Would you 'back' moderators that have made the wrong choice?

Would you back a moderator that has removed a comment or banned a member or whatever, when perhaps you as an administrator wouldn't have done, rather than you contributing to loosing the confidence of the moderator?

On our forums, if a moderator has taken an action and the result ended up being the 'moderated member' was in the right, and the moderator has done wrong, we still back the moderators publicly, but will tell the moderator what we (the admins) would have done.

Though we will try to get the member back, we'd rather loose a member over a moderator. We've only removed one moderator out of all our mods, and we've had to remove hundreds and hundreds of members. And I think it's really important for the moderators to know that whatever action they take, they will never be undermined by an admin for their wrong-doings.

The reason for this is due to the fact that every move the moderators make, they have the best intentions at heart, and I don't want to upset them and loose them over a member.

I wondered if you guys take the same stance or have the same view, or if you do something else (and perhaps I could learn something I'm not thinking about?).

Cheers in advance for any replies. And if you feel the need to, please use the Anonymous feature in your replies.

 

I back up the moderator unless it was a grievous offense. I'll also take the time to use it as a teaching moment and work with mod team on how we can avoid the same issue in the future.

 

That's exactly the reason I do it mate.

I think loosing the confidence of a mod, or one wanting to quit after they realised the mistake, is going backwards. And always keeping your mods, and always correcting them without a lecture, is the way to keep moving forward.

As a result, I end up with moderators who help the forums evolve into something I couldn't do on my own, after all, many hands make for light work, and 2 heads are better than one. And above all, I'm just human too, and I'm sure I've made mistakes and I'll make others again.

 

Exactly what I do. I handle the issue privately, or sometimes in the Staff forum, and if the moderator changes their mind, they may undo what they did. Or, if they want me to undo it, I will. But I will NOT go over their head and change things. (I've had that done to me as a moderator and it was very unmotivating.)

 

As umpires I and my mods are able to take our experiences from the diamond to the forums. We all have a great deal of experience presenting a unified front in tough times and tough calls. But behind the scenes we will be more frank and open. I have a moderators forum open to just the mods where we discuss these things and look at members and situations as things develop and trike to make the one right call. But if any kicks one on the field or in the forum we'll have each others back.

 

I would type "woopsie! let me check into it", then have a light hearted discussion with the mod, perhaps there were things unknown at first glance of the situation.

Everyone makes mistakes or less than perfect decisions. If the moderators skin is that delicate then they should not be a moderator.

 

This could certainly be a tough call, though I've never been put in the position myself where I felt the moderators actions were totally unwarranted. There's been a few times where I felt I would have handled it a bit differently, but in the end it is the moderators who're more active in the day to day discussion than myself, so I would stand by their decision unless it was a terrible offense. Our moderators tend to use the report post function themselves to discuss each issue and come to an objective decision together before taking action. This helps to prevent a situation like that.

 

Nah, I don't mean if the moderators have made a terrible offence as such. I just mean, say, they've closed a thread that perhaps you wouldn't have done yourself. Or told off a member when perhaps it wasn't that members fault.

If a moderator had got drunk one evening and erased a bunch of threads or something, I think I'd be having words. Though thankfully I setup my forums so they only soft delete (and more thankfully, they've never tried to do that).

Our mods are always members first, and they have to be some of the higher posters, and they'll generally be reporting posts and such with their views before they even get on our 'maybe be a moderator radar'. So when we do get them on as a mod, and we spend some time with them showing them the ropes, they'll be pretty good.

I just mean rather than offending the mod and loosing them, I'd back their choices and use it as a learning curve for them to improve on, and then I hope they'd not do it again. But unfortunately the member who got moderated would still be in the same position, but for the greater good (not trying to play god here) I'd have to back my moderator over the member who may be actually be right.

 

Me too. Hardly have I ever reversed or objected to a moderator's actions. When they do something that I wouldn't do, I try to turn it into a learning experience, explaining how I would do it differently and why.

True, but I have observed in the past that when a moderator of a forum is known for being too vicious, heavy-handed or in any way unfair to a single member, other members take notice and may retract from posting on the forum. I've been on a forum in the past where one of the moderators was severely 'controlling' and did pretty much anything he wanted. Although he and I never had any beef, I observed the way he handled other situations, and knew that the community wasn't the place for me. I don't want to take part in (or manage) forums where each moderator has their own rule book and their own set of punishments; I prefer 100% consistency in regards to actions and repercussions.

So although you would prefer to back your moderator in order to save him and lose one member, you may be losing more than just one member.