Encourage mentors to add background to profile info

[UsableThought]

Recently I had a concern about a comment from a mentor in a particular thread. I won't go into details, but my concern was exacerbated by two things:

1) In the comment in question, this mentor did not give any information about their credentials, background, expertise, etc. for either the forum or the thread topic; nor provide any relevant cites or in fact any cites at all for their claims relative to the topic.

2) The mentor has zero information in their profile about credentials, background, or expertise. That part of their profile is simply empty. This is not uncommon for both mentors and members.

Together, these two absences of information made it not just difficult, but impossible to judge the trustworthiness of the mentor's comment. It was a judgement by authority only, rendered by someone who unintentionally has left himself/herself unreadable as to credentials and background. As an aside, it's my impression (from reading many many threads before posting this) that this mentor is widely liked and admired; my concern isn't with the person, but with this type of situation as it pops up from time to time.

Why does this matter? Mostly because no one could possibly be considered equally expert in all of the sciences represented by all the PF forums; so subject matter expertise does matter at times. Of course it doesn't come into play when mentors are jumping into a thread to restore civility or ensure adherence to guidelines. But it does come into play when mentors comment on the content of a thread - that is, about the topic being discussed. In that case they have the same responsibilities as ordinary members in providing support & clarity for their claims.

What are these responsibilities?

1) It's not required, but it's sometimes recommended (typically by mentors or experienced members when helping new members) to provide brief information on your profile about your background. To reiterate, it's absolutely not required as part of membership; but it in some cases it's of great help in figuring out on what level to respond. So, vice versa: Many members (myself included) will have encountered only a few mentors even after many months; there are some we still know nothing about; these mentors are as new to us as we may be to them.

2) It's equally often recommended (and is part of the guidelines) to provide cites/sources for statements where the source is not already obvious. Often this isn't necessary - if it's a particular set of equations, or a widely known interpretation in QT, for example, these often speak for themselves; but even then, I've often seen mentors ask newcomers to provide cites or sources for claims whose origin is unclear. Obviously this is helpful for anyone commenting - including mentors. Nearly all the time - some very high percentage - mentors are great at providing whatever may be needed; they serve as role models for the rest of us. Now & then - rare, but it does happen - a mentor will forget & rely only on authority. When this happens it creates the potential for ambiguity or lack of trust if not addressed.

Now, point 2 above is merely a guideline for all of us bear in mind, and no more. My suggestion is really meant only for point 1. Specifically: can we please suggest to mentors (or even make it part of the job description, since it's so easy to do) that they put a brief sketch of their background & subject matter expertise into their profiles? They can do this and still be anonymous if they wish - just don't mention specific institutions or workplaces, etc. It will take two minutes of their time. If they feel they are expert in many fields, fine; just briefly sketch the relevant background. Over time, this will quietly prove useful to everyone, including them. Most of all it will help new members (e.g. me) who don't know many of the mentors still.

- - -

P.S. Some other steps I did in this case to try & find out this mentor's background: 1) I searched for the mentor's handle inside the "Announcements" forum, figuring that there would be at least one or more related announcements. Indeed there were; but no mention of background whatsoever. 2) I searched the help and found the help topic "Mentors and their assigned forums." Unfortunately, the moderator in question is "Unassigned." So still no way of knowing their background. 3) I started wading through "All content by this member"; but the first page of hits wasn't helpful, and I didn't want to spend an hour or more trying to get to know this mentor by reading enough threads - the hits were quite diverse and the ones I did read similarly mentioned nothing about background.

Also, although I couldn't PM this mentor previously, apparently that issue has been resolved; so I will be doing so shortly. But I wanted to bring it up as a wider topic, because I think it would be helpful for everyone in future if it was as easy and reassuring to find out a mentor's background as to click on their profile. Not required of ordinary members - but "With great power comes great responsibility."

 

[Borek]

Mentors are not selected at random and they are not selected based on their real life credentials - they are selected from those that have shown their expertise on the forum. All Mentors have a voice in this process, kind of a peer review.

Not everyone wants to share their real life details, besides - we can't check whether things people write on their profiles is true. That would create its own problems, not necessarily making the situation better in general.

We are not infallible though, nobody is. Asking us for sources is perfectly OK. Asking us for clarification is perfectly OK.

