Suggestion Censoring the Censorship Comaplaint?

[TheRedHead]

I was reading that thread and it disappeared while I was reading. Seems that we have a lot of disappearing threads around here...

 

[Scuba]

I'll start by saying that in my experience, overall, the moderation of this board has been good. A good amount of lively discussion is allowed while mostly preventing discussion from degenerating into abuse. A fine, and not an easy line to follow. Lately, due to an anomaly, hopefully, a certain bias in enforcement of the rules has crept in. At least in regards to a few threads I have noticed which have generated a few threads on this forum.

Moderation of your "free expression" is spelled out in, and moderated by, the Terms of Service. You agreed to follow those rules when you became a member of this community.

You are free to express yourself within the boundaries of behavior spelled out there.

You are free to complain (obviously) that you don't like those rules.

You are free to leave if you feel that observing those rules is unreasonable.

I don't believe anyone is challenging these positions.

You are NOT free to argue, harass, name-call, or otherwise break the Terms of Service ... and when you do, your posts will disappear.

Really? Which board are you referring to? This may all make perfect sense from your perspective. But from others, all this takes place without the magical disappearing act. NOT free to argue? Can we whisper sweet little nothings then?

If you feel you cannot, in good conscience, abide by the Terms of Service ... and moderate your own behavior so we don't have to spend our time doing it for you ... then perhaps you should consider that ScubaBoard isn't the right forum for you. There are lots out there that will let you post anything you want to, free of charge, and with no moderation whatsoever.

While this is definitely applicable to some posters. I do not believe it is warranted, at all, in regards to the threads and majority of posts at issue here, from what I have seen. Certainly not as a whole. The unfairness of deleting a whole thread due to a few posts is hardly a positive for anyone. While editing or controlling the development of some threads may be difficult, in others, such as these being discussed, it's quite simple, unless the intent is removal or lockout. Valid reasons for locking have been given, but are not being equally enforced in other threads.

These threads started in regards to pilots fish's removed thread. Did he violate TOS or regulations? Did the majority of the posts, at least till a certain point violate TOS or regulations? Did the thread addressing the thread closure, which was quickly closed, violate TOS or regulation? It was said it went off topic for the forum - fine. But the "Clean and Sober Thread Closed For ????" has 62 post and counting, many totally off topic. The words fairness, equitable, unbiased moderating should apply, but in this case do not.

Did my thread addressing censorship violate TOS or regulations? By the way, I was not informed of its closure. Don't have to, but common courtesy and consideration would be welcomed. Mod's do value non mod. members of this community, right? Even imperfect ones? Back to my deleted thread which is supposed to be getting a trim. Unless I missed many posts, which can happen, the thread only had a handful of posts last time I checked a couple days ago before I received email notification of a new post, which I suppose was an offending post leading to thread removal. I have no knowledge of subsequent posts. Maybe you can offer specific guidance if any of these threads or the majority of posts before removal violated TOS or regulations. How a few posts in violation or off topic warrant closure or removal? And most importantly, why this action is not warranted in so many, many, other cases?

All the violation, or off topic issues are well taken, as long as they are evenly enforced.

No community is perfect ... nor is any staff member here. But we do feel that the vast majority of our members appreciate the level of civility we work to maintain in this community. On the whole, we feel that the level of moderation is appropriate for the type of community we wish to promote ... and frankly, our success at attracting and maintaining active members bears this out.

No argument there. That would violate TOS according to one of your prior comments. LOL Level is fine and good for many as you said. More balance and less bias would make it even better.

Not coincidentally, the people who complain the loudest about the limits to their "freedom of expression" are the same ones who most often ignore the agreement they made when they joined the board, and feel that the rules somehow don't apply to them.

I don't know who you are referring too. But since we are discussing the aforementioned threads and those who have expressed an opinion in them, at least in regards to most of the one's I have seen - I couldn't disagree more. If this is a general statement, as regards this discussion - your bias is showing.

I'd like to remind EVERYONE that the ScubaBoard.com website is a PRIVATELY OWNED site and we are all permitted to participate on this board by the INVITATION of the owner.

Being a privately held site gives the owner sole intellectual rights to determine what he finds acceptable and unacceptable to be posted to the board. With that goes the right to "uninvite" any member or members.

It's about private ownership.

Keep in mind, folks, this is a private site, and even though the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America does not apply here in its full force, the owner dilligently tries to provide a forum where topics about scuba diving can be discussed in an intelligent, mature and civil manner.

Yes, the owners and those running it can do whatever pleases them. But this omits the point about how those in charge and in power treat and value the members that make up this online community. Respect and responsibility are two way streets. But we know many disagree on that point. There is certainly no lack of Dictator For Life conviction amongst many divers as seen on various threads.

Gentle people,

This board was created to fill a need: to be able to freely exchange ideas.

Unfortunately, some people see this as a place to harrass, to flame and perchance to bully. Some see it as a place to offend with racial remarks, or perhaps with sexual innuendo. Not on our watch. Your moderators are committed to removing any obstacle that hinders people from posting and having fun.

Good for you guys. It's appreciated by many of us. Thank You All.

Funny though, for the few that accuse us of downright censorship, we seem to allow your comments about how unfair we are. However, we won't allow you to hijack our community so you can abuse others.

