EVE Search - Sticky:The future of Community and CCL

CCP Guard wrote:

Vera Algaert wrote:

apologies for stating the obvious but a lot of the recent troubles seem to come down to one very simple issue:

Q: Who has the strongest motivation to volunteer for the CCL?
A: Someone who was not happy with the way forum rules were enforced pre-CCL.

People who were basically happy with the way forum rules were enforced by CCP moderators (i.e. extremely sporadically & inconsistently) had little reason to act and those who would want forum rules to be relaxed knew they would not be able to change anything by joining CCL.
However, CCL gave those who were fed up about CCP tolerating constant violations of the forum rules an outlet for action (and there isn't much CCP can do about them - after all they only enforce the rules that were created by CCP).

A second point I'd like to bring up is that I don't think having "anonymous" moderators was a good idea.
These ISD characters don't have any reputation to gain or to lose through their actions, they don't command any respect and they deemphasize the "those people moderating the community have been chosen from the community itself" aspect which is crucial for the success of this experiment. It also invites speculations about hidden bias on part of the ISD moderators as their true identity is not known.
In my opinion CCP would have done good to get respected community figures on board for the CCL and should have leveraged that respect to enforce forum rules.
If "ISD Lady Spank" locks my C&P thread for trolling I have little choice but to shut up, look into the mirror and ask myself if I have become a badposter. When "ISD Whatsyourname" does the same my initial reaction is that he probably doesn't "get" C&P anyways.

I agree with your assessment that people who think forum moderation can be improved are likely to be the ones that apply but then I don't think that's a band thing since we sort of agree, and that being one of the reasons for starting the CCL...other major reasons being more boots on the ground to gather good feedback, and to interact in a pro-active manner etc.

However, I disagree with the argument that we would all be better off if they moderated under their in-game names. While that can work very well in a community that's purely based around a forum and all social repercussions are contained on that forum, it wouldn't work the same in a community where the forum is just a part of a persistent galaxy where their corporations, assets, relationships and livelihood can be severely affected by who's toes they step on during their daily duties.

Would they constantly have to worry about things like whether or not to lock someone's thread because he might toss them out of an alliance if they did? Or about editing this guy's thread because he runs the meanest infiltration group known to man and would probably be feasting on their corpses in a few months time if he knew their in-game identities? :)

Don't get me wrong, it would have its benefits, but more downsides in my opinion.