Semi-support. A user that may not understand why they were alerted(ex:a young kid that found inappropriate content and tried to explain why the user shouldn’t do it) may get confused and genuinely not understand that mini-modding may be annoying, more if it was for a instance that does not actually violate the community guidelines. However, there a some cases where it has been helpful (I.e. encouraging users to report inappropriate/malicious links before anyone is hurt) however it has more disadvantages rather than advantages, so I think it should be discouraged.

philip0210 wrote:

Semi-support. A user that may not understand why they were alerted(ex:a young kid that found inappropriate content and tried to explain why the user shouldn’t do it) may get confused and genuinely not understand that mini-modding may be annoying, more if it was for a instance that does not actually violate the community guidelines. However, there a some cases where it has been helpful (I.e. encouraging users to report inappropriate/malicious links before anyone is hurt) however it has more disadvantages rather than advantages, so I think it should be discouraged.

I disagree that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. I think that the type of mini-modding with a friendly voice and encouraging demeanor can be beneficial in teaching better forum etiquette and strengthening the quality of new forumers' posts. People tend to respond better to kindness rather than “This is what you did wrong, do better.”
Rather than discouraging mini-modding as a whole, it would be best to encourage a kind, friendly approach with constructive criticism.

DarthVader4Life wrote:

I disagree that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. I think that the type of mini-modding with a friendly voice and encouraging demeanor can be beneficial in teaching better forum etiquette and strengthening the quality of new forumers' posts. People tend to respond better to kindness rather than “This is what you did wrong, do better.”
Rather than discouraging mini-modding as a whole, it would be best to encourage a kind, friendly approach with constructive criticism.

Yeah, I prefer people being kind and just letting their peers know rather than sounding like the front desk lady at McLeod.

Bump

cambegonefr wrote:

DarthVader4Life wrote:

I disagree that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. I think that the type of mini-modding with a friendly voice and encouraging demeanor can be beneficial in teaching better forum etiquette and strengthening the quality of new forumers' posts. People tend to respond better to kindness rather than “This is what you did wrong, do better.”
Rather than discouraging mini-modding as a whole, it would be best to encourage a kind, friendly approach with constructive criticism.

Yeah, I prefer people being kind and just letting their peers know rather than sounding like the front desk lady at McLeod.

Even then, it's still not their responsibility.

SkyCedar wrote:

sometimes if someone with actual experience onsite doesn't step in before ST does things could get really bad

I don’t think it matters how well-experienced people are. If they tell someone not to break the rules instead of silently reporting them, it would cause more clutter than the person rule-breaking themselves, thus adding more work on the moderators’ plate.

Kiyan_LiftFan wrote:

SkyCedar wrote:

sometimes if someone with actual experience onsite doesn't step in before ST does things could get really bad

I don’t think it matters how well-experienced people are. If they tell someone not to break the rules instead of silently reporting them, it would cause more clutter than the person rule-breaking themselves, thus adding more work on the moderators’ plate.

That's with merely saying “Don't do x.” And if a user is either an obvious troll or insulting people, the clear choice is to silently report. My point of being respectful and constructive comes in when we're talking about explaining the forums to someone new to them. It's less work for the moderators when they have new forum posters learning how to be constructive faster, in my opinion.

Sasha_Banks272 wrote:

cambegonefr wrote:

DarthVader4Life wrote:

-snip-
Rather than discouraging mini-modding as a whole, it would be best to encourage a kind, friendly approach with constructive criticism.

Yeah, I prefer people being kind and just letting their peers know rather than sounding like the front desk lady at McLeod.

Even then, it's still not their responsibility.

I feel like most people who practice my description of what I think is good mini-modding are aware of that, but it's still something that they'd like to do. I like the notion of encouraging others to develop critical thinking skills and teaching them some of the things that I've learned over the years. Is it something that I'm obligated to do? No, but that doesn't mean I can't.
I think it's a matter of prerogative; the people who wish to mini-mod (with the approach I've detailed) can do so and the people who don't want to do that are free to not do that.

Kiyan_LiftFan wrote:

SkyCedar wrote:

sometimes if someone with actual experience onsite doesn't step in before ST does things could get really bad

I don’t think it matters how well-experienced people are. If they tell someone not to break the rules instead of silently reporting them, it would cause more clutter than the person rule-breaking themselves, thus adding more work on the moderators’ plate.

Agreed! I rather not insert myself into anything like that.

semi support, most minimods are fine as they are but for 3 chill guys there is always 1 zealot somewhere. if you have previous moderation experience then it should be fine, if you're a 12-year-old who wants to look cool then stay out of it (totally not speaking from past experience nuh uh no sir)

Sasha_Banks272 wrote:

cambegonefr wrote:

DarthVader4Life wrote:

I disagree that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. I think that the type of mini-modding with a friendly voice and encouraging demeanor can be beneficial in teaching better forum etiquette and strengthening the quality of new forumers' posts. People tend to respond better to kindness rather than “This is what you did wrong, do better.”
Rather than discouraging mini-modding as a whole, it would be best to encourage a kind, friendly approach with constructive criticism.

Yeah, I prefer people being kind and just letting their peers know rather than sounding like the front desk lady at McLeod.

Even then, it's still not their responsibility.

it's also not really your responsibility to give your friend a hug if he/she is sad, but you do it anyways out of kindness
as stated several times previously, being polite about your minimodding and trying to guide the person to do better instead of throwing them onto the pavement can help them avoid a scuffle with an actual moderator in the future.

