Moderation levels.

[Cruella]

After hearing a few complaints from various forumites during conversations, I thought I'd ask the question. Are you happy with the level of moderation on this forum? I don't use any other forums myself, so I have no comparison other than how it was when I first joined this one. It seems to me that the fun and lightheartedness has diminished somewhat since more moderators were recruited. I have had numerous posts deleted or moved and am far more careful about what I dare to write (I know, you can't tell!:na: )
I want to go back to the old days, where it was more like having conversations in the pub. (No one moves you to a different table if your conversation veers off in another direction!)
So what is your opinion, less or more moderation, or is it fine as it is?

[Twirly]

I think it's fine on the dance-related threads (see splitting of little piggy from Utopia thread), but that chit chat threads are over-moderated.

If someone feels they have been personally slighted and complains to the mods, then obviously that should be dealt with. And sometimes things will have to be moved upstairs or outside.

But we are all capable of starting new threads by quoting the post which interests us.

Good thread Cruella!

[David Bailey]

I won't vote (amazingly :) ) for obvious reasons.

But it's also worth bearing in mind that there's a lot more "openness" in moderation operations than there was even a month ago - lots of PMs from "the moderating team" and so on.

So the perception of change is likely to be because of the greater visibility of changes.

Generally, I don't think there's more moderation than there was, say, over Christmas. In fact, if anything, actual moderation actions have been fairly low recently, compared to some of the, shall we say, more "interesting" times. But members normally never saw this stuff happening before.

Personally, I've done much less moderating recently, as a wind-down, although I've talked about it a lot - again, perceptions may be skewed a lot by that too.

EDIT: can I just say how totally shocked and saddened I am, by the way that Dreadful Scathe has now skewed the results with his sabotage spray voting? :whistle:

[Lynn]

I don't use any other forums myself, so I have no comparison other than how it was when I first joined this one. I'm on several other dance forums (about 6 or so) - some have almost no moderation - but almost no discussion either! Some would probably have if anything, more moderation than this one. So in my experience this is about average.

I think with any change in moderation policy - as has been recently with more moderators - there is a settling down period - after which time forumites hopefully start to moderate themselves.

I also think there is an element of deliberately going off topic (possibly even just to annoy mods?) - which effectively pushes the forum towards requiring even more moderation. So don't just blame the mods if there is a lot of moved posts and thread splitting.

[Twirly]

I won't vote (amazingly :) ) for obvious reasons.

But it's also worth bearing in mind that there's a lot more "openness" in moderation operations than there was even a month ago - lots of PMs from "the moderating team" and so on.

So the perception of change is likely to be because of the greater visibility of changes.

Generally, I don't think there's more moderation than there was, say, over Christmas. In fact, if anything, actual moderation actions have been fairly low recently, compared to some of the, shall we say, more "interesting" times. But members normally never saw this stuff happening before.

Personally, I've done much less moderating recently, as a wind-down, although I've talked about it a lot - again, perceptions may be skewed a lot by that too.

Since so far I've not complained about anybody and am not aware of having been complained about, the only moderating activity I tend to see is the splitting/moving of threads. And although I haven't been on here as long as some, it feels as if there is more of this activity going on than there was end of last year.

However, by "moderating" you, DJ, might mean something a bit different?

[SilverFox]

I think a lot of the current problems are not down to the whole moderating team, rather just the postings/actions of a couple of over-zealous individuals.

Far be it for me to name names but......

There's.....

...one moderator who should visit fetish shops more often. :drool: :devil:

...one moderator who takes everything far too personally.

...one moderator who is far too iCool for their own iGood. :na: :waycool:

...one moderator who should be allowed near alcohol more often, as the results are very entertaining.:yum: :cheers:

...one moderator who needs to get out more and find a sense of humour.

...one moderator whose love of fast cars appears to have driven them away........

[ducasi]

A year ago people were complaining about too many off-topic posts in threads. Now we have complaints that we delete posts and split threads too much.

Just can't win... :(

[David Bailey]

the only moderating activity I tend to see is the splitting/moving of threads. And although I haven't been on here as long as some, it feels as if there is more of this activity going on than there was end of last year.
Seriously, there really isn't, if anything there's less going on now than there was then - but it's all much more visible than it was; you get PMs telling you what's happening, and you get notes at both ends of split threads.

(Note: all this action is done with the laudable aim of informing members more, but like Lory, I personally am sometimes unsure whether it's worth the grief...)

So I think it's largely a matter of perception.


However, by "moderating" you, DJ, might mean something a bit different?
By "moderation" I mean "using moderator-specific functions to perform actions on areas of the forum" - so that includes editing posts, deleting them, moving threads, splitting them, merging them, plotting world domination and so on.

But I don't include "talking about moderation stuff" in that list.


A year ago people were complaining about too many off-topic posts in threads. Now we have complaints that we delete posts and split threads too much.

Just can't win... :(
Ah, but it's different people complaining, you see - our secret motto of "can't annoy all the people all the time, but you can annoy a lot of them a lot of the time" is working... :wink:

[LMC]

I have belonged to a *lot* of forums (fora?) in the last 10 years or so.

I prolly post regularly now on four or five, including this one.

And all credit to Franck and the team - I think the moderation on this forum is just about the most even-handed and appropriate that I've ever experienced.

I don't always agree with admin and moderator action. But then it's not my forum.

Whoever pays the bills gets to make the rules.

[Cruella]

Whoever pays the bills gets to make the rules.

Absolutely agree, it's Francks decision to make the rules and if we don't like the way the forum is, then we can leave. Unfortunately a few people have done just this.:sad: I'm sure though, Franck still appreciates feedback, so he can make his 'informed' decisions.

[Beowulf]

Everything in Moderation.. including Moderation ;)

While thread splitting etc in the "technical" areas (Dance, DJ , etc) is fine, excessive splitting and moderation in the chit chat threads is getting to be a trifle annoying.

(not to be confused with an annoying trifle.. which attacks with custard and smears jelly on you!)

Of course, it's Franck's Forum and he makes the rules and I'll go along with any and all decisions made (like I didn't before? :rolleyes:)

Having run a few forums myself (none this size granted) I know how tricky it is.

[TA Guy]

I want threads to remain on-topic. If people want to chit-chat, then fine, do it in the chit-chat forum. If necessary, expand the chit-chat parts of the forum. Possibly create a new forum called 'The Old Ocho and Ronde Inn' or something :)

It can be very irritating when your having a sensible discussion about something, and somebody derails the thread into a chat about mushrooms or something. Especially as I am pretty sure this has been done on several occasions with no other purpose than to derail the thread and 'get' at somebody.

There's a place for serious discussion, and a place for chit-chat, and I enjoy both, but the two shouldn't meet in the same forums.



As for thread splitting: I'm in favour if it's attempting to move off-topic in a non chit-chat forum, or bringing chit-chat to a non chit-chat forum. In those cases I'm in favour of thread splitting. If people want to talk about something else, or just chat, they should respect the contributors enough in the original thread to start their own and not hijack somebodies else.
I'm not in favour of thread splitting in chit-chat areas where by definition, anything goes. That's what chatting is.


I know some others think differently to this, just my two cents.

[ducasi]

I want threads to remain on-topic. [...]

It can be very irritating when your having a sensible discussion about something, and somebody derails the thread into a chat about mushrooms or something. [...]


As for thread splitting: [...]
I'm not in favour of thread splitting in chit-chat areas where by definition, anything goes. That's what chatting is.

[...]
There's a thread about what's happening in Iran at the moment. It's in the "Chit Chat" area of the forum. Do you think it's acceptable to have off-topic discussions about mushrooms in this thread?

[straycat]

There's a thread about what's happening in Iran at the moment. It's in the "Chit Chat" area of the forum. Do you think it's acceptable to have off-topic discussions about mushrooms in this thread?

What kind of mushrooms?

