moderation!

[Administrator]

As I said, rather than getting into a personal battle over this, let's try and move forward to the benefit of the whole community who read this forum (who include thousands of non-posters/unregistered users/ex posters etc.)

All we are seeking to do is create a harmonious atmosphere in which people can help each other. Through knowledge comes better health. When individuals seek to control the forum, the problems start.

Regards,

Admin

 

[Dippy3103]

Ok, my opinion for what it is worth....

I understand why the mods are numbers and not names and it makes no odds to me either way. Even if they had user names they would still be faceless (as in no one knows who they really are in real life anyway). I don't know who the current mods are but I think they do a good job, and I think that five is enough.
If she isn't already I think catherinecherub would be great ( obviously if she wanted to do it).
I do think that monitors would be best served having something in their signature that makes it clear that monitor posts are in bold, their own in normal typeface. It is easy for members to forget that kind of thing.

 

[Marky4]

Okay - that's a bit weird, and I think what this thread is all about. Sue has changed the formatting of my previous post.

Reason: Edited for clarity. Really?

That changes the whole context of my post - censoring it. That's quite dangerous, don't you think? I'm the voice of me - I don't want mods/monitors to tone me down, or change what I've written.

Yes, if that did actually happen, and someone edited the formatting what you had written without your consent - then thats exactly what I was talking about: An edit like that has nothing to do with preventing anyone from being misinformed. Its about trying to control people's input, and to misrepresent them. Censoring, and changing someone's posts like that is pretty disrespectful. Very unusual, and controlling behaviour for any web Forum actually. No-one is going to appreciate their posts being edited in such a way.

 

[sugarless sue]

Patch, Marky4.......

It was joke!!! :twisted: Meant to be ironic !! Usually Patch seeing the funny side but this time obviously not.

 

[Sid Bonkers]

Let's see a community-formulated proposal of a solution.

- Anonymous or public moderators? ..........Public
- Five moderators or ten?......................Enough to do the job, why put a number on it.
- Possible candidates? ..........................Anyone egotistical enough to apply should be avoided.
- Knowledgeable moderators on each specific forum? ...........Not necessary they should be moderators not guru's.

All I can say is, the monitors do a very good job, and don't deserve anything but praise.

You would say that :lol: But I do agree with you, there advice has definitely helped me.

 

[Sid Bonkers]

- Anonymous or public moderators? ..........Public

- Knowledgeable moderators on each specific forum? ...........Not necessary they should be moderators not guru's.

Just had a thought that perhaps anonymous mods arn't such a bad thing. If the mods are public there is the possibility that thier views my be seen as being those of an 'expert'. This isn't as clear cut as I first thought.

 

[Marky4]

Patch, Marky4.......

It was joke!!! Meant to be ironic !! Usually Patch sees the funny side but this time obviously not.

Ah … Ok then :?

 

[carty]

Please could we see what Patch actually posted even though unclear.It may help those of us who have no idea what is going on to understand what is being edited.
Personally I think this is a great forum and seems to work very well we get a good mix of opinions and personal stories and recommendations.
CAROL

 

[sugarless sue]

Patch posted,

Oh, I see. My bad.

Being funny as usual. I changed it to normal ....being funny....obviously not.

 

[Marky4]

Being funny as usual. I changed it to normal ....being funny....obviously not.

Thats not typed in Bold, haven't you just 'broken the rules''?

k I'm giving up… no idea what's going on

 

[sugarless sue]

:roll: :roll: :roll: That's the point Marky :roll: :roll: :roll: It was done as me the member not me the Monitor.... I give up too !

 

[jopar]

Even though the concerns I've expressed and the questions I asked in my last post haven't been addressed...

However, Dan has asked us for our opinions and suggestion in improving a moderation system that concerns have be expressed about, to see if and how the moderation system can be improved..

I am happy for the post to take this turn, as it's an opertunity for all of us to be invovled as a membership in decision that until this post started seemed to be not possible...

I am disspointed, that some have chosen to to ignore this opertunity thats been created, and use it as an operuntiy to make personal attacks...

So can we please get down to business, with ideas and opinons for Dan to consider...

P.S

As if any changes are made, it won't be happening over night, so in the mean time we remain with the current moderation system, can I ask that some of the question's I've asked be addressed while we await a finial decision to if and how any changes will be implemented?

 

[Sid Bonkers]

:roll: :roll: :roll: That's the point Marky :roll: :roll: :roll: It was done as me the member not me the Monitor.... I give up too !

If a member can be a monitor and a monitor can be a member shouldn't a member who is a monitor be able to post as a member without being assumed to be a monitor all the time? :lol:

 

[Administrator]

1, if one has a grievance with another member of the forum, how does one know that they aren’t complaining to the very same person they have a grievance with?

2, Take this one step further, if the moderators decision is final, then how do we know this decision has be reached in an unbiased manner?

3, what do Moderators and Monitors consider being personal attack?

4, If we have a grievance with a Monitor, to whom do we complain, More so as the only means of communication with any of 5 anonymous moderators? How do we know that the monitors aren’t in fact the moderators?

1 - Complain to me by pm
2 - This could be an endless debate, no individual is entirely unbiased. I have asked the moderators and monitors to be impassive and neutral, but of course there are human limitations to this.
3 - A personal attack is a criticism of the individual, not the opinion
4 - See 1, communicate with me

How's that?

 

[Dippy3103]

Sid, are you in the civil service per chance???
I do agree though.

 

[Administrator]

As far as I'm concerned, the monitors are monitors for the very good reason that they've put immense amounts of time into keeping the forum on track. When they post they don't need to use bold, in my opinion. If they choose to, that's up to them. The responsibility they have taken on carries with it authority, and this should earn the respect of the community.

And to the conspiracy theorists over the road, where did you learn? And how much money did you give in return? The answer HERE and NOTHING. That is what this resource is, free from commercial obligations, and unrestricted but for abuses of a (really quite lenient) system. Yawn...

 

[Dippy3103]

Ken and Sue have both my respect and gratitude. I am lucky enough to have a very supportive GP, but her time is limited and I have had more education from this forum than I have had from the NHS.
In particular I feel Ken deserves a special mention as he has continued to give his time and advice despite his treatment for cancer. That takes true grit.

 

[daisy1]

I agree with you Dippy. Sue and Ken have both been very kind and helpful to me and the place wouldn't be the same without them.
Thanks you are appreciated Sue and Ken

 

[Ardbeg]

Moderation is a thankless task; I've been there, done it & got the T shirt.

However, the moderators, Sue & Ken in particular deserve a special mention. They are on here very frequently and give of their time, knowledge and expertise freely. They deal with the same old newbie queries time and time again without complaining.

My only real gripe is over the "moderating" of weblinks. Why can't we be allowed to put weblinks on here in full? If someone wants to visit it they will simply do so one way or another anyway.

 

[jopar]

Dan

How's that? I so tempted to put a cricket reply to that 'OUT' but then realise somebody might take it the wrong way..

So a thanks, yes that it does go a long way to address my questions...

Perhaps a suggestion for monitors, perhaps using a different colour to post to worn of minor infringements, reserving the black bold type for dealing with the offences that require tackling, might come across more friendly :?: Just a thought...

As to monitors in general

I'm not sure about the monitor position (for clarity, it's an opinon of the title monitor and not any individual)

I feel that no indiviudal member should act as both a monitor and a moderator, these do need to kept separate...
Monitor shouldn't have the same powers as moderators.. They should only be allowed to remind members that they have made minor infridgements, but all offences above a certain level must be tackled only by a moderator..

Just my thoughts...