Discussion about moderation

[Lory]

What some people fail to grasp, is that you don't 'always' have to agree with your friends.

Having a different POV, doesn't have to mean you don't like them! (i've said it loads of time before, me and my dad, who I love more than anyone, have the biggest rows ever and then we have a cup of tea! )

You don't have to have to join 'the pack' as its been called.

I know its hard sometimes, to humble yourself to agreeing with someone you might not particularly like in real life but it doesn't mean that because your sharing the same the same POV, on one particular subject, that your making a huge statement to the forum/world, that your best mates.

and similarly, just because you verbalise a differing opinion from someone you might see at dancing that night, shouldn't mean when you see them, there has to be any sort of atmosphere!

This is a note for everyone, don't make your posts personal and don't take differing opinions personally!

[Spiky Steve]

Mod hat off...

The people I admire and appreciate the most on this forum, are the one's who have the ability to debate 'reasonably', who have 'open minds' and are 'willing to listen' to alternative views, the people who don't have to result to getting personal and sarcastic to 'score points', the people who can be humble and admit when they sometimes get things wrong!

OK in this case I believe the system of neg rep to be unfair. The fact that a new person can be given neg rep anonimously for pretty much nothing. Obviously inexperienced they complain and are given more neg rep by less than helpful members. Nobody visibly helps or explains. Remembering the pen is mightier than the sword and hence they are not merely words. I have seen a number of people struggle in this way.

I believe you have that wrong in the assistance of newbies and the rules to existing members that newbies might be unaware of.

Steve

[David Bailey]

OK in this case I believe the system of neg rep to be unfair. The fact that a new person can be given neg rep anonimously for pretty much nothing. Obviously inexperienced they complain and are given more neg rep by less than helpful members. Nobody visibly helps or explains.

So, are you suggesting we disable neg repping for new members - say, for the first 100 posts?

Any ideas / response to my previous suggestions about new member welcoming? Repeating them:

- put something about the rules to say "please be especially courteous and welcoming to new posters"
- encourage people to reply to all first posts with "welcome" messages
- be more heavy-handed on discipline for people who are aggressive to new members

Oh, and can we try to keep this discussion focussed on actual discussion and suggestions for ways in which we the moderators can help you the members, if that's OK?

[Lory]

OK in this case I believe the system of neg rep to be unfair. The fact that a new person can be given neg rep anonimously for pretty much nothing. Obviously inexperienced they complain and are given more neg rep by less than helpful members. Nobody visibly helps or explains. Remembering the pen is mightier than the sword and hence they are not merely words. I have seen a number of people struggle in this way.

I believe you have that wrong in the assistance of newbies and the rules to existing members that newbies might be unaware of.

Steve

Sorry, I seemed to have missed the relationship between the quoted part of my post, to your response

[Dreadful Scathe]

You've all seen the sketch from the Office when David Brent is making racist jokes and he's surprised when it wasn't the black guy who put in the complaint.

Which is the first thing i thought of when Steve posted the offense/bullying post. I don't think of bullying and offense as the same thing though. I dont think anyone has been overly bad recently (and certainly not to the point of bullying) - i mean really, Andy takes that "particular line of questioning" quite often. And Im annoyingly pedantic in the face of minor points often. And Stewart38 is borderline incoherant most of the time. Thems just the cogwheels of the forum dochaknow

As for causing offense, its a weird day when no one is offended by SOMETHING here.

..great stuff...
Please don't take this post as me having a go, I'm not. I'm just trying to help, honest.

I want to be your groupie

[Lory]

Weren't you going to suggest an idea...?

I 'was' but, maybe today isn't the day for it..

I need to pack!

[Spiky Steve]

Sorry, I seemed to have missed the relationship between the quoted part of my post, to your response

I guess the modorator team put the rules together and leave them that way.

I think I quoted the part of you post about how you respect the people who are open to debate, have an open mind and may even admit when you have it wrong.

I then stated that I was unhappy with the neg rep rules.

To date all I have seen is that when people are unhappy with neg rep system they are told that they are the ones that are wrong and that the rules were not up for debate.

Hope this helps.

Steve

[swp]

I want to be your groupie

You're in.

In fact, you can be my head groupie and keep the others in line. They're not here yet, but I'm sure they won't be long. Funny how things work out.

[Dreadful Scathe]

To date all I have seen is that when people are unhappy with neg rep system they are told that they are the ones that are wrong and that the rules were not up for debate.

Yes, because those people are always wrong

[Spiky Steve]

I don't think of bullying and offense as the same thing though. I dont think anyone has been overly bad recently (and certainly not to the point of bullying) - i mean really, Andy takes that "particular line of questioning" quite often. And Im annoyingly pedantic in the face of minor points often. And Stewart38 is borderline incoherant most of the time. Thems just the cogwheels of the forum dochaknow

As for causing offense, its a weird day when no one is offended by SOMETHING here.

Your mention of Andy relies on the reader knowing the history of Andy's posting and simpliarly yours and Stewart38's.

I agree one offense is not bullying. However, is one offense acceptable. Generally if offense is given unitentionally then it is polite to apologise.

