# Report mods



## Şafak

Hello allerseits, a todos, everyone, herkese

Could you please tell me why I cannot report a moderator? I thought we were all equal!  

In fact, I wanted to report one moderator that hasn't visited the website since last April. I just wanted to draw the moderator's team attention to their colleague. Maybe something happened to the individual, so another person should be appointed instead.

With kind regards,
JW


----------



## cherine

Hi,
Please use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the forum page, or contact another moderator that you may know.


----------



## bandini

Jennifer Weiss said:


> Hello allerseits, a todos, everyone, herkese
> 
> Could you please tell me why I cannot report a moderator? I thought we were all equal!
> 
> In fact, I wanted to report one moderator that hasn't visited the website since last April. I just wanted to draw the moderator's team attention to their colleague. Maybe something happened to the individual, so another person should be appointed instead.
> 
> With kind regards,
> JW



You're lucky. I would love to see less moderators in the forums I visit.


----------



## merquiades

No, it's not possible to report a moderator or ignore one either.

Moderation varies greatly from one forum to another.   Some have only one moderator so it's impossible for him/her to be on top of everything and it can take more time to receive an answer.


----------



## swift

merquiades said:


> No, it's not possible to report a moderator


This is from the FAQ:


> _Can moderators be disciplined just like other members? By whom?_
> Moderators must abide by the rules, just like other members. Their posts can be reported by members and are subject to moderation by other moderators. If disciplinary action is warranted, it is carried out by the administrator.
> 
> FAQ about Moderators


----------



## Loob

Actually, Sr Swift, while you can report a moderator's posts, I don't think it _is _possible to report a moderator, in the sense of clicking on the "Report" button in the top right-hand corner of their profile page. I've just done a quick check on several mods and the button does seem to be missing....


----------



## Şafak

Loob said:


> Actually, Sr Swift, while you can report a moderator's posts, I don't think it _is _possible to report a moderator, in the sense of clicking on the "Report" button in the top right-hand corner of their profile page. I've just done a quick check on several mods and the button does seem to be missing....


It’s missing. I thought we had a democracy here.


----------



## Peterdg

Jennifer Weiss said:


> I thought we had a democracy here.


What makes you think that?   

This site is a business and it is run as a business. The owner of this site and his employees make their living here. The owner also pays for this infrastructure (or did you think this website doesn't cost money to maintain and support it?)


----------



## User With No Name

Peterdg said:


> This site is a business and it is run as a business. The owner of this site and his employees make their living here. The owner also pays for this infrastructure (or did you think this website doesn't cost money to maintain and support it?)


And every person who contributes time or expertise here, whether as a user or as a moderator, is making a donation to for-profit business. Personally, I have sometimes wondered why so many of us (including me, obviously) are willing to do that, when we certainly wouldn't dream of sending Amazon a check out of the goodness of our hearts.

Probably a good thing to keep in mind.


----------



## Peterdg

User With No Name said:


> I have sometimes wondered why so many of us (including me, obviously) are willing to do that


Because it is fun and you learn things and you can help other people. Simple no?

If you want to earn money to share your knowledge, this is not the good place.


----------



## wildan1

User With No Name said:


> I have sometimes wondered why so many of us (including me, obviously) are willing to do that, when we certainly wouldn't dream of sending Amazon a check out of the goodness of our hearts.


Nor would I. But did you realize that the moderator team (some 50+ WRF members who were invited to help moderate) are volunteers? We do this out of commitment to learning languages and interacting with and guiding other members.

This is hardly the same as the Amazon approach... (And WR owner Mike Kellogg is a great guy with a big heart!)

Back to Jennifer Weiss's question: anytime you have a problem with a moderator (at least in my case), send the moderator a private message to express your concern. That's the first step. Or just click on "Report" to express the same, so that the whole moderator team for the given Forum will see it. We all work as a team and advise/support each other to do a good job.


----------



## Peterdg

User With No Name said:


> when we certainly wouldn't dream of sending Amazon a check out of the goodness of our hearts.




Do you send checks to WR?

But you do send checks to Amazon each time you buy something from their website. You'll say: yes, but I get something in return. Well, here you have a free dictionary, so you also get something in return.


----------



## bandini

I love the idea of WF but some forums are over moderated, gleefully deleting comments, ending threads and enforcing rules. Oh, and on the constant lookout for that dangerous "chat."   And the ever-occurring, "Provide an example of what you're trying to say", even when the poster's question is clear as a bell.  I've actually had comments deleted for answering a pretty simple question because I didn't wait for "more context" after a moderator demanded it.  I guess I never cared for hall monitors, even in school, but whatever.


----------



## Şafak

bandini said:


> I've actually had comments deleted for answering a pretty simple question because I didn't wait for "more context" after a moderator demanded it.



Even though we are NOT supposed to discuss the moderator's work, I have seen a couple of similar situations and I find it absurd. Moderation is good but in moderation.


