NationStates Jolt Archive

Everyone seems to be adding, "Oh, I'm not a mod.", to their posts. This trend really needs to stop. It's pretty obvious that you either are or aren't a mod, judging from the titles underneath your name, so don't bother posting it. It's completely unnecessary.

People have been deleted for not posting it, and seeming to pose as moderators. I don't do it, I'm just sayin. That's when it started, the mods told us we should be clear that we weren't trying to pose as mods.

Personally I think adding the tag is a little ridiculous, and not just for the title thing. You can make it very clear you're not a mod with word choice. "The mods have said", "they", etc., can distance the poster from modhood.

People have been deleted for not posting it, and seeming to pose as moderators.

There's a difference between posing as a moderator, and adding that little disclaimer in when only giving out advice.

Also, in the past, I don't exactly know what the moderators did concerning the 'not a mod' disclaimers, but times have changed and they aren't needed anymore.

Personally I think adding the tag is a little ridiculous, and not just for the title thing. You can make it very clear you're not a mod with word choice. "The mods have said", "they", etc., can distance the poster from modhood.

Agreed.

Actually, I was under the understanding that it was against the rules to begin with. I'm sure I read it within the One Stop Rules Shop at one point.

Regardless, it made for some ugly posting habits. Well done, IMO.

--- AU's Player.

I think part of the problem is that people that post in the Moderation forum sometimes don't know that Mods will always have a title that says moderator. And until a Moderator actually posts, they won't see the difference.

That said, I usually just try for the word choice. Fris made a point about saying things definitively vs. "I think" or "I've seen that before". Choosing words carefully is always a good thing. :p

Everyone seems to be adding, "Oh, I'm not a mod.", to their posts. This trend really needs to stop. It's pretty obvious that you either are or aren't a mod, judging from the titles underneath your name, so don't bother posting it. It's completely unnecessary.

Is this solely based on the fact that it's irritating? Kinda weak argument, IMHO. It's not that they're confusing people with it. People sometimes are kinda paranoid to sound like a mod. That's the reason of their disclaimers. Besides that, it is unnecessary, I agree.

Is this solely based on the fact that it's irritating? Kinda weak argument, IMHO. It's not that they're confusing people with it. People sometimes are kinda paranoid to sound like a mod. That's the reason of their disclaimers. Besides that, it is unnecessary, I agree.

No, it's not based on the sole fact that it's irritating. It's simply unnecessary. Just by looking at the title beneath the user name can tell you if the poster is a moderator or not. There are ways of wording things without sounding like a mod such as the examples Erastide provided.

Basically, if you're not a mod, you don't need to point it out. It's pretty obvious.

Is this solely based on the fact that it's irritating? Kinda weak argument, IMHO. It's not that they're confusing people with it. People sometimes are kinda paranoid to sound like a mod. That's the reason of their disclaimers. Besides that, it is unnecessary, I agree.

I don't think it's solely because it's annoying. (I sometimes disclaim myself, but I do find putting [/notamod] or some such nonsense on posts very trying.) I think it's also because adding 'not a mod' sometimes allows players to post very definitive answers, which they shouldn't really be doing.

That's not actionable. (Not a mod.)

That's part of why I (who is not...) think they're pointing this out.

(Plus, irritating is a reason to an extent. Bandwidth isn't so much of a consideration on the Jolt forums, as I understand it: the prohibiting of spam is because spam detracts from debate and roleplay and is, well, irritating. So it wouldn't be a unique precedent in any case.)

EDIT: Ah, Euro posted while I was writing. He's right.

No, it's not based on the sole fact that it's irritating. It's simply unnecessary. Just by looking at the title beneath the user name can tell you if the poster is a moderator or not. There are ways of wording things without sounding like a mod such as the examples Erastide provided.

Basically, if you're not a mod, you don't need to point it out. It's pretty obvious.
I'm not all too sure. I've been mistaken for a mod myself, as have a few other people I know of. Not everyone looks at the member title.

I'm not all too sure. I've been mistaken for a mod myself, as have a few other people I know of. Not everyone looks at the member title.

I personally don't think that an exception should be made for the few people who don't look at the member titles. That's not our fault that they can't tell that someone is or isn't a moderator. I've been mistaken for a moderator (before I became one, and hell, Dread Lady Nathicana still gets mistaken for a mod despite sayings she isn't in her sig). Doesn't mean that I think everyone should say "Not a mod".

