Comment on OTW Election Candidate Chats and Q&A Roundup 2021

  1. Your comparison only proves my point as a security guard can remove you from the premises and a customer service rep can't, similar to how an ao3 mod can take action against your account. That you think they're closer to CS reps then security guards is so insane that I almost wonder if you're trolling.

    It doesn't matter if they aren't actively seeking violations. If they're someone that people report content to and issue out warnings and suspensions then they're a mod. End of story.

    I don't care what people come here to do. The candidates probably view these posts to see peoples feedback and if they don't they're bad candidates. Your opinions are irrelevant to me. Last reply you'll get from me.

    Comment Actions
    1. Sure, sure, insult me all you want if it'll make you feel better. I'll explain a bit more in case other people are wondering why I'm such an insane troll. Feel free to ignore my irrelevant opinions and have a nice day! I'm just gonna unload all my brain barf now, thanks!

      For what it's worth, if you're on the reporting end of dealing with PAC, it does feel a lot like talking to customer service. So it's like, beefed up customer service with some admin-ish abilities. Still not security guards though.

      There perhaps isn't a good one-to-one real world comparison that I can think of, but anyway. Online moderation and moderators are terms used almost exclusively in the sense of keeping the peace during conversations between users, presiding over discussions and blocking inappropriate comments. If that is the definition being used, it is inappropriate here because this is not a social media site where people go for those kinds of general discussions. (So yes, even if you don't care what people come here to do, what they come here to do is relevant in a discussion about moderation.) Also, the moderation system would prioritize mods to be actively scanning these conversations... So, that's not it.

      When it comes to an archive, I've usually only heard of moderator used in the sense of "a moderated archive/collection", which means submissions are checked over before they're allowed to be posted. That's not true here, either.

      What AO3 has, the tag wranglers and abuse team... if you want to call them "mods" it would seem to be doing a disservice to every site out there with active moderation. The site itself can be considered lightly moderated, but it's strange to call any of the volunteers actual "mods" since their duties are so different from those of traditional forum/chat/archive moderators. Call them staff or PAC or whatever, but "mod" has connotations that don't apply here. Tag wranglers would then be mods too, since according to the ToS FAQ "Tag wrangling is the process of moderating the tags", and I believe they can also warn users about improper tagging. Can you imagine how strange that would be in a conversation though, to be like, "Yeah, I'm a moderator on such-and-such site. What do I do? I fix people's tags."

      Recently I've been seeing, in the comments of fics in perhaps younger fandoms, people say stuff like "uh oh the mods are coming to get you!" which imply that the moderating forces of AO3 are actively looking for infractions. Like it or not, the word "mod" very strongly carries this connotation of someone watching and monitoring content/conversations whether in real time chat or making the rounds on a forum. PAC and tag wranglers can technically be called mods because they do moderation work, but it's really freakin' odd and contributes to misunderstandings.

      Comment Actions
      1. "I believe they can also warn users about improper tagging"

        Not true, actually. Tag wranglers don't have any power to do anything about anyone's tags beyond changing capitalization. They can't hand out warnings or change people's tags, they're not even allowed to tell you to change your tags in fact.

        Comment Actions
        1. Ah, gotcha! Thanks for the correction.

          Idk what I was thinking. My mind was swirling with thoughts of the time when all the Chinese users forgot to change the language tag or something and I guess I misremembered what was done at the time. Bluh. Yes, you're absolutely right. Abuse handles tagging issues if they brush up against ToS issues. :)

          Comment Actions
          1. Tag wranglers can't change tags and they do not interact with creators about them.
            The Abuse committee can change tags if a work is reported for improper tagging, but they will only do so if they try contacting the creator of the work and the creator doesn't do it themselves. This only applies to very specific tags, though, like language, fandom, archive warnings, and (maybe, not sure) rating. No one other than a work's creator can change their relationships/characters/additional tags

            Comment Actions
      2. It's not worth engaging this person. The original argument they are trying to make is: They violated the rules, were caught, were told to change to be within the rules, and refused, and were caught again, but this shouldn't count because the unchanged/rule-breaking works have always been there.

        They make the circular argument "Nobody who has changed their behavior should have to suffer multiple bans for old violations." But this doesn't make sense, because changing the behaviour can only mean not violating the rules. If you aren't violating the rules, you can't be caught violating the rules.

        The others clearly haven't read the ToS or the FAQ either because it is clear there are rules against repeatedly, maliciously reporting other users as well.

