How to fix moderation: :: Suggestions / Ideas

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Suggestions / Ideas > Topic Details

D. Flame 5 hours ago

How to fix moderation:

Pretty simple actually, and Steam could easily afford to do it.

1.) Hire some moderators.

2.) Pay them a salary instead of an hourly wage so that they can "be working" even when just browsing the forums on their own time.

3.) Rework the rules with strict guidelines rather than vague statements that could be interpreted to mean anything

4.) Limit the moderators' power to only being able to issue a warning, a 1 hour cooling off period, a 1 day ban, or a 72 hour ban.

5.) If something warrants a harsher penalty (e.g. permaban for credible threats of violence), then have them issue a 72 hour ban, then escalate the issue to a team that can apply harsher penalties

6.) Do monthly audits of their actions to make sure they are meeting performance metrics, to review one or a few cases they handled during that month, making it clear that if they are found to be abusing their position, they will be terminated

7.) Set guidelines so that all infractions are handled consistently and fairly. If two people get caught for the similar offenses, then the two people should be given the same punishment.

...and no, a random call center from who knows where doesn't cut it. A call center is better than volunteers, but a call center only cares about closing tickets as fast as possible because they are usually paid per ticket resolved/call handled. That's why you get so many copy-pasted replies that have nothing to do with your actual issue.

< >

Showing 1-15 of 19 comments

Ben Lubar 4 hours ago

You think there are no moderators? On this forum where people constantly complain about their bad behavior resulting in bans? Who do you think is doing that, ghosts?

datCookie 4 hours ago

I still have to ask - what financial incentive does Valve have to spend more money on their forums that majority of the user base doesn't use?

Last edited by datCookie; 4 hours ago

D. Flame 4 hours ago

Originally posted by Ben Lubar:
You think there are no moderators? On this forum where people constantly complain about their bad behavior resulting in bans? Who do you think is doing that, ghosts?

The numbered suggestions above are meant to be taken as a whole.

cSg|mc-Hotsauce 4 hours ago

Valve pays the 3rd party company.

The 3rd party moderation company pays the salary.

Valve does not directly pay the moderators nor do they have any say in their pay.

Shreddy 4 hours ago

Forum moderation here is pretty good for the most part, it’s game forums that are the problem since devs are allowed to run those however they see fit and steam have already said that they won’t be changing that.

The best solution is simply to stop game forum bans from affecting community wide bans. It’s a good idea to have a community ban system but not when it can be affected by arbitrary nonsense rather than an objective rule set that can easily be followed.

Start_Running 4 hours ago

Originally posted by D. Flame:
Pretty simple actually, and Steam could easily afford to do it.

1.) Hire some moderators.

They've already done this/

Originally posted by D. Flame:
2.) Pay them a salary instead of an hourly wage so that they can "be working" even when just browsing the forums on their own time.

You clearly don't know how work works m8. Salary workers watch the clock just as much as hourly workers, more so in fact since they are paid what amounts to a flat rate.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
3.) Rework the rules with strict guidelines rather than vague statements that could be interpreted to mean anything

Yeah no. STrict rules just make it easier for certain types to rules lawyer. The rules as written are clear to those who are inclined to follow the rules of civil discourse.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
4.) Limit the moderators' power to only being able to issue a warning, a 1 hour cooling off period, a 1 day ban, or a 72 hour ban.

Yeah no. They will administer the level of ban the person's actions and history warrant.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
5.) If something warrants a harsher penalty (e.g. permaban for credible threats of violence), then have them issue a 72 hour ban, then escalate the issue to a team that can apply harsher penalties

This seems redundant. Why pay an extra team to do what you can just empower the first team to do.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
6.) Do monthly audits of their actions to make sure they are meeting performance metrics, to review one or a few cases they handled during that month, making it clear that if they are found to be abusing their position, they will be terminated

Already done.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
7.) Set guidelines so that all infractions are handled consistently and fairly. If two people get caught for the similar offenses, then the two people should be given the same punishment.

Already done.

Originally posted by D. Flame:
...and no, a random call center from who knows where doesn't cut it. A call center is better than volunteers, but a call center only cares about closing tickets as fast as possible because they are usually paid per ticket resolved/call handled. That's why you get so many copy-pasted replies that have nothing to do with your actual issue.

Service centres work fine m8. Moderation actually works fine. if you're behaving yourself and observing the rules of civil discourse. If you're not, then you're going to have issues.

D. Flame 2 hours ago

Originally posted by Start_Running:
You clearly don't know how work works m8. Salary workers watch the clock just as much as hourly workers, more so in fact since they are paid what amounts to a flat rate.

In the USA:
A part timer will have to keep their hours at 28 hours or below.

A full time worker will work 40 hours a week. And more than this, and they will start getting paid time and a half or double time.

A salaried worker is usually exempt from over time, so they are expected to put in 50 to 60 hours a week on average to make up for their additional benefits and getting paid the same even when they work less than 40 hours on rare occassion.

Yeah no. STrict rules just make it easier for certain types to rules lawyer. The rules as written are clear to those who are inclined to follow the rules of civil discourse.