 

[UsableThought]

Mentors are not selected at random and they are not selected based on their real life credentials - they are selected from those that have shown their expertise on the forum. All Mentors have a voice in this process, kind of a peer review.

If they've demonstrated expertise on the forum, that expertise comes from somewhere. So it could be described very briefly as to how it was acquired (see next point).

Not everyone wants to share their real life details, besides - we can't check whether things people write on their profiles is true. That would create its own problems, not necessarily making the situation better in general.

Again, I am not suggesting CV level detail, nor being forced to list institutions or workplaces or anything else that might break anonymity. Even a single sentence in the form of "My particular background is in W and X, and I am also interested in Y and Z" would be great. If someone is willing to go further and put "long-time professional in the Z field" that is great too, but strictly optional. All I'm suggesting is enough to get away from complete blank mystery when dealing w/ a mentor the first time.

All Mentors have a voice in this process [of selection], kind of a peer review.

Understood; but this is an opaque process to ordinary members and I wonder if it sometimes leads to false perceptions to those outside the process; if so this would be worth avoiding. Clearly during peer review or other discussion among mentors, confidentiality & privacy are important; but to have everything about a mentor be opaque, even their backgrounds in fields they comment on, seems to me to fall short of good pedagogical/educational practice. And part of PF's mission is educational. Mentors aren't there just to preserve the peace, but to teach.

On the other hand I do understand that mentors are volunteers; and that it's already a heavy commitment in terms of time; and more red tape isn't always better. And also that mentors wouldn't want so much scrutiny that volunteering would become a chore rather than a pleasure. And maybe adding bios would open up mentors to undue criticism somehow. My own experience has been that proactively providing one's context & background to an audience, whether in authoring or teaching, reaps many more benefits more than it causes problems; but admittedly I have never been a forum moderator.

I can only suggest that if a mentor is willing, putting a brief, anonymous description of fields/interests on your profile would be a favor to the member community. I doubt many if any members would try & use such information in an adversarial way.

 

[Borek]

To add a step on the ladder: Mentors are selected from the Science Advisors, and it is SAs that do the "peer review" before someone is added to their group. So while the process is still not transparent to the general public, the group involved in the evaluation is much larger than just Mentors.

I do understand your position, we've been through similar discussions several times over the years. So far we think keeping things as they are outweighs possible benefits of making the process transparent. This is quite a convoluted thing with many aspects.

 

[UsableThought]

To add a step on the ladder: Mentors are selected from the Science Advisors, and it is SAs that do the "peer review" before someone is added to their group.

Thanks for this info; very helpful.

Probably this has been discussed before - but for mentors who have been/are science advisors, could a list topic be kept as to science advisor by science? Such a list would seem helpful and not intrusive. There is supposedly a list of science advisors here, according to this help topic; but the list seems the regular mentor/staff list which does not give info about fields.

Just knowing a mentor had been/is a science advisor in a particular science would be great; although of course science advisors are likely to have background in additional areas too, which would be important to keep in mind.

 

[Borek]

The idea is that someone who doesn't know where his competence ends won't get the SA badge (and in the past it was an argument against many candidates). At least once we stripped user of his SA status exactly for this reason (commenting from the position of authority on things he had no idea about).

Yes, it is not guaranteed to work, and yes - having a list of competence areas could be better. Still, it would be probably a nightmare, as every classification attempt is. We've been through countless discussions about how to split subjects into categories to make the forum structure clear. It's a swamp

 

[UsableThought]

We've been through countless discussions about how to split subjects into categories to make the forum structure clear. It's a swamp

Well, I'm glad it's been discussed; that reassures me that whatever can feasibly done, has been. Thanks.

 

[symbolipoint]

Nice idea, but still any mentor might not want to share too much that would lead to knowing his/her real identity. Maybe Greg Bernhardt could communicate confidentially with prospective or current mentors about actual (but still hidden) qualifications of the mentors. I'm not a mentor. I insist on being behind a username. My real name and "credentials" are for people I meet in person, live (regardless of mentor or not).

 

[Nidum]

I don't see the problem . The quality of answers given by SA's and mentors is usually immediately obvious to other members with knowledge in the same field .

Simple feedback on threads challenging any poor answers works quite well .

 

[phinds]

Simple feedback on threads challenging any poor answers works quite well .

