Anonymous Moderation is cowardly.

[Biomech]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

moon soon for hyp

Hell with that. Aim for Alderaan. 

This was in the Hyperstake thread, which is a self moderated forum. It was NOT off topic, and was not considered off topic or detrimental by the leaders of that community, who I am well acquainted with. Allegedly, you only moderate self moderated topics in the event of complaints by the thread's owner (doesn't apply in this case or several others of late) or egregious abuse of forum members. Compleatly non applicable.

Obviously, as a private forum you have the "right" to do as you please, but if you lay down rules and then deliberately violate them, you NEED to be accountable. If moderators are going to do this, then it should not be anonymous.

Let's be serious for a moment. You do NOT EVER moderate known scammers, nor do you seem to give a tinker's damn about content, intellect, or even the ability to construct a sentence. But you will moderate off hand comments like this for no visible reason. And in a self moderated forum where it is not offensive to the community so moderated. It has become a source of running humour and contention among your users.

At the very least, if you are going to remain anonymous, state your reasons for deleting a post. That in itself would likely make you hesitate, as it often seems the only justification for deleting things is "somebody pissed in my wheaties this morning". If you have a real reason for it, then you should have no problem identifying both the reason and yourself (via screen name). If you are just playing god, you should just stop.

[Foxpup]

Your post was likely deleted because the comment you were responding to was also deleted (likely because it was insubstantial) and your post didn't add anything else to the conversation. I don't see why you're acting so surprised by this.

[sdmathis]

I wouldn't call it anonymous either. Most people who frequent the ALTCOIN sections knows that mprep is the moderator. Those who don't who the moderator can look at the top of the page and find out. Undoubtedly, mprep deleted your comment.

[thebitcoinquiz.com]

Your post was likely deleted because the comment you were responding to was also deleted (likely because it was insubstantial) and your post didn't add anything else to the conversation. I don't see why you're acting so surprised by this.

I guess whenever your post gets deleted because of the comment to which you responded to also got deleted, you personally get a message from the moderators explaining that "the post got deleted because it was a reply to other deleted post", at least this is what I got from grue when my post got deleted in these situations. So I don't think this is the case.

[Biomech]

I chose one example of several over the last month. And yes, I do assume it was mprep, I just can't prove it, because NOWHERE in the message does it say who made the decision. I'm not surprised, I'm annoyed. Either the stated rule that self moderated threads are moderated by the owner of the thread is true, or it is not.

Since the mods do not actually give two shits and a fuck about scams, what is the point of deleting comments like that? If Presstab (in this instance) finds my post to be problematic, he would be the one to delete it, not the moderator who Cannot Understand Normal Thinking. In this particular instance, I am completely sure that the OP had nothing to do with it, as he is a personal friend. In others, I suppose it's possible... except that on a self moderated thread if the OP deletes it, it SAYS SO.

[theymos]

The only reason you would need to know who deleted something is to pester them about it, which would be a pointless annoyance that might even prevent moderators from doing a good job. Admins are the only ones who can restore deleted posts and the only ones who can properly deal with inaccurate mod actions: post in Meta and we'll look into it.

Self-moderation is moderation in addition to global moderation. Both of those posts were insubstantial, so deleting them seems correct.

I guess whenever your post gets deleted because of the comment to which you responded to also got deleted, you personally get a message from the moderators explaining that "the post got deleted because it was a reply to other deleted post", at least this is what I got from grue when my post got deleted in these situations. So I don't think this is the case.

That sort of message isn't always sent.

I wouldn't call it anonymous either. Most people who frequent the ALTCOIN sections knows that mprep is the moderator.

Even sections with assigned mods can also be moderated by global mods.

[Crestington]

Your post was likely deleted because the comment you were responding to was also deleted (likely because it was insubstantial) and your post didn't add anything else to the conversation. I don't see why you're acting so surprised by this.

Right so a post like that would be deleted, but yet I see people calling each other the most disgusting things imaginable with NO relevance to the topic at hand and those comments are not deleted? (on other topics than the HyperStake topic)

I remember several months back on the HyperStake topic there were a few posts about being superhero's, it went on for a few posts and then back to discussion about Staking and other boring conversation. Was it offensive to people? no, and it contributes to the community and self moderated topic in that it keeps users engaged with the community and fosters new ideas.

How about the GAW service discussion thread? I see lots of minor posts there. How about the tnt exchange (likely scam) thread recently? That was renamed as a giveaway thread and wasn't taken down as fast as some of these comments.

