jh6you said:
What is funny? Maybe you are not familiar with the concept
of peer review?
I agree with till, though, that peer review is probably an
inappropriate term in this case.
Regarding my previous post, I would like to add one thing. What
I said about moderators asking another moderator to step in
is IMHO obvious also in other cases than conflicts of commercial
interest. It is also the obvious thing to do for a
moderator who gets too involved in a heated or emotional
debate where this moderator can no longer be assumed
objective. Hopefully, the moderators themselves realize
when this is the case and otherwise, somebody should tell
them when it is time to hand over the thread.
Moderation in Moderation?
One of the most painful lessons I had to learn as a supervisor was that I was a supervisor. Always. Like many people, my first supervision job was the result of a promotion from the general ranks. The folks who I supervised were in many cases my friends – folks who I went out with after work, drank many beers, and chased skirts.
For some time after my promotion, I continued to go out after work and tried to remain “friends” with my co-workers – but was finding myself in difficult positions with both my boss and those that I supervised. What I found was that once I became a supervisor, that I was always a supervisor and to act otherwise was grossly unfair to my employer, those that I supervised and to me. If I failed to act when I should have to correct an employee, I was failing my company. And in the end, my “friend” really didn’t gain by my inaction either… When I did act, sometimes my “friend” failed to place the right amount of attention since it was coming from his friend, not his supervisor.
So for Peter, or anyone else acting as a Moderator, to believe that he is or could act as just a member when he is not “wearing the funny hat” is unfair to the board and to the members. What a moderator says, by virtue of having that title under their name on the left, should be given more deference – it’s the only way things can work; to do otherwise is to have an real democracy at best, but unless this place is ready to put everything to a vote, we will more likely have anarchy. With that deference comes a responsibility to act "above reproach" - there should not be the apprearence of ethical delimias. And have money at stake, without regard to how much, creates the appearence, fairly or not.
As for the case of P/A’s board – Walt Jung made it quite clear that his name should not be attached to the PCB that P/A was trying to produce. That should have been the end of it right there. But it was not – and I suspect had P/A not been a mod, perhaps a better outcome could have resulted. And while yes, the general circuit is commonly known with Jung’s name, he *ALWAYS* has the absolute right to control his name and its use. Especially since his has commercial value. Even if P/A’s intended use was not commercial, Walt Jung still has the right to ask that his name not be used. To do otherwise is theft – P/A if he continued to use his name would be stealing from Mr. Jung, since to a large degree, what Walt Jung, Nelson Pass, John Curl have to sell is their name. They have spent decades building its value. I clearly remember Mr. Jung asking P/A to remove any reference to him from P/A’s work. It didn’t happen – and the posts using Walt’s name were not removed. I don’t know if all of them have been now.
It is also patently clear that P/A was developing a product for sale within the thread on diyAudio. I doubt that someone coming off the street would have been allowed to maintain such a thread without moderator attention.
But in this case, the moderation surely failed. Badly. Repeatedly.
Finally, I have been a member for 3 years – and have seen diyAudio.com grow from a pretty small website. I hurt my back and had to have surgery a year or so ago, so for many months I did not visit the site. It’s only in the past month or two that I have returned. So I think I can report, and I believe fairly, that the site has taken a wrong turn somewhere. It seems that almost every thread with more than 10 posts has something for sale inside it. It was notably different to me when I returned. Perhaps it is an inevitable result of the growth. I hear moderators saying that members don’t see what they are doing that makes it better – and perhaps more transparency in this process would improve the member’s perceptions. I don't blame the mod's - perhaps the analogy of the frog in the boiling pot applies here.
Sorry for being so long winded. Hopefully I got my points clearly across.
One of the most painful lessons I had to learn as a supervisor was that I was a supervisor. Always. Like many people, my first supervision job was the result of a promotion from the general ranks. The folks who I supervised were in many cases my friends – folks who I went out with after work, drank many beers, and chased skirts.
