Moderation: Too much or too little?

[The Chairman]

I think the most plausible explanation, Pete, is that someone with the permissions to change them decided to play a little game in the Whine and Cheeze thread, without considering the consequences throughout the rest of the board. Once those consequences became known, they went back and undid the little game they were playing down there.

Quite possible, Bob.

And that's really my point ... people need to think about the effects of their moderation before they do it.

We'll have to agree to agree here Bob. People should consider the effects of their moderation as well as their posts. If you noticed, we have a new group of mods and care is being taken by a few Advisors to make sure that they understand this.

With power comes a certain responsibility ... when the actions of a staff member affect members who are not doing anything wrong, it reflects badly on staff as a whole. This is why you need to do a better job of policing yourselves, and weeding out those who misuse their authority as staff members. Particularly if you want to continue billing ScubaBoard as a friendly place to be.

Some weed with a shovel, Bob. You know that's not my style. I might be an idiot, but I am a patient and tolerant idiot who tries his hardest to make people better both in the water and on the forum.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

How much detail did you want me to go into here, Bob? We found a pattern from a certain set of smileys used in a manner that inhibited discussion rather than encouraged it. While the issue was brought to our attention by a singular use of a different smiley (not popcorn), our experience from moderating this site made us feel that it was time for a few smileys to be deleted. So far we've had a negative reaction from about 0.005% (0.00005) of our registered users concerning this smiley. I keep hearing about we are going to hell in a hand basket, and yet our continued growth seems to contradict that. People are clamoring about censorship, yet this kind of discussion is openly permitted.

The Advisors, the Mods and myself are dedicated to making this an inclusive and friendly site, even more so than it is now. While I appreciate the fact that a few think I am an idiot, I am an idiot with a vision and a hope. I want to see others learn from ScubaBoard, just as I learned from ScubaBoard. To do that, I am going to have to buck the tide a bit. No, I don't own the community: we all do. That being said, the "all" is far bigger than the few people who want the popcorn smiley back. It's my opinion that they could care less about ScubaBoard becoming more inclusive, AS LONG AS THEY GET THEIR SMILEY BACK. Do I let the wants of 10 or so people prevail over the needs of so many others? How about 20 or so? It's not about listening to them (or you) exclusively as much as it's about listening to the far greater community. To the people who won't register and post because of what they perceive to be an unfriendly environment. IOW, how close to rec.scuba do we really want to get?

The comment bolded above is all the explanation I think needed, Pete ... and had it been provided when the issue first came up, would have avoided a lot of what followed.

The rest of your post is, to my concern, innuendo and hyperbole ... it certainly doesn't reflect anything I have said, which makes me wonder why you posted it.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[The Chairman]

The rest of your post is, to my concern, innuendo on your part, and does not serve you well ... it certainly doesn't reflect anything I have said, which makes me wonder why you posted it.

No, it doesn't reflect on anything YOU have said, but it does reflect on what others have said. My apologies if anyone who thinks differently. Your stance, as far as I understood it, was that eliminating the smiley was fine: screwing with it after was not. You can correct me if that's not the case. That doesn't mean that I agree with everything you have posted here. There is no doubt in my mind that we are a friendlier site than we have been, while you seem to think we have become quite unfriendly. At least, that's what I garnered from your posts.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

Good points, NetDoc.

I started what I think was the original thread in Site Support asking if the popcorn smiley not working was intentional or not ("feature vs bug"). Howard responded. A few others chimed in. When I read Howard's response I was satisfied. Then I noticed the thread had been moved to Whine and Cheeze. That took it from the serious to the silly, and it remains active as a silly thread.

I find the deletions of the subset of smileys to be a form of moderation, and posted in this thread along those lines. Cave Diver started the thread looking for feedback - I gave him some.

NW Grateful Diver has a very valid point about "messing" with the popcorn smiley. I can not add anything as eloquent as his comments.

