Thread: What The Hell Happened to Ben?

Okay seriously guys, this has all been exceptionally fast. One minute he's a senior member, one minute he's an assigned mod, then a super mod, then a user who's still assigned to forums.
Can I get someone to cover what the hell happened and why there's been a TOTAL lack of staff cohesion on this?

Just FYI - If someone becomes a Senior Member, they're allowed to be re-instated to their former position if one asks. I don't understand why this is big deal. Ben was a senior member, he asked to be a SMod again and that's what I did. If there was a problem it means he shouldn't have been a Senior Member (Senior Members mean "left on good terms") So all this extra stuff about "well I dunno why he got reinstated is crap, I'm sorry.

Yes I demoted him when I noticed the staff saying all the problems. If we got members constantly ranting about another moderator on staff, it's counter-productive. We're wasting more time on that mod than on the site. So I removed him from staff for the time being. You want to talk to him and figure out how to resolve your differences to where he can be mod again, I have no problem with that. But right now this is a nuisance.

It would be Me and Surgat actually. While Dragoneer is the owner of the site Surgat and I are the main forum admins. Grimfang retired.

Whoa I really need to buy a new computer to keep up with this stuff.
EDIT: If Ben's not a mod anymore then admins please remove him from being designated as a mod in certain subforums.

Well I demoted him from Supermod status, if there are still problems being even a designated mod then I'll remove him. Right now I want the issues out on the plate and resolved. This way we can see if this a permanent solution or a workable one.

From what I see from everyone these are the general problems with Ben.

1. He's young and makes impulsive decisions and seems often off the cuff, knee jerk and oversensitive.
- I'd like to say this isn't limited to Ben however, the amount of this behavior seems to be the biggest disruption.

2. Constantly seems to make suggestions that are counter-productive or counter-intuitive to the forum.
- I generally have no problems with making suggestions, and we do try to adapt to changes. However, the problems I see with Bens suggestion is that:

a. they wanted to mirror another site and I feel the forums can have similar structures ...it doesn't need to be a clone of X site. FA shouldn't be another DA and FAF shouldn't be Something Awful Jr.

b. He's extremely argumentative about them. If we're gonna have a battle of words and not knowing when to quit - we waste time. This is a volunteer site and even I have limited schedules. - Hence why even though I'm always logged into IRC, I don't really talk much in it.

3. He seems Power hungry.
- I'm going to again state this isn't limited to Ben. When I keep hearing or seeing "when am I gonna be an admin?" or similar posts from staff it can also look that way. However, there is another problem when I noticed is that people feel or have seen in the past Ben reversing others infractions, and even overwriting other moderator's announcements (Which feels like credit stealing) when adjustments are minor.

So have I gotten everything down so far? Anyone else have things to add?

We can use this week to resolve it, or determine if Ben is just not fit for staff.

Which reminds me, when the hell am I going to be an admin? Seriously.

Originally Posted by Witchiebunny

I wasn't aware of the rule regarding Senior Members, Arshes and rather than err in that regard and step on toes, I figured it couldn't hurt to ask him to go to you, so that it would be sure to be okay. It wasn't meant to be a dig, rather me being cautious. I don't consider the forums my jurisdiction, as it were, and deferred to you/Dragoneer on the matter.

I was also being cautious here, I wasn't sure how best to handle the situation, with Ben being a special case and deferred to Arshes as Forum Lead Administrator and Dragoneer as owner. I consider myself on the same level as the other supermods/main-site admins, just with a green badge instead of blue.

@Arshes, I believe witchiebunny summed everything up rather nicely.

Carenath, and the summary still hasn't addressed how this should be resolved ultimately. My de-modding him isn't necessarily a permanent step until we have the discussion to make it so.

Because for one he came to me asking to step down and regardless of reason "ragequit" or not it was deemed as left on good terms. None of the issues were addressed to me personally so it's going to be "He left on good terms as a moderator".

Yes I'm aware of the bickering but it can also be viewed as he took the high road and backed down as moderator. I think it was unfair of you guys on the chat and here to say it was "rage quit". So when people are being opposing forces he just shuts up and doesn't continue doing his job or he makes a decision to take a break?

