Modding Principles

There have been questions raised regarding what guidelines Mods use when dealing with situations in the forums. In another discussion I said we were going to post our “Modding Principles” for people to see. The following is a nearly completed list. They apply to all of our forums as a whole.

A couple of things I should note is that these are “principles” rather than “rules” or “policy.” Rules and policies fall into the black/white category of decision-making. Sometimes they are appropriate. But oftentimes our forums operate in the gray areas of life. That means judgment calls. When it’s time for such a call, we have to ask ourselves how “we” handle things as a team. That’s what the principles are for. They are our guide, yet they allow room for individual evaluation and action.

We ask that those interested read what we offer and respond. This document is listed as the “Preliminary Version” because we would like to hear your thoughts, questions, and concerns regarding them. Also, there are a couple that still need to be added. Eventually, we will have a “finished” version that will appear as a sticky for reference.

So, the following is a nearly completed list. They apply to all of our forums as a whole. Please reply and share your reflections if so inclined. Such feedback will help us to fill in the gaps and bring clarification to the “moddy” waters.

************************

Hands Off
We want FatWallet to be a community of users for and by the users. That means allowing users to use their voices as they deem appropriate. Therefore, we try not to intervene in conversations.

However, moderators are here for a reason. Sometimes, conversations can go awry. At that point, it is our task to prevent the conversation from degenerating into a free-for-all and bring it back into focus. Here’s our basic pattern for engaging such circumstances:

1. Alert: While moderators are always patrolling the forums, many times they will be notified to individual issues by concerned users. After reading the user's remarks, the moderators will decide whether to intervene. If action is deemed necessary, the following steps might be taken:
2. Warning: A reply is posted to call the topic back into focus on the OP
3. Moderation: All replies must go to a moderator for review before being allowed in the thread.
4. Lock: No more posts are allowed.
5. Delete: Into the trash can it goes.

We usually use this pattern, but sometimes things escalate fast enough that we need to adjust the process.

Certain triggers can initiate such an intervention.

Flaming: It is one thing to voice one’s opinion, but it doesn’t have to happen with aggressive language toward another user. We recognize that sometimes our users can get a bit snarky; that’s fine. But there is a line. When people cross it, our job is to nudge them back in bounds.

Offensive Content: Oftentimes we forget that when we post in forums amidst a bunch of screennames that we are really entering into people’s lives through language. Those people are real people, with real flesh and blood, and real feelings. Yes, sometimes it is good for people to grow some thicker skin. But oftentimes comments are made that are offensive regardless of how resilient one is emotionally. Those comments are unacceptable. Such things as racial and religious slurs (among others) will not be tolerated. We are trying to build a community out of a diverse population. Please keep in mind the sensibilities of others when posting.

Off Topic: We want our threads to be useable. When people drop in an abundance of off topic comments, it clutters the threads and makes them hard to follow. In such cases, we will often just delete the diverging post.

Off Topic Forum
Off Topic is a special forum. This is your place to say pretty much whatever you want. Our hands off approach is extended here; we will rarely interrupt the flow. (Not that we won’t ever do it; we just won’t do it often.)

Spam
Anyone who wants to advertise with us is welcome to send us a note, and we will consider the possibility of a partnership. Anyone outside of such a relationship with us who posts something that is of benefit to that user is doing something very, very bad. It’s called spam. We hate spam.

Our community exists for the benefit of the community. Whenever a citizen posts spam, then the focus of the community’s benefit is transferred to the individual. This compromises our sense of communal integrity. We like our integrity. We like our community. Thus, we take our communal integrity very seriously.

That being said, we try not to delete a post as spam unless we have good reason to. Some reasons are as follows:

• Direct connection with business
• Referral codes
• Highly suspicious sites
• Enough circumstantial evidence

There are times when users alert us to posts that in our guts seems like spam, but we just don’t see enough evidence to merit removing the post. In such cases we will drop in a warning underneath the OP that identifies the post as suspicious and urging caution.

Inappropriate Language
We have a pretty lax policy on the kind of language people can use in our forums. Those words that we do not want to see are placed on a ban list. We recognize that not all people will agree with where we have drawn the line. Some will think us too strict; others, too lenient. If ever language is used that is questionable, users are welcome to send in a mod alert, and we will look at the instance.

Alts
No alts. Period. Alts do not serve a productive purpose. People use them for hiding. They are used to skew voting, either negatively or positively. Alts make user tracking difficult. Again, I say, no alts. Period.

Voting
We want our users to have a solid voice in our forums. One of the ways we do this is by allowing people to vote. Voting is a privilege; not a right.