All people coming into the Moderation forum should at least pay attention to who has the authority here, by either reading the "All About the Moderators" sticky or checking out their member title, otherwise, it would be pointless to even come into the forum in the first place.

Well. Then it becomes an issue of how you word things, isnt it? Anyone got the link to Frisbeeteria's explanation, for reference? (Conducts his own search, in the meantime).

--- AU's Player.

No, it's not based on the sole fact that it's irritating. It's simply unnecessary.I don't know that's always the case.

I've seen people get read the riot act because they "passed themselves off as authority" on matters because they didn't add a qualifier that they weren't moderators. I respect you Euro, but in this case, I disagree with this decision.

I don't know that's always the case.

I've seen people get read the riot act because they "passed themselves off as authority" on matters because they didn't add a qualifier that they weren't moderators. I respect you Euro, but in this case, I disagree with this decision.


It's not a matter of using a 'disclaimer' or not, its a matter of how they phrased their post. You can simply state "I believe that" or "The moderators have said this..."and provide proof. It isn't that hard to type out.

Well. Then it becomes an issue of how you word things, isnt it? Anyone got the link to Frisbeeteria's explanation, for reference? (Conducts his own search, in the meantime).

--- AU's Player.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8785406&postcount=6

Maybe if people's posts are sufficiently confusing that there is a danger that some people might mistake them for definitive rulings, they shouldn't be posting them in the first place? Adding [/notamod] surely only indicates that you are unable to use the guidelines Fris gave, for example, and that generally your post might be mistaken...which is decidedly counter-productive.

I think, anyway, the mods have spoken. Maybe some people think it's silly, but shouldn't we at least give them the benefit of the doubt? If bloody anarchy breaks forth, I'm sure they'll be gracious enough to change their mind.

Precedence? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=337610)

Funny how it still hasn't stopped, hee... Suppose that it's a little too time consuming to spend a tenth of a second to check for the member title.

Ahhh, I remember that thread. *grins*

Actually yes, it is silly to continue posting 'not a mod' everywhere, and no, one shouldn't have to post that continuously considering how easy it is to see or find out who the moderators are. The only reason it's in my sig is because one day I was bitching on IRC about getting tired of people coming to me to ask to have their nations rez'd or why they got deleted, or what was going on with the mods in any one particular situation, and Scolo edited my sig as a joke. I was amused by it, and kept it.

As has amply been stated by mods and others here, anyone ought to be able to see plainly that a person is, or is not a mod, just by looking at their name next to their post. Not sure for some reason? Check their nation page - there's a great big tag there. Still not sure, though I can't imagine why? Ask. There's a whole team of moderators and a bunch of regulars who would be able to tell you.

The fact that some lack reading, recognition, or reasoning skills should not be a reason for everyone else to spell it out for them continuously. The only time I've seen the mods get after someone for 'acting like a mod' was when the person was warning others, proscribing penalties for behaviours, or saying 'this or that WILL happen if' sorts of things. Not when people were offering an opinion, or advise, or their take on a situation.

Most folks capable of making coherent posts on a forum ought to be able to tell the difference, one would think.

Even if a poster uses the word 'we' in a sentence.

I personally don't think that an exception should be made for the few people who don't look at the member titles. That's not our fault that they can't tell that someone is or isn't a moderator. I've been mistaken for a moderator (before I became one, and hell, Dread Lady Nathicana still gets mistaken for a mod despite sayings she isn't in her sig). Doesn't mean that I think everyone should say "Not a mod".

All people coming into the Moderation forum should at least pay attention to who has the authority here, by either reading the "All About the Moderators" sticky or checking out their member title, otherwise, it would be pointless to even come into the forum in the first place.my concern is that sometimes posters do "sound" like the mods, and that Impersonating a Mod is an actionable offense. it will be taken into account here when a player is giving options/suggestions that sound "mod-like" right?

and will placing "Not a Mod" in the sig be ok or is that discouraged also?

my concern is that sometimes posters do "sound" like the mods, and that Impersonating a Mod is an actionable offense.Moderation forum regulars should be able to grasp the difference between,

"You really should change your sig; it's supposed to be 8 lines."

and

"Change your signature. 8 lines is the limit."