Understand I do agree with some of the grievances addressed but there's too much "ok I agree with so and so said on the IRC" we need to also address it here. So can you blame Xaerun's assessment?

The problem isn't just Ben here, and the reason for his removal was so we can have the discussion here too instead of fast paced IRC since not everyone has 24/7 access to. There needs to be better cohesion and not a dependence on one chat over the other.

When Ben was upset over his removal (temp or not) can you really blame him? Instead it was more "my side look Ben is bickering again"...exactly how are you supposed to take someone suspending or firing you? Last I recall most people don't take it very well.

So do we agree that he should be permanently removed altogether or do we see if maybe he's just suited for part of the forums and not a Super Mod - because that's an option too. Not everyone is cut out to be "GOD MOD"

After thinking about this a bit I've come to terms with what I think really ought to be addressed here.

Before I say anything of Ben, I will say something of the forum and moderating it...that is a precursor to the problem here. It should be expected and enforced that every moderator should communicate with other moderators when they step into their territory. What I mean by this is that Super Mods can reverse what other Mods do right?

You can reverse infractions, you can close, approve, un-approve, re-open, and move threads. You can give perm, and temp bans. I assume you can reverse those as well. You as a super mod have the ability to go behind other people's backs and reverse what they do, or do more than what they did.

To prevent problems of hostility we should always communicate when we enter the above territory. Lets say for example Mod A gave out an infraction. I don't agree with it. So I should contact Mod A and say such and discuss it. Then if anything is done it's done with both parties having discussed what is to be done if anything at all. The same goes for a thread. If Mod A closed a thread and I want to re-open it, I should talk to Mod A first. I should seek to understand why he closed it also express why I thought it shouldn't be closed.

If you care enough to sit there and want to reverse what other mods did you should care enough to talk to those mods first. Same goes for going into their stickies and changing them. I think here one of the big issues is that some of use feel that we are being overstepped and we don't like it. This creates hostility we don't need.

Moving on another thing that I'd like to bring up is that there are times when and this came up as an issue of sorts with Ben, I brought it up elsewhere that when a thread went off topic, a mod comes in, and gets it back on track. Then after all is good and done, it's done right? Except sometimes one mod decided more ought to have been done. Perhaps they did know a mod has taken care of it. Or perhaps they don't care. Either way this should not happen.

I would love to see a note system that you can put on individual threads that only other mods can read. So if you see a thread and you see that button that says "There is a note on this thread" you can read what another mod has written. As such if this is possible, it prevents things like above. People overstepping other mods and going in an doing things. I post this here because the above factors into some of the issues that exist around Ben's behavior.

As for Ben, I don't know if I really even want him as a mod for assigned areas. He certainly does not need to be a super mod. His past behavior suggests to me he cannot be responsible with it. As for being an assigned mod...is he going to end up being a little tyrant in his own assigned area? Or will the lack of bigger mod tools end up calming his behavior?

Perhaps if we are to have him as a mod, let him moderate less active areas first to see how he handles it. Perhaps in time his behavior can change he can be given bigger areas to mod.

Lastly I have one last thing to say. Are we at some consensus that we should be lenient towards people who post a bit of off-topic chatter and fun posting? If that is the case it should be communicated to all mods new and old...that this is the stance we take. As such people won't end up racking up infractions and appearing a problem when they are not, because the fun post a lot.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Carenath, and the summary still hasn't addressed how this should be resolved ultimately. My de-modding him isn't necessarily a permanent step until we have the discussion to make it so.

I wasn't addressing that, I was simply stating that you listed all the salient points that lead to this event.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Because for one he came to me asking to step down and regardless of reason "ragequit" or not it was deemed as left on good terms. None of the issues were addressed to me personally so it's going to be "He left on good terms as a moderator".

I don't quite recall the details of the first incident, but I believe it involved Ben arbitrarily moving and deleting other staff members posts from a thread he created in the staff area of the forums, and, locking other threads which prevented some of the forums assigned moderators from being able to further contribute to that discussion. I believe Witchiebunny brought this issue up in admin chat and a discussion was had over it.
I suggested dropping Ben to assigned moderator, to prevent him from being able to alter staff threads like that until one of us could speak to him about it.
Dragoneer greenlit it and I changed his access.

