Moderation (in moderation)

[Derek]

Firstly, familiarise yourself with the rules here. (http://ozhoopsboards.com/showthread.php?t=4282)

The intent of the points system was to try and bring some consistency into moderating- some things would get a slap on the wrist, while some would get bans, depending on the moderator and the circumstances at the time.

I also wanted to try and make the process easier- not just for the mods but for our members. So far, for the most part, it's working.

However, there is a (fairly lengthly) thread in the Plus forums about how some things aren't working, so I'll throw it up for debate.

The vast majority of penalties dished out are for:

- inappropriate language. I don't care if you think you have a "Bob"-given right to drop expletives on the internet, you don't have it here. It isn't about freedom of speech, it's about keeping the content reasonably clean so that people accessing from work or from public areas don't feel they're jeopardising their jobs/internet access as a result. And I don't care that you spelled your curse word of choice with a "V".

- off-topic posts. Threads are always going to go off on some tangent given long enough, but if the new discussion warrants x number of pages on its own, maybe it should have its own thread. You're welcome to start one, you know, you don't have to rely on the mods coming in and splitting the thread for you.

Do we need to stomp on tangents and derails more quickly, and move them into their own threads? Or do we leave them be?

- single-word or single-smiley replies. Maybe we're being a little too humourless here, but these don't really add anything to the discussion. I do want to be more lenient in Game Day threads, though; I actually have a possible live-commentary solution for games I'd like to try, hopefully for the Grand Final later this week.

Any other thoughts?

DN

[2sc945]

Single-word or single-smiley replies are acceptable in most forums on the internet.

[CGG]

Single-word or single-smiley replies are acceptable in most forums on the internet.

In moderation surely. I've been known to post a couple myself, but the third or fourth in a row is ridiculous.

[Cussy]

Agreed.

[Stumps]

- inappropriate language. I don't care if you think you have a "Bob"-given right to drop expletives on the internet, you don't have it here. It isn't about freedom of speech, it's about keeping the content reasonably clean so that people accessing from work or from public areas don't feel they're jeopardising their jobs/internet access as a result. And I don't care that you spelled your curse word of choice with a "V".
Would this be mostly solved by returning to message board software that includes an optional swear filter (as the previous version of The Boards did)? That way, you just have to ping people who deliberately circumvent the filter (eg by using a "v" or by putting a tag pair in the middle of the word in question).

- off-topic posts. Threads are always going to go off on some tangent given long enough, but if the new discussion warrants x number of pages on its own, maybe it should have its own thread. You're welcome to start one, you know, you don't have to rely on the mods coming in and splitting the thread for you.
That's true, but the person whose post starts the deviation has no way of knowing whether it will be a single-post, partially-related aside, or whether it will spawn a monstrous tangential debate.

Do we need to stomp on tangents and derails more quickly, and move them into their own threads? Or do we leave them be?
If they've truly overshadowed the "main" topic, then just prune them off to their own thread. This would IMHO be a much better use of limited mod bandwidth than going to the trouble of formally yellow-carding people for letter-of-the-law rule infringements that don't actually cause inconvenience or offence to any other Boards user.

- single-word or single-smiley replies. Maybe we're being a little too humourless here, but these don't really add anything to the discussion.
I would disagree. Obviously the potential is there for them to be total time-wasters, but in many cases they can be constructive or even entertaining. For example, it is a pain in the arse when somebody asks a straightforward question that has a one- or two-word answer, and you need to insert another jumble of meaningless text at the end of your answer to validate it for the software. If someone makes a hilarious post, there's no more gratifying sign of approval than a simple LOL smiley in response.

I would think that there is probably only one moderator here who can't be relied upon to subjectively assess the difference between a troll post or pointless post of this type and a worthwhile one.

I appreciate your efforts to carve out a black-and-white set of rules to be objectively applied, to ensure total fairness and transparency, but such an endeavour is really only necessitated when you have mods incapable of exercising discretion in a prudent and sensitive way -- and as the discussion in Off Topic has suggested, there is another solution to address that minority problem.

[Cussy]

Agreed.

[Wallitron]

Would this be mostly solved by returning to message board software that includes an optional swear filter (as the previous version of The Boards did)? That way, you just have to ping people who deliberately circumvent the filter (eg by using a "v" or by putting a tag pair in the middle of the word in question).


Filters are for fascists! Quit advocating the nanny state and start making people personally accountable for their poor language (ie vocab).

[Stumps]

Filters are for fascists!
Yes, MANDATORY ones are.

[Clips]

Single-word or single-smiley replies are acceptable in most forums on the internet.
Most forums don't have you posting random pictures or smiley replies that has everyone except yourself asking WTF you're on about.

[Glenn]

Firstly, familiarise yourself with the rules here. (http://ozhoopsboards.com/showthread.php?t=4282)

The intent of the points system was to try and bring some consistency into moderating- some things would get a slap on the wrist, while some would get bans, depending on the moderator and the circumstances at the time.

I also wanted to try and make the process easier- not just for the mods but for our members. So far, for the most part, it's working.

However, there is a (fairly lengthly) thread in the Plus forums about how some things aren't working, so I'll throw it up for debate.

The vast majority of penalties dished out are for:

- inappropriate language. I don't care if you think you have a "Bob"-given right to drop expletives on the internet, you don't have it here. It isn't about freedom of speech, it's about keeping the content reasonably clean so that people accessing from work or from public areas don't feel they're jeopardising their jobs/internet access as a result. And I don't care that you spelled your curse word of choice with a "V".

- off-topic posts. Threads are always going to go off on some tangent given long enough, but if the new discussion warrants x number of pages on its own, maybe it should have its own thread. You're welcome to start one, you know, you don't have to rely on the mods coming in and splitting the thread for you.

Do we need to stomp on tangents and derails more quickly, and move them into their own threads? Or do we leave them be?

- single-word or single-smiley replies. Maybe we're being a little too humourless here, but these don't really add anything to the discussion. I do want to be more lenient in Game Day threads, though; I actually have a possible live-commentary solution for games I'd like to try, hopefully for the Grand Final later this week.

Any other thoughts?

DN

:(

Seriously as for the Off topics, if (when) they develop and then it becomes clear the replies are also off topic time to move them elsewhere (Off topic/Playground forum???)

[Southern Joe]

Most forums don't have you posting random pictures or smiley replies that has everyone except yourself asking WTF you're on about.


... Disagree.

Many forums that I have participated in offer a wide array of emoticons that singularly convey what would be said in a long drawn out sentence.


If someone was making a bad habit out of it & it was widely acknowledged that it was a series of useless posts, & could be proven ..... then , yeah ... they get pinged.

[Clips]

... Disagree.

Many forums that I have participated in offer a wide array of emoticons that singularly convey what would be said in a long drawn out sentence.
Oh I don't mean everyone here, I just meant that jackass with random numbers and letters as a name, 9s23cd or whatever...

If someone was making a bad habit out of it & it was widely acknowledged that it was a series of useless posts, & could be proven ..... then , yeah ... they get pinged.Exactly my point.. ;)