On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Donald Whytock <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Christian Grobmeier <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Do you really want to discuss a users behavior in public? >> Wow, I really don't want to do that. I strongly believe that only a >> few people would discuss another guys behavior in public. > > It happens. In fact it happened here, on this list, yesterday. There > was some pretty excessive vitriol, open and in public. And yet it > seemed to work into more mature and rational discussion today. > > If behavior discussions are going to occur at all, it's probably > better that they happen in public rather than there be the feeling of > a secret faceless committee to which users can neither respond nor > appeal. The latter can lead to discontent. >
Exactly. And where do users go to complain about moderators? I had one person contact me off list, not about the support forum moderation specifically, but about moderation in another part of OOo. He had concerns about heavy-handiness in moderation, of unpopular views being booted. We shouldn't hide our heads in the sand and pretend that everything at OOo was perfect and that everyone got along, and everyone was happy. This is not true. There were power centers within the project, there was abuse and there was discontent. LibreOffice didn't just happen on a whim. I think a jolt of transparency will do us much good. We need to learn to collaborate well with each other openly. We need to be moderate in moderation. If we think we need 30 private moderation forums and 30 moderators in order to do user support, then that is a warning sign crying out that we're doing the wrong thing. Like I asked before, if we had zero private moderator forums, what bad thing would happen? Why can we replace secret tribunals with open, peer pressure and leadership by example? -Rob > Don >