Ben came to speak to me and Dragoneer about it, and talked it over. A definitive conclusion wasn't met when I asked if he should be reinstated as a supermoderator from what I recall. As far as I remember, he quit after that. He certainly left me with the impression that he left out of upset, and that would be understandable, but he had never said a word to me prior.

When he asked to come back, knowing these previous and unresolved issues I suggested to Witchie that he be directed to you and Dragoneer. I didn't realise you were out of the loop on things. I don't try to act unilaterally either, my heart is certainly in the right place.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Yes I'm aware of the bickering but it can also be viewed as he took the high road and backed down as moderator. I think it was unfair of you guys on the chat and here to say it was "rage quit". So when people are being opposing forces he just shuts up and doesn't continue doing his job or he makes a decision to take a break?

I wouldn't call it bickering.. regardless I merely agreed with Witchiebunny's conclusion as it seemed to fit the pattern I'd observed of Ben's behavior personally. I've spoken to Ben myself and explained my concerns, and some of the general points that I had observed of him to try and get some feedback and insight in the interest of finding a workable solution.

Understand I am neither for, nor against him at this point. I've spoken to him about his actions which were an issue for me, namely, trying to make FAF 'Something Awful Jr'. I offered my understanding of the situation w.r.t. Ben in that admin chat, but I made no suggestions nor requests that he be demoted (other than what I've said, and that I can remember)

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Understand I do agree with some of the grievances addressed but there's too much "ok I agree with so and so said on the IRC" we need to also address it here. So can you blame Xaerun's assessment?

I don't blame Xaerun's at all. To be honest I was surprised he was demoted myself, but it wasn't entirely unexpected. I just figured it was discussed someplace and acted on, I've become rather used to discussions taking place without everyone being there, myself included so it didn't raise any alarm bells with me.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

When Ben was upset over his removal (temp or not) can you really blame him? Instead it was more "my side look Ben is bickering again"...exactly how are you supposed to take someone suspending or firing you? Last I recall most people don't take it very well.

I can't blame him at all, but I did talk to him the first time this happened and tried to explain why the action was taken, namely because he was editing and locking staff threads. I figured a small period of time to cool off and he'd be back where he belonged, I actually went to bed after our conversation. But from what I recall, he wouldn't drop the issue and kept on about it, hounding Witchiebunny over IRC.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

So do we agree that he should be permanently removed altogether or do we see if maybe he's just suited for part of the forums and not a Super Mod - because that's an option too. Not everyone is cut out to be "GOD MOD"

I would be happy, to give him back his smod powers, if he can sort things out with the other members of staff, the key problem that Witchiebunny and some others iterated is Ben's inability to communicate and lack of respect for his fellow staff members. His heart is in the right place but his execution needs work. Maybe he doesn't realise this, and does not realise how his actions are perceived. I have tried talking to him and pointing this out.

Originally Posted by Trpdwarf

LONG POST

Three things:
1- I thought "asking other mods for their opinions when you want to reverse their actions" is common sense. We shouldn't need a rule for that, and even if we did I'm sure there is one rule saying this already. Lemme find it...
Here it is: Staff Behavior Guidelines, point 2: Behaviour among staff

2- That notes system sounds handy as hell. I guess right now we could start threads in the mod subforum but that would be slow, probably ignored (by accident I mean) and fill that forum with unimportant discussion

3-Again, being lenient to off-topic posts seems like common sense, otherwise the forums would be really boring. Our job is to draw the line, when it goes from "harmless discussion, having fun" to "derailing the thread with crap".

----

I personally have no problems with Ben but I never noticed any of the problems being discussed here (apparently some happened right before I was reinstated) so I won't vote or whatever you people decide.

I guess I'll take Ben's side here in the interest of somebody doing it.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

1. He's young and makes impulsive decisions and seems often off the cuff, knee jerk and oversensitive.
- I'd like to say this isn't limited to Ben however, the amount of this behavior seems to be the biggest disruption.