        Comment Actions
        1. You have to admit that was a good flounce though! I've never derpily rambled someone into a dramatic exit in only one comment before! XD

          Well, I'm fairly certain this is one of those people who popped up complaining about the same thing on another news post, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt anyway. It sounded like they mostly just wanted more than one week to go through their old fics and bring them into compliance, which is fair. I suppose if you really did have hundreds of fics that needed editing it would take a lot of time, and even though there are rules against malicious reporting, that wouldn't protect the user from being reported again by another random passerby... Or would it? Would that second report add another warning onto the user?

          Idk, I'm still curious about how hard it can possibly be to find out what's breaking the rules. Someone had to report the fic, and in that report they would have said exactly what they found to be rule breaking, and that info would be passed on to the user, wouldn't it? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          Comment Actions
        2. furthermore there's one thing that doesn't seat well with me about the whole position that user is taking: they say they have changed and yet in the same breath they are trying to defend their right to leave not-allowed content on this website.
          If they really are changed and are behaving better they should demonstrate some kind of goodwill to go back and see if they have multiple violations and fix that. But they aren't.

          Comment Actions
      3. Yeah, not to be the crotchety old-timer gatekeeper or whatever but I feel like most of the influx of new, younger users straight-up don't get AO3 culture at all (and also I just find them/the way they communicate obnoxious, but that's just a personal thing). And I only joined in 2016! But obviously there's been huge generational shifts since then.
        I feel like there needs to be some sort of tutorial or initiation process that explains to newcomers how this site works, what to expect and generally induct them into A03 culture rather than having then import the culture of wherever they came from.

        Comment Actions
    2. The fact that you think you can stay on the premises of a store after a customer service rep kicks you out is telling. If you are asked to leave private property and don't, you can be arrested for trespassing. You are not entitled to stick around the store just cause the person that asked you to leave isn't a security guard, and you are not entitled multiple chances to fix behavior that you have already been warned about. Personal responsibility is the key issue at hand - not the definition of mod.

      Comment Actions
      1. I see my point flew right over your head. I'll explain it simpler.

        A CS rep cannot actually remove you themselves. They can tell you to leave and threaten to call security but cannot actually do any ACTION themselves to remove you. Security are the only ones who can actually DO something. You know similar to how the ao3 mods on here can do action against your account but the support team can only tell you what to not do.

        Now as for this part:

        "and you are not entitled multiple chances to fix behavior that you have already been warned about."

        Well maybe the tos should be more clear then. There isn't even anything in it about linking to ko-fi or paying sites. Yes in the TOS FAQ there is but I why would I think the TOS itself wouldn't have all the info about what actually breaks the rules? More importantly why is a week to go through hundreds of fictions, (including the comments) and find where previous violations might be something that anybody would consider reasonable? Even going through them in the month of suspension takes longer and is made even more time consuming because you have to make notes to refer to later because their stupid rules don't even let you edit your stuff while suspended.

        Maybe they should actually be useful as mods and find and remove the stuff themselves instead of giving out suspensions for honest mistakes. Or they could let you edit stuff while suspended and then appeal once you've gotten everything removed and have them take a look. Otherwise I guess they only exist to go on power trips by issuing out warnings and suspensions.

        And finally, you are either insane or have no life if you think that amount of time to fix things and a ban when a user is behaving currently is a good thing. Either way, I didn't read the other users drivel and won't be reading yours if you reply. Some people have a life and don't want to argue with trolls who have their head up ao3s ass.

        Comment Actions
        1. lol I had an inkling that someone /this/ entitled was caught for breaking one of the cardinal rules on this website. The one that actually endanger OTW's mission of non-profit. Risking it for everyone else. And then acting like a child throwing a fit because other people won't clean up your mess. Incredible.

          Look: it's here in the TOS: https://archiveofourown.org/tos#IV.B.
          it clearly states: "B. Spam and commercial promotion - Promotion of commercial products or activities is not allowed. "

          I hope they ban you for good.

          Comment Actions
        2. Support contacts you by email. Why wouldn't you just reply to that email and explain the situation? It's one week to fix a single violation; if you explain you've done it hundreds of times, they can give you more time to clean up your mess.

          How long could it possibly take you to delete a link in your author notes or whatever? A few minutes each? Even if you broke the rule hundreds of times, that's what, an hour or two out of your whole week? You have the time to write hundreds of fic, but no time at all to respect the archive? You clearly have the time to troll comments. Why don't you spend that time acting responsibly instead?

          "Behaving currently" doesn't make sense. If you have hundreds of violations sitting in your account, then you aren't behaving. It's also hard to take an anonymous troll that calls people names seriously when they say they are "behaving".

          Comment Actions
        3. You are missing the point, but continuing to prove the point. You feel that you should be able to not listen to posted rules or valid requests from authority figures. Asking you to leave is them taking action, and you not grasping that is problematic. If you choose to not respond to someone's initial request, you can't then be surprised when there are consequences.

          Comment Actions