One item about your response, NetDoc, does bother me a bit. When you cite how small an item is by the percent of registered users, you are artifically minimizing the issue. I say artificially, as some of the registered users are inactive, and I know some of them are dead. Without comparing to the "active" or "current" users, the statistic comes across as an attempt to blow smoke up someone's butt. I'm sure you don't want to perpetuate that.

Thanks for reading this.

 

[HowardE]

Without comparing to the "active" or "current" users, the statistic comes across as an attempt to blow smoke up someone's butt. I'm sure you don't want to perpetuate that.

Hi,

I'll respond to this, since I'm the marketing manager for ScubaBoard.

The active member statistic is: more than 50,000 users have logged into their account on ScubaBoard.com in the last 365 days.

Daily, ScubaBoard.com receives an average of (rounded to the nearest thousand) 25,000 visitors, with 17,000 unique visitors daily.

Currently. ScubaBoard.com is ranked 25,709 on Alexa worldwide, with a US rank of 8,905.

So... I would have to say that the people who believe that ScubaBoard's current position of trying to make the site friendlier is NOT backfiring, but actually has been working quite well. Over the last 3 months, our alexa rank has moved from 35,000 to 25,000 which is no small feat, and our daily traffic has grown from an average of 22,000 visits to the current 25k average. Also... no small feat.

ScubaBoard.com is the worlds most visited website dedicated to diving period. No smoke and mirrors... just the facts.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

Hi,

I'll respond to this, since I'm the marketing manager for ScubaBoard.

The active member statistic is: more than 50,000 users have logged into their account on ScubaBoard.com in the last 365 days.

Daily, ScubaBoard.com receives an average of (rounded to the nearest thousand) 25,000 visitors, with 17,000 unique visitors daily.

Currently. ScubaBoard.com is ranked 25,709 on Alexa worldwide, with a US rank of 8,905.

So... I would have to say that the people who believe that ScubaBoard's current position of trying to make the site friendlier is NOT backfiring, but actually has been working quite well. Over the last 3 months, our alexa rank has moved from 35,000 to 25,000 which is no small feat, and our daily traffic has grown from an average of 22,000 visits to the current 25k average. Also... no small feat.

ScubaBoard.com is the worlds most visited website dedicated to diving period. No smoke and mirrors... just the facts.

Thank you Howard.

With over 200,000 registered users, and 50,000 active in the past 12 months, you understand that there is about a factor of four difference. One could argue (based on the numbers) that 3/4 of scubaboard registered users have not posted in the past year.

That's why I wanted to be clearer about things.

 

[The Chairman]

One item about your response, NetDoc, does bother me a bit. When you cite how small an item is by the percent of registered users, you are artifically minimizing the issue. I say artificially, as some of the registered users are inactive, and I know some of them are dead. Without comparing to the "active" or "current" users, the statistic comes across as an attempt to blow smoke up someone's butt. I'm sure you don't want to perpetuate that.

If we compared to the number of people on the site at this one instant in time, it's still less than one half of one percent. If we compare to the projected minimum number of visitors we will have just today, then it's more like 5 hundredths of one percent. As Mark Twain once suggested: There are lies, damn lies and statistics. I don't think I have artificially minimized the issue nearly as much as some have artificially inflated the same issue. It's often a matter of perspective and people rarely comprehend the reach ScubaBoard enjoys. I heard about an encounter at BTS where the President of DEMA actually rolled his eyes when he was told that ScubaBoard was the largest site devoted to Scuba. We have a few detractors both within and without. If all I did was to focus on the negative rather than on the positive, I could easily believe that I am as stupid and inept as some would like everyone to believe. The actual figures are far better for me to look at. What other Scuba site can say that they are in the top 10,000 sites viewed in the USA and just outside the top 25,000 sites worldwide? Am I artificially minimizing the issue by citing these stats? You can verify them on Alexa the Web Information Company. Go ahead and check out your favorite sites to see how they compare against us.

