Disappointing behavior by a MacRumors reporter

[eltoslightfoot]

Again, I just don't understand what is wanted here. This is a voluntary site that doesn't exactly make a gold mine for anyone involved. It's a labor of love and then we come across a multi-page post angry about a 2-word relevant post from a former mod. Yes, they must really be feeling the love for their volunteering.

 

[I7guy]

Which is essentially the same as what I said:


...but posting under an emeritus title is still stating an affiliation to an organisation, whichever way you cut it, and carries some level of responsibility to act as a representative that organisation.

Just to re-iterate, this is all hypothetical and rhetorical in the case of @bousozoku who hasn't AFAIK broken any rules and has - for this thread at least - explicitly said that they are not speaking for MR.


Yes (we're talking about the post originally quoted by the thread starter) - as shown earlier in this thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...by-a-macrumors-reporter.2419165/post-32931033 - the rules explicitly mention "two word posts" and "LOL".

1. Frivolous posts. Posts that contain no relevant or constructive commentary. This includes one- or two-word posts such as "cool", "LOL", "I agree", "+1", "this", "me too", "no way", other equivalent comments of any length, posts consisting only of smilies or overused memes, posts about being the first post in a thread, posts about your lack of interest in the thread (ignore the thread instead), and posts with irrelevant images or videos, especially those without text. If your post will add nothing to a discussion, don't post it.

The relevant verbiage is above. it can argued that the post did add something to that convo. I understood exactly where that two worded was going, but @theluggage I had no idea what your post was about.

 

[G5isAlive]

It seems this is being interpreted as "Macrumors says don't do X. Staff does X. Staff take no action. Staff bad."

Perhaps an alternative interpretation of these events could be "Macrumors says don't do X. Staff does something that people misinterpret as X. Staff don't need to take action because rule was never broken."

Perhaps that toes the letter of the law, but staff should aim for a higher standard, to avoid even the appearance of such. And given how subjective moderators can be (I get it, it's a tough job), it is plausible that a moderator would have removed such content for others. So yeah, I am on the OP with this. But in the scheme of things, the world is going to go on turning regardless.

 

[G5isAlive]

I've seen it before. MacRumors moderators also contribute to threads just normally, too. I've seen both things.

you would think a way to avoid confusion on whether a response by a moderator is official or private, private separate accounts could be used. Would that create more work for the mod? Yep. Oh well. It's the professional thing to do.

 

[G5isAlive]

There is a rule against having two accounts, so people working for MacRumors will always have their title with them.

Yep there is a good reason for that rule for normal posters. Not sure why it has to apply to official capacity. It's not like MR does not make the rules. Rules have caveats all the time.

 

[bousozoku]

Yep there is a good reason for that rule for normal posters. Not sure why it has to apply to official capacity. It's not like MR does not make the rules. Rules have caveats all the time.

MacRumors tends to be straightforward and easily understandable. Besides, having two accounts might lead to posting from the wrong account.

No one should consider that people working for MacRumors aren't people. They are and should be treated as such, not just as some title.

 

[bousozoku]

It seems this is being interpreted as "Macrumors says don't do X. Staff does X. Staff take no action. Staff bad."

Perhaps an alternative interpretation of these events could be "Macrumors says don't do X. Staff does something that people misinterpret as X. Staff don't need to take action because rule was never broken."

The post "LOL, What?" should have been reported and deleted, regardless of who wrote it. It violates the rules.

 

[AlastorKatriona]

In all the years I've been on these forums, this is the first time I've ever seen a MacRumors reporter "LOL"ing at a member's post.

View attachment 2348259

While some might consider the original post far-fetched or conspiratorial, it's not a good look for MacRumors when the reporter chooses to dismiss it with an "LOL." Instead, the reporter could have taken the time to explain to the OP why what they are suggesting is unlikely. (Or, even better, the reporter simply could have refrained from weighing in at all.)

You're talking about a site that chooses to obsessively limit the use of Dislike reactions, because feelings. This pales in comparison.

 

[icanhazmac]

Some people have never ran a forum or been a moderator, and it shows. Ya'll do realize that this is a private forum, right?

Exactly!

And what has that got to do with it? Are you implying that because it is a private forum that those that run and moderate the forum do not need to be held to the same standard of obeying the rules like the rest of us have to?

Yes, I will imply that.

They do not have to obey any rules or be held to any standard. They can act with impunity and do what ever the hell they want to do. Is that clear? That is what you can do if you own your site.

Now, that being said, would it be smart to blatantly ignore your own rules? No, of course not and MR doesn't. If they did membership would surely dwindle. Can you make everyone happy... no, you certainly cannot.

Can we please put an end to this "gotcha" crap? There are instances, every single day, that by the letter of the law breaks one forum rule or another and MR does nothing. IMHO this is either because it goes unseen/unreported (try managing posts at scale) or MR has chosen to allow certain things to happen to foster well intentioned conversation amongst its members.

It truly never ceases to amaze me that people can be so miserable here and yet stay. It is almost as if the act of complaining is somehow satisfying and y'all need a fix.

 

[nicho]

The post "LOL, What?" should have been reported and deleted, regardless of who wrote it. It violates the rules.

How ironic.

The sequential post also violates the rules.

 

[blkjedi954]

LOL simply means laughing out loud, not "I dismiss your post." It is your interpretation that it is dismissive. It could be laughing with the OP's remark.
However, I do think it is cryptic.

Either you’re new to American culture as well as those that liked your comment but that “LOL” is pretty clear in its dismissive nature. Nuance can escape those who aren’t entrenched in daily Western societal ongoings or maybe you’re being sarcastic. Maybe he’s overreacting to the Mac reporters response but his assessment is accurate.

 

[wohstihsyrot]

You could always head over to AV Forums to check out what really bad moderation looks like.

They've even managed to get on the wrong side of Trustpilot!

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Now at 3 pages, this is getting to be truly impressive. How many pages can we go complaining about the most trivial of matters?

 

[bousozoku]

You could always head over to AV Forums to check out what really bad moderation looks like.

They've even managed to get on the wrong side of Trustpilot!

wccftech is always my guideline, as they don't reallly have moderation, except to dismiss posts that don't agree with the writer of the article. There are so many fanatics that no one does much of anything.

 

[bousozoku]

How ironic.

The sequential post also violates the rules.

Oh, you mean where I have two posts because the forum software is broken and every time I combine posts for a reply, it won't allow me to reply?

What's ironic is that I used to merge posts to reclaim space on the server and save visual space way back on the old software.

 

[bpeeps]

One or two word posts are supposed to be removed, per the rules.

However, seeing the post in question. I would be shaking my head and possibly saying "LOL, what?" to myself, as I've done several times in the last week.

Rules for thee and not for me. Just another case of the fabulous MR moderation at work.

 

[bousozoku]

Rules for thee and not for me. Just another case of the fabulous MR moderation at work.

They keep reminding me about the rules. 😆

Apparently, I ramble a bit and bend or break the rules.

 

[I7guy]

Rules for thee and not for me. Just another case of the fabulous MR moderation at work.

Nothing like taking a specific minor situation and making a generalized hyperbolic post about it.

 

[Madhatter32]

Rules for thee and not for me. Just another case of the fabulous MR moderation at work.

Jaywalking is usually not enforced. I would not blame city hall if I were you.