feedback about moderation

Anything about use of this forum : NOT about cycling
thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby thirdcrank » 15 Oct 2018, 12:15pm

We are now edging into carefully worded personal attack territory which is unfortunate. Whatever anybody's feelings about the moderators or moderation, I don't think their personal integrity is in doubt

brynpoeth
Posts: 10103
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby brynpoeth » 15 Oct 2018, 12:25pm

mjr wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:We've had posts from time-to-time about the possibility of people being deterred from posting or even quitting the forum. Were I a moderator, I might be looking for the exit. Volunteers seem to be fewer than the critics, although the latter are not numerous.

When was the last call for volunteers anyway?

As I think I mentioned when this came up before, I'd want a beginners' boards added and ableism and a few other things banned in the rules
..

What else would you want banned?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we love life

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13088
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby mjr » 15 Oct 2018, 12:31pm

thirdcrank wrote:We are now edging into carefully worded personal attack territory which is unfortunate. Whatever anybody's feelings about the moderators or moderation, I don't think their personal integrity is in doubt

Agreed about mod integrity here AFAIK, (I just disagree with at least one's beliefs - I don't accuse them of lacking integrity or anything like that), but it's a bit lame to throw in a carefully-worded personal attack of the critics for not volunteering and then try to take the moral high ground when some facts are stated in reply!

brynpoeth wrote:
mjr wrote:As I think I mentioned when this came up before, I'd want a beginners' boards added and ableism and a few other things banned in the rules
..

What else would you want banned?

Sexism and some other isms. In line with thirdcrank's request, please search for the old discussions, rather than rehashing here what happened to my previous offer.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13088
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby mjr » 15 Oct 2018, 12:56pm

Vorpal wrote:
mjr wrote:...ableism and a few other things banned in the rules...

Personally, I think it's better to explain by reply why something is ableism, sexism, racism, etc., rather than banning them outright, except when they are clearly offensive.

I don't think that's better because there's a delay between the nasty being posted and the reply when the nasty stuff appears to be unchallenged (and does it always get challenged?), then when it finally appears, it's all unofficial and looks like the forum admins don't care, plus it's a lot of upsetting work explaining it over and over and over again, even when people are just uninformed rather than actively discriminating or - just maybe - deliberately trolling.

Vorpal wrote:Also, it can be difficult for moderators to make appropriate judgements about something, especially if they do not belong to the protected class in question. Furthermore, opinions are likely to vary about whether something is or is not ableism, sexism, racism, etc.

Many judgements are difficult and opinions often vary - the mods must already have ways to handle those about things like whether something is a personal attack.

Vorpal wrote:
mjr wrote:Current practice doesn't match policy, specifically "In reality, should an issue occur the forum staff will normally contact the user concerned to explain any action that they have taken to try to sort out the issue in a friendly and amicable way." We don't even get told when our posts are deleted or edited. No-one can learn anything from that.

Perhaps that should be reworded. If I explained every singly moderation action I took, I could sometimes spend several hours in a day explaining just moderation actions.

It probably should be reworded rather than ignored, but I beg for it to not just be deleted.

Vorpal wrote:If somebody posts something that begins,'How stupid are you...', unless they are a new user, I'd like to think they could figure out what happened to their post. Along the same lines, if I remove multiple posts, I may send only one or two people a pm, asking them to stop insulting each other, and send nothing to the users who quoted the insults. Sometimes I just post on the thread.

Posting on the thread is good, but I think the mod-edit footer is less intrusive - it depends what the comment aims to do.

How are people going to know anything has happened to their post? I certainly don't spend all my time reading back over my posting history and playing "spot what's gone missing" or looking for unmarked edits.

Also, those who quoted the insults (especially the likes of Psamathe defending himself) would probably like to know that the mods have stepped in.

Mods no longer have to hand-craft a PM each time in phpbb any more. You just click the "warn user" icon on the post (a white-on-black exclamation mark, the reverse of the "report post" icon) and then confirm it. You can change the default message, but it's not strictly necessary.

If mods are getting so much work that there's no time to even fill out the "reason for editing" box on the mod screen or click the "warn user" icon, then changes should be made to lighten the load or more volunteers recruited to share the work IMO.

(edited to clarify the first paragraph)
Last edited by mjr on 15 Oct 2018, 1:18pm, edited 1 time in total.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby thirdcrank » 15 Oct 2018, 1:05pm

I've carefully avoided criticising anybody for not volunteering, although I can understand why it might be inferred. (edit to add) I'm pretty sure I've never said anything like "If you think you could do better, give it a try" because that's hardly the way to recruit moderators, more a rather clumsy way of trying to silence people. I have mentioned the shortage of volunteers and I'm not surprised that this is so.

At the start of the new, moderated forum, it was suggested I might give it a go and I listed the qualities required as something like having the wisdom
of Solomon, the patience of Job, and not being a frequent poster - an unlikely combination - but I do feel that anybody with strongly held views on cycling topics might find it hard to be impartial. I did a spell as a spambuster, but I didn't feel I had the other qualities needed.