DarthVader4Life wrote:

Kiyan_LiftFan wrote:

SkyCedar wrote:

sometimes if someone with actual experience onsite doesn't step in before ST does things could get really bad

I don’t think it matters how well-experienced people are. If they tell someone not to break the rules instead of silently reporting them, it would cause more clutter than the person rule-breaking themselves, thus adding more work on the moderators’ plate.

That's with merely saying “Don't do x.” And if a user is either an obvious troll or insulting people, the clear choice is to silently report. My point of being respectful and constructive comes in when we're talking about explaining the forums to someone new to them. It's less work for the moderators when they have new forum posters learning how to be constructive faster, in my opinion.

Yes, this approach is a lot better. Some folks are pretty rude when it comes to helping others learn from their mistakes, so it’s better to politely guide them through the forums if they’re unsure of how they operate.

also when people will realize that the support convention (e.g. saying “support/semi-support/no support”) is useless and the constructive reasoning on their post is what matters lol this ain’t a presidential election

quick guide to everyone on how to use scratch and the forums
if something doesn't look right, speak to contact us or use the report button. see it, say it, sorted
you should simply report the content and move on. make no public scene. this is how you're encouraged to report so please don't backseat moderate. it isn't necessary and only causes more drama

Banana

At that point, I would just use Contact Us. Yes the process is way longer and it takes time, but it’s more reliable and safer to ask a ST member than asking for help from people you follow or talk with normally on Scratch.

This may be rejected, but there is also a very good chance it's not. I'll have to ask a mod lol

28: Moderating mini-mods:
It's rather difficult to decide exactly what “mini-modding” is. In many cases, the user is trying to be helpful (such as by pointing out that a user should not spam/necropost, or quoting this sticky when someone suggests a rejected suggestion), and it can generally be useful for users who may not know that what they're doing is discouraged or not allowed. If you see a user who doesn't seem to actually know that they're not a moderator, you can report them.

Not sure if it's quite the same as this, but this is from an old TOLORS (And based on old comments from the current TOLORS, it used to be on the list as well)

There is also this quote, which I don't know what to make of: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/252951/?page=6#post-2620893

And it also may be a dupe: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/634006/?page=1 but I think it would do more good for it to be merged if it's not rejected

The-Sushi-Cat wrote:

This may be rejected, but there is also a very good chance it's not. I'll have to ask a mod lol

28: Moderating mini-mods:
It's rather difficult to decide exactly what “mini-modding” is. In many cases, the user is trying to be helpful (such as by pointing out that a user should not spam/necropost, or quoting this sticky when someone suggests a rejected suggestion), and it can generally be useful for users who may not know that what they're doing is discouraged or not allowed. If you see a user who doesn't seem to actually know that they're not a moderator, you can report them.

Not sure if it's quite the same as this, but this is from an old TOLORS (And based on old comments from the current TOLORS, it used to be on the list as well)

There is also this quote, which I don't know what to make of: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/252951/?page=6#post-2620893

And it also may be a dupe: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/634006/?page=1 but I think it would do more good for it to be merged if it's not rejected

I can't personally consider this a duplicate because the topic you linked has 4 posts and is just barely anything, while my topic and ideas actually into depth.

And as for it being rejected, moderating other users should never be rejected. And secondly, you're using an outdated version, which you acknowledged. It's better to use up to date and accurate sources.

cambegonefr wrote:

The-Sushi-Cat wrote:

-snip-

I can't personally consider this a duplicate because the topic you linked has 4 posts and is just barely anything, while my topic and ideas actually into depth.

Dupes are dupes, but I agree. It'd be more good if that one was closed or they were merged

cambegonefr wrote:

And as for it being rejected, moderating other users should never be rejected. And secondly, you're using an outdated version, which you acknowledged. It's better to use up to date and accurate sources.

Exactly. The whole point is that it might be rejected still, if it was back then. But it could also very well not be. It probably isn't though, as ST didn't close this

Almost all the downsides of mini-modding are already structured by the CG.

If the mini-modder spreads misinformation, it breaks the “Be honest” part.

If the mini-modder is rude, it breaks “Treat others with respect”.

But if the mini-modder actually mini-mods, that should be allowed.

This is because warns and other messages from the ST arent that specific; “Please dont spam” can be for ASCII art, advertising, or actual spam, and the ST (from what I know) only specifies the rule the comment breaks, and shows the comment itself. It does not show what is wrong with the comment.

IloveRoblox003 wrote:

Almost all the downsides of mini-modding are already structured by the CG.

If the mini-modder spreads misinformation, it breaks the “Be honest” part.

If the mini-modder is rude, it breaks “Treat others with respect”.

That's not true. That's just things no users should do period. The downsides of mini-modding are listed earlier in the topic.

Sasha_Banks272 wrote:

IloveRoblox003 wrote:

Almost all the downsides of mini-modding are already structured by the CG.

If the mini-modder spreads misinformation, it breaks the “Be honest” part.

If the mini-modder is rude, it breaks “Treat others with respect”.

That's not true. That's just things no users should do period. The downsides of mini-modding are listed earlier in the topic.

Could you elaborate why you don't think that's true? Where do you draw the line at what a user should and should not be permitted to do?

Sasha_Banks272 wrote:

IloveRoblox003 wrote:

Almost all the downsides of mini-modding are already structured by the CG.

If the mini-modder spreads misinformation, it breaks the “Be honest” part.

If the mini-modder is rude, it breaks “Treat others with respect”.

That's not true. That's just things no users should do period. The downsides of mini-modding are listed earlier in the topic.

When did I say only mini-modders have these rules? I was saying that the CG and its rules will prevent most of the downsides to be invalid.