Players make suggestions and give hints. Moderators get to make demands. A player making a demand and then tossing "not a mod" on the end, is like calling someone a scum-sucking piece of shit and then claiming it's okay because they added "j/k" on the end. It's like saying you didn't lie because your fingers were crossed.

my concern is that sometimes posters do "sound" like the mods, and that Impersonating a Mod is an actionable offense. it will be taken into account here when a player is giving options/suggestions that sound "mod-like" right?

and will placing "Not a Mod" in the sig be ok or is that discouraged also?
Well, it seems to be ok for Nathi, so I don't see why it won't be ok for others who frequently get mistaken for mods. Of course, if you're just a random player who's never made a single sticky or done too much to help others, you have little reason to put that in your signature.

Moderation forum regulars should be able to grasp the difference between,

"You really should change your sig; it's supposed to be 8 lines."

and

"Change your signature. 8 lines is the limit."

Players make suggestions and give hints. Moderators get to make demands. A player making a demand and then tossing "not a mod" on the end, is like calling someone a scum-sucking piece of shit and then claiming it's okay because they added "j/k" on the end. It's like saying you didn't lie because your fingers were crossed.
So basically, if we make grammar mistakes we won't get mistaken for mods? :p

Criminey, Czardas, if you're going to get your panties in a twist over a joke in a sig ... If the mods want it out of my sig, it's out. Simple. Not like I've ever expected special treatment. Regardless, I think what was being addressed was the constant tags being posted, like it was some sort of 'look at me' club or something.

I dont really see what the big deal is. Jolt's tagging feature has made it quite clearly enough. For example, when I look at The Most Glorious Hack, I think to myself, "Oh, he's a part of the Nationstates Moderator Team." hence the tag below his name.

But when I look at Nathi, I look at her and think to myself, "Oh, she's no Moderator; she's a Semi-Pro Sp@mPig."

IMO its clear enough, and if people are really mistaking you for a Moderator after you make a comment, then maybe you need to look at how you're phrasing what you write. Of course, there are special exceptions--Nathi being one herself, given that people might mistaken her for a Moderator, if not for that fact that she plays as an Op on #nationstates only.

If you have a real issue, it comes down to basics. If they have a proper reason to believe you're a mod, aside from the fact that it doesnt say so beneath your name, then a small disclamer in your signature ought to be fine. But when it comes to being an average poster, posting your comment from time to time, maybe you ought to re-word your posts.

Again, see this for help if you cant understand it yourself;
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8785406&postcount=6

Honestly though, there's no need to get one's knickers in a twist over a new rule that Euro (and probably a bunch of others) have decided to introduce. Learn how to do things properly, and if that doesnt work; identify the issue, and make the adjustments. Tis quite simple, really.

Well, it seems to be ok for Nathi, so I don't see why it won't be ok for others who frequently get mistaken for mods. Of course, if you're just a random player who's never made a single sticky or done too much to help others, you have little reason to put that in your signature.
The only reason it's in my sig is because one day I was bitching on IRC about getting tired of people coming to me to ask to have their nations rez'd or why they got deleted, or what was going on with the mods in any one particular situation, and Scolo edited my sig as a joke. I was amused by it, and kept it.
(emphasis all mine)

Really, Czardas, drop it.

So, if I put in a statement like [\notamod] or something like that, will I be punished?

I dont imagine it would actually carry a real heavy penalty; depending on how much they want to rule this out. But regardless, the jist of this thread is a peaceful suggestion that players do refrain from tagging their posts, [/notamod] in future.

--- AU's Player.

So, if I put in a statement like [\notamod] or something like that, will I be punished?

I think the point of the thread is that any statement that requires such a disclaimer probably shouldn't be posted in any case. They don't object to those seven letters, so much as people giving definitive opinions, sometimes wrongly, and then hiding behind a shield of saying 'well, I did say I wasn't a mod'. Euro and the others seem to be saying that you shouldn't put that, because you shouldn't need to put.

Man a very sick but funny part of me wanted to start up this post with a big, bold, 'not a mod' disclaimer... but I figure that could get me in trouble.

Hokay -

IMHO, this is wasteful bureaucracy. If this is going to be a new rule, which is what it sounds like, it's adding a new rule that doesn't solve a pressing problem or making the forum significantly better. Sure, posting the 'not a mod' disclaimer *can* at times be annoying, and to be sure is unnecisary, but come on, how many things that happen on this forum fit both those two parameters?

I'm just saying, in an effort to stop something unneccisary, you have in fact created what I would call an unneccisary expansion of the rules of conduct.

Just my two cents. It is in the end up to you guys, of course.

