Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Admin interventions & decisions thread

12

Hey guys,

Thought about this thread to give feedback and opinion on admin interventions.

Both when admins took a decision, or when they should take a decision.

I think it can be helpful on both sides.

Admin can make mistakes, be too lenient, too forceful, or act on personal whims.

And people on the receiving end of a warning tend to feel that the admin is being biased or unfair against them. So hearing from the community that the intervention might have been called for can help people face their mistakes (rather than self-deny), and potentially fix them.

Some of the admin decisions can also be taken by the community, or following the community's preference.

Matthew Whitewood and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewoodselffriend
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I think a good admin

  • Builds trust
  • Remains objective
  • Considers input from the community
  • Is decisive and uses authority when appropriate

One of my main challenges as a long-standing forum member is sometimes I would like to express my thoughts objectively without coming across as power-aligning with authority.

I think any sort of elitist or inner circle impression on the forum community may hinder honest expression and exchanges on the forum.

Maybe we should have admin intervention and community members with veto power. I think it's more efficient and effective when the admin can step in whenever needed.

Though if the admin is unsure, he can encourage the community to give third-party input.

Lucio Buffalmano and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Lucio Buffalmanoselffriend

Hey Matthew,

Thank you for sharing that man!

Yeah, the apprehension on what sharing one's third-party thoughts might mean is part and parcel of the (power) dynamics.

Sometimes I asked for private feedback to some community members over some situations, both some I know who read but don't write, and active members.
More than one person mentioned they wanted to share their thoughts but were afraid of coming across as power-alining if they agreed with some of my points. I thought that was a loss for the community as the person who received the feedback might have failed to realize that it was several people who thought the feedbacked behavior was poor -and that might have cost him a chance for self-development-.

Plus, I'm sure there are, or there will be, situations when people disagree with the admin, or think his behavior/intervention is poor, but do not say so to avoid "pissing him off".
Maybe this thread will help in that direction.

All I can add is: speak up, since everyone will gain more with a freer exchange.
The forum's self-development goal is to enable members to win at life, outside the forum, not to win in the forum :).

 

Matthew Whitewood and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewoodselffriend
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Thank you for sharing as well!

I think the challenge is to draft out a response that is

  • Detailed & precise enough to explain the underlying dynamics
  • Interpreting the grey areas of the context
  • Potentially making the discussion messier in a single thread
  • Confrontation & escalation on an asynchronous medium

I prefer addressing challenging topics with synchronous communication (face-to-face, phone calls).
Because it's best not to have a drawn-out confrontation.
It's distracting in many ways.

All I can add is: speak up, since everyone will gain more with a freer exchange.
The forum's self-development goal is to enable members to win at life, outside the forum, not to win in the forum :).

I think new members may need to "win" a bit on the forum to get the value from the interactions.
A video explaining the forum guidelines may be useful.
And sending this video through an introductory email during a new user's sign-up may help get him/her up to speed.

This may not be a priority as it has no obvious short-term benefits towards advancing the knowledge of power dynamics.
The more naturally inclined people as you mentioned previously don't need any sort of explicit grease or push towards participating effectively on the forum.

Lucio Buffalmano and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Lucio Buffalmanoselffriend
Quote from Matthew Whitewood on May 1, 2021, 6:24 pm

One of my main challenges as a long-standing forum member is sometimes I would like to express my thoughts objectively without coming across as power-aligning with authority.

Hi Matthew,

If you like, could you please provide one example (or a hypothetical scenario) that someone's thought could not be expressed objectively because of the thoughts are not power-aligning with authority?

I am willing to learn more as I find your two helpful posts, along with this thread, are written in a very sophisticated and intelligent way.

I will give a personal example.

In the recent exchange between you (selffriend) and Lucio on the Feedbacks & Clarifications thread, I wanted to address that interaction in a manner that is objective to both sides.

I wanted to convey that, if I agreed with Lucio in certain aspects, it is because I am evaluating the interaction as a third party and I'm not simply deferring to the admin authority which Lucio has a role to play in this forum.

As Lucio has mentioned, that will take up quite a bit of time with the further risk that it will take up even more time.

selffriend has reacted to this post.
selffriend

I noticed that there are a few banned users on this forum.
Transitioned recently flagged up one on the other thread.
I guess for this particular example in the screenshot, he is trying to be an imposter of Lucio.

Is that a question as in "what about the banned users", Matthew?

If so, yes, there are a few, but none of them were active users.
Such as, no active-posting user has been banned so far.

Only one "warning" was issued to an active user, and I guess you're aware of that.

If an active user requires a ban, we can discuss it in this thread and/or update this thread.

Most of the banned ones were spammers or banned as pre-emptive spam-prevention, as in the case of that "Lucio2".

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I could have phrased that better into a question.
I guess somehow I was subconsciously afraid of asking about banned users for some reason.
I felt that it could be a sensitive question on some level.

I was curious about the user, viktorcheberachko, getting banned after stumbling upon the thread about Bangkok, Thailand.

Yeah, I thought so, props to you for recognizing the dynamics and owning to them :).

If I remember correctly, the guy added some hyperlinks to the dental clinic, and now that I checked his post history, probably also to an escort agency.

If you check his post history you quickly see that his posts weren't adding any value, it was just filler posts to look like a "normal" user.

And to draw a nugget of wisdom from this story rather than wasting time on spammer:

If you truly gotta deceive to add your link, either do it well, or don't waste time at all.
At least, not on a website where people are most likely to recognize your BS.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
12
Processing...