well, as I was writing that post, one of the individuals I was discussing went back to the thread I had asked to be moderated, and posted another off-topic and purposefully useless response. The second one on purpose – the first was just not on point, nothing intentional there.

So, it seems that if an OP takes responsibility for keeping a thread on topic by placing it in the general section, and telling the individual politely why he or she is doing so, the person moderated feels they have the right to attempt to derail the thread because they’ve felt slighted.

Is it a problem with the question police, then…or the answer “rebels.”

Hmmm, I have a different view on how the mods do their work. I was under the impression users don’t flag comments often, and the mods are constantly out on patrol, checking all questions for violations.

My view is since the mods volunteer, this is a free site, and overall the site functions very well, the work they do is sufficient. The mods are human and make judgement calls. Some may think a comment is acceptable that others remove. I got maybe irritated one time of the several dozen comments of mine I noticed were modded (coincidentally, once when I told @iamthemob to screw himself). The modding is a good thing and prevents the site from deteriorating into a comments section on a news site.

@iamthemob @cockswain: You are both correct. We do rely on users to flag questions and answers but I will moderate anything I see that does not fit the guidelines even if there is no flag. However, we do not always see things that do not fit the guidelines so you must flag when see something that may not fit the guidelines, even if you are unsure.

Most of the mods, being human, will do what they are supposed to do – according to the guidelines. Just like traffic cops in real life, right? Some are sent to the scene of an accident, or crime – others cruise the highways looking for action, so to speak.

Being human, some of them are dolts.

Some have become mods a little prematurely, IMHO, in that they have become “annointed ones” – so to speak – and volunteer to do this – yet cannot separate themselves from being a part of the Fluther “chit chat” – for lack of a better.

I’d say 90% are wonderful – and I thank the stars for moderation – I’ve seen unmoderated sites – it aint pretty – and they fail.

Auggie and the founders would help along the idiots sooner than you can say wtf was that mod thinking because an idiot mod is bad business anyway.

We’re like fans: without us – there is no Fluther.

Too much “moderation” – fewer questions. Fewer questions, less Fluther. And it’s federated now.

;-)

And @cockswain knows that I was not the one that flagged that one…;-) I really, really wanted to though. I’m sensative.