This is also true of a couple of other staff, and Ben's usually not too bad about it I find.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

2. Constantly seems to make suggestions that are counter-productive or counter-intuitive to the forum.
- I generally have no problems with making suggestions, and we do try to adapt to changes. However, the problems I see with Bens suggestion is that:

a. they wanted to mirror another site and I feel the forums can have similar structures ...it doesn't need to be a clone of X site. FA shouldn't be another DA and FAF shouldn't be Something Awful Jr.

b. He's extremely argumentative about them. If we're gonna have a battle of words and not knowing when to quit - we waste time. This is a volunteer site and even I have limited schedules. - Hence why even though I'm always logged into IRC, I don't really talk much in it.

I'd say he's gotten the hint about this since his forced demotion, but maybe someone with authority (forum admin) needs to talk to him one on one about this, rather than publicly shaming his ideas. Taking into consideration he's young and somewhat new to this, maybe take it a little easy.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

3. He seems Power hungry.
- I'm going to again state this isn't limited to Ben. When I keep hearing or seeing "when am I gonna be an admin?" or similar posts from staff it can also look that way. However, there is another problem when I noticed is that people feel or have seen in the past Ben reversing others infractions, and even overwriting other moderator's announcements (Which feels like credit stealing) when adjustments are minor.

I'm going to put an extraordinary amount of emphasis on the fact this isn't limited to Ben. That's all I have to say about that.

Originally Posted by Trpdwarf

Before I say anything of Ben, I will say something of the forum and moderating it...that is a precursor to the problem here. It should be expected and enforced that every moderator should communicate with other moderators when they step into their territory. What I mean by this is that Super Mods can reverse what other Mods do right?

You can reverse infractions, you can close, approve, un-approve, re-open, and move threads. You can give perm, and temp bans. I assume you can reverse those as well. You as a super mod have the ability to go behind other people's backs and reverse what they do, or do more than what they did.

To prevent problems of hostility we should always communicate when we enter the above territory. Lets say for example Mod A gave out an infraction. I don't agree with it. So I should contact Mod A and say such and discuss it. Then if anything is done it's done with both parties having discussed what is to be done if anything at all. The same goes for a thread. If Mod A closed a thread and I want to re-open it, I should talk to Mod A first. I should seek to understand why he closed it also express why I thought it shouldn't be closed.

If you care enough to sit there and want to reverse what other mods did you should care enough to talk to those mods first. Same goes for going into their stickies and changing them. I think here one of the big issues is that some of use feel that we are being overstepped and we don't like it. This creates hostility we don't need.

No objections there, and I'm going to agree that Ben's done that- but I recall another staff member opened a thread that I locked simply because they thought the users in it were being rather funny. And this seems to be an issue that was never actually discussed with Ben, no "Hey, maybe give me a shout first", nothing that I've seen.

Originally Posted by Trpdwarf

Moving on another thing that I'd like to bring up is that there are times when and this came up as an issue of sorts with Ben, I brought it up elsewhere that when a thread went off topic, a mod comes in, and gets it back on track. Then after all is good and done, it's done right? Except sometimes one mod decided more ought to have been done. Perhaps they did know a mod has taken care of it. Or perhaps they don't care. Either way this should not happen.

I would love to see a note system that you can put on individual threads that only other mods can read. So if you see a thread and you see that button that says "There is a note on this thread" you can read what another mod has written. As such if this is possible, it prevents things like above. People overstepping other mods and going in an doing things. I post this here because the above factors into some of the issues that exist around Ben's behavior.

I agree with this completely- I personally look at a thread, if a staff member that is able to lock the thread has posted and let it slide, I let it slide for a bit as well. *shrugs* It works for me.

Originally Posted by Trpdwarf

As for Ben, I don't know if I really even want him as a mod for assigned areas. He certainly does not need to be a super mod. His past behavior suggests to me he cannot be responsible with it. As for being an assigned mod...is he going to end up being a little tyrant in his own assigned area? Or will the lack of bigger mod tools end up calming his behavior?

I vote we do reinstate him as an assigned mod- that way we can give him another chance, as well as contain it to a particular area, which'd make it easier to observe behavior and any reforms etc. Additionally, if we could actively try to be less involved in his assigned area, so that most moderator action is definitely his... hmm.

