Moderator actions, part 2

Anything about use of this forum : NOT about cycling
Post Reply
Jdsk
Posts: 27500
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Jdsk »

I recently started a thread about some unpleasantness that had occurred:
viewtopic.php?t=162604

After several deletions I see that the whole thread has now been locked. I had deliberately not given my own views in order to allow some cooling off and so that I could hear from others. I would have referred to specific posts to explain my conclusions but there's not much point now.

1 A new poster made a series of posts on several subjects. Several of them contained views that traditionally provoke strong reactions, including views on cycle helmets and causes of collisions and injuries and the bad behaviour of some people riding bikes.

2 This produced a lot of reactions, including some which were unpleasant and were described as "piling on". I'd agree with that description.

3 A highly-respected poster and moderator suggested in no uncertain terms that anyone who expressed views of this sort should find or start another thread and stop posting in the existing thread. I was very surprised by this as I think that thread derailment does a lot of harm to the forum, and had discussed the need for action on this with several moderators with very little response. I came to the conclusion that the recommendation to use another thread was connected to the subject matter rather than to any general principles.

4 The new poster decided to leave the forum.

5 I started the other thread and read the reactions with interest.

6 Several posters took it on themselves to judge the new poster's contributions to the forum.

My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.

2 The principles which determine whether threads should be split or merged or posters should be told not to use an existing thread should be made public.

3 It is extremely rude to post negative judgements about other posters' contribution to the forum. (Disagreement and correction are fine and contribute to healthy debate. Praise for contribution is excellent and improves the tone.)

4 Consideration should be given to moderators using separate IDs for moderation and for personal contributions. But of course that would be additional hassle for them.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the other thread and to the moderators for all of their work on our behalf.

Jonathan
Last edited by Jdsk on 29 Sep 2024, 10:51am, edited 1 time in total.
Jdsk
Posts: 27500
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Jdsk »

In case anyone hasn't spotted it... guidance on what to do if you spot thread derailment:
viewtopic.php?t=162757

Jonathan
sjs
Posts: 1360
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 10:08pm
Location: Hitchin

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by sjs »

Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am
1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.

2 The principles which determine whether threads should be split or merged or posters should be told not to use an existing thread should be made public.

3 It is extremely rude to post negative judgements about other posters' contribution to the forum. (Disagreement and correction are fine and contribute to healthy debate. Praise for contribution is excellent and improves the tone.)

4 Consideration should be given to moderators using separate IDs for moderation and for personal contributions. But of course that would be additional hassle for them.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the other thread and to the moderators for all of their work on our behalf.

Jonathan
For what it's worth I agree with recommendations 1,3 and 4. In point 3, I feel it is especially rude for posters to chat among themselves negatively about a third party who has already been hounded out. I have no view on 2. I feel that new posters coming here expecting a gentle chat or an answer to a "beginner's" question must often be surprised at the hostility of the response.
User avatar
SimonCelsa
Posts: 1272
Joined: 6 Apr 2011, 10:19pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by SimonCelsa »

Jeez it's tough living with all these First World problems... :wink:
Corpulent_Porpoise
Posts: 54
Joined: 4 Sep 2024, 11:08am

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Corpulent_Porpoise »

Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am I recently started a thread about some unpleasantness that had occurred:
viewtopic.php?t=162604



My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.

2 The principles which determine whether threads should be split or merged or posters should be told not to use an existing thread should be made public.

3 It is extremely rude to post negative judgements about other posters' contribution to the forum. (Disagreement and correction are fine and contribute to healthy debate. Praise for contribution is excellent and improves the tone.)

4 Consideration should be given to moderators using separate IDs for moderation and for personal contributions. But of course that would be additional hassle for them.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the other thread and to the moderators for all of their work on our behalf.

Jonathan
Me again!

I'm just here to provide a little clarification to points 1 and 4 of your conclusion. I don't feel as if I've been 'hounded out' at all so please have no concerns in that direction. I'm quite happy with brisk debate and have no issues with any forum members. I hardly could have given I'd only been here a couple of weeks! Posters shouldn't shy away from potentially contentious issues, it's important for all that differing opinions are heard. My decision to depart the forum was solely based on the behaviour of a moderator, not because of fellow forum users.

As to point 4 - I've been a moderator on an Alfa Romeo forum for many years. It's not too onerous as the forum doesn't need much in the way of guidance and my tasks are mostly of a housekeeping nature. We have a strict rule though that mods have two IDs so that it's clear which hat they're wearing when a post is made. It saves for any confusion and, importantly, prevents a mod from abusing his/her position. It's a system C-UK might do well to consider.

I think that's me done now but it's difficult to resist the temptation to pop back occasionally! I've been viewing the forum as a guest for a long time (especially the legislation threads) so I'll probably return to that.

All best,

Corpulent Porpoise
briansnail
Posts: 1052
Joined: 1 Sep 2019, 3:07pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by briansnail »

Please could this be checked.Is this a hack? if someone is legitimately using the "the snail " ok fine no problem but I know there is a bit of spamming and rogue AI bots on forums.If there is another snail at large?.We will share some mice lettuce if genuine.Sorry nice lettuce.This was on a Tea shop post title "UK energy"

Many thanks "Briansnail" (pseudonym after the famous very old TV-series).No reply needed but "thesnail" COULD POSSIBLY be a AI bot.
Post Reply