[SilverFox]

I think it speaks volumes about some moderators, when they even vote in a poll about their actions. Well we'd never have guessed which way you'd vote would we? :rolleyes:

[straycat]

I think it speaks volumes about some moderators, when they even vote in a poll about their actions. Well we'd never have guessed which way you'd vote would we? :rolleyes:

Since the moderators take the time and trouble to perform an often thankless role, why would we want to deprive them of having a say in how that role should be carried out? :confused:

[SilverFox]

Since the moderators take the time and trouble to perform an often thankless role, why would we want to deprive them of having a say in how that role should be carried out? :confused:Brown noser! :wink:

[ducasi]

I think it speaks volumes about some moderators, when they even vote in a poll about their actions. Well we'd never have guessed which way you'd vote would we? :rolleyes:
Don't we get a say? Who knows better what we do and what we could do?

I let by a lot of things which I think could maybe do with some moderator action because I am too busy or can't be bothered. If there was more demand for moderation action, or more moderators I'm sure we'd do more.

I'm not just talking about just moving/deleting/merging posts and threads – in fact, I'm more thinking about things like fixing links and quotes in people's posts.

[straycat]

Brown noser! :wink:

Nooooo - I just have occasional flashes of consideration for others. :cool:

[SilverFox]

So let's take a look at the voting so far.

Voting for more moderation we have:

2 Moderators
1 Wannabe Moderator
1 West Coaster

....and a Smurf.

Telling, very telling....:devil:

[TA Guy]

There's a thread about what's happening in Iran at the moment. It's in the "Chit Chat" area of the forum. Do you think it's acceptable to have off-topic discussions about mushrooms in this thread?

I don't see why not. When I chat, have a chat, it can cover all topics under the sun. That's what chat is. It rambles.

But, to be honest, I don't care.
I've used the chit-chat forum on here, but it is the very minor side of the forum for me.

I would say go with whatever the majority of people who do chit-chat in the chit-chat forums want.
But, as I said, keep the chit-chat out of the (relatively serious) discussion forums.

[ducasi]

Voting for more moderation we have:

2 Moderators
1 Wannabe Moderator
1 West Coaster

....and a Smurf.
Caro, David Franklin, Divissima, Dreadful Scathe, ducasi

Who is the other moderator in that list? :confused:

[SilverFox]

Caro, David Franklin, Divissima, Dreadful Scathe, ducasi

Who is the other moderator in that list? :confused:Divissima, on the MJDA forum.

[David Bailey]

I don't see why not. When I chat, have a chat, it can cover all topics under the sun. That's what chat is. It rambles.
Maybe there should be "focussed chit-chat" and "rambling chit-chat" sections :rofl:

[TurboTomato]

A year ago people were complaining about too many off-topic posts in threads. Now we have complaints that we delete posts and split threads too much.

Just can't win... :(

Moderating is always a no win situation from my experience. You'll get **** whatever you do unfortunately

[Lory]

I let by a lot of things which I think could maybe do with some moderator action because I am too busy or can't be bothered. I don't but maybe I just don't notice as much or it doesn't bother me as much :confused:


If there was more demand for moderation action, or more moderators I'm sure we'd do more.
The thing about moderation is, most of it's down to personal judgement and each of us has different levels of tolerance and opinions on what's acceptable or needed.

I think if we had 10 moderators with similar views as me, I doubt we'd do much more BUT if we had 10 moderators, all with different opinions about what bothered them, we'd probably end up with, erm, NO members! :D

[Lory]

Moderating is always a no win situation from my experience. You'll get **** whatever you do unfortunately

:yeah: Very true! :rofl: :tears: :rofl:

[Cruella]

I don't but maybe I just don't notice as much or it doesn't bother me as much :confused:


The thing about moderation is, most of it's down to personal judgement and each of us has different levels of tollerance and opinions on what's acceptable or needed.

I think if we had 10 moderators with similar views as me, I doubt we'd do much more BUT if we had 10 moderators, all with different opinions about what bothered them, we'd probably end up with, erm, NO members! :D

So basically the over moderation is down to certain moderators? :devil:

[SilverFox]

So basically the over moderation is down to certain moderators? :devil:May I refer the lady to my earlier post number 6.

[Lory]

So basically the over moderation is down to certain moderators? :devil:

Well, according to the pole, not everyone is of the opinion that its 'over-moderated'

[Cruella]

May I refer the lady to my earlier post number 6.

That obviously must be directed at you Lory not me.:wink:

[Lory]

May I refer the lady to my earlier post number 6.

I'm still trying to work out which one is me? :innocent:

[Cruella]

Well, according to the pole, not everyone is of the opinion that its 'over-moderated'
True, just twice as many as those that think it's OK or under-moderated. That is once you discounted DS name on every option! Can a moderator remove his votes? (Oooh, the irony of that request!)

[ducasi]

I don't see why not. When I chat, have a chat, it can cover all topics under the sun. That's what chat is. It rambles.

But, to be honest, I don't care.
I've used the chit-chat forum on here, but it is the very minor side of the forum for me.

I would say go with whatever the majority of people who do chit-chat in the chit-chat forums want.
But, as I said, keep the chit-chat out of the (relatively serious) discussion forums.
I moderate threads according to how serious the discussion in them is, not just based on what forum they are in. (I expect all the other moderators will do similarly.)

Therefore a serious thread in "Chit Chat" is likely to be moderated as much as one in "Let's talk about dance".

I think the majority would agree with this.

[Zebra Woman]

I'm still trying to work out which one is me? :innocent:

I think you know which one you are. :whistle:

But I'm always happy to take you to the fetish shop Lory....:devil:

[Trousers]

I think you know which one you are. :whistle:

But I'm always happy to take you to the fetish shop Lory....:devil:

Can we make it a Forum outing?

[LMC]

Out of 22 people - that's a pretty low percentage of regular posters, let alone total forum members. Lots of them don't post (we miss you DF :tears: ) - but perhaps they would contribute more if the moderating changed.

No, I haven't voted. Because I'm fence-sitting as usual. I'm mainly "Happy" but with a small element of "Under-moderated" (from the POV of fixing things, like ducasi says, but also sometimes get exasperated with sniping - I know I go on about stuff, but not usually about people - and I don't have a problem with the odd bitchy remark - just as well, I make 'em - but constant aggression towards someone is bullying IMO.)

Surely Iran is not damp enough to grow mushrooms?

[Ghost]

I moderate threads according to how serious the discussion in them is, not just based on what forum they are in. (I expect all the other moderators will do similarly.)

Therefore a serious thread in "Chit Chat" is likely to be moderated as much as one in "Let's talk about dance".

I think the majority would agree with this.
:yeah: Using the pub analogy. if I was sitting round a table with a group of friends discussing Iran and another friend came along and started discussing mushrooms, it just wouldn't make sense.

Given that a lot of forums would simply delete the off-topic posts, I think splitting the threads off is a good way of having a win-win , especially now that Harperlinks are being added to show where they've gone / come from.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the moderators are flexible on this. I personally loved Beowulf's cunning plan to get the World of Warcraft thread moved back to the Geek's Corner :respect: ; but if you look at it - David moved the thread to where he felt it made sense; explained his reasoning and when the posters still wanted it returned, he returned it; this is hardly draconian.

I think it was LMC(?) who said this is an adjustment phase while everything settles down - I'm inclined to agree, but think it's good that the moderators are taking on board contructive criticism and hopefully we'll end up with a shinier Forum because of it.

[Caro]

Personally I'm happy with the level of moderation that is going on in the chit chat sections (i.e. not that much really apart from a bit of thread splitting and gentle policing... and frankly I don't lose sleep over it :rolleyes: ).

However I think some areas of the dancing section would benefit from more moderating, so that we can get really serious threads that could serve as a reference when you really want to find good advice about dancing. (my guess is that I'm not the only once since it seems to be one of the reasons the mjda forum was created).
Again with that I wouldn't be totally against implementing a system that would enable different people to have different 'power' (don't really know about how exactly that could be done) so that you can easily identify if the advice is worth taking (i.e. in those technical threads I wouldn't rate posts by a well established and respected dance teacher the same way as posts by some random newly intermediate who thinks he/she knows it all now that he/she can lead a dozen of moves and do double spins :rolleyes: ).
Also I wouldn't mind re-organising a bit the intermediate section to make search on some particular topics easier (i.e. subsections about 'spinning', 'shoes', 'moves', 'musicality', 'arm styling', etc)

It's no secret that I'd like a nice 'library' section for video clips, organising them by dance style etc. (instead of having the same clips dumped several times in the 'youtube' thread).

