• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Moderation on diabetes.co.uk

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, the forum isn't a democracy. It's owned privately. However, that's not a reason not to change. A good forum should, within reason, be run by the members. Rules shouldn't be set, they should be voted on.
We know it's a popular forum and yes, we know it works but that's not a reason to prevent change and try to improve things. The forum works, yes, but it could certainly work better. How many of the hundreds of thousands of members actively post ? Where have they all gone ? Has this forum improved their diabetes management ? Who knows. So, to say "it works" is very relative and unfounded. A huge platform like this should be leading the way, not advising newbies that they can carry on eating the same things they did prior to diagnosis. Moderators are only human. There are good and bad and make mistakes as well as good work. Currently, if a mistake is made, there is no appeal.
 
I have been delighted at @Administrator 's recent presence on the forum, and his willingness to listen and embrace change.

Very refreshing.

But the agreed upon changes are not being consistently applied. Some mods apply the rules consistently while others seem to ignore them and chop and massacre threads with no acknowledgement that it has even happened.

Within the last week, whole chunks of threads have disappeared with no markers to say why, and posts are regularly edited with no explanation that it has happened.

These actions are being implemented by mods who should all be working under the same rules as we, the posters, are required to obey. When we disobey, we can get Warned and Banned. What system is in place to bring mods into line?
 
As a point of information, I have had a hiatus from being active on the forum. In July I had half my right kidney removed to get rid of a tumour and had a long and difficult recovery period. I am more or less recovered now.

Moderation has changed in that many decisions are not made by one moderator but after discussion among mods. We are keen to achieve consistency.

Being a moderator does, in fact, allow me to speak of the forum in clinical research circles with a greater acceptability by those listening. That has to be good for the forum and, ultimately, for all of us.

This thread is to discuss moderation and not moderators per se - even if some are trying to get me to the exit An expanded team would always be welcome but, generally, it is not a path that many wish to take.

Regards and thanks for all your thoughts to date.

Doug
 
freddy2 said:
a lot of groups have a rotating chair, to keep the egos in check. Perhaps something similar could be applied here?
Click to expand...
And would we have a similar arrangement for forum members The "chair" of the forum is admin.

Regards

Doug
 
As Admin on a totally unrelated forum, I understand the issues that the moderators here face. This forum has far more members than the one that I deal with, but faces the same moderation issues.

Active posters versus members is always an interesting one, but there is a consistency across internet forums that sees no more than 10% of forum members being active, and far fewer being regular contributors.

i personally think that moderation should be light touch and not over-zealous, and that any decisions that result in a ban for someone, or a level of reprimanding should be a group decision and implemented accordingly.

We have a system in place whereby we can place public warnings on those who have overstepped the mark, and these are displayed against a user's profile. They serve as a reminder to all that a member is "on notice", and in the worst case, can be having all their posts moderated before they are made public. We've found this to be an effective brake on people who have caused trouble, and I'd suggest it is a good mechanism for managing people issues.

I haven't found that the moderation on here is particularly over-zealous. i think it's pretty well balanced. Given that there are some enthusiasts for specific ways of life that they believe should be applied to everyone, regardless of the breadth of conditions that are covered by the forum, I think they've done pretty well. Maybe I'm just in the minority on that front.
 
I think it would be interesting to hear what the other mods have to say. I'm surprised they haven't already commented. Surely it's not only Osidge who wants mod feedback ?
 
dannyw said:
I think it would be interesting to hear what the other mods have to say. I'm surprised they haven't already commented. Surely it's not only Osidge who wants mod feedback ?
Click to expand...
I support that .. We really are all a team working for the same cause ,leading from example ..!
Does not mean we always agree though ..

Moderation of the bullies , those with double names causing trouble is not nice .. My trust goes , and I need a dislike button ..! But I hate the thought of one ..

Trouble makers they need to be off the forum .. Life time bans I agree with ..not feeling festive today ..

Honesty I prefer .. Double names on the forum , who am I talking to .. Glad that practice has stopped well I hope it has , not to sure though .. Clarity required ..

We all have enough to cope with ..cope with many different things in life ..
We the members are the moderators to and the most important people who make
up the forum ..FB Twitter etc etc ..it's all there ..

I think moderation may need change .. I don't know how , some is done in a very tactful way and in partnership with us the valuable members , , sometimes sadly this has not been the case .. And moderation may be harmful ..
Sometimes I have seen patronising comments by moderators , all very different ... Positive and negative ..

I have no idea of the training involved ..
Your terms of reference , guidelines
Your training .. Etc etc .. Not that that is really so important , because we the members have life skills to

But the one thing is I like openess and honesty .. Sharing feelings is not always easy .. But here we all are thinking caps on ..
And just like families .. It all happens just before Christmas ..
 
Last edited:
Formalise the system.

Three strikes and you're out. Or similar. Posting privileges removed.

So, privately, on your account, you get a yellow card, with a set period to run. Say 4 weeks, or 12 weeks, or similar.
And if you accumulate three that run concurrently, you are banned for 1 week, or 4 weeks,
So everyone knows where they stand, what they said that caused the yellow card, how long they have left on the warning, and they'll know the same rules apply to everyone.
 
@Kat100 The only thing I don't agree with in your post is lifetime bans. I feel there should be an appeal available.
 
Formalise the complaints systems for the mods as well the.

PM to an administrator, or ensure the system directs the 'report' to admin, not the mods, if you decide to report them.
Ensure you get feedback.
But accept the admin's response to the report.
And also consider a penalty, maybe a yellow card, for multiple frivolous reports simply because someone disagrees with something a mod has written.
 

No, dreadful idea. We need to approach this much more gently. It's a health forum. None of this should be necessary at all. I have been astonished by some of my warnings, they were for such petty things.
 
zand said:
@Kat100 The only thing I don't agree with in your post is lifetime bans. I feel there should be an appeal available.
Click to expand...

You can formalise that as well, maybe a lifetime ban is automatic for posters that rejoin after previous bans etc, but for others, a lifetime ban after several short term bans, or a gross breach of the forum rules?
 
zand said:
No, dreadful idea. We need to approach this much more gently. It's a health forum. None of this should be necessary at all. I have been astonished by some of my warnings, they were for such petty things.
Click to expand...

At least you would have the chance not to do them again.
Or we keep it as it is, as that seems to work well enough at the moment.
(for me, anyway)
 
SunnyExpat said:
You can formalise that as well, maybe a lifetime ban is automatic for posters that rejoin after previous bans etc, but for others, a lifetime ban after several short term bans, or a gross breach of the forum rules?
Click to expand...
Sounds OK, until you realise that some people have been banned unfairly and all they want to do is to post to help others.
 
Sounds like a new board game now .. Like your hired or fired ..
 
zand said:
Sounds OK, until you realise that some people have been banned unfairly and all they want to do is to post to help others.
Click to expand...

But, you have to accept the forum is still an owned business, and possibly it was the style they tried to help in which wasn't acceptable, which is often the case.
The old adage, 'you can lead a horse to water', sometimes it's better simply to move away, and move on, and accept you can't help some people, who have their own, possibly different views.

I must admit, this all seems to be something in the past I don't know anything about, I must have arrived here well after the water was under the bridge, nowadays the forum seems to be run in a friendly fashion, with generally a good mix of people.
(although it may explain why I feel occasionally I have stepped into an old grudge, so this thread has been partially revealing)
 
I'm unsure why you keep on about this forum being a business and owned by someone ? That should have nothing to do with how the place is moderated. In what areas do you feel a private or public forum should have different rules for moderation ? Should they both not just be fair and consistent ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…