A suggestion about challenging moderator actions in public.

[DiscipleOfTruth]

I'd like to suggest that a moderator action can be publicly challenged under certain conditions.

1.A thread is made by the person who received the moderator action where a sub forum is made for such topics.

2.Only the moderation team and the person can post in the thread about the situation. If the mods find themselves in a debate with each other in the thread and standing divided on the matter then it becomes up to the admins to have the final say for the sake of settling the matter.

3.Everyone is allowed to view the thread but they are not allowed to post in the thread. And a new rule is made that the thread should never be discussed in any other public threads by anyone except the moderation team as the admins see fit.

By doing this it enables a way for people who have similar concerns as the accused to hopefully have thier questions answered by viewing the topic. Which in turn can reduce the likelihood of someone else repeating the offence as they might not understand why it was wrong other wise, leading them to possibly forget the matter was already disciplined by someone else and making the same mistake.

[otseng]

We can try this out. For now, post in the Comments, Suggestions, and Questions subforum.

But, I'm skeptical that it would reduce the amount of rule violations. People can already peruse the Probation subforum to see what we consider to be rule violations. And people still seem to think that they can violate the rules without any consequences.

[DiscipleOfTruth]

It appears this thread is in the Comments, Suggestions, and Questions subforum?

And yes, people can see it on the list that shows people receiving violations, but that's all it's really doing-showing the person that recieved the rule violations. No one has access to the PM conversations of others and no one makes that conversation public. The difference here is that people will get to learn more about why the violation was just without having to actually violate a rule to have that PM conversation.

[otseng]

It appears this thread is in the Comments, Suggestions, and Questions subforum?

Yes, users are to create a new thread in this subforum if there is a specific post in question.

And yes, people can see it on the list that shows people receiving violations, but that's all it's really doing-showing the person that recieved the rule violations. No one has access to the PM conversations of others and no one makes that conversation public. The difference here is that people will get to learn more about why the violation was just without having to actually violate a rule to have that PM conversation.

One key difference is that, with PM conversations, a little more liberty is given for people to express their views.

[FarWanderer]

I was about to suggest this myself, but I think that however it's done, there should be a conveniently accessable link from the post containing the relevant moderator action.

It would be something similar to how the MPG system works.

There are two reasons I think this is important. Firstly, many of the objecting posters won't even be aware that there is a place where they are permitted to voice their objections publicly. Secondly, if the existence of objections aren't also made aware to the public right in the thread itself, public observers will likely never even know any objections were made.

People object publicly because they want a public audience. If it's too hard for objecting poster to get a public audience without challenging the moderator action right there in the thread (thereby derailing the thread and breaking the rules), then they'll be that much more temped ignore the rule.

[wiploc]

I'd like to suggest that a moderator action can be publicly challenged under certain conditions.

1.A thread is made by the person who received the moderator action where a sub forum is made for such topics.

2.Only the moderation team and the person can post in the thread about the situation.

I don't like this part. I think public comment would be useful.

On the other hand, since the whole idea may cause a ton of non-fruitful work for the moderators, so they have to end the experiment, maybe this is a good compromise.

If the mods find themselves in a debate with each other in the thread

If that happens, then I think they're doing it wrong.

...

3. ... And a new rule is made that the thread should never be discussed in any other public threads by anyone except the moderation team as the admins see fit.

How is it fair that you can change an old rule by public discussion, but I can't challenge the new one by public discussion?

-

And now I'm off to challenge a moderator ruling.