----------



## Stoggler

Jennifer Weiss said:


> Moderation is good but in moderation.



Nicely said!


----------



## Reina de la Aldea

wildan1 said:


> the moderator team (some 50+ WRF members who were invited to help moderate) are volunteers? We do this out of commitment to learning languages and interacting with and guiding other members.


I often wondered whether these hard-working, dedicated, conscientious and vigilant policers of our forum were compensated.  They should be.  I much admire and appreciate the moderators for the Spanish-English forum, which is what I, by and large, participate in.  Yes, I get stung once in a while with a deleted post (I'm especially guilty of chat and veering off topic), but if the moderators rolled up the sidewalks, all hell could break loose in the forums.  It would degenerate into a bunch of chatrooms rather than a site to which one can contribute their knowledge and talent in an orderly, courteous and colegial setting.  We need these hallway monitors -- 24/7!


----------



## elroy

We don't always get it perfectly right, and different mods/forums have different styles (see Rule 13).
As always, if you believe a moderator has intervened unnecessarily (or does so regularly), please use the Report feature or a conversation.
As a reminder, everyone agreed to abide by our rules when they registered.  Now, it's true that the rules do get interpreted (somewhat) differently from forum to forum or from mod to mod (again, see Rule 13), but you did agree to the rules so you will of course be monitored and mods will intervene if in their assessment you are violating either the spirit or the letter of a rule.
Many members are able to adapt their behavior after initial misunderstandings or run-ins with moderators, once they've understood how the rules are interpreted in their respective case.
In my experience, when unapproved behavior persists, it's typically because the member isn't fully interested in adapting.
We have very active members who have written thousands of posts and participate in multiple forums who almost never require moderator intervention.


----------



## elroy

A few more comments: 


bandini said:


> on the constant lookout for that dangerous "chat."


There's absolutely nothing wrong with chat.  It's simply not what we do here.  If I called a meeting with some colleagues to discuss the project we're working on, I wouldn't want them talking to me about their ailing dog or last night's adventure at the supermarket, although I'd love to hear about those things over coffee when we all have some free time.

The forum provides some outlets for chat:
- conversations
- exclusive forums that are accessible to senior members who have been members for at least six months

Chat doesn't belong in the public language forums.  Perhaps you are not aware that on average, 99%+ (yes, 99%+!) of the people browsing the forums at any given time are *not registered members* but guests, the vast majority of whom are presumably consulting the forums because they looked for something in the dictionaries and the dictionary entries weren't sufficient.  These people aren't interested in anyone's anecdotes about their annoying neighbor or the concert they enjoyed last year.  


bandini said:


> "Provide an example of what you're trying to say"


Indeed, answering questions about words/phrases _in context_ is our specialty.  Since dictionaries are insufficient because they can't cover every conceivable context or unconventional/innovative use, the forums step in to fill in those gaps by offering real human insight about specific contexts.  This doesn't work well if examples/contexts are withheld and people have to guess at what the intended meaning might be.


bandini said:


> even when the poster's question is clear as a bell


What seems clear to you may not be clear to everyone else, and you may end up not being right because maybe you thought it was clear but were missing a crucial piece of information that changes everything.  Besides, it's much more practical to insist on context in each case rather than try to scrutinize each and every question to try to determine if context is truly necessary.  And there's certainly never any _harm_ to adding context. 


bandini said:


> I've actually had comments deleted for answering a pretty simple question because I didn't wait for "more context" after a moderator demanded it.


Rightly so.  That's one of the most discourteous things anyone can do.  When a moderator asks for context, they are saying that the question is not acceptable as is, but instead of closing or deleting the thread, they are giving the OP the opportunity to provide the suitable context.  This is _not_ an opportunity for other members to jump in and answer the question anyway.  Why anyone would think this is acceptable is beyond me.  If you still feel like answering the question, you can do so privately, not in the thread.


----------



## bandini

elroy said:


> A few more comments:
> 
> There's absolutely nothing wrong with chat.  It's simply not what we do here.  If I called a meeting with some colleagues to discuss the project we're working on, I wouldn't want them talking to me about their ailing dog or last night's adventure at the supermarket, although I'd love to hear about those things over coffee when we all have some free time.
> 
> The forum provides some outlets for chat:
> - conversations
> - exclusive forums that are accessible to senior members who have been members for at least six months
> 
> Chat doesn't belong in the public language forums.  Perhaps you are not aware that on average, 99%+ (yes, 99%+!) of the people browsing the forums at any given time are *not registered members* but guests, the vast majority of whom are presumably consulting the forums because they looked for something in the dictionaries and the dictionary entries weren't sufficient.  These people aren't interested in anyone's anecdotes about their annoying neighbor or the concert they enjoyed last year.
> 
> Indeed, answering questions about words/phrases _in context_ is our specialty.  Since dictionaries are insufficient because they can't cover every conceivable context or unconventional/innovative use, the forums step in to fill in those gaps by offering real human insight about specific contexts.  This doesn't work well if examples/contexts are withheld and people have to guess at what the intended meaning might be.
> 
> What seems clear to you may not be clear to everyone else, and you may end up not being right because maybe you thought it was clear but were missing a crucial piece of information that changes everything.  Besides, it's much more practical to insist on context in each case rather than try to scrutinize each and every question to try to determine if context is truly necessary.  And there's certainly never any _harm_ to adding context.
> 
> Rightly so.  That's one of the most discourteous things anyone can do.  When a moderator asks for context, they are saying that the question is not acceptable as is, but instead of closing or deleting the thread, they are giving the OP the opportunity to provide the suitable context.  This is _not_ an opportunity for other members to jump in and answer the question anyway.  Why anyone would think this is acceptable is beyond me.  If you still feel like answering the question, you can do so privately, not in the thread.