Well, NetDoc.... Please explain, without once again using your, and yours, magical powers of disappearance, how it is that you allow these (my) comments of censorship when the whole thread is quickly removed because of a, or a few, offending posts. A thread with aprox. eight posts last time I checked. How did my thread, or these threads in discussion here, hijack our, "your", community and abuse others. These threads arose out of the reasonably perceived abuse and lack of fairness imparted on members of this community - and the desire of these members to help guide and create a better community for all.

 

[MB]

Yes, the owners and those running it can do whatever pleases them. But this omits the point about how those in charge and in power treat and value the members that make up this online community. Respect and responsibility are two way streets. But we know many disagree on that point. There is certainly no lack of Dictator For Life conviction amongst many divers as seen on various threads.

Please know that the "whatever pleases them" perception is the subject of constant and vociferous discussion among moderators. Mods are diligent in working to not use "whatever pleases them" as a standard for action. I think all moderators have turned away from posts and threads that displease, but that do not meet a higher standard of abuse, personal attack, or other TOS violations. Members often identify and refer boorish posts and threads, and mods discuss whether such posts should be canned -- only to decide that they should be left alone, even though they might displease many.

 

[pilot fish]

Scuba, please! You are making sense and asking for fairness. What's the matter with you?

 

[The Chairman]

Dear Scuba,

our average day sees about a hundred threads started and upwards of 2,000 posts. We have about 50 moderators patrolling the board, so that breaks down to 40 posts per volunteer moderator. That's a bunch to ask of a paid staff and ridiculous to demand of these great volunteers. I appreciate their dedication to our sport and to our community. They deserve medals: not derision.

Now here's the real kicker: our mods mostly react to the "report this post" e-mails we get whenever one of our users hits the [!] button on the bottom left of every post. That's right, they are not thought police that some make them out to be, but rather rely heavily on our users to indicate which posts that they find "over the top". Once viewing with the post in question, they will either agree with the report and moderate, or they will move on to having fun elsewhere. This does not mean that they ONLY moderate threads that have been reported: violations of the TOS can be dealt with at any time and for any reason.

As for cleaning threads: it takes up a moderator's valuable time. Did I mention that they are ALL volunteers and unlike myself actually have a life? If they can clean it then GREAT. If they are lacking either time or inclination then the thread lives in limbo. Here's hoping that the fate of one thread does not have a huge impact on your quality of life. If you are feeling distraught, go play in another of the over 100,000 threads that populate our board. Just play nicely!

Now, some complain that we focus on JUST THEM. They think a mod or three base their entire existence to make their "Board life" hell. Well, moderators try not to focus, but if you cross the TOS and are reported habitually, then they learn to recognise your nick as well as your MO. The mods are here to have fun: not to babysit a few users who refuse to play nice. When you cross the TOS, you are consuming their play time. How would YOU feel?

In case there is any doubt: www.ScubaBoard.com exists to bring about a free exchange of ideas and to promote safety. Our users have created the absolute LARGEST community of divers anywhere and we have anywhere from 350,000 to well over 500,000 visitors to our board each and every month! That's two to three times the circulation of the largest magazine devoted to Scuba Diving. It's mind boggling! So many have asked how to replicate our success, and I have no idea. Our users have created this community and obviously most of them rather like the level of moderation that exists here, or we would stop growing and being one of the main forces in the Scuba Industry. Can we improve? We have and we will. We are dedicated to making the best community for divers even better. Every moderator is dedicated to this as well as to fairness.

Again, if you feel that any moderator has a vendetta against you, I want to hear about it. Mods are chosen in part for their lack of aggression and their willingness to lend a hand. If a mod does not fit this profile I want to know about it.

 

[H2Andy]

actually, i do have a vendetta against Pilot Fish (muhahahahahaha)

just a very small one... more like a mini-vendetta... nay, a nano-vendetta

our average day sees about a hundred threads started and upwards of 2,000 posts. We have about 50 moderators patrolling the board

Actually, Pete, if you look at the active moderators, there's really
about 20 of us, including you, of which only about 12 actively moderate
(that's a guesstimate based on personal experience).

so let's say 20 active moderators (that's way too high, but anyway)... you're
talking 100 posts per moderator per day

no way we have time to screw around with that sort of volume

 

[pilot fish]

actually, i do have a vendetta against Pilot Fish (muhahahahahaha)

just a very small one... more like a mini-vendetta... nay, a nano-vendetta


Actually, Pete, if you look at the active moderators, there's really
about 20 of us, including you, of which only about 12 actively moderate
(that's a guesstimate based on personal experience).

so let's say 20 active moderators (that's way too high, but anyway)... you're
talking 100 posts per moderator per day

no way we have time to screw around with that sort of volume

"a lot of truth was said in jest" Willam S.

Suprised to read that, since I considered you to be more reasonale than most.

 

[H2Andy]

ok, my vendetta is growing... it is now amoeba size

:growling:

 

[pilot fish]

ok, my vendetta is growing... it is now amoeba size

:growling:

Listen, you might need some breathing gas at 100 ft. Better reconsider that.

 

[H2Andy]

hmmm.... blackmail and possible threats of murder...

i like this guy!

hermano!



(PF, hope you know my vendetta against you is purely fictional)

 

[El Orans]

Shouldn't this be moved to W&C?