Moderator actions, part 2

Anything about use of this forum : NOT about cycling
Jdsk
Posts: 27827
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: 27827
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: 1362
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: 1282
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: 58
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.
cycle tramp
Posts: 4355
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by cycle tramp »

briansnail wrote: 3 Oct 2024, 3:48pm 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.
I tend to post using names that noone else would wish to use.
Many thanks,
Pharti Ichi-boyz
Unlimited economic growth in a world of finite resources doesn't fit nor does it guarantee happiness.
cycle tramp
Posts: 4355
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by cycle tramp »

Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am 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.

My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.
Here's some advice, if you new to the forum , don't do number 1. We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff. Entering a new forum, telling those of us who don't do dayglo or don't wear helmets that we're wrong is rude, and childish and shows a lack of understanding of the principles involved. Give us some credit that we are adults and have the capability of working out things like risk and equipment choices all by ourselves.

Generally if you don't, the other 1 may happen.
Unlimited economic growth in a world of finite resources doesn't fit nor does it guarantee happiness.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11299
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Bonefishblues »

cycle tramp wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 8:45am
Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am 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.

My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.
Here's some advice, if you new to the forum , don't do number 1. We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff. Entering a new forum, telling those of us who don't do dayglo or don't wear helmets that we're wrong is rude, and childish and shows a lack of understanding of the principles involved. Give us some credit that we are adults and have the capability of working out things like risk and equipment choices all by ourselves.

Generally if you don't, the other 1 may happen.
The new poster knows this how, I wonder? (My bold)
User avatar
Cowsham
Posts: 5702
Joined: 4 Nov 2019, 1:33pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Cowsham »

cycle tramp wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 8:45am
Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am 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.

My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.
Here's some advice, if you new to the forum , don't do number 1. We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff. Entering a new forum, telling those of us who don't do dayglo or don't wear helmets that we're wrong is rude, and childish and shows a lack of understanding of the principles involved. Give us some credit that we are adults and have the capability of working out things like risk and equipment choices all by ourselves.

Generally if you don't, the other 1 may happen.
Unsolicited

I for once agree with Jdsk. Same happened to me when I first joined the forum. I innocently questioned the premise of some posters ( the ones that are left and are of like mind -- nothing wrong with that either *) and was taken by surprise by the hostile responses ( some quite nasty but luckily I'm very thick skinned ).

One solution would be a simple ( as possible ) party line answer which can be left on a locked or pinned part which can be referred to that briefly explains the view of some posters and how offensive questioning the H or clothing thing is. Then all posters of that persuasion can refer to that post and not resort to starting a nasty dialog with an unsuspecting new member and just leave it at that.

* if you want all members to be the same -- but that will end up with a very boring forum with fewer and fewer members. That would be a shame cos there's lots of great advice on bicycles to be had on here.
I am here. Where are you?
cycle tramp
Posts: 4355
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by cycle tramp »

Bonefishblues wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 9:25am
cycle tramp wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 8:45am
Jdsk wrote: 29 Sep 2024, 10:41am 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.

My conclusions:

1 We should try very hard not to hound out anyone else.
Here's some advice, if you new to the forum , don't do number 1. We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff. Entering a new forum, telling those of us who don't do dayglo or don't wear helmets that we're wrong is rude, and childish and shows a lack of understanding of the principles involved. Give us some credit that we are adults and have the capability of working out things like risk and equipment choices all by ourselves.

Generally if you don't, the other 1 may happen.
The new poster knows this how, I wonder? (My bold)
I would suggest that they do a couple of quick forum searches before they post. This course of action is even recommended by the moderators. A quick read of what others have written should lay the ground work for anything that they may wish to add...
Unlimited economic growth in a world of finite resources doesn't fit nor does it guarantee happiness.
cycle tramp
Posts: 4355
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by cycle tramp »

.. whilst I don't expect anyone to agree with me (and even I don't agree 100% with the younger versions of myself) I equally don't expected to be talked down to or treated as a imbecile if I happen to disagree with wearing helmets all the time, in frame cable routing, or that Margaret Thatcher was the best all time ever Prime Minister...

..I think that we can all agree that modicum of personal reflection and some prior research is appreciated by the existing members, before any new members post...
Unlimited economic growth in a world of finite resources doesn't fit nor does it guarantee happiness.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11299
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Bonefishblues »

cycle tramp wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 2:22pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 9:25am
cycle tramp wrote: 27 Oct 2024, 8:45am

Here's some advice, if you new to the forum , don't do number 1. We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff. Entering a new forum, telling those of us who don't do dayglo or don't wear helmets that we're wrong is rude, and childish and shows a lack of understanding of the principles involved. Give us some credit that we are adults and have the capability of working out things like risk and equipment choices all by ourselves.

Generally if you don't, the other 1 may happen.
The new poster knows this how, I wonder? (My bold)
I would suggest that they do a couple of quick forum searches before they post. This course of action is even recommended by the moderators. A quick read of what others have written should lay the ground work for anything that they may wish to add...
A couple of quick searches is unlikely to tell a new poster that, in your words We're tired of it, we've done the bun fight and we' like to get on with other stuff.

In one of the few occasions I agree with Cowsham :wink: I too experienced a Cycling UK 'pile on' as a new member of the Forum when I ventured into an area where is was rapidly apparent a new member shouldn't have had the temerity to voice an opinion.

I also agree with the footnote about the dangers of this place becoming an echo chamber.
cycle tramp
Posts: 4355
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by cycle tramp »

..you sure about that?

As a quick test, I typed in helmet (stop sniggering at the back) and go both the helmet worked for me, and helmet didn't work for me threads, plus a load of others too.

The second test 'day-glo' got up several threads both for and against.

The third would have been road-tax, but by then I was pretty sure that even on your first search, the odds were on your side that you'd pick up the majority of arguements in each case.

If you want to tell me that carbon fibre, helmets, voting far right or far left or whatever else is working for you that's fine. The moment you tell me that I should be doing the same, is the point of disagreement...

..if however other people have already made their views known.. then I won't 'pile on' unless I'm pretty sure I'm bringing a new pie to the table.
Unlimited economic growth in a world of finite resources doesn't fit nor does it guarantee happiness.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11299
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Moderator actions, part 2

Post by Bonefishblues »

Yes, quite certain.
Locked