It's my sincere belief that our moderation needs to be tweaked. I like Cave Diver's thread that solicits how people perceive our effectiveness. I view all feedback as important, even if I don't fully appreciate or understand it. We could not have gotten that high in the rankings by not listening to our target audience. You can be sure that we will keep on listening and evolving. Since it's impossible to please everyone all the time, you can be sure that we'll get a few gripes of wrath along with a few attaboys. Those gripes are still important to us and just as important to keep in perspective. After all, we don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater or a mod out because they made a few mistakes.

Edit: Special thanks to Howard for stealing my thunder!

 

[HowardE]

Thank you Howard.

With over 200,000 registered users, and 50,000 active in the past 12 months, you understand that there is about a factor of four difference. One could argue (based on the numbers) that 3/4 of scubaboard registered users have not posted in the past year.

That's why I wanted to be clearer about things.

I don't understand what you're trying to prove?

I would venture a strong suspicion that pretty much any forum site has similar percentages of attrition. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

If we compared to the number of people on the site at this one instant in time, it's still less than one half of one percent. If we compare to the projected minimum number of visitors we will have just today, then it's more like 5 hundredths of one percent. As Mark Twain once suggested: There are lies, damn lies and statistics. I don't think I have artificially minimized the issue nearly as much as some have artificially inflated the same issue. It's often a matter of perspective and people rarely comprehend the reach ScubaBoard enjoys. I heard about an encounter at BTS where the President of DEMA actually rolled his eyes when he was told that ScubaBoard was the largest site devoted to Scuba. We have a few detractors both within and without. If all I did was to focus on the negative rather than on the positive, I could easily believe that I am as stupid and inept as some would like everyone to believe. The actual figures are far better for me to look at. What other Scuba site can say that they are in the top 10,000 sites viewed in the USA and just outside the top 25,000 sites worldwide? Am I artificially minimizing the issue by citing these stats? You can verify them on Alexa the Web Information Company. Go ahead and check out your favorite sites to see how they compare against us.

It's my sincere belief that our moderation needs to be tweaked. I like Cave Diver's thread that solicits how people perceive our effectiveness. I view all feedback as important, even if I don't fully appreciate or understand it. We could not have gotten that high in the rankings by not listening to our target audience. You can be sure that we will keep on listening and evolving. Since it's impossible to please everyone all the time, you can be sure that we'll get a few gripes of wrath along with a few attaboys. Those gripes are still important to us and just as important to keep in perspective. After all, we don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater or a mod out because they make a few mistakes.

I think you got my point. Comparing to today's anticipated unique users (about 17,000 per Howard) to the "popcorn gang" still shows them to be a minority. No need to compare to registered users - especially with 3/4 of them gone.

ScubaBoard's success speaks for itself - y'all get lots of stuff right.

---------- Post added at 12:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 PM ----------

I don't understand what you're trying to prove?

I would venture a strong suspicion that pretty much any forum site has similar percentages of attrition. It's the nature of the beast.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear.

I think NetDoc understands. Using registered users in the denominator ANY fraction will yield misleading results. Using a more realistic basis of comparison (like unique daily users - around 17,000 from your post above) will be much more defensible and still prove the same point.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

No, it doesn't reflect on anything YOU have said, but it does reflect on what others have said. My apologies if anyone who thinks differently. Your stance, as far as I understood it, was that eliminating the smiley was fine: screwing with it after was not. You can correct me if that's not the case. That doesn't mean that I agree with everything you have posted here. There is no doubt in my mind that we are a friendlier site than we have been, while you seem to think we have become quite unfriendly. At least, that's what I garnered from your posts.

You are correct in my stance that eliminating the smiley was fine; screwing with it afterward was not.

You are incorrect that I think we have become quite unfriendly ... in fact, that directly contradicts something I posted earlier, and it surprises me to hear you say that.

What I have said is that you have a few people on staff who do not act in a friendly manner toward your members ... who have, in fact, acted in an authoritarian, condescending, or disrespectful manner toward members ... and this reflects badly on the majority of staff who do not behave this way.

This doesn't make the board ... or staff ... as a whole, unfriendly. It makes those few people so ... and to my concern you should either convince them to change their ways, or dismiss them.

Is that clear enough?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)