| Result: "Mini-modding" is not against the rules. |
|---|
So last night, I got into a disagreement about what mini-modding actually is. Well, the answer is quite simple: mini-modding is acting like a chat moderator when you're not a chat moderator. Some examples of mini-modding are:
Basically, don’t act like a mod when there's a mod on chat who has the authority to warn and kick users, unlike you. However, the specific disagreement I took part in was about something else: telling under-edits to leave. According to the other side (yes, nobody sided with me), Forum:A Difference Between Mini-Modding,and telling someone to leave decided that the most "non-mods" can say to an underedit is "Please leave". But I share Genesjs' sentiments on the issue: non-mods have to at least be able to say "why". Why? Well, an underedit joined chat last night, and no chat mods were available to tell him the underedit rule. SplashTheHedgehog told the user (and I quote exactly what he said) to "Please leave". Well, the user left, but I suspect for the wrong reasons. I believe that Splash, even though he was doing what he believed he had been told (and I will not hold him accountable), was unintentionally breaking our "Don’t bite the newcomers" rule. He came off rude, and he probably hurt the underedit’s feelings, despite his good intentions. So what should a "non-mod" be allowed to say? It should be something like "Please leave chat before a moderator kicks you; we have a rule that you need a certain amount of edits to use chat and you don't have enough edits to be on chat." But then they'll demand further explanation, and you have restrictions on what you can say. So how 'bout we make this mini-modding again, and let the mods do this their job, as they can do it way better than we can.
I'm confused about this. Are your trying to say a user should have the right to warn someone, or when someone does something ageist the rules every user should ignore it and let a mod or an admin take care of it? SilverPlays97 (Wall) (Contributions) 15:35, February 19, 2013 (UTC) I'm saying we should do one or the other. However, I'm leaning toward letting mods take care of it, since we're not in a hurry and there are some troubles that come with the restrictions of not being a mod. Twinkle Snow Unleash Christmas 201315:37, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
(You made another site discussion? Wow.) I've never understood this "mini-modding" and where it stemmed from. But frankly, it's laughable. It's yet another unwritten rule that someone suddenly came up with. Not only do I fail to see any harm, but look here: if you want to become a chat moderator, how can other users perceive you as worthy when you're not allowed to show chat moderator qualities, like warning users if they break chat rules and telling under-edits to leave? If a user does these things, under no circumstances is he/she actually acting like a chat moderator and trying to make a chat moderator's job worthless. As far as I'm concerned, the only example of "mini-modding" that I'm against is telling users that you'll kick/ban them from the chat if they continue to break rules, because clearly you don't have the ability to do that. That would be acting like a chat moderator. For the "don't bite the newcomers" thing, I can see your point. Warnings for under-edits should never be short, sharp and strict-sounding, as that will intimidate them without a doubt. It's better to make warnings calm, polite, friendly, and encouraging, as it sets a good impression of us as a community. Metal's warning (see here) is a very good example. However, as long as non-chat mods warn users in a similar fashion, they should be allowed to do so. But I believe they should also be allowed to give warnings for other rules. I've never had faith in this big "mini-modding" deal, that's all I will say. (Remember these are my personal beliefs) THE REFLEX dancing on the valentine 15:59, February 19, 2013 (UTC) @Edsta: Sorry, I might have been ignoring usernames and judging by avatars (inwhich case I would have thought Pacmansonic138 was you). @Solace: Mini modding is an unwritten rule that has become all but written, but you already know that. (Why isn't it written anyway; I should've proposed that, too. ._.) By "Acting like a chat mod", I meant acting as if you are in a position of authority (a little less specific than what you said, but it's mainly thee same thing). I agree with second paragraph of your argument, too, you're getting way more specific than I am and pinpointing the issues I'm trying to express. Thanks for the clarification. Twinkle Snow Unleash Christmas 201316:11, February 19, 2013 (UTC) Mini-modding is only acceptable -as stated- when there are no chat moderators around. Obviously, if you are forced to leave a warning regarding the chat rules, it's important that you use clear sentences with words such as "please", to avoid getting the wrong message across. We want new users to feel welcome, even if they are told to step off the chat until they benefit from following the rules. A second option would be to contact a moderator who may be online, be it through the wiki or Skype, if at all possible. Now, if Splash came off as rude in this situation of informing the user to leave, there doesn't need to be a consequence for his actions. He could've meant better off. Our chat rules are crystal clear, if anyone in the future is ignoring them, don't bother creating another site discussion. Just message the user in question about his behavior and kindly reinstate what they failed to follow. Serious Sam
I have only done what I have been told. If I have done this wrong I apologize, I am tring to become a chat mod as I thought saying "please leave" would be polite to say without mini-modding. If I did offend anyone by dying this I'm sorry I'm just trying to help out the wiki as much as I can.i say "please leave" whenever a knew underedit comes in yet before I knew to say "please leave" I said "welcome to SNN"as saying this wasn't enforcing the rules. I agree that when there is no mods on a regular user should be able to warn others. I stay on late at chat with other regular users if they are on and I try to help out as I can as I was told we can warn users and things when non are on.Again sorry if I did things wro hand if I offended anyone.
I if there is a mod on, they should just "leave it to the professionals." Regular users should keep calm, and wait for a mod ,though I think it's okay to tell people the rules if there are no mods on, just to make it more fair for those breaking the rules. They should not actively enforce them, however, as this will make the problem worse. I think regular users may inform about the rules if there are no mods on, but not try to enforce. Again, this is all if there are no mods. If there are mods, just leave it to us. Time Biter "The Rift" 02:20, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
This is why I don't use the chat anymore unless someone asks me to join. The chat does more harm than good, and always has done. It just stirs up too many big deals like this. When I think about it, why do we even need the feature? THE REFLEX dancing on the valentine 12:18, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
What is the difference between this "mini-modding" and being civil on the chat? If someone swears on the chat and I tell him that swearing isn't allowed, that somehow makes me worthy of a status called "mini-mod"?--58SlugDrones • (Contact) 03:55, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
I don't go on chat here much, but my impression of "mini-modding" elsewhere is that it's a complaint by people in authority who feel threatened that other people are encroaching on that authority. As long as everyone is civil, and people who are "mini-modding" don't actually claim to be admins or be able to ban people or whatever, I see no problem with it. The correct response for an admin would be "Yes, such-and-such is correct, I am an admin and that is the rule." -- Supermorff (talk) 20:46, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
So can we all agree with Morff and Biter: that mini-modding is pretty much "impersonating an officer" (if you know what I mean), but that it's still better to let mods do their job? Twinkle Snow Unleash Christmas 201313:17, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
I understood Supermorff as saying that it's fine to tell others the rules as long as you're not pretending to actually be an admin or chat mod. That's what I meant by saying mini-modding was like "impersonating an officer". Twinkle Snow Unleash Christmas 201313:28, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
I don't get on the chat either but I'm not going for this. Mini-mods will actually think they have some status higher than a regular user and will be more likely impersonate as someone in authority when they are just being civil users. Sounds like something to just flaunt about in a user page, otherwise I see no use in this. A mini-mod basically sounds like someone who says "This is against the rules" without banning, that's just being civil, it's not a responsibility.--58SlugDrones • (Contact) 15:19, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
If no one objects to my final point, I will proceed to close this forum. Twinkle Snow Unleash Christmas 201315:01, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
|