Again my statements were general and not necessarily the treatment of swp.

Steve

[Dreadful Scathe]

You're in.

In fact, you can be my head groupie and keep the others in line. They're not here yet, but I'm sure they won't be long. Funny how things work out.

I'm very proud "Head Groupie" cool (off to make myself a badge)

[Spiky Steve]

Yes, because those people are always wrong

Funny, so if these people thought the rules were not up for debate and that they are always wrong then this must mean that the rules are in fact up for debate. You have now caused a paradox.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Your mention of Andy relies on the reader knowing the history of Andy's posting and simpliarly yours and Stewart38's.

True indeed, but what i was saying is we shouldn't expect forum people to pussyfoot around new people and complain if they don't. It would be like advertising a new car for £3000 and when the buyer goes to pay, shout "HA! THAT'LL BE AN EXTRA £10,000 TAX YOU MUPPET". False advertising, innit

Again my statements were general and not necessarily the treatment of swp.

Fair point - the problem with general points though is, they're too general

[Lory]

Fair point - the problem with general points though is, they're too general

er yeah

[Spiky Steve]

True indeed, but what i was saying is we shouldn't expect forum people to pussyfoot around new people and complain if they don't.

A person who does not consider others is in the least case ungentlemanly (not sure the term for a woman) and in the worst case a bully.

An yes I believe if a person offends many people and only once each they are still a bully.

[Stuart M]

So, are you suggesting we disable neg repping for new members - say, for the first 100 posts?

Any ideas / response to my previous suggestions about new member welcoming? Repeating them:

- put something about the rules to say "please be especially courteous and welcoming to new posters"
- encourage people to reply to all first posts with "welcome" messages
- be more heavy-handed on discipline for people who are aggressive to new members

Oh, and can we try to keep this discussion focussed on actual discussion and suggestions for ways in which we the moderators can help you the members, if that's OK?

Cuts both ways though - you could also have a rule along the lines:

• Any newcomer who starts with an aggressive post is fair game

I'm not being flippant - people tend to continue as they started, and if someone starts in a pugnacious manner, that's how they're likely to go on. Of course, this is not necessarily a bad thing: some such posters are great fun, others just end up being PITA, and clog up everyone's Ignore list.

So, erm, what I'm saying is that the rules should be transparent to the length of time an individual has been on the forum. Netiquette says we should be courteous to newcomers, and likewise newcomers should settle in to take the temperature of the forum. But trying to enshrine that in rules is overly restrictive IMO.

[stewart38]

Your mention of Andy relies on the reader knowing the history of Andy's posting and simpliarly yours and Stewart38's.

I agree one offense is not bullying. However, is one offense acceptable. Generally if offense is given unitentionally then it is polite to apologise.

Again my statements were general and not necessarily the treatment of swp.

Steve

Clearly this is true , I mean DS statement below could be taken the wrong way if I was new and didnt know DS Tourettes problem

And Stewart38 is borderline incoherant most of the time.

However I dont think the forum jump on any newbie per say , I certainly didnt , it was only after I found Swp posting getting offensive (and I mean offensive for me).

Also comments like the one below by Swp are going to get responses , like a guy going into a bar for the first time and saying 'this bar has got a reputation for being very poor', pint of bitter please

Going back to what I said before about the forum having a poor rep -

How do you moderate that ? I think its a good idea we know who the moderators are from the start , didnt know Kev F was one

[Dreadful Scathe]

A person who does not consider others is in the least case ungentlemanly (not sure the term for a woman) and in the worst case a bully.

Whilst that may be true in real life - is the virtual world the same? Is the online world not full of ideas ready to be shot down in an impersonal way ? Its not the same as a conversation at the Church Fete is it ?
I refer you to the youTube comments beneath any popular video - are these "real life" people who normally speak like that? or is the internet just not the same thing as "real life" ?

[Spiky Steve]

Cuts both ways though - you could also have a rule along the lines:

• Any newcomer who starts with an aggressive post is fair game

I'm not being flippant - people tend to continue as they started, and if someone starts in a pugnacious manner, that's how they're likely to go on. Of course, this is not necessarily a bad thing: some such posters are great fun, others just end up being PITA, and clog up everyone's Ignore list.

So, erm, what I'm saying is that the rules should be transparent to the length of time an individual has been on the forum. Netiquette says we should be courteous to newcomers, and likewise newcomers should settle in to take the temperature of the forum. But trying to enshrine that in rules is overly restrictive IMO.

People have different ideas on what is courteous.

How will a newcomer know about taking the temperature. Are you agreeing with the suggestion of a welcome message which inlcudes the rules?

There are rules already are you suggesting that they are removed?

[Dreadful Scathe]

Clearly this is true , I mean DS statement below could be taken the wrong way if I was new and didnt know DS Tourettes problem

Also comments like the one below by Swp are going to get responses , like a guy going into a bar for the first time and saying 'this bar has got a reputation for being very poor', pint of bitter please

Or like the warrior who went into the "Broken Drum" in Ankh Morpork and loudly introduced himself as "Vlad the invincible"

(according to the watch - cause of death was "suicide")