Heavy moderation

[Petchy]

No offence to any of the admin or moderation team here, but I think it's a little too heavy handed. You delete posts and topics sometimes with little reason. Instead of doing this, I think you should edit the posts with the reason why, and with topics that you may not necessarily find of interest, others might. So you could either leave them open or just lock them without deleting them so that you can browse them again sometime.

Too many times have I come across topics which are locked that could still be used for discussion. In comparison to other forums, this one is far too controlled.

[FoxyPV]

The ****** who post the continuous stream of shit should engage their brains before doing so and this may change. I daresay many of the deleted/ locked topics are duplicates because people can't use the search function or the posts are potentially libelous/ break the rules of the forum.

[Guest Bilo]

Actually, I think this forum is pretty well modded. It's rather lighter than it used to be now that a few mods have quit.

Do we really need 37 Yakubu threads and the same number of threads asking where all the signings are? No, better to merge them surely.

[Mark]

Which topics are you referring to? If its July 1st, that was due to all the sarcastic replies, which seems to be the norm of late.

We've had an influx of winds ups of late and it's hard to deal with - but everyone would complain if we did nothing.

[Petchy]

There's not been anything recently that has triggered this, I've just been meaning to address this point for a while. Sometimes there seems to be little justification for the deletion of posts and such. I think for the majority, it is moderated rather well but sometimes it doesn't seem consistent.

[Kent]

Not trying to preach here, just a suggestion. Anyway, on a forum I used to work on rather than working 'silently' so to speak and rather than delete posts etc without saying anything, the mods would edit posts with messages like [MOD: Please stay on topic] etc which I think is what Petchy is getting at.

I'm not necessarily saying that this is the best way of going about moderating (making the interventions public can also cause more people to complain about censorship) but it has it's advantages. If people see why posts are getting edited or deleted then it can help the poster and other members to take notice of the rule enforcement and they might not do if themselves, meaning less work for you (which is always nice).

[Petchy]

Not trying to preach here, just a suggestion. Anyway, on a forum I used to work on rather than working 'silently' so to speak and rather than delete posts etc without saying anything, the mods would edit posts with messages like [MOD: Please stay on topic] etc which I think is what Petchy is getting at.

I'm not necessarily saying that this is the best way of going about moderating (making the interventions public can also cause more people to complain about censorship) but it has it's advantages. If people see why posts are getting edited or deleted then it can help the poster and other members to take notice of the rule enforcement and they might not do if themselves, meaning less work for you (which is always nice).

Yeah That's a system used on most other forums and it drastically reduces the ongoing arguments in topics, and off topic chat.

[AoWW]

Much of the time the person who has had their post moderated will be told why and, if needs be, their warn status adjusted and a reason given - I don't see why the reason for moderation needs to be public knowledge. On other occasions it should be blindingly obvious why something has been removed or moved, if only people used a little common sense. Quite frankly, I don't have the time to edit posts with quaint little suggestions as to how they could be improved. Personally, I think making moderation public would cause chaos and even more people feeling they can stick their oar in over every little decision. Given the influx of cretins on here of late, remarkably few posts or topics are deleted - in my opinion moderation is on the light side, and far from heavy-handed.

[Petchy]

I clearly stated that this is a point that I have held for a while but haven't gotten around to enquiring about until now. I would agree with the point that recently, moderation has become 'lighter' but from past experiences it was something I considered a problem. The amount of times I have gone back, scrolling through topics to resume a discussion, only to find it has all been deleted is more than usual on a forum? The whole point of a forum is for free flowing discussion, but obviously there are times when posts and topics clearly violate the rules. It's just that with regards to some posts I see removed, I see little reason as to why. Maybe there just needs to be a differed approach in some cases? For instance: Real Madrid Tickets and Real Madrid Ticket Info. I personally would have had the Info topic sticked and locked so that it is visible for anyone to see at any time, but to use the Tickets topic for the actual discussion.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

I think threads get merged rather than deleted, sometimes I have to search my recent posts to find a thread that has disappeared, so it might be worth having a look at similar threads for the discussion you were following previously.

[Wymsey]

Mods are doing a great job in my opinion. Not fussed at all. I admire this forum. <3

[AoWW]

I clearly stated that this is a point that I have held for a while but haven't gotten around to enquiring about until now. I would agree with the point that recently, moderation has become 'lighter' but from past experiences it was something I considered a problem. The amount of times I have gone back, scrolling through topics to resume a discussion, only to find it has all been deleted is more than usual on a forum? The whole point of a forum is for free flowing discussion, but obviously there are times when posts and topics clearly violate the rules. It's just that with regards to some posts I see removed, I see little reason as to why. Maybe there just needs to be a differed approach in some cases? For instance: Real Madrid Tickets and Real Madrid Ticket Info. I personally would have had the Info topic sticked and locked so that it is visible for anyone to see at any time, but to use the Tickets topic for the actual discussion.