All that especially as the forum gets extremely busy and threads live and die in a matter of hours sometimes.

Now... it's just a forum, and personally I'm very grateful it's there in the first place as it is both a source of entertainment and good advice (from time to time ;) ); and a great place to network and make new friends. I understand only too well that you can't design a system that will satisfy everybody and I accept the drawbacks associated with that, which include disagreeing with some moderating decisions from time to time.

[Trousers]

:yeah: Using the pub analogy. if I was sitting round a table with a group of friends discussing Iran and another friend came along and started discussing mushrooms, it just wouldn't make sense.


Ok then. . .

This friend comes in talks about mushrooms while you are talking politics and instantly gets dragged into another room. Nice

I'll vote for you in the upcoming modeerator election. . . Not!

In the real world - You'd continue your Politics discussion regardless but you'd still have a friend.

[TA Guy]

I moderate threads according to how serious the discussion in them is, not just based on what forum they are in. (I expect all the other moderators will do similarly.)

Therefore a serious thread in "Chit Chat" is likely to be moderated as much as one in "Let's talk about dance".

I think the majority would agree with this.


Quite apart from the problem of what is serious to one person is light-hearted to another and vice versa... just because something is not serious, doesn't mean it's not important to whoever brought it up.

Anyway, I've stated my view... I think...
Idle chit-chat should be kept out of the relatively more serious dance discussions forums.
Attempts to derail threads in the relatively more serious dance discussion forums by taking them off-topic should be result in split threads regardless of whether the thread is deemed 'serious' or not by moderators.

In the chit-chat forum, well, there is a difference between serious discussion of non-dance subjects and idle chit-chat. But I don't use it enough to really care :) Perhaps an actual chat-room might be a good idea. Lots of forums have them these days.

[Lynn]

Perhaps an actual chat-room might be a good idea. Lots of forums have them these days.Including this one!

Mostly happy.

I think there can be a bit too much zealous over moderating on the 'this is an advert' side of things - this seems to have been a more recent change.

And at times there could be more moderating on the dance threads - they can wander off into personal chit chat and banter - and there is enough of that already in other threads. Though I think the real issues are an increasing culture of chit chat - I recognise that this is a place where people who happen to be dancers come to chat about lots of things and a place where people come to talk about dance - but sometimes the ones who actually try to discuss dance can get 'told off' for daring to want to learn something or take a thread discussion seriously. And I have no idea how moderation in itself could change that.

[Ghost]

Ok then. . .

This friend comes in talks about mushrooms while you are talking politics and instantly gets dragged into another room. Nice

I'll vote for you in the upcoming modeerator election. . . Not!

In the real world - You'd continue your Politics discussion regardless but you'd still have a friend.

Close. The friend comes over and wants to chat about mushrooms. One of the people sitting at the table is kinda bored with the whole Iran thing, so they both head over to another table and chat about mushrooms.

Where both our analogies break down is there's nothing stopping a person contributing to both threads, whereas they could only be apart of one real world conversation. So I could chat about the mushroom growing qualities of moist sand in one thread and Iranian political machinations in the other.

[Keefy]

I do wonder if some of the more vocal complainers have ever been a forum moderator, because I have, for many years - which is why I'm sticking up for the mods and why I'm not interested in moderating any more forums :rolleyes:

OK, it can be annoying if your off topic chatter gets split, but that's just now, what about the longer term future and archive? There are some very powerful search features within vB, the SysAdmins have invested in something called SEO which improves search engine optimisation so that we get indexed properly by the likes of Google. Doesn't it annoy the hell out of you when you're searching for something on the web and all kinds of irrelevant drivel comes up for your search terms? It does me and that is what the mods are trying to avoid with the thread splitting.

Cut them some slack here, it's a thankless bloody task and no matter what you do somebody will complain, but somebody has to do it or a forum degenerates into a useless mess. Cr*p attracts cr*p, if the ethos of a forum is abusive off topic rubbish then that is what people post. OK, I'm new around here, but I've been on the internet for many years, I've participated in loads of forums and moderated a few as well. In my view the mods on here do a damn good job, I have seen a lot worse.

I like the idea of a links section, try the vBadvanced (http://www.vbadvanced.com/) Links Directory which integrates very well with vB. You don't want to be actually storing video clips on here, not unless you've got some big dedicated servers and a deep pocket for the bandwidth :)

[David Bailey]

Can people note that I'm officially adding Straycat264 to the Spray Voting Hall Of Shame? 'Coz I think it's downright shocking. :na:

(Why yes, I do like to hammer a point home a lot, why do you ask?)

[Dance Demon]

A year ago people were complaining about too many off-topic posts in threads. Now we have complaints that we delete posts and split threads too much.

Just can't win... :(

Sounds a bit like being a DJ........:whistle:

[SilverFox]

(Why yes, I do like to hammer a point home a lot, why do you ask?)Somebody please tell me he's going away in 12 posts.

[jivecat]

Cut them some slack here, it's a thankless bloody task and no matter what you do somebody will complain, but somebody has to do it or a forum degenerates into a useless mess. Cr*p attracts cr*p, if the ethos of a forum is abusive off topic rubbish then that is what people post. OK, I'm new around here, but I've been on the internet for many years, I've participated in loads of forums and moderated a few as well. In my view the mods on here do a damn good job, I have seen a lot worse.



:yeah: I'm pleased that the moderators have taken steps to prevent the forum being ruined by mindless drivel and spiteful or aggressive posting - arguments that heavy handed moderation have put an end to freedom of expression just don't hold water IMO. I don't see why anybody should be free to post gratuitously offensive or insulting stuff. Surely, most contributors are able to express their arguments effectively without resorting to personal attack which always ends up reflecting badly on the attacker, anyway.

To be honest, I rarely notice when moderators intervene in a thread - maybe I'm not spending enough time reading the forum?:rolleyes:

[Dance Demon]

Somebody please tell me he's going away in 12 posts.

nah....he'll probably just keep plugging away until he reaches the 10,000th post:rolleyes:

[FoxyFunkster]

nah....he'll probably just keep plugging away until he reaches the 10,000th post:rolleyes:


which at the current rate will be about 4.10pm this afternoon....:rolleyes:

[Caro]

nah....he'll probably just keep plugging away until he reaches the 10,000th post:rolleyes:

in fact if memory serves right, he did, yesterday evening... :confused:

(10 000th post (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/chit-chat/7098-come-celebrate-13.html#post358566)on the 'come celebrate thread')

so did you (have to) delete some of your own posts DJ? Come on what happens after the 10,000th one? What is it like on the other side? or did you ... implode somehow? :wink:

[Minnie M]

There used to be a list of the moderators - can't find it now, I have worked out the moderators to be as follows as the have the word 'moderator' under their avatar


Kev F
Lory
DavidJames
ducasi
tiggerbabe
Franck (of course)


Is that it - or are there any hidden ones I/we don't know about ?

[straycat]

Can people note that I'm officially adding Straycat264 to the Spray Voting Hall Of Shame? 'Coz I think it's downright shocking. :na:


Why? I think the forum is over-moderated in some ways and under-moderated in others. Maybe you need a more specific poll :na:

Maybe you should add me to the Poll-Critics Hall of Shame instead.

[Lynn]

in fact if memory serves right, he did, yesterday evening... :confused:

(10 000th post (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/chit-chat/7098-come-celebrate-13.html#post358566)on the 'come celebrate thread')

He's not at 10,000 now - he seems to have lost a few hundred somewhere along the way since yesterday - what happened there?