Voting is multipurpose and subjective. People may vote on a post because they do or do not like the content, the wording, the idea, or any other reason. There are a great many reasons behind responsible voting. As long as users continue to vote responsibly, we try not to interfere. When we identify an irresponsible abuse of the system, however, we will attend the matter appropriately.

Voting abuse comes in two forms: vote stalking a user and burying deals to hide them. If the moderation team determines an extreme problem with a user's voting, then we will do our best to communicate it by PM. If it happens repeatedly, then voting abilities will be removed.

Voting a “live” deal “dead” is a form of burying a deal. If the OP information on a deal matches the listed price on the link, it is considered to be “live.” In the case of price mistakes, we never know for sure that a merchant will not honor the listed price; therefore we consider the deal to be live until the site information changes.

Politics and Religion
At FatWallet, we are trying to create a mutually beneficial community strengthened through discussion and participation. To facilitate this kind of community, we need to keep in mind that certain topics often bring bitter feelings and division. Therefore, we do not allow discussion of political or religious agendas. We will delete such material.

Political and Religious Materials
Although we do not allow political and religious discussion, we do allow threads to be started in Free Stuff that contain political and religious deals (for example, free bumperstickers), provided that they are legitimate deals. Yet, if we ever have reason to believe that a citizen may be using our forums to further a personal political or religious agenda, we will require the user to cease posting of any similar material.

At one point, we also allowed political Hot Deals. However, after polling the community, we discovered that this was contrary to community wishes. Therefore, we no longer allow political deals to appear in our Hot Deals forum.

References and Links to Competing Deal Sites
We do not have any problems with other deal sites. We respect them and the way they contribute to the empowerment of consumers. Although they are our competitors, they are also by default our partners in our mission.

If someone rips a deal from another deal site, we encourage giving credit. Oftentimes, this will look like “ripped from SD” or “thanks to SuperMojo at SlickDeals.” We have no problem with identifying sites by name.

Issues arise when people use our forums to redirect people to deals at other sites. For example:

“Hey, there’s a great deal everyone should see over at SlickDeals: LINK! (insert active link).”

That tells our community nothing. Such a post would be removed.

Here’s an example of something that would be allowed to stay:

“ElectronicsHeaven has the SuperTeck X-30K HD Holo-TV for 30% off, which brings the price to $400,000 (ships free). There is a coupon posted at SlickDeals HERE (insert active link). Also, they are discussing it here: http://www…. .com. (insert URL, but not direct link). LINK (insert active link) to product.”

Note that all of the information for the deal is presented. Because the link is to a coupon, it is fine. Using a URL to refer to a discussion in their forums is fine, as long as it isn’t a direct link and all the deal information is posted on our site.

Rehab
People can (and do) overreact. Something is said by an anonymous screenname that strikes a sore spot. Emotions flair. Nastiness ensues. It happens.

One solutions is to get rid of all the people who do this. But then, where would we be? Since it happens to everyone from time to time, we would have no people. No people = No fun. Yes, people can be a pain in the forums, but they are also the source of fun. Therefore, we try not to eject people from our forums permanently.

Instead, we believe it is better to help those who continually cross the line to learn how to live within the bounds of the community. One way we deal with this is through a little bit of coaching. We might put a note in the thread reminding everyone of our expectations. Or, we might contact a user via our PM system and inform them of our concerns. Through conversation, we can make suggestions on how the user might improve her or his behavior.

In more drastic situations we will give “timeouts.” These timeouts can last anywhere from three days to whatever we feel is appropriate. The idea is to give the user time to step away from the computer and cool down for a while. A few days for clearing one’s head can be a good thing. Then, before reentering, the user needs to identify to us the errant behavior and assure us that it will not happen again.

In extreme situations, there is always the possibility of a permanent ban. This is unfortunate. However, we need to the overall wellbeing of the community to remain our priority. When a user proves to be viral and is not willing to work with us in the rehabilitation process, then the community is simply better off without such a presence. We never eject users lightly.

Gossiping
It is not uncommon for users to report another user, and then ask us to fill them in on what happened. Don’t hold your breath; we’re not going to do it. There are privacy issues involved. We will let users know that we will investigate a matter, but that’s about it. We’re not blowing people off; we’re respecting boundaries to protect those involved.

Protect the Newbies
One of the complaints about our site is how we treat the newbies. The frustrations with spammers and trolls seems to find release in the direction of anyone new who posts something suspicious. This is not good.

We ask that all users try to treat newbies with respect. This is not to say don’t be suspicious. Rather, contact us to look into questionable posts, but try to be nice and inviting. Remember, there is always the possibility that the user is new to the forums environment and might need time to acclimate to the culture.

