Should moderators be impartial?

[unlucky]

No problem, I'm sure people will see the humour in what I said, though since you didn't and you're such a big one for laughing then maybe not!!

[rasselas]

See, you're getting the wrong end of the stick again, unlucky. When I say I can see the funny side, I mean the funny side of the situation in this thread.

I don't mean I'm laughing at you. I'm seeing the funny side of the situation. And I certainly don't mean that other people would be laughing at you.

It may be that I didn't explain myself clearly enough, and that that led to a misunderstanding.

But yes. Post it here. It would be fair. And if there is something I said that was misinterpreted I'd happily clarify it. Because, believe it or not, I'm not out to have pops at you or anyone else.

[Ainsworth]

But yes. Post it here. It would be fair. And if there is something I said that was misinterpreted I'd happily clarify it. Because, believe it or not, I'm not out to have pops at you or anyone else.

well that must exclude me, as you said 'friends- circle' to me when i commented.

i would like you to clarify that one

[rasselas]

well that must exclude me, as you said 'friends- circle' to me when i commented.

i would like you to clarify that one

in the context - as this had happened previously only very recently, again with you and unlucky (and others) making allegations against me, and starting an argument together, which again was also deleted - I would ask that today's deleted posts be quoted here so we can be clear about the context and there be no doubt what was said and why - then I'll happily clarify anything.

and as then so today what did I do? i made a contextual constructive criticism about moderation.

but you are both plucking bits out of context. restore the context here and I'll gladly comment.

talk about making a mountain out of a molehill!

[Ainsworth]

in the context - as as this had happened previously only very recently, again with you and unlucky (and others) making allegations against me, and starting an argument together, which again was also deleted - I would ask that today's deleted posts be quoted here so we can be clear about the context and there be no doubt what was said and why - then I'll happily clarify anything.

and as then so today what did I do? i made a contextual constructive critcism about moderation.

but you are both plucking bits out of context. restore the context here and I'll gladly comment.

talk about making a mountain out of a molehill!

allegations against you and starting an argument together

you accusing me and a mod (and others) of ganging up on you

where you getting that from, some of us complained about the images you posted, some on here were triggered, Unlucky removed them, end of. you came back in after that and caused a fuss about the moderation on this forum.

the mods can read the thread of deleted posts, they would of probably viewed it already. i quite happy for it all to be put back up but it has been moderated, so neither you or i are incharge of that one.

[unlucky]

Sorry for the delay, I'm not sure how to move the posts from where they were to here. Once I find out or if someone does it for me then the quotes will be on here. I really do think though mark that its you who is making the mountain out a molehill. This thread was a serious one to ask what people thought about the way the site was moderated.

[rasselas]

restore that conversation and I'd happily comment on it, and have you comment on it, but it really is unfair to directly refer to the content of a deleted conversation... unless it is going to be restored, so that the context is restored and it can be fairly commented upon.

I do not feel I am being bullied. I do not feel I am being treated unfairly. All I see is that if I make a fair and constructive critcism about moderation I am met with hysteria, and you'll pop up at some point and start attcking me.

Or am I wrong? Is this not happening? Am I imagining this?

Is it expressly forbidden to make a constructive criticism about moderation?

I don't mind being disagreed with. But I do have an issue with posts being deleted and then being directly referred to and misrepresented.

[iffybob]

I like the idea that you should not moderate on your own thread ....
.. but how does that go if you want to post a "personal" oppinion on a thread when all available mods contribute.....

Its not like you falg you opinions as being fro a point of view ie, mod or user ... so you cant actualy clarify ...

[unlucky]

Did you not read my last post? The conversation will be restored when I know how to do it or when someone does it for me. Though I wouldn't imagine there will be many people interested in it. I think in the main people are happy with the moderation on this site.

[rollinat]

Here are all the posts - including those which have been deleted - from the "From the other side of the counter" thread:

Being a former mental health worker (just a lowly technician, not psychiatrist), I always bore the brunt of anger and frustration from the patients I dealt with over the years.

I figured it would be interesting to open a discussion to address issues about all of this. Why "forced drugging" as I've seen it termed here, happens. Why we put people into seclusion. And so on...for examples.

Maybe I can help people understand what it was like from my side of the counter.

I'm taking cover....Who wants to start?

Hi.

What is a lowly technician?

XMHA, I don't envy you!! Take cover when the replies start coming your way and give as good as you get!!!

It's encouraging to see that a moderator is on the fence and in no way prejudicing proceedings or favouring one viewpoint.

I don't need to sit on the fence, I'm as entitled to my viewpoint as any other person on here. And going by recent proceedings I'd say that my lst statement was nothing but true.

A moderator should sit on the fence. You aren't giving your opinion about the topic of the thread. You've given your opinion about what you think is going to happen in the thread - from a moderator's point of view.

Whether your statement was true or not is impossible to say until the discussion has begun. And it hasn't. That is called biasing expectations, and that is improper moderation.

O no. You'll have to delete this thread, or at the very least - all of what I've said, because I have made constructively critical remarks about moderation.

whats your problem with Unlucky? your seem to be going for her all the time.

No, no I won't delete it at all, I very rarely delete things. In fact I can only think of 2 instances where I've deleted anything in the past 6 months, though I digress. If you have a problem with me, which you clearly have please pm another moderator and take your complaint up with them where it will be dealt with in the appropriate manner. I don't wish to discuss the matter with you any further.

Here we go again. I make a constructive observation about moderation and in come the friend-circle to make unfounded allegations and turn it into a personal argument.

Is it really so bad of me to ask for impartiality?

nah people are just sick of this 'friend-circle' crap you keep coming out with, if you have a problem with the moderation on this board then PM mischief, he is around most days now.

so you shouldnt have a reason to post it up in these threads and take it off topic just to have a pop at the mods when it suits you

Making one contextual criticism about the nature of moderation does not equate to a personal attack or to an attack on all of the forum's moderation.

I have no issues with you, with unlucky or anyone.

So please stop painting a vulgar picture. And there really is no need for me to go running to mommy or daddy over this!

I figured it would be interesting to open a discussion to address issues about all of this. Why "forced drugging" as I've seen it termed here, happens. Why we put people into seclusion. And so on...for examples.

Maybe I can help people understand what it was like from my side of the counter.

I'm taking cover....Who wants to start?

Why dont you start. Tell us what it was like to put people in seclusion and what that was like for you. I would chose your words carefully as it is quite an emotive topic for some people. Being the sensitive type you will be aware of this anyway.

a vulgar picture

I'm going to delete all the replies to this including mine because they are irrelevant to the original post and it is unfair to hijack a thread.

Good idea unlucky.

I guess my feeling on it is that these things are very difficult to comprehend unless you have had a foot on either side (would be interesting to know the proportion of mental health workers who subsequently suffer from a mental illness - prob the same proportion as the general population though it might be slightly highrr if people with mental illness choose then to work in this area).

Anyway, any profession has a legacy of knowledge that will inevitably act to constrain the range of options open to them . Yes all professionals commit to professional development but realisticly what can the quality of this be given stretched budgets and staffing limitations. I think there will therefor be a lag in the shift in knowledge and practice. Changes will happen if appropriate, slowly but will be aided by service user involvement as well as greater use of truly multidisciplinary teams.

Anyway, some random thoughts!