The thread I referred to was was recent, but it was still a couple of accidents ago.
Moderation: Too much or too little?
- Thread starter Cave Diver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
The thread I referred to was was recent, but it was still a couple of accidents ago.
John, have a look at post 291 in this thread for the specifics, & how they I think they relate to inconsistency of moderation.
Quero has answered my question though, my posts, used mild language to break the rules & were therefore not removed. That still seems quite inconsistent to me.
Ps. It seems to be a little difficult to discuss our feelings about moderation, if the moderators aren't supposed to talk about the specifics.
Quero has answered my question though, my posts, used mild language to break the rules & were therefore not removed. That still seems quite inconsistent to me.
Ps. It seems to be a little difficult to discuss our feelings about moderation, if the moderators aren't supposed to talk about the specifics.
I was apparently unclear, as you have misunderstood. What I was trying to say was that *I* used mild language to explain the post removals (off topic comments) rather than claim a more serious infraction. The mildness of your posts was not a factor in any way.
I can give a little bit more specificity (in a sort of general way), and maybe that will help, since it was actually the way the moderation took place in this case. When a thread goes off the rails, we try to identify the spot where the train left the track and begin moderating there. In this case, the post that derailed the train came after your two posts, Kern, so the moderation began there, and not higher up in the thread. Does that help?
Quero, I continued to ask until I got an answer.
No it's not important to me at all, I was just using a recent example of something I considered inconsistent in a discussion on moderation. I'v only used these posts as an example, because they were mine, & therefore easy to find. I couldn't care less wether the postsstay or go, but for the sake of consistency, .........
---------- Post added April 6th, 2012 at 10:20 AM ----------
Quero, 1st I'd like to say thanks for your replies to my questions.
As to the quote above, there's an old Jewish proverb that go's something like this, "if 3 people tell you you're sick, it might be time to lay down". Likewise, If 3 or 4 members say "these links don't work, & the thread is not in the forum", it might be time to find out why.
You may be using a different measure for consistency at times than the moderation team does. Factors other than what you perceive or have considered may be coming into play that influence moderation decisions. I've tried to show one factor in the decision you find faulty in relation to your own posts: where did the problem originate in this thread? I try not to "grandfather" my decisions unless I really have to since going backwards into a thread and moderating earlier posts that had not been instigating factors in the train wreck only to maintain some ephemeral "consistency" is neither practical nor necessary. In other words, I "consistently" look for the point in the thread where the problem arises, and I "consistently" moderate from that point forward. I "consistently" evaluate whether the thread seems to be self-correcting and not in need of moderator intervention. In the case of your posts, there was an earlier post to which you replied. That post and yours balanced one another, and therefore the thread was correcting itself. I was "consistent" in looking for that sort of flow in the thread. When the flow became unbalanced and there was dogpiling going on, I intervened. This should illustrate that what *you* see going on in a thread is not necessarily what *I* see happening. You want a black and white definition of what is and is not subject to moderation. I watch the dynamics of the discussion.
- Messages
- 93,167
- Reaction score
- 91,018
- Location
- On the Fun Side of Trump's Wall
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
OK ... since this thread is already active, I'm going to make this comment here.
Please stop closing and removing threads because of the disruptive behavior of one person! It keeps happening, and this request has been made several times in the past.
It just sends a message to all the people who are following the rules that they're going to be found collectively guilty anyway.
Boot the perp ... in this case, permanently. In fact, in this case, ban his IP or something ... because this is something like the fourth or fifth time he's just opened a new account with a different name and repeated the same behavior.
But for goodness sakes, stop removing a whole thread just because one unbalanced person decides to go postal. Treat people as individuals ... not as a herd.
And for those who are going to ask for a link ... I can't ... the thread was removed. But if you're a mod, you undoubtedly got the Reports anyway, so you should know what I'm talking about.
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Please stop closing and removing threads because of the disruptive behavior of one person! It keeps happening, and this request has been made several times in the past.
It just sends a message to all the people who are following the rules that they're going to be found collectively guilty anyway.
Boot the perp ... in this case, permanently. In fact, in this case, ban his IP or something ... because this is something like the fourth or fifth time he's just opened a new account with a different name and repeated the same behavior.
But for goodness sakes, stop removing a whole thread just because one unbalanced person decides to go postal. Treat people as individuals ... not as a herd.
And for those who are going to ask for a link ... I can't ... the thread was removed. But if you're a mod, you undoubtedly got the Reports anyway, so you should know what I'm talking about.
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
OP
I haven't had a chance to read the rest of this thread, but since I clicked to the back page, I'm going to answer this for you Bob.
I believe the thread you're talking about was removed by me. It was removed because a particular user posted something very offensive on his status line and only an Admin or the user themselves can edit that. Several mods, including myself tried and were unable to edit that portion of his profile. As a result, all of his posts were removed until that can be handled, and as you may be aware, if the first post of a thread is removed, that deletes the entire thread. The reason that all of his posts were removed is because EVERY post he made contains the offensive line.
I understand that this seems like an over reaction by some of you, but it's the best solution we had at that moment in time to correct the issue that was brought to our attention. Once we can get the individual problem sorted out, we'll see what can be done to restore the affected posts and threads.
Well said.
Quite fair enough. There will always be someone determined to find a way to deliberately break things, and keep you running in circles trying to fix things. Always is easier to break than fix things.
Banning the offender, as Bob suggests might not clean up the threads effected, but it would show the rest of the members that staff is doing it's best to protect the whole of the membership from the few who would damage or thumb their nose at the TOS, just to prove they can, and in so doing hurt the rest of us.
- Messages
- 93,167
- Reaction score
- 91,018
- Location
- On the Fun Side of Trump's Wall
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
That's a fair explanation ... thank you. I understand it's a lot of effort, but I hope to see the thread cleaned up and restored, and the perp permabanned (again).
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
So we have an ongoing game of Whack a Mole, I see.
Some folks just don't get the message about their welcome, even if you nail the door shut, and turn off the lights.
Similar threads