From time to time, we may need to intervene in threads to remind users that we are trying to be a welcoming community. If you see us do that, please turn the conversational tone into something that is respectful and courteous.

Review of Decisions
We recognize that mistakes happen on our end. Sometimes it’s good to have a decision reviewed. If our citizens feel that an error has been made, the best way to request a decision review is to send in a support ticket. In the ticket, offer a description of the incident and any relevant information regarding it. Another set of eyes will then examine the situation and consider the decision.

shopliftinginva said: Protect the Newbies
One of the complaints about our site is how we treat the newbies. The frustrations with spammers and trolls seems to find release in the direction of anyone new who posts something suspicious. This is not good.

We ask that all users try to treat newbies with respect. This is not to say don’t be suspicious. Rather, contact us to look into questionable posts, but try to be nice and inviting. Remember, there is always the possibility that the user is new to the forums environment and might need time to acclimate to the culture.

From time to time, we may need to intervene in threads to remind users that we are trying to be a welcoming community. If you see us do that, please turn the conversational tone into something that is respectful and courteous.


How about protect the forums from obvious shitty trolls? You know what I'm talking about.

That's actually one of the things that have yet to be added.

jayK said: VBMcGB said: Bad post: Putting this material out for children is stupid. It’s nothing but traumatic brainwashing at an early age. PETA is is a bunch of extremist nuts. Same for everyone who supports them.What if you removed the last two sentences of that post?You all like putting me in the hot seat today, don’t you?

That’s a tricky one. On the one hand, it doesn’t quite cross the line, though it nudges it. It is a comment on the behavior of an organization rather than on the organization itself. On the other hand, it really isn’t productive and it may lead the conversation down an inappropriate path. Though the behavior of the organization is being called "stupid," those who identify with it may bite the emotional hook. We know what happens after that.

Personally, if I were to see this I would be inclined to leave it. However, I would probably put a reminder in the thread immediately that we "don’t want to go there.” I would then watch it and see where it goes. That would be me trying to uphold our “hands off” principle, while at the same time preparing for the possibility that I might have to funnel the conversation to avoid political commentary. Sometimes, trying to balance two principles can be tricky.

IAmStingRay said: VBMcGB said: Alts
No alts. Period. Alts do not serve a productive purpose. People use them for hiding. They are used to skew voting, either negatively or positively. Alts make user tracking difficult. Again, I say, no alts. Period.

Is there an alternative way to view x threads per page on device A and y threads per page on device B (because of different screen size, connection speed, etc)? I understand the motivation behind this principle/rule, but I don't know of an alternative solution.Congratulations! You just found a productive use for an alt.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any other solution. Someone else would have to answer that.

jayK said: Madmurphy said: I suggested a way to perhaps get a new member to feel more comfortable in posting without drowning in a sea of red the first few posts.As did I. However, your solution is to remove or hide functionality, and my solution is to better explain that functionality to newbies.I'm with jayK here. I think that awareness and communication would be better.

But I also think that it would help if people communicated their reasoning when giving red to newbies. Maybe something like: "So you know, I gave you red because this is a repost. Redding reposts is common here. In the future, please search to see if your deal has already appeared in the forums before posting. Thanks."

Such a response would help newbies understand what happened, and it would introduce them to common practice. Of course, not everyone would need to do this; just one reply like this should suffice.

Edited to fix my quote format.

jayK said: VBMcGB said: But I also think that it would help if people communicated their reasoning when giving red to newbies. Maybe something like: "So you know, I gave you red because this is a repost. Redding reposts is common here. In the future, please search to see if your deal has already appeared in the forums before posting. Thanks."IMHO that's part of the moderator's job. Before a thread is locked, it should be cleaned up, and if nothing like the explanation above has already been posted, the mod should include some boilerplate text as the last post.

Just because something is a repost doesn't mean that the reason for red is actually because it is a repost. For a moderator to explain why another person voted something read without explanation would require mind-reading. We don't yet have a tool that enables that at our disposal. (Though it would be nice. I'll have to talk with the dev team about this.)

My immediate concern with this argument is that it starts to sound like the mods alone are expected to be responsible for such courteous hospitality. I do believe that we are responsible for hospitality, but I also believe that hospitality is something that the community is responsible for as well. This goes back to an statement of mine elsewhere that we work best as a team.

We don't require anyone to justify their votes. But I don't believe that asking for (not requiring) a brief response as a common hospitable courtesy is too much if we want to be a welcoming community. This doesn't mean that everyone would want to do it. But it would be nice if someone did, especially if they are already taking the time to type in "repost" as a reply.

"Political and Religious Materials" updated to reflect recent developments.