(emphasis all mine)

Really, Czardas, drop it.Psst... so what is a "Goram Mod"? :D

I'm just saying, in an effort to stop something unneccisary, you have in fact created what I would call an unneccisary expansion of the rules of conduct.There's difference between "knock it off" and creating an unnecessary new rule.

This is an example of the former.

Rules are things like the 8 line signature limit that you're currently in violation of.

How am I supposed to keep Kat entertained if I'm not allowed to come up with witty reasons why I am not (and never will be) a Mod?

Enquiring minds want to know! Sort of. As long as it's good for a joke.

LOL!
You can always telegram me, Trez.

There's difference between "knock it off" and creating an unnecessary new rule.

This is an example of the former.

Rules are things like the 8 line signature limit that you're currently in violation of.

Well... I guess that settles that.

And I can change the sig if it really bothers you.

LOL!
You can always telegram me, Trez.It lacks the same impact. I mean, what good is pointing out how insufferably witty I am if I can't broadcast it to the world at large? To quote the great Zaphod Beeblebrox, "If there's anything out there bigger than my ego, I want it caught and shot now!"

Hmph. I threaten a strike! I won't post if I can't shove my wittiness down your throats!

Oops. I haven't been posting much lately anyway. Well damn, there goes that blackmail. I'll have to think of something else.

And I can change the sig if it really bothers you.I believe this is what we would call a "subtle hint." Stop being subtle, Hack. It clearly isn't getting through.

I believe this is what we would call a "subtle hint." Stop being subtle, Hack. It clearly isn't getting through.

I'd hazard to say that was uncalled for.

I got the damned hint.

I think he was just reminding you that your sig was still over 8 lines...he wasn't being snide.

Speaking immoderately, I ...

My immodest view on that is ...

In an unmodified response, I ...

C'mon, there are thousands of ways those of us who are that way inclined can point out that we play but bit-parts in the great drama that is NationStates.

Or maybe we could just put *sings* or *whistles* in our posts to show that we are light-hearted because we don't walk the dark and gloomy (hard and rocky? strait and narrow?) path that is the Way of the Mod.

I think it's nice of you to provide us with another hurdle to sidle around or burrow under.

*Tries to come up with some ambiguity in the statement 'STOP IT!'*

Speaking immoderately, I ...

My immodest view on that is ...

In an unmodified response, I ...

C'mon, there are thousands of ways those of us who are that way inclined can point out that we play but bit-parts in the great drama that is NationStates.

Or maybe we could just put *sings* or *whistles* in our posts to show that we are lighhearted because we don't walk the dark and gloomy (hard and rocky? strait and narrow?) path that is the Way of the Mod.

I think it's nice of you to provide us with another hurdle to sidle around or burrow under.

*Tries to come up with some ambiguity in the statement 'STOP IT!'*I'll consider it an excercise in creativity... and hopefully the mods will be more amused than irritated...

HOPEFULLY...

Rules are things like the 8 line signature limit that you're currently in violation of.
[subtle hint]
Hack, have you looked at your signature lately?...
[/subtle hint]
[not-so-subtle hint] It's 9 lines... [/not-so-subtle hint]

For all wondering Hack's length... IIRC, the guideline is it must not be bigger than 8 lines of standard text. His sig may be 11 lines, but it is of size 1, and in fact as tall as 8 regular lines (feel free to grab the rulers out... I did)

Oh for goodness sake!

A moderator has said that putting "not a mod" at the end of the post is not needed.
A moderator has said can you please stop doing it.

Why not just say "OK, we'll not do it" ?

Good grief he isn't asking for much is he?

It lacks the same impact. I mean, what good is pointing out how insufferably witty I am if I can't broadcast it to the world at large? To quote the great Zaphod Beeblebrox, "If there's anything out there bigger than my ego, I want it caught and shot now!"

Hmph. I threaten a strike! I won't post if I can't shove my wittiness down your throats!

Oops. I haven't been posting much lately anyway. Well damn, there goes that blackmail. I'll have to think of something else.
Er...you can...uh...



...Take over the forums in a coup d'état in which everyone popularly elects you as Admin or something, and then post your "wittiness" as a message which automatically shows up whenever you click on the forum URL?

Besides that, I'm short on ideas, m'self.

[subtle hint]
Hack, have you looked at your signature lately?...
[/subtle hint]
[not-so-subtle hint] It's 9 lines... [/not-so-subtle hint]Really? I count 8. The blank space after the last line isn't part of his sig.

