Hi all,

I've been running an open discussion forum for close to five years now. I am in the process of switching to Gossamer Forum (psyched!) and I am thinking of setting up moderators.

I am wondering what everyones approach is, from the practical to the philosphical, regarding moderators.

How do you choose a moderator?
How do you enlist their services?
What do you expect from them?
What sort of privilages do you give them?
Do you have moderator policy or guideline? (Can you publish it here?)
Are there any drawbacks or things to watch out for regarding moderators?

Other comments?

Thanks so much for your input.
Mike

Mike,

Big subject with a lot of room for discussion. I'm using mod's in my forum and intend to continue to do so.

Whether you use mod's or not depends on what you are trying to achieve with your forum. I'm trying to spark interest and draw more visitors to my site. A good moderator can start threads that will enliven the discussions providing a "launch pad" for the forum users. Philosophically my thought on moderators are that they are there to facilitate the discussions and monitor for infractions of the forum rules. They are not there to "manage" the forum, or to attempt to restrict discussion in any manner.

Fortunately I've been able to recruit moderators with relative ease. Mostly from other forums that I've been involved with for a number of years. The task doesn't require a great deal of time unless the mod. wants to be especially active in the forum. And that's fine too as long as I don't end up with a "manager". Only some experience with the person you select and a little time will tell you if things are working out.

I give them "moderator" priveledges within the forum they are associated with. Other than that forum, they're just like any other user. From an Admin. viewpoint I can monitor "bans" and I do expect an explantion if that action is deemed necessary.

My moderator "guideline" is the "forum guidline." In that I'm pretty much an advocate of "free speech" there are few things a user can do that will get a post deleted or the user banned. Threatening another member, posting copyrighted material not their own, or posting personal information about another member are among the few I won't tolerate.

The drawbacks are picking a moderator that runs amok in your forum. Selecting stable individuals helps a lot here.

One of the things I'm trying to implement in the forum is a "Report This Post to Moderator" feature. Basically a link at the lower right of every post that spawns an email to the moderator of that forum and to admin. The email will contain the "post_id" of the offending post. This will allow the registered members of the forum to more or less be self policing and significantly reduces the amount of time a mod. has to spend reading posts for violations. I'm trying to get some info from Gossamer to finsih this up. Hopefully they'll respond to my thread on that subject soon.

Ishmael

Ishmael,

Great tips and advice. I think you've laid out a good moderator philosophy. Thanks for taking the time.

Mike

Not a prob. Mike. Good luck.

Ishmael

I have a pretty active site, and have some great moderators. Some of the first, I chose people who were actively working on my Links install (the forum is an outgrowth of that).

As above, I give them special privledges only in their forum, but they also have acces to Mod Only forums- we have a couple of those, too.

I do try to read every post, but at some point, that will be impossible. You have to TRUST your mods to be an extention of your eyes and ears on the board. There is a fine line between giving them their autonomy, and giving them too much. I have a specific post (stickies, of course!) in the mod forum letting them know what I expect. But I also let them make a lot of decisions on their own, like if and when to move posts, edit titles, etc.

I think it is VERY important to never overrule a mod on the boards... I always handle any disagreements via PM with only that mod. If there is a lesson to be learned or anything, I post a summary for all the mods (without pointing directly to a mod).

Because of the nature of my site, we do get a few "spiffs" from various companies. I try to give most away in contests to users, but hold some back to give to Mods as a reward.
dave

Big Cartoon DataBase
Big Comic Book DataBase

Mike,

Sorry I did not get back to your PM. I can ramble about this quite a bit so apologies in advance for the long post. You've received some good replies already so I'm going to try and add around that. First thing I suggest is that you make sure you are clear in your own mind what you are trying to achieve with your forums. Frame your own philosophy. Understand your community.

I hear you when you say you don't want "managers". That may be true in most cases, but when your community expands, and especially if they're a rather rowdy bunch, I can assure you you'll need a certain level of management. It has to remain non-intrusive though. When it grows up you'll always need leadership (which is different from management) and almost always some management. Failure to recognize this and actually embrace that fact is historically one of the killers of online communities.

I suggest anyone interested in this topic read Clay Shirky's article - A group is its own worst enemy.

It's a great synopsis of why and how online communities fail and succeed. Remember, you are dealing with a community and human nature first, the technology follows. It's understanding this that matters. It's not the number of rules you come up with - Dropzone.com has 4 rules only (your rules look strangely familiar! ), the rest are guidelines. It's a bit of Complexity Theory in practice, but that's a topic all on it's own!

People still incorrectly assume that no control or almost no moderation is what's good for online communities and results in "clear communication". It's quite the opposite. (I can hear everyone choke in the room!) It may be what's good for individuals (sometimes) or small self-managed groups but it is simply not what is good for large communities in a virtual world characterized by ubiquity and anonymity. If you think so, you're just wrong. You may not like it, but we should not put it forward as the working model if years of experience on the Internet has proven it to be fatally flawed on many levels.

If your community is timid then you may get away with it for a short while. But it doesn't scale. I have more than 25,000 skydivers making more than 2,000 posts per day, approaching 1,000,000 total posts. The formula for skydivers = (surfers*skatebaorders+rockclimbers)^2-yourgrandpappy. An opinionated fiery bunch who live it to the fullest and speak their minds. We're not swapping recipes (well, we've actually done that as well!). I know you're a surfer so you'll relate.

I chose moderators who had been on my site for a long time. I chose individuals who first and foremost had shown over time that they understood the nature and character of the community I am trying to create. I also had to choose people who knew something (quite a bit) about the subject-matter of the forums they would be moderating. They are as someone else pointed out an extension of me on the boards, but they are also my BS filters. Our sport is dangerous and I need someone to call BS when a user posts dangerous or bad advice. It's not ten-pin bowling. Find people you trust and who buys into your philosophy. Find people who are patient and thick-skinned. Make sure they are nice. Above all find people who will act with integrity at the moment of choice. Then stand by them.

When all is said and done, make sure you're all having fun!

Safe swoops
Sangiro