Edit: I do understand this is a private forum but mods should also understand that people do not appreciate having their posts frequently deleted if not meant to be offensive or spam.

[Biomech]

The only reason you would need to know who deleted something is to pester them about it, which would be a pointless annoyance that might even prevent moderators from doing a good job. Admins are the only ones who can restore deleted posts and the only ones who can properly deal with inaccurate mod actions: post in Meta and we'll look into it.

Self-moderation is moderation in addition to global moderation. Both of those posts were insubstantial, so deleting them seems correct.

Bull. If the moderation were serious, instead of removing a bit of humour here and there, and if said moderation was for any LEGITIMATE purpose, then anonymity is contraindicated for the very reasons I stated. It gives the mods the ability to take out a bad day on people for NO reason. I'm not a young man, and I am not gullible. Make a credible argument. Your mods, with a very few exceptions, do not do a good job. They do things like this, and leave scams and libel so obvious that a dead man could see it to go on. One might get the impression they're in on it. Many have. If self moderated threads are not going to be self moderated, then there really is no point to their existence, is there?

At the very least, it would be prudent for the mods to state WHY a post is deleted rather than doing a hit and run. And if anonymity is de rigeur, then at the very least there should be a reply option. Preferably one that goes directly to you, because I doubt very much you would tolerate their general behaviour if you had to deal with the fallout from it. mprep in particular is a weasel. If you are not fully aware of that, just read any five of his posts. His "arguments" don't even make sense in his head, let alone in any sort of open forum.

Short form. If the mods must hide what they are doing, who they are, and why they are doing it, then they are NOT doing a good job and ARE under suspicion of deliberate malfeasance. I generally find you reasonable, but you are totally incorrect on this one except in the fact that you own the forum.

[hilariousandco]

I think this thread is a good example why mod actions should remain anonymous. Staff would get flooded with PMs asking why this and why that if it told them who did what. I often get posts asking why I moved their thread (from the incorrect sub to the right one) and half of the time it wasn't even me that did it. I think it's a plus that people even get a message informing them that their post is deleted because I've never seen that on any other forum I've been a part of. Normally your posts just disappear and you wouldn't even notice. I know it's frustrating and annoying whenever someone has a post deleted and nobody is going to like it but I think putting a mods name to it would be counter-productive. If people do feel like their post was deleted in error or malice believe me they'll make a thread like this about it and if staff were abusing their power in whatever way then they wouldn't last very long here.

[Crestington]

I think this thread is a good example why mod actions should remain anonymous. Staff would get flooded with PMs asking why this and why that if it told them who did what. I often get posts asking why I moved their thread (from the incorrect sub to the right one) and half of the time it wasn't even me that did it. I think it's a plus that people even get a message informing them that their post is deleted because I've never seen that on any other forum I've been a part of. Normally your posts just disappear and you wouldn't even notice. I know it's frustrating and annoying whenever someone has a post deleted and nobody is going to like it but I think putting a mods name to it would be counter-productive. If people do feel like their post was deleted in error or malice believe me they'll make a thread like this about it and if staff were abusing their power in whatever way then they wouldn't last very long here.

You are correct in that it is better that mods are somewhat anonymous with their post removal in that you can't put blame on a particular person. A reverse of that is that a mod may not like a particular person and heavily moderate them for speaking out against certain policies.

To frame an example, a slew of about 5 posts about superhero's were deleted but the first one deleted was Biomech's and was the last of the few posts. My one posts about Ace and Gary, the ambigiously gay duo was probably the most racey but even took some days to get deleted with the rest. This says to me that the mods can be biased and heavily moderate certain people they do not like, while I agree with the forums rules that +1 posts serve no purpose, I would not agree with being unfairly targeted and having a personal bias.

[Xialla]

I think this thread is a good example why mod actions should remain anonymous. Staff would get flooded with PMs asking why this and why that if it told them who did what.

^^this +100

I was moderator on couple of forums and I really can't recommend to switch from anonymous moderation..

[ABitNut]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

moon soon for hyp

Hell with that. Aim for Alderaan. 

This was in the Hyperstake thread, which is a self moderated forum. It was NOT off topic, and was not considered off topic or detrimental by the leaders of that community, who I am well acquainted with. Allegedly, you only moderate self moderated topics in the event of complaints by the thread's owner (doesn't apply in this case or several others of late) or egregious abuse of forum members. Compleatly non applicable.

Obviously, as a private forum you have the "right" to do as you please, but if you lay down rules and then deliberately violate them, you NEED to be accountable. If moderators are going to do this, then it should not be anonymous.