The issue arose because a mentor made a comment in a closed thread and then re-closed the thread, thus making public discussion of his added comment impossible, thus I understand the frustration of the OP in THIS thread. ALSO, "PM" for that mentor was not available (since fixed). Seems like a rare instance but it started a conversation about a valid concern here on PF.

 

[Ibix]

It's a swamp

But the crocodiles are carefully chosen for sharp teeth science skills.

More helpfully, I have seen fora that list things like "50% of Ibix's posts are in Relativity" (the other 50% are in the Lame Jokes thread). That's just summarising intrinsically publically available information and gives a rough guide to a member's interests, and seems like it ought to be a fairly straightforward database query.

Alternatively add a tooltip to the SA badge that says "SAs are people we trust to only talk authoritatively when they are authorities". And "Mentors are SAs with the power to ban you - respect or else".

Not sure either idea is worth implementing, but thought I'd put them out there.

 

[Bandersnatch]

I just wanted to take this opportunity to bring to @Greg Bernhardt 's attention that the Medals and Awards info page really needs updating/trimming. The hotlinks don't lead to where they claim (there's no viewable list of SAs, as far as I can see), and the 'Guru' awards are four years out of date.

Also, while I can sorta-kinda see how retroactively re-labelling all SAs to indicate their area of expertise would be a nightmare, what's the big deal with making mentors' assigned forum section indicated on their badge? I think it could help casual viewers understand when a comment is made from the position of expertise, and when just as a regular member.
(personally, I'd love to have that for SAs as well, but again, I can see how it might not be doable in practice)

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

big deal with making mentors' assigned forum section indicated on their badge?

Just that the system isn't really built to accommodate that. Some custom work would need to be done. Not much, but it adds up.

 

[mfb]

Also, while I can sorta-kinda see how retroactively re-labelling all SAs to indicate their area of expertise would be a nightmare, what's the big deal with making mentors' assigned forum section indicated on their badge? I think it could help casual viewers understand when a comment is made from the position of expertise, and when just as a regular member.
(personally, I'd love to have that for SAs as well, but again, I can see how it might not be doable in practice)

The assigned forums are not necessarily the field of expertise. They are the focus of moderation activities of these mentors.
As an example, I am assigned to the mathematics forums - as particle physicist.

The hotlinks don't lead to where they claim

Which links .

 

[Bandersnatch]

Which links .

Huh, I would swear there was a link saying it leads to a list of SAs in there, just like there are links to the list of mentors and admins... but I don't see it now. I might have got myself confused there.

 

[Ibix]

Which links .

Huh, I would swear there was a link saying it leads to a list of SAs in there, just like there are links to the list of mentors and admins... but I don't see it now. I might have got myself confused there.

In other news, we have always been at war with Eastasia.

...or am I misunderstanding the halo?

 

[Drakkith]

Note that mentors are not selected because of their expertise in any given area, they are selected because their conduct on the forums has convinced the staff that they might make for good moderators. Formal education is obviously desirable, but certainly not a requirement. We have a least a few mentors who have never held a degree in a STEM field and at least one (myself) that hold nothing more than an associate's degree.

Mentors must follow the same rules as everyone else and if you ever doubt something that they post you can always ask for references.

 

[mfb]

Huh, I would swear there was a link saying it leads to a list of SAs in there, just like there are links to the list of mentors and admins... but I don't see it now. I might have got myself confused there.

It was there before, now it is gone.

 

[symbolipoint]

Note that mentors are not selected because of their expertise in any given area, they are selected because their conduct on the forums has convinced the staff that they might make for good moderators. Formal education is obviously desirable, but certainly not a requirement. We have a least a few mentors who have never held a degree in a STEM field and at least one (myself) that hold nothing more than an associate's degree.

Mentors must follow the same rules as everyone else and if you ever doubt something that they post you can always ask for references.

An associates' degree along with some years of experience can still be a good thing. Further, some people with associates' degrees might have taken some education beyond it, but changed direction out from further formal education.

 

[UsableThought]

Note that mentors are not selected because of their expertise in any given area, they are selected because their conduct on the forums has convinced the staff that they might make for good moderators. Formal education is obviously desirable, but certainly not a requirement. We have a least a few mentors who have never held a degree in a STEM field and at least one (myself) that hold nothing more than an associate's degree.