But your post was completely nebulous... you're basically saying you don't like the way the forum is moderated but haven't given any specific examples that we can respond to until you've now mentioned how you'd have better managed the Real Madrid ticket threads. It's all very well saying 'aw, this is something I've thought for a while' but it doesn't give us, as moderators/admin, a whole lot to go on.

The amount of threads/posts that end up binned are relatively few so I'm surprised that you've had so many occasions where you've gone back, looking for threads, yet claim they're no longer there - are you sure it's not just that they've been moved to a more appropriate location? As for your 'with regards to some posts I see removed, I see little reason as to why' comment, how an earth can you possibly know? If it's been removed it's in the bin and you can't access it to see how the discussion progressed! Chances are it ended up in some petty slanging match, and that's why it was deleted.

At the end of the day the moderators/admin on this site don't get paid for what they do and are all busy people. We're not here 24/7 with the time to agonise over whether some people will feel we're moderating in a 'correct and appropriate' manner. More often than not we get a greater number of requests asking 'why can't so-and-so be banned?' - the simple fact is we can't please everyone all the time, we just do our best to keep the forum running as smoothly as possibly with the limited time and resources we have. Constructive criticism is fine, but your 'this forum isn't moderated as well as others I go on' comment isn't particularly helpful if you're not willing to provide a bit more substance to back up your grievances.

[Petchy]

But your post was completely nebulous... you're basically saying you don't like the way the forum is moderated but haven't given any specific examples that we can respond to until you've now mentioned how you'd have better managed the Real Madrid ticket threads. It's all very well saying 'aw, this is something I've thought for a while' but it doesn't give us, as moderators/admin, a whole lot to go on.

The amount of threads/posts that end up binned are relatively few so I'm surprised that you've had so many occasions where you've gone back, looking for threads, yet claim they're no longer there - are you sure it's not just that they've been moved to a more appropriate location? As for your 'with regards to some posts I see removed, I see little reason as to why' comment, how an earth can you possibly know? If it's been removed it's in the bin and you can't access it to see how the discussion progressed! Chances are it ended up in some petty slanging match, and that's why it was deleted.

At the end of the day the moderators/admin on this site don't get paid for what they do and are all busy people. We're not here 24/7 with the time to agonise over whether some people will feel we're moderating in a 'correct and appropriate' manner. More often than not we get a greater number of requests asking 'why can't so-and-so be banned?' - the simple fact is we can't please everyone all the time, we just do our best to keep the forum running as smoothly as possibly with the limited time and resources we have. Constructive criticism is fine, but your 'this forum isn't moderated as well as others I go on' comment isn't particularly helpful if you're not willing to provide a bit more substance to back up your grievances.

That's incorrect though. The topic and posts could have continued for days before a moderator has come along to deem it 'unnecessary' and deleted it. Also if it did turn into a slanging match, there is an inconsistency as to how they are treated. Sometimes you do seem to delete them, yet other times you just lock the topic and leave the posts there - example: Alan Smith?.

I never said that I expect you to dedicate 110% of your time to the site as it's the most important thing in the world, I was just addressing my opinion and point of view that I feel that sometimes, and sometimes being the minority of occasions, where things could have been handled better so that it is something to consider in the future. I myself have / still do moderate on various other forums and so that's probably why I have picked up on a few things rather than others. As with the whole 'why can't so-and-so be banned' point, that is totally irrelevant. That has nothing to do with the moderation and maintenance of the forum as that is a personal matter stemming from a dispute between certain members.

In all fairness, I thought my original post for this topic was fairly light-hearted and just addressing what I believed to be a potential issue. You've seemed to take to it personally as if I have singled out your contribution and efforts of the running of this forum in particular and gone to great lengths to criticise it. That simply isn't the case. Instead, I was just putting the idea out there of there being a consideration of other techniques used when moderating, similar to Kent's.

At the end of the day I wasn't trying to make it a matter of 'well this forum isn't as good as others', nor was I trying to make it a big deal. Instead I was just posting my opinion, which I knew would differ to others on the forum, to see whether it was an avenue FT could explore.

[AoWW]

That's incorrect though. The topic and posts could have continued for days before a moderator has come along to deem it 'unnecessary' and deleted it. Also if it did turn into a slanging match, there is an inconsistency as to how they are treated. Sometimes you do seem to delete them, yet other times you just lock the topic and leave the posts there - example: Alan Smith?.