4 lines of lyrics
1 line of attribution
1 line of space
2 lines of snide comment/meme

=

8 lines

Edit: If you see more, it's because you're using a weird version of IE that doesn't parse [size=0] properly and makes it bigger than normal text.

For all wondering Hack's length... IIRC, the guideline is it must not be bigger than 8 lines of standard text. His sig may be 11 lines, but it is of size 1, and in fact as tall as 8 regular lines (feel free to grab the rulers out... I did)
Standard text. Ah, that's where the difference lies. Sorry about that. :( *hides behind E-Xtremia*

4 lines of lyrics
1 line of attribution
1 line of space
2 lines of snide comment/meme

=

8 lines
I count 3 lines at the bottom. Maybe you just have an exceptionally large computer screen (mine is 15").

I count 3 lines at the bottom. Maybe you just have an exceptionally large computer screen (mine is 15").It's still 8 on my laptop, which is 12.4" or so.

I have mine at the smallest display, which is 1256 x 768 I believe. What is your display? To me it just looks like 9 lines, and it's 11 according to E-Xtremia, so I don't see how it would appear as less on a smaller computer screen.

I am on my laptop... 11 lines...

I know from the past, my desktop shows 9 (but I have an enormous display there running an ultra-high rez...)

anyway, as has been said... it just is... leave it be... like Hack said, it is size 0, and if you check, it is as tall as a normal text sig of 8 lines.

EDIT: and my 8 lines if size 1 show as 6 usual ones.

Work compy is at 1280x1024. Lappy is 1024x768.

Like I said. Some browsers show size=0 as something like this, which is size=3.

I don't know why they do that, I just know that they do. At size=3, my sig is indeed too long, but we don't base the restrictions improper parsing of forum code.

Work compy is at 1280x1024. Lappy is 1024x768.

Like I said. Some browsers show size=0 as something like this, which is size=3.

I don't know why they do that, I just know that they do. At size=3, my sig is indeed too long, but we don't base the restrictions improper parsing of forum code.
Ah, that must be it. It looks like size 3 to me, so I must have one of the faulty browsers...

Sorry everyone.

... Why not just say "OK, we'll not do it" ?

Good grief he isn't asking for much is he?
We have to keep the mods in line somehow. I mean, if you let them for one second think that making us play nice is easy ... well, look what might happen ( http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=384991&highlight=Moderator+Hell).

IIRC, the guideline is it must not be bigger than 8 lines of standard text. His sig may be 11 lines, but it is of size 1, and in fact as tall as 8 regular lines.
I wrote those rules, and nowhere in them is the phrase "standard text". It's 8 lines. Period. I personally would prefer all of them at size=1, and I'll personally trim anything over size=4, regardless of the 8 line rule.

It's a sig. It's repeated on EVERY post. Why does it have to be so HUGE as to dwarf the surrounding *actual* information? For the life of me, I can't fathom any reason for that.

I am on my laptop... 11 lines...

I sees 8, me hearty. Arr!

Evil ninja pirate mod conspiracy

I see nine lines on Hack's sig.

Then again, I'm using Safari on a Mac. I don't know what my PC at work displays using IE, but that's what I get on my iBook G4.

Eight lines here, but we're all completely off-topic. I'm sure Euro's point has been sufficiently brought across.

I see 8 too...

(goes for coffee after posting a post that was not needed and off-topic)

Funny thing is..it was a mod's suggestion which started all this "not a mod" stuff :p

(posting on topic..yeah, I need coffee...)

*steals Hack's coffee and GMC's cookies*

The "not a Mod" disclaimers making a comeback, huh? I don't remember ever doing that, though I may have once or twice during the heyday of that trend. I just don't act like a Mod, which sorta solves the problem before it starts.

Oh for goodness sake!

A moderator has said that putting "not a mod" at the end of the post is not needed.
A moderator has said can you please stop doing it.

Why not just say "OK, we'll not do it" ?

Good grief he isn't asking for much is he?

Yes, they are. I love to use my under-used super-sexy manual sig:

~The Noble Men
Not a NationStates Moderator~

But if the Big They say I shouldn't use it, I'll play along.

Oh for goodness sake!

A moderator has said that putting "not a mod" at the end of the post is not needed.
A moderator has said can you please stop doing it.

Why not just say "OK, we'll not do it" ?

Good grief he isn't asking for much is he?my only concern was that people would be slapped with a warning for "impersonating a Mod" but that was answered. so I'm just reading...


and making this post...

It appears that we're done here, apart from the spam.