For some time after my promotion, I continued to go out after work and tried to remain “friends” with my co-workers – but was finding myself in difficult positions with both my boss and those that I supervised. What I found was that once I became a supervisor, that I was always a supervisor and to act otherwise was grossly unfair to my employer, those that I supervised and to me. If I failed to act when I should have to correct an employee, I was failing my company. And in the end, my “friend” really didn’t gain by my inaction either… When I did act, sometimes my “friend” failed to place the right amount of attention since it was coming from his friend, not his supervisor.
So for Peter, or anyone else acting as a Moderator, to believe that he is or could act as just a member when he is not “wearing the funny hat” is unfair to the board and to the members. What a moderator says, by virtue of having that title under their name on the left, should be given more deference – it’s the only way things can work; to do otherwise is to have an real democracy at best, but unless this place is ready to put everything to a vote, we will more likely have anarchy. With that deference comes a responsibility to act "above reproach" - there should not be the apprearence of ethical delimias. And have money at stake, without regard to how much, creates the appearence, fairly or not.
As for the case of P/A’s board – Walt Jung made it quite clear that his name should not be attached to the PCB that P/A was trying to produce. That should have been the end of it right there. But it was not – and I suspect had P/A not been a mod, perhaps a better outcome could have resulted. And while yes, the general circuit is commonly known with Jung’s name, he *ALWAYS* has the absolute right to control his name and its use. Especially since his has commercial value. Even if P/A’s intended use was not commercial, Walt Jung still has the right to ask that his name not be used. To do otherwise is theft – P/A if he continued to use his name would be stealing from Mr. Jung, since to a large degree, what Walt Jung, Nelson Pass, John Curl have to sell is their name. They have spent decades building its value. I clearly remember Mr. Jung asking P/A to remove any reference to him from P/A’s work. It didn’t happen – and the posts using Walt’s name were not removed. I don’t know if all of them have been now.
It is also patently clear that P/A was developing a product for sale within the thread on diyAudio. I doubt that someone coming off the street would have been allowed to maintain such a thread without moderator attention.
But in this case, the moderation surely failed. Badly. Repeatedly.
Finally, I have been a member for 3 years – and have seen diyAudio.com grow from a pretty small website. I hurt my back and had to have surgery a year or so ago, so for many months I did not visit the site. It’s only in the past month or two that I have returned. So I think I can report, and I believe fairly, that the site has taken a wrong turn somewhere. It seems that almost every thread with more than 10 posts has something for sale inside it. It was notably different to me when I returned. Perhaps it is an inevitable result of the growth. I hear moderators saying that members don’t see what they are doing that makes it better – and perhaps more transparency in this process would improve the member’s perceptions. I don't blame the mod's - perhaps the analogy of the frog in the boiling pot applies here.
Sorry for being so long winded. Hopefully I got my points clearly across.
So, Bas...
So.....spending about an hour, darn near each and every day, answering e-mails from forum members.....(even from members who say that they can't stand me, but are brave enough to ask.....)
"Jocko, I don't understand how this works. Can you explain it to me."
"Jocko, does this circuit work?"
Jocko, I'm trying to do such-and-such. What is the best way? How do I do it? Will this work?"
"Jocko, I need this part. Can you order one for me and sell it to me cheap?"
That isn't sharing with the DIY community?
Then I really must be a big silly.....[joke]
But.......
Starting a "just collecting the facts" troll, er, ah.....sorry....I mean thread.....
And then disregarding the wishes of the person who came up with all the facts in the first place that you are collecting.......
That is????
I can only assume that you are trying to make me laugh.
Stop it........I can't take anymore.........I need a break.......it is hurting.
Jocko......heading for the ibuprofen bottle.
So.....spending about an hour, darn near each and every day, answering e-mails from forum members.....(even from members who say that they can't stand me, but are brave enough to ask.....)
"Jocko, I don't understand how this works. Can you explain it to me."
"Jocko, does this circuit work?"
Jocko, I'm trying to do such-and-such. What is the best way? How do I do it? Will this work?"
"Jocko, I need this part. Can you order one for me and sell it to me cheap?"
That isn't sharing with the DIY community?
Then I really must be a big silly.....[joke]
But.......
Starting a "just collecting the facts" troll, er, ah.....sorry....I mean thread.....