I never said that I expect you to dedicate 110% of your time to the site as it's the most important thing in the world, I was just addressing my opinion and point of view that I feel that sometimes, and sometimes being the minority of occasions, where things could have been handled better so that it is something to consider in the future. I myself have / still do moderate on various other forums and so that's probably why I have picked up on a few things rather than others. As with the whole 'why can't so-and-so be banned' point, that is totally irrelevant. That has nothing to do with the moderation and maintenance of the forum as that is a personal matter stemming from a dispute between certain members.

In all fairness, I thought my original post for this topic was fairly light-hearted and just addressing what I believed to be a potential issue. You've seemed to take to it personally as if I have singled out your contribution and efforts of the running of this forum in particular and gone to great lengths to criticise it. That simply isn't the case. Instead, I was just putting the idea out there of there being a consideration of other techniques used when moderating, similar to Kent's.

At the end of the day I wasn't trying to make it a matter of 'well this forum isn't as good as others', nor was I trying to make it a big deal. Instead I was just posting my opinion, which I knew would differ to others on the forum, to see whether it was an avenue FT could explore.

You're missing my point entirely. Unless you were sitting watching a thread so avidly that the second it was binned you knew exactly what it contained you can't possibly make an informed judgement on whether it was appropriate to delete it or not. Although I said we don't moderate 24/7 I also find it hard to believe that a topic will have continued for days before a moderator 'comes along'. As for inconsistencies, yes, they happen, and I'm sure we'll all hold our hands up and admit it - we're human, after all, and will have different opinions, even as moderators. Does this never happen on the forums you moderate?

Where did I say that you'd said you expect us to dedicate 100%? I didn't. Equally, I was just expressing my opinion and point of view too - you were the one so keen to point out that forums are about debate and discussion. The 'why can't so and so be banned' isn't irrelevant at all - how can it be when the admin / moderators are the ones that ban individuals? I'm not talking about personal disputes, I'm talking about where depth of feeling across many, many members is so strong that it should be taken into account.

I must have missed the light-heartedness in your opening post as, to be honest, I just interpreted it as being rather sanctimonious. I haven't taken it personally at all - I was just posting my opinion and defending the moderating of this forum against a criticism that appeared to have very little substance. But, yes, thank you for your suggestions of other techniques.

Ok.

[Webbo]

Mods are doing a great job in my opinion. Not fussed at all. I admire this forum. <3

Creep.

[Joe.]

I think we under-moderate here personally. If it was up to me, half the jokers on here wouldn't be able to post their drivel.

I don't get rid of much in truth, but I'll happily delete stupid posts, and lock stupid topics. There's plenty of them.

[DB11]

To relate everything here to football, referees aren't consistent because they're all human. Some are stricter than others. I bet it's the same for the moderators, they're going to have different tolerance levels and so I guess it all depends which one is online at the time.

[MC Prussian]

I don't think we're really that strict.

If it was me, I'd join the Erase Brigade and make a clear cut in terms of deleting rubbish and kicking out some of the few trolls we still have.

But can I just say that I simply don't get it when people post new threads when there already is one on the same topic on the very first page???

It might be part of the problem here, but seriously, folks: Browse the forum with your eyes open. And use the Search function. It's that easy.

I have a tendency to merge topics and re-name them (usually just slight alterations to the previous topic title).

[Jon the Hat]

Mods do a great job keeping out most of the dross, and also not tolerating slanging matches - they really are not very interesting reading. It does amaze me how many people cannot see the difference between reasoned discussion and derogatory comments.

[Bellend Sebastian]

As far as I can tell they only step in when things are getting really out of hand, and they're also pretty good at being able to tell the difference between someone who's apparently who's being genuinely vindictive and someone who's just a bit excitable, a skill that does seem to elude some posters on occasion.

I probably would say that because I've managed not to fall foul of them despite posting mostly guff for my own amusement

[Babylon]

Nobody is perfect, every mod is only human (except Davie G, he's part machine) and they have their good days and bad days.

From the outside looking in it probably looks great to be a mod, being able to ban people, move posts etc. It's great for all of 5 minutes, and then you realise how much shit there is you need to deal with.

If people want to ask why something was moved/deleted then ask away... but do it at the time not 6 months down the line.

[Bellend Sebastian]

The real challenge you mods need to address is how to discourage the dullards whilst giving free reign to the entertaining nut-jobs, of which there are not nearly enough

[Babylon]

The real challenge you mods need to address is how to discourage the dullards

Could you post less please... pretty please.

[Bellend Sebastian]

Could you post less please... pretty please.

Consider it considered

[davieG]

There's no way Moderators can be heavy handed the clue's in the their name, now Administrators that's different story - tee hee