The NamePros Moderation sucks...

[bmugford]

Your post in the thread See you around was deleted. Reason: Please stay on topic. We will have to issue warnings and/or restrictions if you continue not listening to us. You are unnecessarily creating problems

Here, now this is on topic..

More and more quality members are leaving NamePros due to your actions.

Quit worrying about avatars and worry about the real issues such as members who have suspended 5+ times and are still here, members who have threatened others twice and are still here, people infracted multiple times for self-promotion still here, people just adding no value intentionally trolling and causing strife still here..

Brad

 

[Keith]

You don't, but it seemed clear that you also agreed with that part given your other responses. That is supported by your refusal to answer a simple question of whether you agree with it.

In the past, we've Liked content where members wrote a lengthy response, similar to the response by @Peak.Domains, arguing that if you Like a post, then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that you like. Clearly, everyone has their own opinion on that and both sides make good points. However, that's irrelevant to what matters here. This is a discussion with context and a lot of history, not a single "agree" reaction.

You proclaim deflection and then you deflect. You wrote more than 100 words in your reply and you couldn't write a single word for "yes" or "no" to whether you agree with that quote?


The majority of the rules exist because of member requests and feedback.

What do you mean by "personal feelings"?

If you mean making irrational or unreasonable decisions based on an emotion, then our history is clear that we don't do that. We do, however, respond to other members doing that with appropriate and swift action(s). There is no place for anarchy in a professional community.

If you mean making rational and reasonable decisions based on our feelings of a situation, which includes our perspective on the situation, our understanding of the intent behind the relevant rules, our sense of the members' objective(s), our belief about the members' intentions, etc., then yes, that is what we are tasked to do and what a moderator must do.

If that wasn't necessary, then a robot (computer program) would be doing it.

What I mean by “personal feelings” is that things should operate on a majority basis, not what hurts 2 or 3 members feelings

By the pole in the case of Elad, it’s obvious that the few complaints are majorly overruled. The mods shouldn’t be so quick to act. Maybe lay back and let the community work itself out.

 

[bmugford]

Mod Team Bravo said: ↑

In the past, we've Liked content where members wrote a lengthy response, similar to the response by @Peak.Domains, arguing that if you Like a post, then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that you like.

In our opinion, a "Thanks" or "Like" does not necessarily mean that the person thanking or liking the post agrees with, is thankful for, or likes the entire post; it could just be part of the post.

We are thankful that he said, "We are happy to support NamePros with sponsorship." The "Thanks" feature is a nice, quick way to express that.

Alright, I am seeking clarity. Those (2) comments seem to contradict each other.

1.) The first one says "arguing that if you Like a post, then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that you like"

2.) The second one says - "In our opinion, a "Thanks" or "Like" does not necessarily mean that the person thanking or liking the post agrees with, is thankful for, or likes the entire post; it could just be part of the post."

Those seem like complete opposite statements to me.

Brad

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

1.) The first one says "arguing that if you Like a post, then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that you like"

We were describing situations in which other members took that position against us: they said that if we Like a post, then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that we like.

Here's the same sentence restructured and clarified:

In the past, we've Liked content where members wrote a lengthy response arguing that "if you Like a post then it should be the whole thing and not only a part of it that you like," similar [in length] to the response by @Peak.Domains.​

 

[Keith]

@Mod Team Bravo

My best advice would be to take more of a backseat. The members will definitely weed out the bs posts and call out the nonsense.

What’s more important? A avatar pic, a sales thread, auctions, maybe a LLL.com that appears to be stolen? The pic is low on the list.

In most cases, the members are the first to pounce when a post is off key. That’s when we alert you and hope for your support. Let’s work together to grow a stronger base as opposed to taking out our own players on the same team

 

[JudgeMind]

I’ve been almost non-existent on namepros the past few months. Not that I’m using another forum, but I’ve found many of the Veterans that used to pave the way have disappeared. Many are now in chat groups on Skype, telegram or WhatsApp or spend their time on social media. There’s no denying there have been some big changes on NP over the past couple of years. Also, the moderation, imo, could lighten up a bit and perhaps allow some of the smaller things to slide. Just some constructive criticism.

 

[NameShiba]

I used to work as a forum administrator and community manager for two major gaming companies for a number of years.

The salt on the forums was near-constant.

NamePros administration -- if you feel that the userbase here is critical. You have not seen the personal hell an angry gaming community can unleash towards staff members.

I would handle support tickets on a daily basis and provide technical support and help to thousands of people across threads and support tickets.

Constructive advice sans salt.

• Please, stop using cookie-cutter CTRL + C / CTRL + V responses. This is not MailChimp -- and you are not cold emailing us.
• Do not take forum threats personally unless the person actually poses a threat. Conduct a risk assessment and if that person is deemed a legitimate threat -- report to the authorities. Not the forum.
• If there is salt, use it to season your french fries -- not lose customers and damage reputation.
• Appear friendly -- not judgemental. Dial down responses and frequency to minor infractions.

The pastebin of text response that I received after making a minor chat infraction through the community chat box was more damning than a lawyer on his way for a class-action lawsuit. Dial your responses down.

They do not appear suited to the forums in this manner -- responses appear cold, calculated, and controlling. Less savvy members to online rules and moderation would take this in a very negative light.

I canceled my gold membership across this account and others -- and would like to see the forums change for the positive before reactivating any kind of membership again.

Until then -- I can not and will not throw more money into the forums.

Moderation works best -- in moderation.

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

Hello,

As moderators, we encounter the same situations often and templates help us to provide consistency. However, we will look into updating the templates to make them less impersonal.

Please contact us if you have any additional suggestions.

Thanks for the feedback.


For internal use: https://www.namepros.com/conversations/3107002/