And then disregarding the wishes of the person who came up with all the facts in the first place that you are collecting.......
That is????
I can only assume that you are trying to make me laugh.
Stop it........I can't take anymore.........I need a break.......it is hurting.
Jocko......heading for the ibuprofen bottle.
Sheldon said:
My resignation will not change anything in my approach to the forum, or my presence here.
I never felt like I was really a moderator, and whatever I did was mostly geared by the good of the forum and it's members, not because I wanted to act as a moderator.
Recently, I wasn't even making any moderator's decisions, as all the new guys here are so eager to take initiative.
When I look at the past, I feel I had some influence on the direction the forum has taken (and maybe thanks to me some members were not banned) But we pretty much figured our way and the direction and I don't see much that can be really improved or changed. The moderators team consists of good guys and they definitely share similar approach as I saw it years ago, when I started to be a mod. The members are well aware of rules and what is expected out of them.
I must say I really enjoyed to be a mod and I always felt good about it, as I was acting acording with my principals and in the way I would like to be handled by other mods.
However, for some reason, the WebMaster chose to take a different approach and I simply couldn't agree with his vision of how things should be run here.
Well, that's the main reason I quit (my wife seems to be happy about it
). Me, I still don't know.
Re: Moderation in Moderation?
This is often done
At the time, P-A was not a mod (he was not even on the radar)... and the only request we received was that the thread title have Walt's name removed... which was done. Had anyone asked us mods to even look at the thread, or to remove Walt's name elsewhere it would have happened. P-A may even have gotten SinBin for not respecting Walt's wishes, but he had no ability to go back and change posts already written. we mods can't even hope to see all the threads and rely heavily on members self-policing and pointing out situations that need looking at.
dave
Christer said:
This is often done
Sawzall said:
At the time, P-A was not a mod (he was not even on the radar)... and the only request we received was that the thread title have Walt's name removed... which was done. Had anyone asked us mods to even look at the thread, or to remove Walt's name elsewhere it would have happened. P-A may even have gotten SinBin for not respecting Walt's wishes, but he had no ability to go back and change posts already written. we mods can't even hope to see all the threads and rely heavily on members self-policing and pointing out situations that need looking at.
dave
Sawsall,
while I can see your point, I think it is also important that the
moderators can still be ordinary members too, with orindary
members rights to discuss etc. You don't necessarily have to
think of moderators as supervisors. If one compares with the
academic world, for instance, certain scientists are appointed
for a period of time to be on the editorial board of a journal,
or asked to be on the programme committee of a certain
conference. That means they become judges for what papers
are to be accepted to the journal/conference, but it does not
mean they have to stop being ordinary scientists at the same
time. In fact they couldn't stop to, since these extra jobs aren't
paid. There is usually no problem at all with this system. Other
collegues around the world don't suddenly start to talk differently
to me just because they have submitted a paper to a journal
where I am an editor. We still discuss in the same friendly or
unfriendly way we always have. The exception might be if
paper reviewing is not blind, so the author know which editor
made which review. I may have a suspicion a certain person
had something to do with rejecting a paper I have submitted
somewhere, but I usually cannot know, and even if I knew,
it would not and should not affect how I judge that persons
future papers that I get to review. (BTW, this is the system
called "peer review" that was mentioned previously.) This
is slightly different from the moderators job, but what I mean
is that you can be appointed a position where you exercise
power and still be one in the crowd. Perhaps you are a
moderator on another forum where some moderator of this
forum is an ordinary member.