Or is he going backwards and will vanish from the forum altogether? Maybe that's what happens when you hit 10,000 :eek:

[Dance Demon]

Or is he going backwards and will vanish up his own a*s*h*l* altogether?

now there's a thing......:whistle:

[Lynn]

now there's a thing......:whistle:Someone's misquoting! :eek:

MODERATOR! :whistle:

[Caro]

(snip modified, a tad insulting :rolleyes: quote )
now there's a thing......:whistle:

and then you moan there's too much moderation... I wonder if there's a cause - effect pattern to investigate there :rolleyes:

[SilverFox]

and then you moan there's too much moderation... I wonder if there's a cause - effect pattern to investigate there :rolleyes:I think you could be right Caro. :respect:

Let's get rid of David James from the forum for a short period. Say..... 2 years, and see what happens.

Is that a plan? .....:cheers:

[Dance Demon]

Someone's misquoting! :eek:

MODERATOR! :whistle:

It wasn't me your honour...a big boy did it and ran away..........







I think you could be right Caro. :respect:

Let's get rid of David James from the forum for a short period. Say..... 2 years, and see what happens.

Is that a plan? .....:cheers:

I'll say ............

[Andy McGregor]

I used to post on this forum regularly. Many times a day. Nowadays I post rarely. That change is entirely due to a change in moderation. As they say, Franck can do what he likes, it's his forum. If you don't like it, don't post.

I think the result of this change in moderation is that a number of talented dancers have ceased to post on here. One day I will be talented enough to be missed. Until then I'll pop in and post from time to time :wink:

[Caro]

I think the result of this change in moderation is that a number of talented dancers have ceased to post on here.

It's a pity that some of those talented dancers have left the forum indeed, however it's a rather weak argument as there have also been some even more talented dancers who have left this place (or don't post much) because of the absence (or limited level) of moderation...:na:

[Dance Demon]

I used to post on this forum regularly. Many times a day. Nowadays I post rarely. That change is entirely due to a change in moderation. As they say, Franck can do what he likes, it's his forum. If you don't like it, don't post.

I think the result of this change in moderation is that a number of talented dancers have ceased to post on here. One day I will be talented enough to be missed. Until then I'll pop in and post from time to time :wink:

I just received an " infraction" for misquoting and using a "swearword"......I won't sleep tonight........Andy i think I'll probably join you.......

[Lynn]

I think the result of this change in moderation is that a number of talented dancers have ceased to post on here. IMO its because they actually wanted to discuss dance subjects without threads turning into lovefests/playground rows/completely off topic waffle.

[Andy McGregor]

It's a pity that some of those talented dancers have left the forum indeed, however it's a rather weak argument as there have also been some even more talented dancers who have left this place (or don't post much) because of the absence (or limited level) of moderation...:na:This is completely wrong. I'm not sure if it's deliberate, but Caro has quoted me and is saying that I've said the opposite of what I've actully said. I think that people have left due to over-moderation. The moderators went through a period of defending people who were posting total rubbish. But we got infractions for disagreeing with said rubbish. Most of us thought this resulted in a dumbing down of the Forum - Caro's post has proved this to be true:whistle:

I know of nobody who has left the Forum due to the lack of sufficient moderation. I know of many people who no longer post because of the heavy-handed moderation. Complain? Moi? I can't complain about infractions. It results in another infraction :wink:


IMO its because they actually wanted to discuss dance subjects without threads turning into lovefests/playground rows/completely off topic waffle.I don't think this is true. I think the change has been very much political. Franck has been disagreeing with non-Ceroc people. This partisan approach is new and is unpleasant - but very clear to me. And it has been clear to many others too. Hence their absence...


I just received an " infraction" for misquoting and using a "swearword"......I won't sleep tonight........Andy i think I'll probably join you.......Do you think it's because you aren't a Ceroc person? My guess is that Ceroc don't want us on here. And that Franck is doing Ceroc's dirty work and making it difficult for us to stay :tears:

Isn't it time some non-Ceroc person started another Forum that is less partisan?

[Dreadful Scathe]

There used to be a list of the moderators - can't find it now, I have worked out the moderators to be as follows as the have the word 'moderator' under their avatar


Kev F
Lory
DavidJames
ducasi
tiggerbabe
Franck (of course)


Is that it - or are there any hidden ones I/we don't know about ?
has someone premoted Emma to non-moderator? surely not ?

[Dance Demon]

Do you think it's because you aren't a Ceroc person? My guess is that Ceroc don't want us on here. And that Franck is doing Ceroc's dirty work and making it difficult for us to stay :tears:

Isn't it time some non-Ceroc person started another Forum that is less partisan?

Funny you should say that Andy......

[straycat]

My guess is that Ceroc don't want us on here. And that Franck is doing Ceroc's dirty work and making it difficult for us to stay :tears:

http://pctalk.info/forums/images/smiles/withstupid.gif

It was bad enough when Ceroc Central became involved in international politics, and had Kennedy assassinated. Then came their coverup at Roswell, followed by Franck's role in fixing the Bush election, and worse still, Mr Ellard's scandalous involvement in the deforestation of Bognor Regis, and the knockon effects on the Gulf conflict. But this... this... I have no words. :what:

[Andy McGregor]

Funny you should say that Andy......Do we get the keys to the sweetshop too?

Of course, any new forum will still need to be moderated. But I hope it will be independent of any jive organisation.

I think the changes to this forum have reflected a change in focus in Ceroc. There has been a change in how Ceroc interacts with those outside Ceroc. Ceroc are now very wary of those who are non-Ceroc. It seems to me that Ceroc have drawn a line in the sand and asked people to step across.

This Forum used to welcome all comers, irrespective of their organisational affiliations. However, this is no longer the case. Until recently I was posting in the way I always have done: I posted in a way I hoped was entertaining, I posted in a way that was controversial and might stimulate debate, I debated in a robust style and often responded in a way that could be considered "right back at ya!" and sometimes, just sometimes, I was very, very funny. I debated in a way that the management of the forum seemed to enjoy and partake in. However, it's like those people have been reprogrammed in some way and have taken on some others who have had the same programming - it's a bit like the staff of McDonalds, you can not stray from the script or the "McDonalds Way". Many have not had this recalibration and seem unsuitable to remain in the new, recalibrated, Scottish Ceroc Forum. Many have departed and been replaced with more suitable posters who will post in line with the new regime. Speaking personally, I'm finding myself becoming invisible on the Forum. Most of those old sparring partners have departed and I get little response to my posts from the new people who have had their chip fitted.

Along with the new regime came the cattle-prod of infractions. This seems to be used as a way to somehow retrain us into posting in the new way. If you did something that was OK before but was no longer accepted you would get an infraction. And, if you complained that you thought the infraction was unfair, guess what? You got an infraction!

On one hand I think that Franck has been brave to let people like me continue to post - on the other hand, I think I'd have preferred to have been told that I was no longer welcome here :tears: I suppose we were being given a chance to change. I'm reminded of an arrogant HR person who once told me "if you can't change the people, you change the people".

Times change, places change, people change, and some don't change, at least not quickly enough. There will always be change. Sometimes it takes us a while to work out what the changes have been. And a bit longer to work out if we like them or not. I've been hanging on, popping in, posting a bit and hoping that this forum will change back to it's free and easy former self. My current opinion is that the new regime is here-to-stay and that anything which is not in line with the "Ceroc Way" will be moderated.


.. large fries with that?

[ducasi]

Is there an anti-independent, pro-Ceroc bias in the moderation team? Try asking Rocky or Silver Fox...

Andy - get real. Everyone is welcome on this forum while they follow the forum rules. You'll not see a rule that you need to be "Ceroc" to post here. :rolleyes:

[Andy McGregor]

Andy - get real. One of us needs to...

[Caro]

This is completely wrong. I'm not sure if it's deliberate, but Caro has quoted me and is saying that I've said the opposite of what I've actully said.

No.

You are saying that over-moderation has lead to some talented dancers leaving the forum.