Someone has been mocking me with off topic subject matter for almost 2 years with zero recourse. I linked to said posts, and I was given a 1 week ban in less than 2 or 3 hours (later overturned).

Someone in that same thread was blatantly insulting me, in no uncertain terms, and that post remained up for over 20 hours until I opened a ticket with support over the harassment.

So no, the rules and enforcement as the stand now do not work.

D. Flame 2 hours ago

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:
Valve pays the 3rd party company.

The 3rd party moderation company pays the salary.

Valve does not directly pay the moderators nor do they have any say in their pay.

:nkCool:

And that is the problem See:

no, a random call center from who knows where doesn't cut it. A call center is better than volunteers, but a call center only cares about closing tickets as fast as possible because they are usually paid per ticket resolved/call handled. That's why you get so many copy-pasted replies that have nothing to do with your actual issue.

Valve needs to handle it in house.

mldb88 2 hours ago

Originally posted by D. Flame:
Originally posted by Start_Running:
You clearly don't know how work works m8. Salary workers watch the clock just as much as hourly workers, more so in fact since they are paid what amounts to a flat rate.
In the USA:
A part timer will have to keep their hours at 28 hours or below.

A full time worker will work 40 hours a week. And more than this, and they will start getting paid time and a half or double time.

A salaried worker is usually exempt from over time, so they are expected to put in 50 to 60 hours a week on average to make up for their additional benefits and getting paid the same even when they work less than 40 hours on rare occassion.

Yeah no. STrict rules just make it easier for certain types to rules lawyer. The rules as written are clear to those who are inclined to follow the rules of civil discourse.
Someone has been mocking me with off topic subject matter for almost 2 years with zero recourse. I linked to said posts, and I was given a 1 week ban in less than 2 or 3 hours (later overturned).

Someone in that same thread was blatantly insulting me, in no uncertain terms, and that post remained up for over 20 hours until I opened a ticket with support over the harassment.

So no, the rules and enforcement as the stand now do not work.

I work salary, in the US no less... you clearly have no clue how pay scales and salaries work. Also were they blatantly insulting you or just telling you why and how you're wrong? Because you have a nasty habit of conflating the two.

Last edited by mldb88; 2 hours ago

rawWwRrr 2 hours ago

Originally posted by D. Flame:
Valve needs to handle it in house.

No ROI on in house moderation these days. Much more cost effective to outsource it. Shared Services is the path forward. Unless it's mission critical, it's much more economical to pay some else to do it.

#10

Nx Machina 1 hour ago

1) Hiring - External company.

2) Salary - External company.

3) Let me be a rules lawyer.

4) Follow the rules.

5) Follow the rules.

6) Audits - External company.

7) They are fair. Those that abuse think they are not.

Last edited by Nx Machina; 1 hour ago

#11

D. Flame 1 hour ago

Originally posted by mldb88:
Also were they blatantly insulting you or just telling you why and how you're wrong? Because you have a nasty habit of conflating the two.

Like I said, it was in no uncertain terms. There was zero way to interpret it as anything other than an insult. It was taken down, and they were banned, but only after 20+ hours and opening a support ticket.

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:
Originally posted by D. Flame:
Valve needs to handle it in house.
No ROI on in house moderation these days. Much more cost effective to outsource it. Shared Services is the path forward. Unless it's mission critical, it's much more economical to pay some else to do it.

The lax, inconsistent, and slow-to-respond moderation is allowing people to become radicalized on the Steam forums. Gabe is being made to appear before the US congress as a result of this.

They would benefit by stepping up their game.

Last edited by D. Flame; 1 hour ago

#12

datCookie 1 hour ago

My question remains unanswered:

What financial incentive does Valve have to spend more money on the forums that a fraction of the user base uses?

#13

D. Flame 1 hour ago

Originally posted by datCookie:
My question remains unanswered:

What financial incentive does Valve have to spend more money on the forums that a fraction of the user base uses?

For one, it stops their CEO from getting dragged in front of Congress.

For two, it lets them control their forums before the government steps in and regulates it instead.

For three, there were threads threatening Gabe himself right in their titles. Yet, despite being mass reported by the user base, the current call center mod solution left those threads up for over 3 hours before acting on them.

The financial and reputational benefits should be self-evident.

#14

datCookie 57 minutes ago

Originally posted by D. Flame:
Originally posted by datCookie:
My question remains unanswered:

What financial incentive does Valve have to spend more money on the forums that a fraction of the user base uses?
For one, it stops their CEO from getting dragged in front of Congress.

For two, it lets them control their forums before the government steps in and regulates it instead.

For three, there were threads threatening Gabe himself right in their titles. Yet, despite being mass reported by the user base, the current call center mod solution left those threads up for over 3 hours before acting on them.

The financial and reputational benefits should be self-evident.

1) Gabe was invited to attend a hearing, not forced. He could refuse if he wishes.

2) The Government can't step in and control them, because Valve is a private company.

3) As unfortunate as that is, the fact that a fraction of the user base uses the forums means the reputational risk is absolutely minimal, if not non-existent.

#15

< >

Showing 1-15 of 19 comments

Per page: 1530 50

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Suggestions / Ideas > Topic Details

Date Posted: 29 Sep @ 5:55pm

Posts: 19

Start a New Discussion