So you are a moderator.

[Xyrin]

I would totally be lax. What I do on my forum. All you need to do is PM a guy and say "Hey. You broke a rule and here's how you fix it" unless it's something like disrespect or trolling. Then you infract or warn them. No need to infract for everything.

 

[Sammi]

I'm probably forgetting a billion things

Uh, I'm another one of those people who's really relaxed. Hell, even when I'm yelling at people I feel so informal about it. (When I'm not making myself look stupid anyway. XD) I don't really want to come off as some strict person, because tbh that's not really what I am. The last thing I want is for members to go "omg that forum's modded by a real meanie and I never want to post there."

I'm an awfully forgiving person; I've never been the kind of person to give warnings/infractions unless they reaaaaally have it coming. I'd rather talk things over and try to get them to learn before jumping the gun and leaving something on their record. For the most part I usually just delete the offending post and hope they notice.

To be honest, I'm probably not helping change OVP for the better as much as I should. So far the biggest thing I've done is re-start Poll of the Week (and I took forever doing so...). I guess I also re-did rules but it wasn't that exciting. *shrugs* It's not that I don't want to; I care about OVP and don't like seeing it dead. It's just that I'm not good with ideas. D:

 

[Seki]

I will be friendly to those who abide to the rules and harsh to those who don't abide to the rules.

 

[Kenshin5]

Depends on the type of offensive, length they have been here, the forum the offensive occurred in.

Warning somebody for something that is minute just seems overboard. Too me before I do anything I would look at their user history. Do they have prior warnings or infractions, if they do then are they over the same thing that is in question at the moment. Then to proceed to either lock(pending the topic is dead or gets way off topic or delete the post and detail what they did wrong and what they can do to correct and build about that they messed up with).

I mean sure you could warn somebody for piddly things but that's not going to teach them to adjust their actions any more then it would if you just gave them a verbal warning telling them "You did this in violation of said rule, so refrain from repeating said action in the future" That's all it takes no warn no infraction. Now if it's blatant trolling, flaming, or flame baiting then that seems to be a different story.

As for how I would conduct myself seems pretty simple. Do the job set out. I would be there to essentially maintain order, so I would lay down the law in accordance to the rules. I would probably come off quite generic and robotic about it at times. Else where I try and make it as interpersonal as possible, because it is not my job to let emotion slur my ruling on a matter.

Like Machiavelli said "It's better to be loved then feared" so do you want to be a ruler that is loved or one that is feared? It seems like two extremes and most staff probably strive for a middle ground or at least I do. I wouldn't want to be a push over, but then again there is no reason to be a complete hardass to get the point across.

 

[Kairi]

Locking threads is easy (although back in the day we were way too kneejerk with the power). Participating in your forum, finding the real issues, and reviving it (if need be) is so much harder and more abstract. But we need it! That's why they tend to hire for a forum based on activity in it. If you can think of a particular forum that has a distinct feel, chances are it has a pretty active mod.

I tried really hard to do that for every single forum on the site, and I got burned out pretty bad. Once you get to the smod+ status, your focus does need to shift away from individual forums. I'm still not convinced we need that many higher staff, though.

 

[Melody]

If I were mod, I'd probably close/delete and politely VM once or twice first, depending on how new or experienced the user is. Then the warning shot and finally the big red.

 

[Astinus]

I guess I could say that I'm a pretty relaxed moderator. I never hand out warnings/infractions, since I do employ a three-strike method, and people tend to get why their post was deleted (which is the biggest offense in FF&W, for posts that aren't constructive criticism). I'm very relaxed when it comes to doing anything else for mod work, since trying to be harsh stressed me out too much. So I just sit back and watch over things in my section and step in when need be, but I'm not really harsh.

I have changed FF&W in the time I've been modded. Merged it, changed the rules, got rid of old activities and threads, and got the new community of members in that section involved.

 

[Her]

damnit i was hoping this thread would be a showcase of LOOK AT ME I COULD BE A GOOD MOD ONE DAY JUST GIVE ME A CHANCE LOOK HOW GOOD I COULD BE

In my head, I'd think I was a super cool mad who upheld the sanctity of said forum and everyone loved me im the jesus of moderators etc but in reality, I'd definitely be biased and too lax on the rules. Even worse, I'd probably commit the unforgivable sin of locking threads without a funny anecdote oh mary please forgive me hail mary x1000.

 

[PlatinumDude]

Depending on the situation, I'd be harsh to anyone who really breaks the rules. For example, one of my main sections is the Competitive Battling Center. If someone doesn't follow the right format for posting a team, then I close the thread and tell them to re-do it with the right format. If they can't, I'd move the thread to the in-game team section and re-open it.

