Is there a Moderator Training Manual?

[RestrainedRaptor]

I feel like with each topic, we all get to know each other a little better, which is heartwarming.

In the previous episode of Quickly Lock RestrainedRaptor's Thread, Neer said in his closing remarks:

The vast majority of our staff are volunteers, and their time and effort does not deserve this level of "respect."

On the contrary; I might question why they do it, but I certainly respect the time they put into it. However, that respect is on the condition that they follow a set of well-defined procedures, much like an engineer diagnosing a car. Hence I'm making this new thread to talk about the moderation process, and how moderators are trained. I would love to know...

1. Does FA have a set of documents outlining the moderation process and training guides for volunteers?
2. If not... Erm, why not? Do you plan to make some soon?
3. If yes, then can we please see them? Making the documents public would aid in our understanding of the process and also open it up to valuable feedback.

For all you other lovely other forum members, I invite you to discuss what you think should be in such a training document. Do you have any examples from other websites or jobs relating to customer support? Please share!

 

[quoting_mungo]

Yes, there's internal policies (which has been mentioned publicly on multiple occassions), and no, you can't see them. I'm not going to pretend to know every nuance as to why, and I'm not going to flirt with saying too much by making an educated guess.

I'm honestly surprised you weren't tempbanned considering your last (linked) thread is literally reposting removed content. Which should be an obvious big no-no. When I was on staff you 100% would have been. Hell, your first thread would have been closed immediately with, at most, "other people's suspensions are not your business." (Not in those exact words, but the general gist of it.)

 

[vickers]

That doesn't seem like the type of thing that should be public, considering that it would be something for internal use within a company. But I'm no legal expert.

 

[ben909]

is there really a benefit to asking this?

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

That doesn't seem like the type of thing that should be public, considering that it would be something for internal use within a company. But I'm no legal expert.

The difference between this and other internal company documents is that good moderation practices shouldn't be considered a trade secret. Weasyl took a different direction by publishing its Staff Code of Conduct. According to this extremely old thread, FA might have one of these too now, but without knowing what's in it, it's hard to say if it's of any use.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

is there really a benefit to asking this?

Yes, I believe there are. The main one that's on my mind is detecting contradictions between moderation guidelines and the publicly visible ToS, CoC and AUP.

For example, if the AUP says "Section 123: you're not allowed to post a picture of an apple" but the training manual says "If you see a picture of an orange, you should delete it and cite section 123". You can see that there's an issue here, which would cause users to be unfairly penalised, and any future appeals to fail.

 

[luffy]

We have a huge document that is... checks... 84 pages long. No, we can not and will not post it publicly as it uses real use cases for examples, among other reasons (shared with real staff names/emails, internal discussion happening in comments, etc.). No, there are no contradictions like you've mentioned. The only thing that I would consider relatable to that is a list of specific characters and how to handle them in cub porn tickets.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

It's really nice to get a straight answer for once. I appreciate that. Thanks.

I understand that you may not be able to share all of the documentation for the reasons specified, but it would be very helpful for me if you could share some excerpts from it, paraphrased if necessary. The parts I'd find most helpful would relate to:

1. Amount of detail/evidence given when formulating a submission/journal deletion notice to send to the user.
2. Judging and handling violations of CoC section 3.1
3. Judging and handling violations of AUP section 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3

 

[luffy]

It's really nice to get a straight answer for once. I appreciate that. Thanks.

I understand that you may not be able to share all of the documentation for the reasons specified, but it would be very helpful for me if you could share some excerpts from it, paraphrased if necessary. The parts I'd find most helpful would relate to:

1. Amount of detail/evidence given when formulating a submission/journal deletion notice to send to the user.
2. Judging and handling violations of CoC section 3.1
3. Judging and handling violations of AUP section 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3

This isn't something that I can disclose as an admin. If a director wants to, they may, but you would have better luck reaching them by direct question ticket on the main site.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

Mmm... That's a bit of a shame, since I have yet to observe a single successful trouble ticket so far, and it's impossible to determine whether one was answered by a director or just someone who hates me... On a completely unrelated note, how many directors are there other than Dragoneer? I thought FA used to have a staff page.

 

[luffy]

Mmm... That's a bit of a shame, since I have yet to observe a single successful trouble ticket so far, and it's impossible to determine whether one was answered by a director or just someone who hates me... On a completely unrelated note, how many directors are there other than Dragoneer? I thought FA used to have a staff page.

We did and, no disrespect, this is an example of why we don't anymore. Coupled with targeted harassment. I can assure you if you ask for a director, it won't be answered by a mod or admin. We don't really have time to be vindictive, and I verified all of your requested escalations were escalated to the proper channel.

 

[Raever]

Well, there ya have it. Assuming Luffy hasn't done it already with any current things you might have open, asking for a director to clarify some things in your next ticket sounds like a great step forward. And also a good way to keep FA Forums out of the interpersonal drama. X'D

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

We don't really have time to be vindictive, and I verified all of your requested escalations were escalated to the proper channel.

