You know, yes, that is true in an ideal world. Tell, me though....have you ever read a post as more aggressive then it
really was because the person's avatar was something extremely aggressive or condescending? I know that I have,
and, as a psych student, I should know better.
As a fellow psychology student I know what you are suggesting. The problem with what you suggested is something that the mods should be told about, that they should know before ever clicking "yes, I accept mod powers" that perhaps the names, avatar, and signature may cause more primitive areas of our brain to activate, but that they should stop and look at what was actually said.
What it comes down to is not a matter of X number of years of psychological training. I need one more psych class to fulfill my psych class requirements for my bachelors. I know on another forum that there are those that are working on their masters and higher. Even if you were finishing your Associates, though you could be finishing your doctorates for all I know, you would probably understand that what we see is in a sense irrelevant for a moderator if they followed a set of rules and applied some half baked investigative work. Doing so would sidestep anything that we would have to say ever becoming relevant. Of course we could suggest they cover up the names, the avatars, the signatures and look at just the words so that nothing other then logic and reading comprehension is applied.
We are not looking for them to dissect a post for emotional content. We are not asking them to psychoanalyze the poster(s) that may be offending someone. Therefore any cues that trigger any reactions is unnecessary and may be suggestive of an individual's ability to moderate properly. Of course if we are going to suggest that psychology has anything to do, I would like to bring up that there have been posts that were openly hostile towards me over something I had said that was not meant to suggest anything about the character of the person, yet the comments made at me were. Such posts have sat around for a few days without a peep, without a mod blowing up the post and or thread.
When I come back and read it and see how long it has been there it is suggestive about the kind of posts that are going to be allowed. Just because my post might be far more brutally effective due to stabbing points instead of blunt and clearly insulting comments does not mean that I am being offensive for the sake of being offensive, nor attacking the individual, I am the one that triggers the moderation. At that point I would hope that the mods would realize that 2 days went by without them being offended by, and without the others being offended by the post against me, and that there is a particular signal being sent to the attacked individual. When such is indicated not all personalities are going to want to hit the "moderator" button. Instead they may decide that this is okay, so making some sharp statements about the behavior of the other person, or their logic is perfectly acceptable. Not everyone wants to cry and curl up in a fetal position.
I have no problem with people, but people tend to have a problem with me. It does not matter if it is in person with someone trying to make threats, or someone online making insults, I have no problem responding. I have no problem making the other person look like a fool, making them feel stupid, getting them to back down, even making it so they want to leave a job or simply state that they no longer have any desire to argue with me because they know I'll cut down their arguments. Mods either need to adjust due to personality or just follow the rules.
I think people who do not make personal attacks should get a warning, just a warning saying "calm down, take a walk from the thread" instead of "we are going to ban you!!" The frustration builds up and it becomes attached to the forum and the mods instead of just the offending individual. It also causes people to wonder if people are being targeted since someone did not get offended by the direct personal attack, but they are offended by an attack against the logic and behavior of someone making personal attacks? What I really hate is having a thought out post getting blown up because of one little quip that someone didn't like. it makes me want to avoid the forums more then it makes me want to reconsider what I might have said, though I know it was not a personal attack. The way i see it, don't go around provoking rhinos if you can't take take the hit. But i would rather have a warning and ahve them delete the "offending" line.