Originally Posted by Trpdwarf

Lastly I have one last thing to say. Are we at some consensus that we should be lenient towards people who post a bit of off-topic chatter and fun posting? If that is the case it should be communicated to all mods new and old...that this is the stance we take. As such people won't end up racking up infractions and appearing a problem when they are not, because the fun post a lot.

Didn't Surgat post some "topic drift" guidelines?


To sum up my position again:
I think Ben should be reinstated as an assigned mod, with careful observation and perhaps coaching if staff can spare their time.

Thank you, because this is the discussion that is needed. Instead I'm hearing bits and pieces on IRC and like I said the main reason de-modding is that if something is disruptive I'd rather just cut the problem at its source. Removing Ben from moderating seemed the best idea so it doesn't become the "wait till he's gone" or spurts of arguments on IRC and continued scattered bickering. In addition we don't want him around with the power to cause more "bad blood".

Xaerun, yes it's not limited to Ben. I may not be able to be on all the time and see every issue but I did see one mod constantly complain about this issue of not being an admin either here or on the main site. Simply put, I didn't feel this person was ready.

I'm often aggravated when I'm nagged about "promotions" and Ben wasn't the only one.

Carenath, I listed the points as I did to show my opinion and counter arguments. This was to lead to discussion for the outcome. I don't see the need to say "Whose outline was better" the point is discussion. It's needed, necessary and I'm also saying this wasn't permanent until we decide it is. I mean what is the point of "yeah but so and so said this better" gonna do when it's not addressing the real problem? It's so unnecessary.

Carenath, also his name was still Smod Black when I put him as senior member, so if this really happened...it definitely didn't show up on his name, and I recall pulling down from Smod to Senior Member.

Xaerun, as for the point about his disruption on ideas, I did have conversations with him in the past about it.

This is why I have to react the way I do.

One hand like I said I understand the grievances. On the other hand I was left out of quite a bit...so there's a problem right there. This shouldn't be run by "small group of people talking on IRC" we have to work better as a team.

I have to consider the person I de-modded. I have to look at it objectively. I've seen other members of this staff do some of the same things in terms of being power hungry do too.

For me the reason I gave the assigned moderator option is that he can be better trained to deal with these issues instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It appears his promotion came too soon overall and his heart is in the right place. He wants to help. As Carenath said, the execution needs work, and he's the youngest we've had since Ratte. If he still doesn't work out then yeah, we can drop him from staff. Not everyone turns out to be suited for the site, and I try to allow much leeway for different personalities because we all have to get along.

As for notes system, we can see if there's a good plugin for VB or wait till the upgrade (when that happens). I know VB has an editing history but I don't think you can customize the history.

I've been trying to keep up on the events surrounding this incident and largely failing, which is why I've been silent on both forum and IRC.

However, this action raises an immediate concern for R&R mods and Smods. Since this sort of thing hasn't happened since Dave Hyena blew up most of two years ago, we don't have any clear guidance on how to handle the forum's reaction to this decision, even if it's not final or is eventually reversed. It took a surprisingly long time for someone to notice, but someone did.

I spent ten minutes trying to put into words how our status as moderators (and in Ben's case a former mod at least temporarily) puts us in a unique position regarding the spectrum between privacy and transparency, and I couldn't.

Ariel that I know but my concern was to keep the disruptions down. Users are gonna be like regardless of the outcome. Ben doesn't have to discuss it at this time and shouldn't He is still an assigned mod if you look at where he's assigned to.

I saw pretty quickly that Ben was doing the same thing he was before his time off. I'm not sure if it's happened yet, but I think that someone needs to CLEARLY state what he is doing wrong. If we're just saying, "You aren't being a good moderator," then there's no way he can improve.

Also, as for the 'power hungry' bits, I'm pretty sure he was trying to use me as a way into the position. He asked me repeatedly for support (which I probably would have given anyways), and sent constant PMs over IRC asking about his status in the voting process. I think it showed how much he wanted that position of power on the forums.

Also, I think that if Ben, by choice or otherwise, is removed from FAF staff, he should be allowed to talk about the demotion. We can't really 'force' him to not post about it if he's not on the staff.

