"Backseat moderating"...
Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:09 am
OK, this issue was brought up on NSMBX a while ago before it got merged into SMBX:R (or was it on Knux's?), but I don't think anything actually took place and the rule is still there.
The issue that I am talking about is the backseat moderating rule, and I got the inspiration to make this topic after reading one specific post that told a user not to backseat moderate.
First of all, what is backseat moderating?
This is when a user posts in a thread telling them to follow the rules, and that they're breaking the rules.
What do the staff say about it?
According to the staff, it's against the rules and you should not do it.
When moderators say that its against the rules to backseat moderate, it is pretty much like me saying to read the rules before posting, and the moderators would say that it is against the rules to say that. This is because mentioning the rules is making a person aware of the rules here.
If a staff member says not to do it, then the user who was backseat moderating would be put into a position like a character from a television show who was causing trouble, trying to help. but then, no backseat moderation seems kind of a dumb rule, as it only wastes time saying "don't backseat moderate" and also causes trouble like someone would then reply "ok sorry", which is a useless post. This may cause another staff member to tell the other user who said "ok sorry" not to make useless posts.
Is it in the rules?
Yes, it is in the rules. Joey even posted a pic to show us that backseat moderating should not be taken and that the Report button exists for a purpose. Here it is again:
But try applying it to real life situations. You're in school, and you see a kid being bullied in the playground. What would you do? Would you go and tell a teacher, or would you tell off the bully? Backseat moderating is the equivalent of telling off the bully, and trying to enforce the rules. If you wanted to use the Report button, that's the same as telling the teacher that someone was being bullied, and...You can't! You would be expelled or punished for doing so!
This brings me onto the fact that a lot of the time, this rule is often misinterpreted. Here's an example I found from back in July in a thread:
My point is that many threads have been closed due to backseat moderation, which means that many, many moderators these days misinterpret the meaning of it, or that the term has lost its original meaning, which isn't helped by the fact that the rule's explanations are very woolly. I suggest we should change this rule around, making it have more detailed explanations, or just get rid of it altogether. What do you think?
The issue that I am talking about is the backseat moderating rule, and I got the inspiration to make this topic after reading one specific post that told a user not to backseat moderate.
First of all, what is backseat moderating?
This is when a user posts in a thread telling them to follow the rules, and that they're breaking the rules.
What do the staff say about it?
According to the staff, it's against the rules and you should not do it.
When moderators say that its against the rules to backseat moderate, it is pretty much like me saying to read the rules before posting, and the moderators would say that it is against the rules to say that. This is because mentioning the rules is making a person aware of the rules here.
If a staff member says not to do it, then the user who was backseat moderating would be put into a position like a character from a television show who was causing trouble, trying to help. but then, no backseat moderation seems kind of a dumb rule, as it only wastes time saying "don't backseat moderate" and also causes trouble like someone would then reply "ok sorry", which is a useless post. This may cause another staff member to tell the other user who said "ok sorry" not to make useless posts.
Is it in the rules?
Yes, it is in the rules. Joey even posted a pic to show us that backseat moderating should not be taken and that the Report button exists for a purpose. Here it is again:
Spoiler: show
This brings me onto the fact that a lot of the time, this rule is often misinterpreted. Here's an example I found from back in July in a thread:
DimitrisPowerSeven wrote:Projects and episodes need screenshots
To be honest, the second post was redundant. DmitrisPowerSeven already told jetace98 to post screenshots, and he was only kindly enforcing the rules, so how is it backseat moderating? To be honest, it's impossible to say that a project/level/graphic needs screenshots without it seeming like backseat moderating. In this case, it wasn't backseat moderating, he was just pointing some stuff out to a new user.Valtteri wrote:Don't backseat moderate, DimitrisPowerSeven. jetace98, please get something done before posting a collaboration. You have 24 hours to post screenshots or your topic will be locked.
My point is that many threads have been closed due to backseat moderation, which means that many, many moderators these days misinterpret the meaning of it, or that the term has lost its original meaning, which isn't helped by the fact that the rule's explanations are very woolly. I suggest we should change this rule around, making it have more detailed explanations, or just get rid of it altogether. What do you think?