I agree w/ this aspect completely; this is from my comment #1 that started this thread: "Subject matter expertise does matter at times. Of course it doesn't come into play when mentors are jumping into a thread to restore civility or ensure adherence to guidelines."

Mentors must follow the same rules as everyone else and if you ever doubt something that they post you can always ask for references.

Except that asking is sometimes difficult; and even when you do ask, it doesn't mean you'll get an answer. For example, when a thread has been locked, but then a mentor comes in, unlocks the thread, posts a comment about the topic without providing references, and locks the thread again so no one else can comment about the comment. What then?

Well, you can try & PM them; this requires that they have privacy settings set to accept conversations (see "Mentors who can't be PM'd?").

And even then, just because you can PM them doesn't mean they will reply. When they don't, you are left to wonder: is it a glitch? Are they choosing not to reply? This just deepens the mystery - along with the blank profile and the lack of references of any sort in the comment.

Such an extreme situation ought to be extremely infrequent. However, it is not infrequent for mentors to enter a locked thread, post a new comment about the topic (repeat: not about conduct, but about the topic), then lock the thread again so no one ordinary member can comment on the new comment. I have seen this happen several times in my few months at PF. I don't consider this good practice in a community; but some mentors obviously feel it's OK.

 

[UsableThought]

PS. I see that at times Greg has posted "Meet a Mentor" interviews, e.g. as here. Obviously this is on a voluntary basis; still, a great feature - not so much to answer the question "what's their expertise," but more in terms of inspiration & human interest.

 

[Drakkith]

Such an extreme situation ought to be extremely infrequent. However, it is not infrequent for mentors to enter a locked thread, post a new comment about the topic (repeat: not about conduct, but about the topic), then lock the thread again so no one ordinary member can comment on the new comment. I have seen this happen several times in my few months at PF. I don't consider this good practice in a community; but some mentors obviously feel it's OK.

Indeed, it can be useful to have a final post to add useful information or explanations after a thread has been locked. Does it have the potential to be abused or for the post to be incorrect? Absolutely. That's why the report option is always available. You can report any post that you feel is problematic. That doesn't mean the rest of the mentors will agree with you or feel any action needs to be taken when they look into the matter, but I assure you that the matter is looked into.

 

[UsableThought]

That doesn't mean the rest of the mentors will agree with you or feel any action needs to be taken when they look into the matter, but I assure you that the matter is looked into.

You have been especially good in following up on reports, which I appreciate.

 

[Ibix]

However, it is not infrequent for mentors to enter a locked thread, post a new comment about the topic (repeat: not about conduct, but about the topic), then lock the thread again so no one ordinary member can comment on the new comment.

I think I've seen mentors say that locking a thread doesn't stop them from posting in it. The only notification they get is the padlock icon, so if they miss that for whatever reason they can post a technical comment without having to jump through any hoops.

 

[Drakkith]

I think I've seen mentors say that locking a thread doesn't stop them from posting in it. The only notification they get is the padlock icon, so if they miss that for whatever reason they can post a technical comment without having to jump through any hoops.

Pretty much. I've also occasionally started composing a message and then had the thread locked before I posted, only finding out after I post my message.

 

[ZapperZ]

I think I've seen mentors say that locking a thread doesn't stop them from posting in it. The only notification they get is the padlock icon, so if they miss that for whatever reason they can post a technical comment without having to jump through any hoops.

When I was Mentoring, I often "accidentally" posted in a thread that had been locked. Afterwards, I often "report" myself to ask other Mentors if I should delete my post, or if it should be left as is. So yes, from my experience, I have posted in a locked thread not realizing that it has been locked until after the fact. I made it my policy to try and respect the locked thread and not post in there.

Here's my advice to anyone who have trouble contacting a Mentor regarding anything: (i) if it is due to a particular thread or post, be it locked or not, use the REPORT feature on either the "offending" post, or on any post. Just say "I'm not reporting this post, but I am having an issue with ... "; (ii) contact the Moderators of the forum or other Mentors, especially someone you are familiar with; and finally (iii) contact the Admins/Greg.

You have so many different ways to air your grievances privately in this forum. Any one of those will work.

Zz.

 

[Orodruin]

Pretty much. I've also occasionally started composing a message and then had the thread locked before I posted, only finding out after I post my message.

I lost count of how many times this happened to me ...