If it's not obvious, I'm trying to stick to the issue rather than personalities.

brynpoeth
Posts: 10103
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby brynpoeth » 15 Oct 2018, 1:33pm

Strongly held views on cycling topics? Most of us have those

Maybe non-cycling moderators would be worth trying :wink:
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we love life

brynpoeth
Posts: 10103
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby brynpoeth » 15 Oct 2018, 1:37pm

My profile shows 6832 posts but when I want to search them there are only 6751:
81 fewer
I guess some were on "for sale" threads that are automatically deleted after a while, maybe others were moderated, or whole threads were deleted

Not sure I have ever given cause for moderation, I try to be friendly and fair :wink:
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we love life

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13088
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby mjr » 21 Feb 2019, 2:18pm

Vorpal wrote:Personally, I think it's better to explain by reply why something is ableism, sexism, racism, etc., rather than banning them outright, except when they are clearly offensive. Also, it can be difficult for moderators to make appropriate judgements about something, especially if they do not belong to the protected class in question. Furthermore, opinions are likely to vary about whether something is or is not ableism, sexism, racism, etc.

The libel of the newly-independent MPs at viewtopic.php?p=1327247#p1327247 was reported but left unchanged. Do opinions now vary about what libel is?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby thirdcrank » 21 Feb 2019, 2:37pm

mjr wrote: ... The libel of the newly-independent MPs at viewtopic.php?p=1327247#p1327247 was reported but left unchanged. Do opinions now vary about what libel is?


I'm no expert on defamation but from what little I do know, there's nothing there that's amenable to any sort of action for libel. Run-of-the-mill comment about politicians IMO. Whether it's appropriate for the forum is for others to judge. The basic problem with politicians is that they have a tendency to move their lips.

User avatar
Spinners
Posts: 1262
Joined: 6 Dec 2008, 6:58pm
Location: Port Talbot

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby Spinners » 21 Feb 2019, 2:55pm

mjr wrote:
Vorpal wrote:Personally, I think it's better to explain by reply why something is ableism, sexism, racism, etc., rather than banning them outright, except when they are clearly offensive. Also, it can be difficult for moderators to make appropriate judgements about something, especially if they do not belong to the protected class in question. Furthermore, opinions are likely to vary about whether something is or is not ableism, sexism, racism, etc.

The libel of the newly-independent MPs at viewtopic.php?p=1327247#p1327247 was reported but left unchanged. Do opinions now vary about what libel is?


You have to be kidding, right?

I've seen far worse views expressed on this very forum. Your problem is that someone has expressed a contrary view to you're own.

Let the mods enjoy their spare time and only jump in when absolutely necessary.
Cycling UK Life Member

User avatar
kylecycler
Posts: 617
Joined: 12 Aug 2013, 4:09pm
Location: Kyle, Ayrshire

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby kylecycler » 21 Feb 2019, 2:57pm

brynpoeth wrote:My profile shows 6832 posts but when I want to search them there are only 6751:
81 fewer
I guess some were on "for sale" threads that are automatically deleted after a while, maybe others were moderated, or whole threads were deleted.

In terms of post count you're long since away and gone, brynpoeth - dunno what you're complaining about! :)

(Edit to add, just pulling your leg - sometimes sarcasm doesn't quite translate and there's a mod about... ;))
Last edited by kylecycler on 21 Feb 2019, 4:17pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1178
Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 8:27pm
Location: Lancing, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby admin » 21 Feb 2019, 3:39pm

mjr wrote:The libel of the newly-independent MPs at viewtopic.php?p=1327247#p1327247 was reported but left unchanged. Do opinions now vary about what libel is?


I don't think that statement could be classed as libellous, because it does not, in my opinion, "defame a named or identifiable individual in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them".

I'm pretty sure at least The Daily Mail has published much worse statements about named politicians and public figures.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13088
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby mjr » 21 Feb 2019, 4:12pm

admin wrote:
mjr wrote:The libel of the newly-independent MPs at viewtopic.php?p=1327247#p1327247 was reported but left unchanged. Do opinions now vary about what libel is?


I don't think that statement could be classed as libellous, because it does not, in my opinion, "defame a named or identifiable individual in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them".

How do you reason that? What part or parts do you think are not satisfied?

admin wrote:I'm pretty sure at least The Daily Mail has published much worse statements about named politicians and public figures.

And I'm pretty sure at least The Daily Mail has been found guilty of libel many times, including politicians such as ex-minister Alan Sugar.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1178
Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 8:27pm
Location: Lancing, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby admin » 21 Feb 2019, 4:35pm

mjr wrote:How do you reason that? What part or parts do you think are not satisfied?

  • The individuals are not easily identifiable (you would have to go and look up who it might be)
  • The statement is not likely to "cause them loss in their trade or profession"
  • The statement is not likely to "causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them".

mjr wrote:
admin wrote:I'm pretty sure at least The Daily Mail has published much worse statements about named politicians and public figures.

And I'm pretty sure at least The Daily Mail has been found guilty of libel many times, including politicians such as ex-minister Alan Sugar.


Yes, but the Daily Mail has not been sued for libel for statements about politicians, in the front page headline, that are much more explicit about who the individuals are, and are much more likely to change people's opinions of those people.

However I am not a defamation expert, and should such an expert approach me saying that something on the Forum was libellous, I would of course take suitable action!

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: feedback about moderation

Postby thirdcrank » 21 Feb 2019, 5:14pm

A couple of bright ideas:-

1. Put up something along the lines of everybody mentioned on this forum denies any wrongdoing.
2. Everybody mentioned on the forum is invited to comment
3. Let's worry about something else.