Ben...

Is trying to act in good faith, most of the time. I'll give him that. Now, just because I act in good faith doesn't mean I'm doing a good or right thing - it just means that I'm thinking what I'm doing is going to help. This is where I think a lot of issues between others and Ben lay - we disagree on what would help or not.

Combine that with Ben acting on his own initative on things that do not need that much speed, or things that really need additional mod input, we have a moderator who can cause some problems.

Perhaps the best bet is what was suggested earlier - keep him as an assigned mod to some forums (Not R&R, I'd think), and watch him for now.

Because I know pretty much nothing about Ben, I can't really give any suggestions other than agree that maybe he could use guidance as a mod, in his own forum, and be overlooked by another mod if he's given another chance. When he makes a mistake, a HIGHER POWER (Arshes or the top mods) should likely be the ones who need to speak up and give him advice, etc.

That's all I can agree on/ offer unfortunately.

Originally Posted by Corto

Three things:
1- I thought "asking other mods for their opinions when you want to reverse their actions" is common sense. We shouldn't need a rule for that, and even if we did I'm sure there is one rule saying this already. Lemme find it...
Here it is: Staff Behavior Guidelines, point 2: Behaviour among staff

2- That notes system sounds handy as hell. I guess right now we could start threads in the mod subforum but that would be slow, probably ignored (by accident I mean) and fill that forum with unimportant discussion

3-Again, being lenient to off-topic posts seems like common sense, otherwise the forums would be really boring. Our job is to draw the line, when it goes from "harmless discussion, having fun" to "derailing the thread with crap".

----

I personally have no problems with Ben but I never noticed any of the problems being discussed here (apparently some happened right before I was reinstated) so I won't vote or whatever you people decide.

I agree that we should not need a rule for that. That said, it is something that needs to be discussed with Ben. He does have this habit of doing that. Going behind people's back and doing stuff without actually asking first.

If that note system got put into place I'd be ever grateful. I'd love to be able to post a note on a thread for other mods to read.

The whole leniency thing needs to be discussed with Ben, preferably from the word of mouth of an admin. I've got nothing much of anything else to say.

A side note with all this talk about IRC: My computer melted 2 months ago and I don't nearly have money enough to repair it, so I use the university computers to check the forums and hence can't join IRC (no big loss to you people, all I did was rant when drunk anyway) so if anything important is discussed there I'd like someone to give a summary here or whatever.

Also I repeat: I have no problem whatsoever with Ben. If you people think he needs a helping hand I gladly offer my assistance, however poor it may be.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Ariel that I know but my concern was to keep the disruptions down. Users are gonna be like regardless of the outcome. Ben doesn't have to discuss it at this time and shouldn't He is still an assigned mod if you look at where he's assigned to.

People on FAF now already know something is up. If Ben wants them to know that something is up however vague that answer is...I don't see why not. The users want to know what is going on, knowing a little bit of nearly nothing is better than running around building upon the mistrust that already is being fostered due to a lack of communication at times between the administration of FA(which is something in the future when I collect my thoughts I might address) and the users. But of course if Ben is opposed to it..that's okay too.

EDIT: Also Ben should never have been demodded without having a group discussion prior. You don't demodd then have people talk about how to fix the issues or what to do. You have the discussion then do something. That part of this really actually bothers me now that I think about it.

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Carenath, I listed the points as I did to show my opinion and counter arguments. This was to lead to discussion for the outcome. I don't see the need to say "Whose outline was better" the point is discussion. It's needed, necessary and I'm also saying this wasn't permanent until we decide it is. I mean what is the point of "yeah but so and so said this better" gonna do when it's not addressing the real problem? It's so unnecessary.

I apologise, I just felt your post was an attack on me (and Witchiebunny) and just wanted to state, that there was nothing else to add, that you had not missed anything. I was not trying to imply 'whos outline was better'. I did go on to address the relevant points

Originally Posted by Arshes Nei

Carenath, also his name was still Smod Black when I put him as senior member, so if this really happened...it definitely didn't show up on his name, and I recall pulling down from Smod to Senior Member.

Then perhaps these past issues had been resolved and his status restored.