I am saying I know of some even more talented dancers who have left this forum, or do not post much, because of under-moderation on this forum. To make it clearer, when I said your argument was weak, I was practicing (sadly with very little success :sad: ) your British Art of Understatement. I thought by using the counter example I made it obvious that your argument was irrelevant, if not plain wrong.


The moderators went through a period of defending people who were posting total rubbish. But we got infractions for disagreeing with said rubbish.

Unless I am very much mistaken (but that doesn't happen too often :na: ), you got infracted for the way you disagreed Andy, not the fact that you disagreed. Once again, get over it :flower:
If you were able to disagree with somebody in a courteous manner, you would not get infracted (you might want to try and not use "rubbish" too much in those cases :whistle: ).
(don't get me wrong here as I actually have sympathy for your disagreement in question, as it's just very difficult to remain calm and courteous when disagreeing with some hopeless people - and sometimes it might even be worth the infraction :devil: ).


I know of nobody who has left the Forum due to the lack of sufficient moderation.

:what: - I'll be happy to PM you with names.


Do you think it's because you aren't a Ceroc person? My guess is that Ceroc don't want us on here.

My guess is that it is because he was plain insulting, and that had little to do with his affiliation or not to Ceroc. But what do I know :rolleyes:


Isn't it time some non-Ceroc person started another Forum that is less partisan?

That already exists Andy, it's called the mjda forum.




This Forum used to welcome all comers, irrespective of their organisational affiliations. However, this is no longer the case. (snip I was... I ... I... I... I..., I... I... I... I... I... ).

Along with the new regime came the cattle-prod of infractions. This seems to be used as a way to somehow retrain us into posting in the new way. If you did something that was OK before but was no longer accepted you would get an infraction.

As Ducasi said, you are mistaken Andy. The new forum rules prevent advertisement, including from Ceroc people, and even Ceroc Scotland people if I am right (ask Lorna :whistle: ).

They also reprehend insulting posts, hence the infractions. (I'm sure DJ or somebody will point you to the relevant section of the said rules if you ask nicely :whistle: ).

May be you should stop taking this too personally Andy, and realise 1. that rules apply to everybody and 2. that people are allowed to disagree with whatever you post on here. If you can't take it, don't post.

Equally while some people will find your style amusing, others won't.

And the moderators / admin are quite open when it comes to talking about events from others organisations (as long as you try to be helpful and not advertise - look at the SP threads and myself I have started several threads about WCS events - and never got infracted or warned for it :innocent: ).


I'll have a diet coke please, no ice. :wink:

[Sheepman]

That already exists Andy, it's called the mjda forum.
And given a critcal mass, that could be the place to be for unbiased chat, but that mass hasn't been reached yet.

For me the most important part of this forum has been discussion of events, what's on, who's going, what happened.

Such discussion seems to have got more difficult over the years, and this applies equally to events that I have no connection with, as to those that I'm involved with organising or DJing, be they Ceroc or non Ceroc. I can't say it feels like there is a heavy Ceroc bias here, (after all, DJ is just as negative about Ceroc as he is about anything else.) It's more a case of the (legitimate) proctectiveness that Ceroc has towards it's business, weighs heavy here. I'm unlikely to highly praise or criticise any event here, in case it is viewed as a simple case of me being biased for commercial reasons.

So I may not have chalked up many infractions, but in being cautious I contribute far less here.

Most of us won't know the reasons why infractions are handed out, or why people are banned, after all the evidence soon gets removed, but the "fight scenes" used to be the most entertaining.

If moderation was just about splitting threads to keep them on topic, that would suit me fine, that does seem to be the case at the moment on the other forum.

Greg

[Andy McGregor]

I'll have a diet coke please, no ice. :wink:Supersize?

[Dance Demon]

No.
My guess is that it is because he was plain insulting, and that had little to do with his affiliation or not to Ceroc. But what do I know



Maybe not as much as you think.....?

[straycat]

Maybe not as much as you think.....?

Oooh. Common sense vs paranoia. This ought to be good. Let the fight commence :devil:

[Lory]

For me the most important part of this forum has been discussion of events, what's on, who's going, what happened.



Hi Greg

Like you, the section of the forum which interests me most personally, is the 'Social events' section! I think that the reviews and feedback given on here, are extremely useful (good or bad) for the punters and organisers alike.


I'm unlikely to highly praise or criticise any event here, in case it is viewed as a simple case of me being biased for commercial reasons.

That's a real shame you feel that way. :sad:

Because 'I' value everyone's opinion, from what ever perspective they may have and I believe its up to the individual readers to decide if your being biased for any particular reason.

And on a personal note, I like reading your reviews, as I know we share quite a few of the same likes and dislikes, so if you enjoyed an event, then i'd probably enjoy it too!;)


Most of us won't know the reasons why infractions are handed out, or why people are banned, after all the evidence soon gets removed, but the "fight scenes" used to be the most entertaining.

On this point.. I can't think of a single time a 'fight scene' has been removed, without a direct request from someone actually involved.:confused:

Yes, if it gets heated, we might decide to move it 'outside' but that's done purely to let them get on with it :wink: in a slightly more appropriate area (only 'members' can view this section and because its outside, members can't unwittingly stumble across an argument, which they may not wish to read).

In heated arguments, people often regret what they've said later on, and after a period of reflection, they might ask for the thread to be removed.


Anyone who's name is mentioned, or who's directly involved in a thread, will have the power to have their posts, or posts about them removed if they so wish, they only have to ask. And this is what happens mostly, although from the 'outside' it may 'seem' as though the moderators have interfered.

We will not disclose this information publically, as its our policy to keep this information confidencial. ;)

So to everyone......please bare this in mind, before jumping to conclusions! :cheers:

[Andy McGregor]

Oooh. Common sense vs paranoia. This ought to be good. Let the fight commence :devil:I don't think Caro is totally paraniod ...

[straycat]

I don't think Caro is totally paraniod ...

Which must be why she chose the 'common sense' team :waycool:

[Dance Demon]

Oooh. Common sense vs paranoia. This ought to be good. Let the fight commence :devil:

See....see...I told you.....they're all out to get me.......

[robd]

Which must be why she chose the 'common sense' team :waycool:

Using logical argument to try and persuade Andy McGregor of anything doesn't strike me as a particularly good showing of 'common sense'.

[straycat]

See....see...I told you.....they're all out to get me.......

The little gray men in their little white coats are coming to take you away.... :D
The little gray men in their little white coats are coming to take you away.... :D
The little gray men in their little white coats are coming to take you away.... :D
The little gray men in their little white coats are coming to take you away.... :D

:whistle:

[straycat]

Using logical argument to try and persuade Andy McGregor of anything doesn't strike me as a particularly good showing of 'common sense'.

I thought I was supposed to be the catty one around here :rolleyes:

[Caro]

Supersize?


Maybe not as much as you think.....?

In front of such a profound and compelling argumentation I have no choice but to admit defeat and bow to your witty wisdom, Sirs :worthy:


I'll have the diet coke by perfusion in fact :what:

you think that if it cures me from paranoia Barry could be convinced it was a miracle? or is that a different thread...


Using logical argument to try and persuade Andy McGregor of anything doesn't strike me as a particularly good showing of 'common sense'.

Damn why did nobody warn me of such things? :tears:

[Dreadful Scathe]

Using logical argument to try and persuade Andy McGregor of anything doesn't strike me as a particularly good showing of 'common sense'.
WHAT ARE YOU ALL ON ABOUT?

Its only a forum for goodness sake. :rolleyes: I am one of the handful of people who was on the old forum before Franck got the vBulletin software, in those days it was purely an extension of the Ceroc Scotland site. The majority of people who posted , I either knew personally or had heard of and it was very much a community forum. Its grown some way beyond that now.

Franck had no specific policies to do with posts or threads to begin with, after several incidents extra areas were created to handle "dodgy threads" and extra moderators were brought in to tidy up threads and watch for innappropriate posts. Recently , we have had even more moderators*. Each change has been brought about by what was necessary at the time.