Yeah, I wish I could take more than your word for that. I have no time or interest in bitter squabbling either, but if you look at things from my point of view, I have simply been trying to point out a flaw in the AUP that's affected dozens of people, and every step of the way, I've been struck down by the anonymous "FurAffinity Staff".

Well, there ya have it.

I really wish it was that simple. I'm not even allowed to make any more trouble tickets on the matter so it makes no difference. I have been found guilty of violating the CoC by the court of Frost Dragon Art LLC, and every single time (approximately 6 times) I've asked for evidence (at least three of which have been seen by the director), the answer has been "the content was removed appropriately", "we're not going to tell you why", "please go away and never ask us again", and "this thread is closed" respectively. It's clear that if I ask again in another TT, I'll be suspended for 1 day due to a second count of CoC 3.1. That is why I'm here on the forums. It is literally my only option.

As a very rough estimate, the tickets and forum threads have counted up to at least 2 man-hours of work now, when answering the question (or approving my appeal) would've taken maybe 10 minutes at most. Perhaps these kinds of figures should be factored into the training material.

 

[Vino The Strange-One]

Before this thread closes, I will leave a message for fun. :]

 

[Raever]

@luffy is there an active support email for @RestrainedRaptor to reach out to for further help beyond just reopening tickets...? That way if it's through email the member might be able to have more detailed respectful discussions without the fear of being in trouble for seeking out further answers regarding their confusion (and without bringing it into a public space, thus no longer putting the staff in an uncomfortable spot).

 

[luffy]

@luffy is there an active support email for @RestrainedRaptor to reach out to for further help beyond just reopening tickets...? That way if it's through email the member might be able to have more detailed respectful discussions without the fear of being in trouble for seeking out further answers regarding their confusion (and without bringing it into a public space, thus no longer putting the staff in an uncomfortable spot).

No, everything is kept in tickets for consistency.

 

[quoting_mungo]

It's clear that if I ask again in another TT, I'll be suspended for 1 day due to a second count of CoC 3.1. That is why I'm here on the forums. It is literally my only option.

And staff is being incredibly nice to you by not treating these threads as another violation. You've been told the journals were a violation. You've been told how your journals were a violation. Reread the line in your removal notice starting with "-- You have done this by"; that's your answer.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

...

I truly admire your optimism and your desire to help. I wish you luck in becoming a director of your own company some day.

Reread the line in your removal notice starting with "-- You have done this by"; that's your answer.

Yes, thank you for pointing that out. If you look at the trouble tickets, you'll see that's precisely what I was disputing. (Edit: to clarify, I put forward evidence that I did not do said things, or that said things are not in the CoC at all)

No, everything is kept in tickets for consistency.

Perhaps grant me an official pass to create another ticket?

 

[RamblingRenegade]

Most sites I have been on when it comes to being a moderator, the first rule in them picking a new mod is for the person to not ask to become one or how to become one

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

Most sites I have been on when it comes to being a moderator, the first rule in them picking a new mod is for the person to not ask to become one or how to become one

Yep, that's fair. I think along the same lines when considering mods for my Discord server and DA group. At least, they shouldn't be asking without having a proven track record elsewhere.

 

[TyraWadman]

If I had to guess, it probably has everything to do with you posting journals that not only harass staff, but spread misinformation about a third party ruling. But that's just my educated guess.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

But that's just my educated guess.

I'm very relieved that you clarified that. I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think you were accusing me of anything.

Everything I've done thus far, I did for my friends and other users who believe they were unfairly treated. You are, of course, entitled to criticize the methods. One day, you might feel the need to stand up for something you believe in, and perhaps then you'll understand.

By the way, I think you and mungo would make an excellent couple. Please invite me to the wedding once it's scheduled.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand... We were talking about mod training guidelines, I believe.

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

1. Amount of detail/evidence given when formulating a submission/journal deletion notice to send to the user.
2. Judging and handling violations of CoC section 3.1
3. Judging and handling violations of AUP section 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3

Oh, one other thing I thought of, if Dragoneer is willing to help discuss this: I noticed that in all trouble tickets filed by myself and other friends, mods and admins never ever commented on, or even acknowledged that the user had provided evidence on defence of their case. Is there a policy or guideline about that too?

 

[RestrainedRaptor]

@Dragoneer your feedback on this is still very welcome. Or you can delegate to another director, if one exists.

 

[DesecratedFlame]

Never had any issue with the moderation team on here myself, but I have seen some real crappy ones on other sites. I also have no idea what you did or did not do, so my response is just a general, overall commentary on what I have seen through the years.

Typically, mods receive little to no training. They simply get told to read the rules, how to use the systems, and "to ask for clarification" if they are "unsure" if anything. After that, they usually get free reign. The rules are usually written in a way to give them as much wiggle room in their interpretations as possible.

In my experience, mods absolutely will use a rule against posting apples to infract you for posting an orange (and will pick and choose which oranges to crack down on). If you take it to an admin, 99.9 times out of 100, they will side with the mod without looking into it for more than 30 secs.

If you have gotten to the point where they have banned you from even opening tickets, just give it up. Again, I don't know what you did or did not do, but at this point, even if you were in the right, you can not win. They will just keep ruling against you until you get banned. Time to move on.