Help - forum is in war!

I have problems again.
Because of the banned moderator, our team started falling apart.
Each member of our team brought a significant amount of people to the forum. With them leaving, our community would have fallen apart too.

So I was faced with a total disaster.

We spoke a lot and finally decided to solve the situation in a different way.
We made peace, and I think Mr. Y is returning to the forum. He will not be moderating anymore. He is warned and we hope that he will not be provoking Mr. X ever again.

:idiot:

 

I know I'm a little late, but...

Typically what I try to do in this and all cases, is to stay somewhat neutral and try to avoid picking sides. Picking one side or the other just leads to divisions.

That's not to say that I won't call a spade a spade when need be though and I will also admit the obvious.

But by staying somewhat neutral, what I usually try to then do is, bring up the issue in a thread and ask the members how we should solve it. I usually just point out that the the situation is not helpful and that we need to try to find a suitable solution and then I try to listen to the member's feedback and do my best to build a consensus with everyone involved.

Even after doing that sometimes, someone may choose to sign off for good, (they usually return later) but at least the dialogue typically tires everyone out and also softens people's positions.

Let us know how you ultimately make out.

 

Very wise.

I am working on the situation right now. It looks like everything will be OK. Now everyone is tired of fighting and wants to make peace.

 

I totally agree with what Vekseid said. This is YOUR forum and you make it what it is, don't let a bad egg ruin the rest of the basket.

Luckily I haven't been in this situation with my forum or it's members. Everyone has been very helpful. I have deleted posts in the past which were overstepping the line and warned the people concerned that it wasn't necessary. Then locked the post and that pretty much buried it.

All the best with it and let us know what you end up doing and what the result it .

 

Banning a mod is a serious thing to do. The large forums that we see out there do not have mods involved in the discussion. They make announcements, but nothing that involves their opinion on things. When you have a mod that is attacking a member, then that only shows he/she is questioning your authority. When the people see that you have banned someone, then they will not test your power. Another forum that I am a member of, has a signature under the members name, so when he/she gets banned or put on a temp ban, everyone will easily see.

You need to prove that you have the higher authority. This doesn't mean you can go ban random people, but you can always make some fake users and bann them. You have to make it look real though and only once in a while when you feel things are starting to go over the line.

 

Count yourself lucky, for large communities it can take months to resolve social problems : )

 

I also noticed that on larger forums. Neither moderators, nor administrators take part in the discussion.

Is that the way it should be?

On our forum, everything is different. Administrator and moderators take active part in the discussions and they have strong relationship with the rest of the community.

Therefore banning a moderator is a problem. He has hundreds of friends, which are on his side.

 

Not necessarily. Moderators should however always be held to a higher standard than the general membership. Proper authority is also responsible authority.

Actually, I would go so far as to say, avoiding the discussion on a site as small as yours would be a bad idea. Just be picky about who you promote. The best moderators are usually not your most active members, though they certainly are active members. The ones with the most activity sometimes get a sense of entitlement regarding how your forum should be run and that can cause drama.

I highly doubt 'he has hundreds of friends' rather than a few dozen very vocal allies. Don't let the pheasant tactic fool you. I'm not saying compromise is useless, just remember that you do in fact have a significant edge. It would be bigger if you were larger and more established, but that's just it - by cutting the ex-mod down to size now, you do limit future influence if/when he decides to start trouble.

 

Thank you. That makes perfect sense.

The ex-moderator has left and is not making any trouble anymore. I am happy I was strong enough to confront him.

He had many friends, but none of them left with him (at least for now). Of course they unhappy that he left, but they did not go away.

 

Good for you ... you seem to be working your way through this. Agree with all the comments that such a situation damages the forum's attractiveness to both current and prospective new members.

Only suggestion I have is to have a clear, objective set of rules that reflect the kind of forum you want to run. Then enforce them - clearly and objectively. No one can stalk, harrass, troll if it's against the rules and the rules are enforced.

I most endorse your determination that a member was not interested in abiding by the rules. What I learned was that any member that argued with a rule, and/or whether it should be enforced, probably wasn't going to follow it later.

It's also my opinion that the lowest level of behavior that is tolerated by moderators will be the standard that begins to take over the forum. People who like that behavior gravitate to the forum, people who don't avoid it. I've observed that that is true even if there isn't an alternative forum for that subject, if the tolerated behavior is objectionable enough to members who don't care for it.

 

You will find many people like that. They only follow someone who is brave enough to lash out, but when this person is gone, then its like "cutting the head off the snake".

Some mods begin to overuse their power and they begin to do more things that they want, not what you want. You have to make them understand that even a mod can be banned. If a mod is pulling off these "stunts" on your people, then that means he/she has no respect for you.

Another comparison that we can make are jobs. When you are a boss you are advised not to get into serious relations with the people working for you simply to have more control, which in the long term leads to a more productive industry. Another thing to think about is what the mods work for. It is very hard to find a good mod that will work free. In a job people fear losing their job mainly because of pay. Ninety-five percent of the mods for forums are not paid, therefore they have nothing that really "keeps" them there, which in result leads to less fear or less respect for the admin.

Look for a good mod that respects you, not one that has a lot of posts. This is especially the hard part, since you are taking a risk each time you hire a mod.

 

Yes, thanks God, the situation seems to be resolved.

You are absolutely right and I am going to stick to this rule from now on.

 

Agree!

Yes, that is the real problem. Mods moderate because they are enthusiastic and because they consider you to be their friend. They work for you because they like you.

This is the real problem, because they think of you as a friend, they are not afraid of you, they believe you will always be nice to them.

They become arrogant, and then when you give them a warning they get so offended and pissed off. Not mentioning the infraction or ban! :mad2::mad2::mad2:

 

I do think some mods will work because they like the forum, whether or not they like the admin, and this is a good thing. They do need to agree with my objectives for the forum. They also need to have mod qualities, or course.

The greatest reward for mods is the satisfaction of the job, but I really believe they need some recognition. Public thanks in the forums and private perks/swag to help them feel appreciated. Just every once in a while is plenty for a mod who likes the forum.