I remember when 500 registered members was a major milestone, we are now at 2,336 registered members. All of the recent changes are predictable. If this was MY forum I would delete threads like this - this thread is purely about admin of a forum which is none of your business :). The fact that Franck doesnt and is interested in our opinion says a lot for him.

I introduce your host Franck Pauly...someone who has NO NEED TO CONTINUE FUNDING AN EXPENSIVE TO RUN WEBSITE JUST SO YOU LOT CAN WHINGE CONSTANTLY ABOUT IT :)



* each more beautiful than the last...:)

[ducasi]

[...] more moderators*. [...]

* each more beautiful than the last...:)
I think I might have been the last appointed. :) Or do I mean most recently?! :eek:

[LMC]

OK folks, DS has made a nearly serious post. We must be at Defcon 1.

He's right though. Except (thinking about the order Lory, DJ) about successive moderators becoming increasingly beautiful.

[Dance Demon]

WHAT ARE YOU ALL ON ABOUT?

]

Who asked for your opinion likes....eh.....:na:

[Andy McGregor]

Its only a forum for goodness sake. :rolleyes: This is, of course, total rubbish. This is the real world. What you experience outside is the 'only'...

[MartinHarper]

I used to post on this forum regularly. Many times a day. Nowadays I post rarely. That change is entirely due to a change in moderation.


I think that the joining of an individual can make the forum much less fun and raise the temperature for some people more than others. I used to post here a lot. Then an individual started picking on me, over and over again and the resultant arguments made me look bad. I used reaching 5,000 posts as a convenient way to exit what was becoming a silly situation for me.

I am confused. Could you explain the discrepancy between these two differing explanations of why you don't post as often any more?

[Andy McGregor]

I am confused. Could you explain the discrepancy between these two differing explanations of why you don't post as often any more?:yawn: The 5,000 post thing was a simple divice similar to stepping outside to cool off and let my antagonist hear the sound of one hand clapping - it was personal. The current situation is completely different. The forum has changed, it's not personal, it's just a change in policy, but I don't like it and neither do others. It's a bit like your local pub taking out the pool table :tears:

And, yes, Martin Harper is confused - about many things :wink:

[Franck]

Franck had no specific policies to do with posts or threads to begin with, after several incidents extra areas were created to handle "dodgy threads" and extra moderators were brought in to tidy up threads and watch for innappropriate posts. Recently , we have had even more moderators*. Each change has been brought about by what was necessary at the time.

I remember when 500 registered members was a major milestone, we are now at 2,336 registered members. All of the recent changes are predictable. If this was MY forum I would delete threads like this - this thread is purely about admin of a forum which is none of your business :). The fact that Franck doesnt and is interested in our opinion says a lot for him.

I introduce your host Franck Pauly...someone who has NO NEED TO CONTINUE FUNDING AN EXPENSIVE TO RUN WEBSITE JUST SO YOU LOT CAN WHINGE CONSTANTLY ABOUT IT :)



* each more beautiful than the last...:)I don't have much to add to that, the Forum is ever growing, everyone is welcome, and all we (myself and the moderators) have to do is try to keep things civilised and manageable.

Infractions are really no big deal, just warnings that you have crossed the line. You receive temporary points (just like points on your license for speeding but no fine) and after a few days, the points disappear. If you accumulate over 10 points you get a temporary automatic ban until your points expire.

It's disappointing that Andy McGregor and Dance Demon are over-reacting and being so paranoid, the reasons for the infractions were perfectly justified and explained by PM at the time: Deliberately editing a quote attributed to another forumite to add offensive words is definitely a line that I would rather not see crossed, even if the forumite concerned saw the humour.

[Dance Demon]

It's disappointing that Andy McGregor and Dance Demon are over-reacting and being so paranoid, the reasons for the infractions were perfectly justified and explained by PM at the time

sheesh........I thought this thread had died three days ago......Yes my infraction was explained by PM, and I replied by PM. Surprised to see it being discussed in open forum now.


Deliberately editing a quote attributed to another forumite to add offensive words is definitely a line that I would rather not see crossed, even if the forumite concerned saw the humour.

You've already explained that to me....or is the bit in bold for the benefit of others, so that they don't do the same?

Anyway.....maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is best in this instance?

[Andy McGregor]

It's disappointing that Andy McGregor and Dance Demon are over-reacting and being so paranoid, the reasons for the infractions were perfectly justified and explained by PM at the time: Deliberately editing a quote attributed to another forumite to add offensive words is definitely a line that I would rather not see crossed, even if the forumite concerned saw the humour.I don't think any of the infractions I've received were for this reason :confused:

Dance Demon and Andy McGregor are the ones who have stayed*. We're hoping to effect a change from within. Others have simply left :tears:


*maybe we had nowhere else to go....

[Andy McGregor]

I don't have much to add to that, the Forum is ever growing, everyone is welcome, and all we (myself and the moderators) have to do is try to keep things civilised and manageable.

Infractions are really no big deal, just warnings that you have crossed the line. You receive temporary points (just like points on your license for speeding but no fine) and after a few days, the points disappear. If you accumulate over 10 points you get a temporary automatic ban until your points expire. Hey Franck, take a look at the result of this poll. The MAJORITY of members of your Forum think that it is over moderated. And what is a forum for if not for it's members. The Forum has spoken and it has said FREEDOM!

[straycat]

Hey Franck, take a look at the result of this poll. The MAJORITY of members of your Forum think that it is over moderated. And what is a forum for if not for it's members. The Forum has spoken and it has said FREEDOM!

Well - looking at the figures, that's not entirely true...

We have 17 votes for over-moderated.
If you add together the votes for 'happy as it is', 'under-moderated', and 'don't care', you get eighteen votes - and all of those disagree with 'over-moderated'

If you make it a little fairer by taking DS' three votes on the 'not over-moderated/don't care' side & making them one vote that comes down to 17 votes for 'over-moderated' and 16 against - so you have a teensy little majority, yes. Just not much of one. :cool:

As for freedom - sounds like a different issue. You could always start a poll? :devil:

[Caro]

I don't think any of the infractions I've received were for this reason :confused:


FOR THE LOVE OF GOD !!!!!!!!! give it a rest !


Well - looking at the figures, that's not entirely true...
...
If you make it a little fairer by taking DS' three votes on the 'not over-moderated/don't care' side & making them one vote that comes down to 17 votes for 'over-moderated' and 16 against - so you have a teensy little majority, yes. Just not much of one. :cool:


:yeah: plus given that the people who feel the forum is overmoderated are very vocal in doing so, and given the dismissive and contemptuous nature of some posts (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/forum-technical-problems-questions-suggestions/12065-moderation-levels.html#post358379)refering to people who think it's under-moderated, I'd add that it is also a tad biaised towards not encouraging less vocal members, who might feel it is fine or under-moderated, to vote on a public poll. :rolleyes:

[Andy McGregor]

Well - looking at the figures, that's not entirely true...

We have 17 votes for over-moderated.
If you add together the votes for 'happy as it is', 'under-moderated', and 'don't care', you get eighteen votes - and all of those disagree with 'over-moderated'

If you make it a little fairer by taking DS' three votes on the 'not over-moderated/don't care' side & making them one vote that comes down to 17 votes for 'over-moderated' and 16 against - so you have a teensy little majority, yes. Just not much of one. :cool:

As for freedom - sounds like a different issue. You could always start a poll? :devil:A majority of one is still a majority and will win you an election - or lose you one if you're the the person with one less vote. At least it always was when I was a politician.

So what is the point of posting that I'm only just correct? I am correct that the majority of people think the forum is over moderated. Caro is talking complete rubbish, of course, and I won't even comment about her blasphemous post :mad:

[Caro]

Caro is talking complete rubbish, of course...

that makes for a constructive argument in the debate 'is the forum over moderated and is this poll representative enough to be used as an augument'. :respect:

[straycat]

A majority of one is still a majority and will win you an election - or lose you one if you're the the person with one less vote. At least it always was when I was a politician.