That said, it can still make sense to discuss what are sensible
rules of conduct for moderators etc. I sometimes wonder if
it would be better if moderators had two identities on the
forum, one as ordinary member, and one as moderator, to
make it clearer both to themselves and to others when they
are acting as which?
while I can see your point, I think it is also important that the
moderators can still be ordinary members too, with orindary
members rights to discuss etc. You don't necessarily have to
think of moderators as supervisors. If one compares with the
academic world, for instance, certain scientists are appointed
for a period of time to be on the editorial board of a journal,
or asked to be on the programme committee of a certain
conference. That means they become judges for what papers
are to be accepted to the journal/conference, but it does not
mean they have to stop being ordinary scientists at the same
time. In fact they couldn't stop to, since these extra jobs aren't
paid. There is usually no problem at all with this system. Other
collegues around the world don't suddenly start to talk differently
to me just because they have submitted a paper to a journal
where I am an editor. We still discuss in the same friendly or
unfriendly way we always have. The exception might be if
paper reviewing is not blind, so the author know which editor
made which review. I may have a suspicion a certain person
had something to do with rejecting a paper I have submitted
somewhere, but I usually cannot know, and even if I knew,
it would not and should not affect how I judge that persons
future papers that I get to review. (BTW, this is the system
called "peer review" that was mentioned previously.) This
is slightly different from the moderators job, but what I mean
is that you can be appointed a position where you exercise
power and still be one in the crowd. Perhaps you are a
moderator on another forum where some moderator of this
forum is an ordinary member.
That said, it can still make sense to discuss what are sensible
rules of conduct for moderators etc. I sometimes wonder if
it would be better if moderators had two identities on the
forum, one as ordinary member, and one as moderator, to
make it clearer both to themselves and to others when they
are acting as which?
Re: Re: Moderation in Moderation?
It is good to hear it works that way, and I did not mean I
thought elsewise.
I think this is an important point. It sometimes seems that when
a forum gets moderated, people stop to help keeping the forum
tidy and let things run along until the moderators step in and
say stop. I think it is all members responsibility to help avoid
the situations arise where moderators have to take action.
Any ordinary member can say that they think a debate is
getting too heated and the participants ought to cool down,
for instance. We don't have to wait for the mods to say it
and then sinbin them.
planet10 said:
It is good to hear it works that way, and I did not mean I
thought elsewise.
I think this is an important point. It sometimes seems that when
a forum gets moderated, people stop to help keeping the forum
tidy and let things run along until the moderators step in and
say stop. I think it is all members responsibility to help avoid
the situations arise where moderators have to take action.
Any ordinary member can say that they think a debate is
getting too heated and the participants ought to cool down,
for instance. We don't have to wait for the mods to say it
and then sinbin them.
SY said:
We do. If you don't see the cop icon (), we're just ordinary members. We use the icon when taking mod action.
I know, but even without the cop in a post it still says moderator
under your name, for instance. What I meant is that perhaps
moderators shouldn't be visible as moderators at all until they
take action as moderators. Of course, most people will know
who the mods are, but I still think it would make a difference.
till said:
Sorry Till , but you really have a very negative way of seeing things.
Your view on Per-Anders ( that's his name ) and Peter's role on the forum and the connection to them wanting to sell their products is unrealistic to say the least. Even if there is a slight smell of what you've accused them of the way you judge on them is over the top. For example that they set the standards on this board. I wish there were more people like them working so seriously on quality and esthetics. I've seen enough Veroboards with badly soldered halfbaked circuits here by members that got help from the guy that has a "well developed ability of autosuggestion" as you call it. I do notice some jealousy here.
Concerning the Zobel network, well there's a point in that as I also have the opinion that leaving it out in might give problems as it is an essential part of the circuit ( even though it may sound 1% less good ). I don't have the idea that both guys make much money on the stuff you think they sell because they're showing it on the forum. If they wouldn't put so much time in the forum they could make more money by having more valuable time to produce their products.
There are probably members that don't present themselves openly as tradesmen that make much more money behind the curtains via PMs.
People who criticise moderators don't get threatened, where do you get that from ? And don't start about narcism, some members suffer from that as well. This is a board that's visited by different people and it needs to be moderated as sometimes things go out of hand. Sometimes a group forms against a certain person and I think that should not be tolerated. This moderator thing costs time and energy without any revenue, please be happy that there is moderation and that some people care to do that. If a moderator would misuse his status for commercial purposes I am 100 % sure he gets moderated by his "collegues". I really don't know where you get these ideas from ?!?! The mods aren't here for the things you throw for their feets now, they're here for cleaning up things.
I guess you're the type of guy that just likes to criticise everything, even when things are OK....
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.