[Rules] Remove backseat modding rule | Rewriting Backseat modding Rule

[Bricket]

I want to finish of with saying that it's a bit weird that you're complaining that members shouldn't have to follow the system we have set in place, then complaining that the system isn't working because people aren't following the system:P

I take your points on consideration.
About that last thing: that does sound like a strawman my friend 

There is a golden rule about rules (yes there is a rule of rules... why I don't know but there is) that goes as this: if many people break a rule consider 2 things: find the source why they do this, and find out if breaking the rule has its' origin in the rule itself. In other words: would you break the rules and why would you break said rule?

With the backseat modding rule you have to take in consideration: is it useable in its' current form and does it have to adapt to the forum culture?

[Ventus Fall]

(...) if many people break a rule (...)

I wonder, do you happen to have any information we don't?
Because as far as I'm aware of this rule isn't being broken that much. That aside, just because a rule is broken a lot, doesn't mean the rule is wrong.

[MrRazot]

Yes, this is in fact very true and I am very happy to take that into account.


I would however like to say that what you've said seems to say that everyone is always forever backseat moderating always forever every second.


I would like to stress that this is in fact not the case and that it is something that happens quite rarely.
If this is however not the case, I strongly urge you to please report these posts so that we can continue working towards achieving synergy between members and mods

[Bricket]

(...) if many people break a rule (...)

I wonder, do you happen to have any information we don't?
Because as far as I'm aware of this rule isn't being broken that much. That aside, just because a rule is broken a lot, doesn't mean the rule is wrong.

If you see breaking a rule as normality then there is no issue with installing a rule prohibiting to post any content.
See the point I'm telling.

Good remarks Razot

[Ventus Fall]

I did not say it was normal, I said the rule wasn't broken much. Doesn't mean I think it's normal.
It's what Razot pointed out, it happens rarely, and if you have information we don't, like seeing more backseating than we are, then you should report it.

[Bricket]

I'm going to be honest here: I don't see why I should report backseat moderating since giving simple rule advice can also be seen as backseat moderating 

[anoni]

As many people have already touched upon there are some primary reasons for the rule being in place.

1. People sometimes get it wrong: In actuality, most of the time I've seen a user tell another user for violating a rule, the backseat moderator has been wrong and the actual "infringement" wasn't against the rules. This can be very problematic ESPECIALLY if the user being told off is new, it can cause them to feel unwelcomed in the forum, can cause them to learn incorrect rules and has other unfortunate side effects. It's best that moderators step in to make sure that the appropriate rules are being followed and that the appropriate action is being taken. (And while moderators do sometimes make mistakes, we have a great team that discusses these actions in great length, so potential mistakes can be reversed and the correct action taken, something that is less viable with backseat moderators)

2. It can cause arguments: Someone who attempts to take forum justice into their own hands, even if they're correct, can cause arguments and debates that eventually spiral out of control. There are two reasons for this. The first reason is that the backseat moderator does not have any additional powers to silence a heated argument, if you tell someone to "follow the rules" and they say "No f you", there's not much you can do about it, instead what will most likely happen is there will be a heated response and the thread will spiral out of control causing a much worse situation than the initial rule infraction. The second thing is, you're just a normal member, and by telling someone to "do something" people can take offense to that, there's no reason why you should be commanding them, so they may lash out against that, feel unwelcome, annoyed or irritated at the user for trying to enforce a rule that he doesn't really have the authority to enforce.



  I personally think that reminding someone that "Maybe this isn't the most appropriate of conversation", is fine. It doesn't involve a demand, it's just saying "I'm feeling uncomfortable with this, so please stop" and that's totally fine. But telling someone to "Follow the rules" or "You're doing X wrong you should do Y" can be problematic due to the above reasons.

[Bricket]

This brings us to the following point: the idea here is that a person can remind someone of a certain rule yet if this person continues breaking a rule then the person who reminded the other person to NOT break the rule gets punished for not reporting OR not reporting in time.
Which forces us to ask the following question: is the person who remined the rule really guilty or do the other people who where active on the topic also guilty because they didn't report something and thus breaking the "moral-duty" of being a member?

[anoni]

It's not really about guilt, it's about prevention. We don't want people commanding others on what they should be doing for the above two reasons (they get it wrong, or they start arguments making the situation worse). So we give a small warning to deter people from doing this. It isn't saying "YOU'RE A TERRIBLE PERSON", it's exactly what the name suggests, a warning, "Don't do this".

Also regardless whether person A stops breaking the rule or continues breaking rule, the backseat moderator would still be warned for backseat moderating.

Simply not reporting a post is ok, I mean it would be ideal if you did report posts, but sometimes people forget, they don't know or they're new. We don't give warnings for simply not reporting a post, we give warnings for people telling others to do something when they don't have the authority or experience to do that.

[Bricket]

Also regardless whether person A stops breaking the rule or continues breaking rule, the backseat moderator would still be warned for backseat moderating.

Where do you draw the line of backseat modding?
Where is that line?
Is there a clear definition of it?

[anoni]

Backseat moderating is defined simply as "Someone acts like a moderator who is not a moderator".

That's basically the clearest definition, so this means telling someone what to do*, instructing them to do something* or anything that makes it imply you have a sense of authority over the user in question, even though you don't.

*In a moderator sense

[Bricket]

Anoni, could you change your sentence to be a bit more clearer?

Was this backseat modding or not because in the definition you just gave this can be seen as backseat modding.
Anyway, I propose this discussion what we're having to move it to the PM's

[anoni]

What can be seen as backseat moderating? What you're doing now or what I'm doing now?

This threads about whether the backseat moderating rule should be removed, I think this discussion is relevant here.

Either way, what I'm doing now is not backseat moderating because I am a moderator (I'm an admin but I'm also a moderator if you like to think of them as separate).

What you're doing now is not backseat moderating, because you are not acting like a moderator, you are acting like a member, making a suggestion on how we should change the forum. Which is good!

The examples I gave were examples, not the definition, the definition remains "Someone who acts like a moderator but is not one".

So some clearer examples would be

  - A member who tells another member that they have to move their thread to another part of the forum.
  - A member who tells another member that their post is violating a certain rule and they should or must change it.

Those are just some examples.

[Bricket]

Suggestion is "A member performing tasks that are meant for a moderator, these tasks are [Summary that differ a member from a moderator]"

[anoni]

Some of them aren't tasks though, for example someone who acts like they are a moderator could just be someone who acts like they have some authority over the forum. Someone who demands that a member respects them and does what they say. That's not really doing a task, that's within the general attitude of the member in question.