I think I missed the point where this poll went from being a vague representation of the tides of opinion amongst those who feel strongly enough to say something, and a call to action. Silly of me, really. :cool:



So what is the point of posting that I'm only just correct? I am correct that the majority of people think the forum is over moderated.
The point is that with this being Franck's forum and all, he might have slightly different criteria concerning when to take action. As for the majority of people thinking that this forum is over-moderated? If I'm not mistaken, the majority of people haven't stated their opinion - so I'm not sure how you figure that.



Caro is talking complete rubbish, of course,
Really? I must have missed that bit...

and I won't even comment about her blasphemous post :mad:
I think you just did.

[Andy McGregor]

I think I missed the point where this poll went from being a vague representation of the tides of opinion amongst those who feel strongly enough to say something, and a call to action. Silly of me, really. :cool:A majority is a majority. Of those that voted the majority agree with me. That others have not voted is of no consquence. They have not voted, therefore their opinion is unknown and can not be considered. We do not know how they would have voted.


As for the majority of people thinking that this forum is over-moderated? If I'm not mistaken, the majority of people haven't stated their opinion - so I'm not sure how you figure that. Many elections are decided on a minority vote. A significant proportion of the population not voting is how the Conservative Party have won most of their victories :wink:

Really? I must have missed that bit... Caro has implied that I've failed to get over previous infractions I've received. She's even given me negative rep on this assumption. What I'd pointed out was that I'd never received an infraction for changing a quotation and putting in a swear word. Very different from what Caro has assumed - therefore what she has said is, IMHO, rubbish. Not only has she accused me of something that I have not done. She has done it in a way that attempts to make me sound stupid - and I can do that without any help :innocent:


I think you just did.I was hoping somebody would notice :whistle:

[Andy McGregor]

that makes for a constructive argument in the debate 'is the forum over moderated and is this poll representative enough to be used as an augument'. :respect:
This is, again, complete rubbish. Not because it is wrong. But because it is out of context. The complete rubbish Caro posted is below.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD !!!!!!!!! give it a rest !I said that I'd never received an infraction from Franck for changing a quote and putting in a swear word. I'd never complained about this before. Therefore I can not take a rest from it. I complained once and would have left it there. Unlike Caro who has moaned and moaned and moaned and moaned...

.. and took the name of our Lord in vain.


You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

[Caro]

I said that I'd never received an infraction from Franck for changing a quote and putting in a swear word.

oh you mean you haven't got that one in your collection yet?


I'd never complained about this before. Therefore I can not take a rest from it.


I have never had an infraction for changing a quote, being insulting, fit in an advert in, AND use bold size 7 Garamond blue font, can I moan about it ? :innocent:



Unlike Caro who has moaned and moaned and moaned and moaned...


:rofl: that's a joke, isn't it?
Who exactly has being moaning about receiving infractions at every single opportunity? :what:




You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.


oooooh I'm scared :eek: :rofl:




Originally Posted by God
(snip)


how's that by the way for 'make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God' :rolleyes: :rofl:

[straycat]

A majority is a majority. Of those that voted the majority agree with me.

Voting the way you voted is not necessarily the same as agreeing with you (I did, yet I don't). Regardless, it looks like there's been a last-minute upset at the polls... :whistle:

[Andy McGregor]

Voting the way you voted is not necessarily the same as agreeing with you (I did, yet I don't). Regardless, it looks like there's been a last-minute upset at the polls... :whistle:However, if it was an election, the "Overmoderated" candidate would still be 16.67% ahead in the poll :innocent:




.. and I really see no reason to respond to Caro's post.

[Gadget]

I think that the remaining 2310 members* could be said to be in the Don't particularly care. grouping; which I'm afraid puts your statistics for any of the level of moderation in the 'why did I bother standing?' category.:na:

(* or 813 'active' members, but that's not qute as impressive ;))

[bigdjiver]

I come to this forum from the chaos of unmoderated newsgroups. I have been irritated, (sometimes mistakenly :( ) by some of the moderators decisions, but it is a small price to pay for the advantages.

Way back I was a victim of a mass redundancy and took an evening cleaning job rather than claim dole. There were many complaints about the teams performance, very many unjustified, and very few serious, but they were neglible compared to the state the block would have been in if there were no cleaners at all. I put up with the ocassional irritation in the knowledge of what the forum could be like if there were no moderators.

[Andy McGregor]

I come to this forum from the chaos of unmoderated newsgroups. I have been irritated, (sometimes mistakenly :( ) by some of the moderators decisions, but it is a small price to pay for the advantages.

Way back I was a victim of a mass redundancy and took an evening cleaning job rather than claim dole. There were many complaints about the teams performance, very many unjustified, and very few serious, but they were neglible compared to the state the block would have been in if there were no cleaners at all. I put up with the ocassional irritation in the knowledge of what the forum could be like if there were no moderators.I don't think people are complaining and leaving the forum because it's moderated. They are doing so because there has been a change in moderation that is not to their liking. I was completely satisfied by the old moderation style and continued to post in the way that style permitted. I did not change, the moderation did. I feel that it is reasonable to comment on a change that you do not like. If the forum had been this way from the start I would not have complained, I could have chosen to join or not join. This is a completely different situation as it is the forum that has changed to one that doesn't suit my style in the same way as the old one :tears:

[ducasi]

I don't think people are complaining and leaving the forum because it's moderated. They are doing so because there has been a change in moderation that is not to their liking. [...]
You keep talking of people who have left the forum due to over-moderation, but I see no evidence of it. I know one or two significant members who appear to have stopped posting due to a relatively lax moderation policy.

[Martin]

IMHO it is real easy, get rid of normal moderation..

Insist that all members have personal details available, real name, venue, status and e-mail address. Maybe even phone number.

Then get real, stick to what you say.

Only when it gets "freaky" - i.e. stalkers... time to bannish

Otherwise, let people have their say...

[straycat]

However, if it was an election, the "Overmoderated" candidate would still be 16.67% ahead in the poll :innocent:

...until the Happy People form a coalition with the Undermoderated people, and blow him out of the water :devil:



.. and I really see no reason to respond to Caro's post.
Then why do you keep doing so? :confused:

[Dreadful Scathe]

IMHO it is real easy, get rid of normal moderation..

Insist that all members have personal details available, real name, venue, status and e-mail address. Maybe even phone number.

Then get real, stick to what you say.

Only when it gets "freaky" - i.e. stalkers... time to bannish

Otherwise, let people have their say...
that was all suggested on another thread , by Gav i believe, and shot down :)

[Andy McGregor]

...until the Happy People form a coalition with the Undermoderated people, and blow him out of the water :devil: That would never happen, each group has such different and incompatible policies on Europe, Defence, Women's Rights and Global Warming.


Then why do you keep doing so? :confused:Stop giving the game away. Some people aren't as intelligent as you :innocent:

[Lou]

that was all suggested on another thread , by Gav i believe, and shot down :)
I wonder why? :rolleyes:

[Caro]

Stop giving the game away. Some people aren't as intelligent as you :innocent:

Don't mistake peaceful wisdom for idiocy :wink:

[straycat]

That would never happen, each group has such different and incompatible policies on Europe, Defence, Women's Rights and Global Warming.
You think? I've been lobbying. Over the past few hours, each of said groups has agreed to adopt the Euro. We've lumped the next two items together, and have all signed a common Women's Rights Defence Policy, and we've all moved house to higher ground, to take our stand against global warming. It's amazing what you can accomplish if you put your mind to it.



Stop giving the game away. Some people aren't as intelligent as you.

Well - I'm clearly not quite intelligent enough to understand this quote. It seems sensible on the surface, but what could it mean?


'Some people' could refer to Caro, but that's clearly not it, 'cos she's obviously a smart cookie,
'Some people' could refer to everyone else on the forum, but that would suggest you're adopting a ...'Utopian'... strategy when it comes to public relations, and you've always struck me as too sensible for that.
Or it could be one of these triple-bluff-sarcasm-strikes where you're actually suggesting that I'm the unintelligent one for constantly pointing out the obvious. Wonder if I should take offence at that? Hmmm. :innocent:

[Andy McGregor]

Well - I'm clearly not quite intelligent enough to understand this quote. It seems sensible on the surface, but what could it mean?