Let's be serious for a moment. You do NOT EVER moderate known scammers, nor do you seem to give a tinker's damn about content, intellect, or even the ability to construct a sentence. But you will moderate off hand comments like this for no visible reason. And in a self moderated forum where it is not offensive to the community so moderated. It has become a source of running humour and contention among your users.

At the very least, if you are going to remain anonymous, state your reasons for deleting a post. That in itself would likely make you hesitate, as it often seems the only justification for deleting things is "somebody pissed in my wheaties this morning". If you have a real reason for it, then you should have no problem identifying both the reason and yourself (via screen name). If you are just playing god, you should just stop.

Sorry to go meta on a meta post, but have you tried to start a constructive dialog with mprep? Such as for example a simple private message along these lines:

"Hey mprep, some posts were recently deleted in so and so thread. I understand the posts may have seemed non substantial but actually the particular group of users interested in the thread seems to appreciate post of this kind. If there is no real harm done could you cut us some slack in this thread and let us self moderate it?

Thanks!"

I'm fairly certain such an approach would get you better results. And even if it didn't, you could still come here to open the offensive on "anonymous" moderation by a very well known and small group of forum staff.

[CryptoWiz420]

The only reason you would need to know who deleted something is to pester them about it, which would be a pointless annoyance that

This is bullshit because there are clearly THREADS that should be deleted and comments I have made about how the OP is likely a scammer are the part deleted.. Not to mention the thread is an illegal service.. Are we just waiting for more content to send the feds?

[KWH]

Why is it then so many make their accusations ( petty or legitimate ) in Meta and so forth under throw away accounts? If we are demanding Mods be completely transparent, why aren't members held to the same standards? It would actually lend more credibility to those making accusations to post from their main account.

[dogie]

Why is it then so many make their accusations ( petty or legitimate ) in Meta and so forth under throw away accounts? If we are demanding Mods be completely transparent, why aren't members held to the same standards? It would actually lend more credibility to those making accusations to post from their main account.

Because many of them are hippocrates and only want transparency when it suits them.

[BadBear]

And if anonymity is de rigeur, then at the very least there should be a reply option. Preferably one that goes directly to you

There is, hit the report to admin button on the pm, and make your case there.

I think this thread is a good example why mod actions should remain anonymous. Staff would get flooded with PMs asking why this and why that if it told them who did what. I often get posts asking why I moved their thread (from the incorrect sub to the right one) and half of the time it wasn't even me that did it. I think it's a plus that people even get a message informing them that their post is deleted because I've never seen that on any other forum I've been a part of. Normally your posts just disappear and you wouldn't even notice. I know it's frustrating and annoying whenever someone has a post deleted and nobody is going to like it but I think putting a mods name to it would be counter-productive. If people do feel like their post was deleted in error or malice believe me they'll make a thread like this about it and if staff were abusing their power in whatever way then they wouldn't last very long here.

You are correct in that it is better that mods are somewhat anonymous with their post removal in that you can't put blame on a particular person. A reverse of that is that a mod may not like a particular person and heavily moderate them for speaking out against certain policies.

To frame an example, a slew of about 5 posts about superhero's were deleted but the first one deleted was Biomech's and was the last of the few posts. My one posts about Ace and Gary, the ambigiously gay duo was probably the most racey but even took some days to get deleted with the rest. This says to me that the mods can be biased and heavily moderate certain people they do not like, while I agree with the forums rules that +1 posts serve no purpose, I would not agree with being unfairly targeted and having a personal bias.

Sure it's possible, but that's what we're here for. That's what meta is for. Mods get enough grief as it is, painting a target on their back would exacerbate that to intolerable levels.

[Biomech]

Why is it then so many make their accusations ( petty or legitimate ) in Meta and so forth under throw away accounts? If we are demanding Mods be completely transparent, why aren't members held to the same standards? It would actually lend more credibility to those making accusations to post from their main account.

You make a good point. However, it doesn't apply to me. I don't use sock puppets, and my real name is known with just a little searching.

My main problem, whether or not it's anonymous, is that the deletions (and other moderation operations that I have observed) seem arbitrary, capricious, and often petty. They serve no purpose in "policing" the forums, but seem almost intentionally to be abrasive.

