Cycling UK Forum

Si wrote:Sending a PM to politely explain etc.,

Do the mods on here flag the message as having been moderated and state the reason? Common practise on other modded forums I'm a member of. Which make this one look like a vicars tea party in comparison.

And long may the tea party continue .
I for one use this forum in the knowledge that I will not end up in a slanging match.

Edwards wrote:And long may the tea party continue .
I for one use this forum in the knowledge that I will not end up in a slanging match.

I'm not knocking it, trust me!

workhard wrote:

Si wrote:Sending a PM to politely explain etc.,

Do the mods on here flag the message as having been moderated and state the reason? Common practise on other modded forums I'm a member of. Which make this one look like a vicars tea party in comparison.

I must admit when I first started using this forum that the moderators allowed a thread that criticised named individuals in the membership department. In other forums the threads would have been locked and the individuals banned. The moderation on this forum seems to be remarkably relaxed.

That said, it probably would make sense if the moderators did put something like {deleted because of XYZ} not only for transparency sake but as a reminder that the rules exist and are enforced.

andymiller wrote:

workhard wrote:

Si wrote:Sending a PM to politely explain etc.,

Do the mods on here flag the message as having been moderated and state the reason? Common practise on other modded forums I'm a member of. Which make this one look like a vicars tea party in comparison.

I must admit when I first started using this forum that the moderators allowed a thread that criticised named individuals in the membership department. In other forums the threads would have been locked and the individuals banned. The moderation on this forum seems to be remarkably relaxed.

That said, it probably would make sense if the moderators did put something like {deleted because of XYZ} not only for transparency sake but as a reminder that the rules exist and are enforced.

My thoughtd entirely though I do think transparency is important else moderation can appear more like censorship.

and don't get me started on the membership service, which I have complained in writing to HQ about.

I must admit when I first started using this forum that the moderators allowed a thread that criticised named individuals in the membership department.

Given the high post to moderator ratio (remember that most mods are unpaid volunteers and have real world jobs to do) it is inevitable that some questionable posts will be missed. Here we rely on the forum users to report to us anything they think suspect in case we miss it.

Do the mods on here flag the message as having been moderated and state the reason? Common practise on other modded forums I'm a member of. Which make this one look like a vicars tea party in comparison.

If a major change is made to a post or a post removed then we try to either PM the author or leave a post in the thread. If just one person's post is affected then ideally we PM them so that it doesn't look like we are giving them a public telling off. IF the thread is descending into a bit of a free for all then we just tend to leave a message in the thread to save the effort of having to do a load of PMs and then handle the responses.

However, if the rule breakage is reapeated or the person whose post was judged to break the rules has responded to the previous PM in an abusive manner (has some of you might have noticed by a recently by an ex-forum member) than we may take the view that there is little to be gained in repeating ourselves and so it is possible that no PM will be sent, however, should the moderated party then request, in a reasonable way, clarification of the moderation we will give explanation.

We have tried to outline the forum rules as clearly as we can. If anyone does not believe that a certain rule is o benefit to the forum then they are perfectly free to discuss this as long as they do so in a polite way and reasonable way, and do not break the rule while it is still in force.

Now it appears to me that Bikepacker ether disagrees with a particular rule or disagrees with the way that it has been enforced. I have done my best to explain to him why that rule is there and why I have enforced it and I am sorry that he still dissagrees with either it or me. But I would humbly suggest that he would have more joy in discusing the issue if his point of departure wasn't that I was ruining the forum and should be sacked immediatly - such a provokative post does little to open a meaningful and constructive discusion.

It is clear that Bikepacker's and my interpretations of past events, as well as the current one, differs somewhat. Thus I think that we will have to agree to disagree. Although exchanges such as this one can leave a bit of a bad taste I hold no personal bad feeling to you BP, although I do apparenetly disagree with _some_ of your views, or perhaps your approach to airing those views - but then it would be a boring world if we all thought the same.

However, I'm afraid that I will continue to enforce the forum rules in the way that I have been doing until the senior mods instruct me otherwise.

This not withstanding, I hope we can metaphorically shake hands and put this episode behind us.

...and appologies if my english is worse than usual - new keyboard this weekend.