'Some people' could refer to Caro, but that's clearly not it, 'cos she's obviously a smart cookie,
'Some people' could refer to everyone else on the forum, but that would suggest you're adopting a ...'Utopian'... strategy when it comes to public relations, and you've always struck me as too sensible for that.
Or it could be one of these triple-bluff-sarcasm-strikes where you're actually suggesting that I'm the unintelligent one for constantly pointing out the obvious. Wonder if I should take offence at that? Hmmm. :innocent:
Or it could be a throw-away line which was never given that amount of thought ...

.. maybe :whistle:

Or it could refer to emotional intelligence :confused:

[Caro]

'Some people' could refer to Caro, but that's clearly not it, 'cos she's obviously a smart cookie,


:waycool:


Or it could be a throw-away line which was never given that amount of thought ...


From you? - how surprising - no wonder Stray would have never thought of that :innocent:

[LMC]

I know that arguing with Mr McGregor is like wrestling with a pig in **** ...

So why, oh why am I unable to resist? :tears:

Andy, you're one of the Old Guard who has been on the forum since the olden golden days. Sadly, those days are gorn, never to return. You could see this as the forum being a victim of its own popularity - and to a certain extent this is true. Trying to manage a community of over 2000 people is different from managing one of only 200. In a smaller community, big personalities like you can be indulged because "everyone" knows that you're actually a genuinely nice guy. You could say stuff that would raise the reaction of "TROLL" if an unknown newcomer said it.

Unfortunately, this can't happen in a larger community. Rules have to be clearer and stricter and as people don't "know" each other so well, moderators have to apply more consistency. Bottom line of all this is that some people are resistant to change. There's no point trying to change it back again. Ain't gonna happen. IMO, the best policy is to adapt. Otherwise eventually even those who love you will get pissed off by your constant attacks against the way things work. The only other alternative is to open your own forum - then you can have it exactly the way you want it.

[Andy McGregor]

From you? - how surprising - no wonder Stray would have never thought of that :innocent:I only said "could be". I was just adding to Stray's options. It's all part of the he-said-she-said that normally kills off an interesting thread.

This thread is about moderation levels. It is not about how clever, or othewise, Caro is. It is not an opportunity for Stray to show that he is not quite as clever as Caro. It is not even an opportunity to debate the democratic process.

This thread starts with a poll asking people what they think about moderation levels on this forum. And the result is amongst those who still visit here and care enough to vote. We can not say how those who no longer visit would have voted and we can not guess why they stopped voting or how they would vote.

I believe that it is significant that such a high proportion of responders state that they think this Forum is over moderated. I also believe that it sends a strong message to the moderators.

On the subject of Caro's comments about my bleating on about over moderation and the actions of moderators, this is, IMHO, inappropriate when it comes on this thread. This thread is about that very topic, to criticise me on this thread for staying on-topic is therefore wrong. However, please feel free to criticise me on other threads for bleating on about over-moderation, but only when I've done so in a way that diverts the debate :flower:

[Andy McGregor]

you're actually a genuinely nice guy.Admit it, you fancy me, don't fight it :flower:

[LMC]

Admit it, you fancy me, don't fight it :flower:>counts on fingers< - you're number 7 on my list. Only 'cos I'm hoping you'll gimme your sparkly red shirt when you're bored with it.

Would now be a good time to talk about shoes?

[Andy McGregor]

>counts on fingers< - you're number 7 on my list. Only 'cos I'm hoping you'll gimme your sparkly red shirt when you're bored with it.

Would now be a good time to talk about shoes?I"m yours. A woman who talks about sparkly shirts and shoes is my kind of girl:love:

Shopping?:flower:

[Dreadful Scathe]

>counts on fingers< - you're number 7 on my list. Only 'cos I'm hoping you'll gimme your sparkly red shirt when you're bored with it.

Would now be a good time to talk about shoes?
He's 7 ? Where am I ? Lower than an ageing conservative councillor in a dress...I really really hope not.....:(

[straycat]

This thread is about moderation levels. It is not about how clever, or othewise, Caro is. It is not an opportunity for Stray to show that he is not quite as clever as Caro. It is not even an opportunity to debate the democratic process.
etc


Yeah - I do have this small problem with staying on-topic - my brain seems to like going off at tangents. That aside....

Thing is - I feel you're extrapolating a bit too much from the poll results, and the reason for that is quite simply that the poll doesn't really go into very much detail. No disrespect meant to you over that, because I only realise this from the debate that follows the poll (and likely wouldn't have thought of it if I'd been posting the poll myself) - but the detail's really in the wrong place - there's far more options for the people who don't think that the forum's over-moderated (or don't care) than for the ones who do.

So you're making guesses at the severity of the issue, and which aspects of moderation the 'yes' contingent are concerned about - when in fact, even if someone's voted that the forum is currently overmoderated, we still don't know:

Which aspect(s) of moderation they think is (are) overdone - thread splitting? Crackdown on swearing? Infractions? Do they want to get rid of moderation altogether?
How annoying do people find it? A little bit? Enough to quit the forum for? Are they considering that? Do they really know anyone who has definitely quit for that reason? Or are they guessing that that's a reason people leave? Example: on that score, you say one thing, Ducasi says another - but neither of you has stated it as anything but an opinion. Myself - I find Ducasi's argument more persuasive, but that, again, is just an opinion.

Utlimately, there isn't enough information to form any hard-and-fast conclusions about what course of action is 'best'.



This thread is about that very topic, to criticise me on this thread for staying on-topic is therefore wrong.


I don't feel you're being criticised for staying on topic. I think the criticism, such as it is, is more for extrapolating conclusions from insufficient data, gathered from a fairly small collection of forum members.

Hmmm. Being on-topic for this long is taxing my brain. I'd better relax a bit and get back to work. :innocent:

[Caro]

Thing is - I feel you're extrapolating a bit too much from the poll results
...
So you're making guesses at the severity of the issue...
...
Utlimately, there isn't enough information to form any hard-and-fast conclusions about what course of action is 'best'.
...

I don't feel you're being criticised for staying on topic. I think the criticism, such as it is, is more for extrapolating conclusions from insufficient data, gathered from a fairly small collection of forum members.


big :yeah: to all that... and as far as criticism is concerned, mine also comes from the fact that you seem to constantly refer to how the new level in moderation affect you and how you don't like it, with little consideration for what might be best for this forum overall - apart from the fact that you are stating that talented dancers have left because of it, which as I have already explained, I think is plain wrong.

Also if you look at the poll you'll notice that with the notable exception of Stray, all 'commercial operators' have voted 'over-moderated' - in fact they are making almost 50% of that contingent (and exactly 50% if you include SF).
Now I am not saying that their opinion has less value than other members of this forum, but there is a good chance a good number of them feel that way because they cannot freely advertise their event anymore (or not as much as they might have used to). I know it's a fine line and some of their posts might have been moderated eventhough they didn't intend to advertise, but still I think this is playing a substancial part.



I believe that it is significant that such a high proportion of responders state that they think this Forum is over moderated. I also believe that it sends a strong message to the moderators.


For the reasons explained above, I think it doesn't send a strong message at all, and then I believe it actually says that overall most people (commercial operators excluded) are happy or don't really care about the level of moderation that is taking place.


This thread is about moderation levels. It is not about how clever, or othewise, Caro is.


and yet that would make such an interesting subject :tears:

[Andy McGregor]

He's 7 ? Where am I ? Lower than an ageing conservative councillor in a dress...I really really hope not.....:(Surprisingly, I've only ever worn a dress on one occasion. And that was a nurse's uniform. I find that a top and skirt suit my measurements much better as I can mix and match the sizes.

We are all ageing, surprisingly, at the same rate :eek:

And I've not been a Conservative councillor for over 3 years - I'd like to say it was because I came to my senses. However, the real reason was lack of time. Once I've got a fully trained team of teachers, have given up my day job and lost some weight I will start again.