The Chainlink

Melissa, while I have no relation to the OP, in the open letter post, your response and closure of the thread goes COMPLETELY against the transparency he's trying to get at. I don't think he cares who you are in real life, just wants to know who the mods on here are (by username) and what the standards for editing/deleting/moderating posting are, that's not too much to ask.

I've seen much worse posted on here, so don't know if there's more behind the scenes or if the OP and mods have a history or what, but that comment being moderated doesn't make much sense to me either.

I'm not claiming that you are, but you're making yourself look like a very poor moderator at the moment, please reconsider the way you are dealing with this-nobody is attacking you, just looking for some explanation.

Views: 881

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I agree completely.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

The only mods I have been able to figure out are Melissa and Chi Lowe. Both because they made themselves known.

It should be open knowledge: 1 who the moderators are, 2. What are the rules they moderate by.

It also works better if moderation happens in the open. Not because I want to argue with the moderators whether they are correct or not, but because it can create clarity what is acceptable and what is not acceptable on the Chainlink. I’m pretty sure that no one has any problem with moderation if it is applied evenly and consistently. It’s the off-list conversations that undermine the credibility of the moderators.



Kevin C said:

The Chainlink used to identify who the moderators were. In the other thread, Melissa said she's one of a dozen. The Mods Activity Group says there are 7. Knowing who they are not only seems reasonable, it seems necessary.

I concur!

Craig S. said:

I agree completely.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

The only mods I have been able to figure out are Melissa and Chi Lowe. Both because they made themselves known.

It should be open knowledge: 1 who the moderators are, 2. What are the rules they moderate by.

It also works better if moderation happens in the open. Not because I want to argue with the moderators whether they are correct or not, but because it can create clarity what is acceptable and what is not acceptable on the Chainlink. I’m pretty sure that no one has any problem with moderation if it is applied evenly and consistently. It’s the off-list conversations that undermine the credibility of the moderators.



Kevin C said:

The Chainlink used to identify who the moderators were. In the other thread, Melissa said she's one of a dozen. The Mods Activity Group says there are 7. Knowing who they are not only seems reasonable, it seems necessary.

Hey Chainlinks,
 
To answer some of your questions,
 
Our policy has always been to err on the side of extremely light moderating and not to delete content or close threads as we are an independent social network based on community building, communication and sharing information among cycling enthusiasts in and around Chicago.
 
In the last 5 years we've probably closed half a dozen threads, primarily over spam or nudity and only after exhaustive deliberation as a group, including myself and Lee Diamond, who has been our main moderator for the last 4 years.
 
The rest of those in the mod group consist of volunteers with admin capabilities, including volunteer IT people, interns and others who help with building and maintaining our online community.
 
What happened here was a mistake and it won't happen again.
 
People with moderator capabilities include myself, Lee Diamond, Melissa, Garth (Globalguy), Frederick (Chi Lowe), Xiao (intern) and Ryan (Wigwam, intern),  Joe Sak and Cezar and a few others with limited capabilities including Jeremy (JM) and Anne Barnes.
 
I want to reiterate again what happened was a mistake, we always discuss things thoroughly before taking any mod action, and it won't happen again.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service