Veo que tenemos una diferencia filosófica pero bueno, el que huye del costo huye del provecho y estoy Felipe y con tenis estar a sus órdenes sin que añada nada más al dicho.  No se vale apañar salvo que decir que hoy día la libertad verdadera le da cosa a la gente, la mayoría de la cual prefiere la vida con barandillas.  Saludos


----------



## elroy

Todos tenemos nuestras propias filosofías y perspectivas, somos una comunidad con mucha diversidad. Espero que tu filosofía personal no sea óbice para que puedas hallar una forma de aprovechar de los foros en harmonía con los demás, tanto brindando lo que puedas aportar como sacando provecho de lo que los otros te ofrezcamos.


----------



## Reina de la Aldea

elroy said:


> What seems clear to you may not be clear to everyone else


So true!  Or what seems clear to you (even if you're the OP) may not be clear to you as the thread evolves.  This is a colegial effort, and we can't presume to be able to climb into peoples' heads and know what they're thinking.  In providing information, complying with the forum rules guarantees the mere minimum.


bandini said:


> estoy Felipe y con tenis estar a sus órdenes sin que añada nada más al dicho


I made a real effort to interpret this.  I plugged it into Google Translate (what a train wreck), and I tried various Google strings, to no avail.  Yet I'd like to know what this means, Bandini, as I feel left out of understanding something of what you wanted to say.


elroy said:


> on average, 99%+ (yes, 99%+!) of the people browsing the forums at any given time are *not registered members* but guests


From now on, I'll be keeping this audience front and center in my mind!


----------



## bandini

Reina de la Aldea said:


> So true!  Or what seems clear to you (even if you're the OP) may not be clear to you as the thread evolves.  This is a colegial effort, and we can't presume to be able to climb into peoples' heads and know what they're thinking.  In providing information, complying with the forum rules guarantees the mere minimum.
> 
> I made a real effort to interpret this.  I plugged it into Google Translate (what a train wreck), and I tried various Google strings, to no avail.  Yet I'd like to know what this means, Bandini, as I feel left out of understanding something of what you wanted to say.
> 
> From now on, I'll be keeping this audience front and center in my mind!



Hi Reina.  Felipe y con tenis is coloquio and Mexican and kind of a silly way to say "feliz y contento."  It's "albur". 
So, I'm happy to comply and have nothing else to add to what's already been said.
Have a good weekend!


----------



## bandini

elroy said:


> Todos tenemos nuestras propias filosofías y perspectivas, somos una comunidad con mucha diversidad. Espero que tu filosofía personal no sea óbice para que puedas hallar una forma de aprovechar de los foros en harmonía con los demás, tanto brindando lo que puedas aportar como sacando provecho de lo que los otros te ofrezcamos.



¿Ser óbice para aprovechar de los foros en harmonía con los demás?  De plano ¿le cae?   Sí vivo en la harmonía como dijo   Benito Juarez que el respeto al derecho ajeno es la paz.  Oiga disculpe pero yo no soy quién borre comentario que no me guste o que no conforme ni tampoco busco pleito con nadie.


----------



## Şafak

The point of my thread was something else.


----------



## bandini

Jennifer Weiss said:


> The point of my thread was something else.


Yeah we appear to have gotten off track. My apologies, Jennifer.


----------



## Şafak

bandini said:


> Yeah we appear to have gotten off track. My apologies, Jennifer.


No apologies. I just wanted to draw people’s attention that there are mods who have not been around for quite a long time.


----------



## elroy

Jennifer Weiss said:


> I just wanted to draw people’s attention that there are mods who have not been around for quite a long time.


This was already addressed:


cherine said:


> Please use the Contact Us form at the bottom of the forum page, or contact another moderator that you may know.


----------



## Şafak

Yes, I just reiterated the point of the topic. 😁😁


----------



## Reina de la Aldea

You see how threads can take on a life of their own!  I'm glad you got your question answered, Jennifer.  It was on-the-ball of you to want to report a moderator who's MIA.  Thank you for affording us the opportunity to wander into adjacent territory, to bandy about ideas and share experiences


----------