 

[mondays suck]

I'd probably be a relatively lax mod, who'd only close or move threads if they're completely, and I mean completely, out of place and only punish the worst kinds of offenses, like insults or severe spam. I don't know, I just like that kind of forum climate. I guess I could say I think that moderation is best used in moderation.

 

[Taemin]

Yeah, I don't think I'd be a rough mod. I'd probably give 3 warnings at least to a single person about a continual problem before infracting them, just because things happen, sometimes people forget rules. I know I've broken rules accidentally in the past myself.

Pretty much this.

That's more or less how I used to mod New Users / Welcome.

I had a 'three strikes' method if the rule they broke wasn't very severe. Also because I was dealing with newbies, and rarely do people read the rules once and never break any of them, most people have to learn from their mistakes. So I'd warn them up to three times, and then infract them if they still didn't get it. > >; If they blatantly seemed to ignore the rules, or their offense was bad enough, then they'd get a straight infraction.

Even though I'm not bound to NU/W anymore, it still use the same methods when dealing with users are newer to the community. If you're an olbie with 1,000+ posts, who should know the rules by now, then I just infract. :D /shot

 

[Jack O'Neill]

Leaving aside the sheer absurdity of me being a moderator here, I would be harsh, but ultimately fair. There is no bias here. I do not look down on newbies, and I do not give special consideration to veterans or staff. As far as I'm concerned, they're all equally worthless. You break the rules, you get infracted. Simple as that.

 

[The Corrupt Plague]

There would be little to no chance of me ever becoming one unless somebody decided to pull a prank or something since I'm pretty low on the food chain. Still, if I ever did become one I would try to keep order without ruling with an iron fist. This means that I wouldn't be handing out infractions like candy and instead calmly tell them in a PM to knock it off. If the disruptive behavior persists, they get the infraction. Of course, I would make exceptions for spambots and kill them with fire.

 

[Montgomery]

I've known a number of moderators on different forums who, after being promoted to staff, promised to be flexible and lax. They did for a while, then they were rude, unforgiving and impatient, rendering the members calling them 'jerks'. This surreal authority changes a person.

My answer would be stick with rules and punish whoever breaks them. Simple as that.

 

[Captain Hobo.]

Well, I am on staff on other forums and I am pretty easy going:)

 

[Ayselipera]

UMM. I think I was lax as a moderator. I usually just pointed out what was wrong about whatever they did and left it at that and only then gave out a warning if they kept doing it. I always felt like I was nice about it too, so sorry if anyone took what I said as mean because it wasn't!!!

Anywayyyy, idk sometimes I question why there are so many rules here or anywhere on the internet. I feel like the internet should be my passage way into doing whatever I feel like, but yet I'm faced with a bunch of rules here and there.

 

[Yoshikko]

It really depends, but overall I think I wouldn't really be that harsh. There are some situations though where being harsh is necessary, and I can be very strict, and in those cases it's definitely how I would act. But mostly, I'd try to be friendly, but still disciplined, because I think that making a mistake is okay, it just needs to be mentioned, but when someone is intentionally breaking the rules, it's a whole different story because then they are doing it for the sake of breaking a rule, and if all is well, they know the consequences.

 

[-Jared-]

I probably would be pretty lenient. Mainly, if I saw an issue, I would contact the person responsible, and respectfully explain to them what they did wrong. If they responded respectfully, than I would let them off without any punishment, because they would probably seem repentant.

If they were disrespectful however, I would keep an eye on them, but I wouldn't immediately infract them for subsequent incidents. I would still try to reason with them, but after a while, I would probably infract them for incessant rule breaking. But I would definitely give plenty of chances.

 

[RetroRoller]

If I was a moderator, I would be friendly when inducing punishments like infractions, but if there is a user who has been around on PC for a while, and should have the knowledge not to... say... revive month old threads, I would just bluntly tell them not to revive month old threads. Obviously, repeated offenses would spark my meaner side and I would INFRACT THEM INTO NEXT WEEK! Just kidding, but repeat offenses are always annoying, you know what I'm talking about, right guys?

I would also not take kindly to backchat or disrespect. I would obviously handle someone calling me 'gay' or 'homo' on PC with strictness, but because I am actually a homosexual, seeing 'gay' used in that way does annoy me, but you gotta keep your cool and treat it like any other mod would, right? :)

 

[Livewire]

I feel I'd be more lenient if Other Chat wasn't a trollpit when I inherited it last December. I tend to be strict. As far as I'm concerned, the rules should provide you everything you need and they suffice as a warning.