As I have said, and others have noted, it is COMMON for obvious scams to be left completely alone. Yet make a comment ON TOPIC that is a bit tongue in cheek, or as Crestington noted, a reference to claws and cigars, and it get's "moderated". The particular "incident" that he was referencing was a bit off topic, but not terribly so. Several of us had achieved "hero member" status within a short time of each other. We're all known to each other (some of us IRL), and we had about a five post go at each other about what sort of super hero we were. It was just a bit of fun, nobody with an IQ larger than their shoe size would have been offended, and it ended as quickly as it began. It was FRIENDLY, and it was removed. Yet some jackass spewing vitriol and slander gets to keep it on site forever. The disproportionality of it is amazing.

The message being sent, whether intentional or not, is that being an ass is ok, but having a sense of humour is not. It's also been rather clear in my time here that open scamming is perfectly ok, but legitimate business will be heavily monitored. Is this REALLY the message we wish to send to the world via the largest cryptocurrency forum on the internet? If so, good luck with mainstream adoption.

When I (guardedly) invite people here, I tell them that Bitcointalk is Mos Eisely. A Wretched hive of scum and villainy, but with some of the most brilliant minds and ambitious people you'll ever meet. That's obviously said with some poetic license, but I defy ANY of the mods to deny the truth of it.

[Biomech]

And if anonymity is de rigeur, then at the very least there should be a reply option. Preferably one that goes directly to you

There is, hit the report to admin button on the pm, and make your case there.

Problem with that is, again, anonymity. In the unlikely event of a response, the odds are I'm making my case with the other aggrieved party as judge. If we knew such a button went directly to Theymos, it would be useful.

I think this thread is a good example why mod actions should remain anonymous. Staff would get flooded with PMs asking why this and why that if it told them who did what. I often get posts asking why I moved their thread (from the incorrect sub to the right one) and half of the time it wasn't even me that did it. I think it's a plus that people even get a message informing them that their post is deleted because I've never seen that on any other forum I've been a part of. Normally your posts just disappear and you wouldn't even notice. I know it's frustrating and annoying whenever someone has a post deleted and nobody is going to like it but I think putting a mods name to it would be counter-productive. If people do feel like their post was deleted in error or malice believe me they'll make a thread like this about it and if staff were abusing their power in whatever way then they wouldn't last very long here.

You are correct in that it is better that mods are somewhat anonymous with their post removal in that you can't put blame on a particular person. A reverse of that is that a mod may not like a particular person and heavily moderate them for speaking out against certain policies.

To frame an example, a slew of about 5 posts about superhero's were deleted but the first one deleted was Biomech's and was the last of the few posts. My one posts about Ace and Gary, the ambigiously gay duo was probably the most racey but even took some days to get deleted with the rest. This says to me that the mods can be biased and heavily moderate certain people they do not like, while I agree with the forums rules that +1 posts serve no purpose, I would not agree with being unfairly targeted and having a personal bias.

Sure it's possible, but that's what we're here for. That's what meta is for. Mods get enough grief as it is, painting a target on their back would exacerbate that to intolerable levels.

You being one of the three mods I don't find offensive, this kind of pains me to say it to you. But frankly, there SHOULD be a target on the back of the mods. Or on the front. You take policing actions, it's what you do. If you cannot do so in an open and above board manner, then you WILL receive a great deal of grief. If what the mods did was consistent, constructive, and served to better the community, the problems would be minimal. It is unfortunate that moderation is NOT consistent, NOT constructive, and frequently detrimental not only to this community, but to the digital currency ecosphere as a whole.

If a thing or action cannot withstand scrutiny, it is false.

[Bicknellski]

I think there should be a mod rating system based on feedback from the community. Have to agree the anonymity is less than desirable but so is not being able to get any traction on system changes in these forums that could help improve moderation. Complaints like yours Biomech are often ignored or shouted down without listening to reason you are making the complaint. Inconsistency or worse bias.

You being one of the three mods I don't find offensive, this kind of pains me to say it to you. But frankly, there SHOULD be a target on the back of the mods. Or on the front. You take policing actions, it's what you do. If you cannot do so in an open and above board manner, then you WILL receive a great deal of grief. If what the mods did was consistent, constructive, and served to better the community, the problems would be minimal. It is unfortunate that moderation is NOT consistent, NOT constructive, and frequently detrimental not only to this community, but to the digital currency ecosphere as a whole.

If a thing or action cannot withstand scrutiny, it is false.

[xhomerx10]

Why is it then so many make their accusations ( petty or legitimate ) in Meta and so forth under throw away accounts? If we are demanding Mods be completely transparent, why aren't members held to the same standards? It would actually lend more credibility to those making accusations to post from their main account.

Because many of them are hippocrates and only want transparency when it suits them.

 LOL

 You have my word as a gentleman that none of them are Hippocrates!  Did you mean hypocrites?