Earl Stepping down & Moderation

[luthor1]

...I am absolutely and completely at a loss as to the moderation of the thread regarding Earl stepping down, and I would like to open up this ON TOPIC discussion directly addressing the action of the moderators in removing posts from there, relevant posts, important IMOC related posts.

This whole situation is becoming unbearable, everyone is being silenced!! I have never seen anything like it in my life!

There is NO communication allowed even when it was exchanging ideas for the better.

Please come to this thread and post your objective opinions on how this behaviour makes you feel as a member, no PREMIUM member of this site!

[Tiamat]

Luthor1, the thread was supposed to be about Earl stepping down, not about the "war" that was gone into on there.

I agree, the members should be allowed / indeed encouraged to raise specific issues and will contribute what I can to the thread in answer to any questions.

Can I just suggest to anyone about to post on here though, can we not have a rehash of any IMOC vs TB generalisations? I would suggest specific questions relating to the forum and conduct that can be answered. If you put "IMOC are evil and you moderate too much" it hardly gives us anything to reply to.

[luthor1]

remove the TB rehash - fair enough, but there was some GOOD stuff in there and it's just been all wiped away!!!

I'm absolutely livid right now, I've never seen power wielded in such a way, and on a CAR FORUM.

EDIT: There was some communication, points amde on both sides, the mild chance of coming to an understanding between mods and members, now it's all gone, wiped away by the 'mods' we were trying to re-build a relationship with.

Wonder why the members are cynical???

[Jaspa]

The purpose of my removing the OT stuff was simply that, it was doing no one any favours having it in there.

It was suggested that if you had any suggestions that you open a new thread and you have Now, What would you like to see done differently?

The name was only added to the swear filter as the whole situation had got out of hand. It is only an interim situation until we can understand how the situation is going to pan out in the long term, and Ben is liasing directly with Tim on this matter at the moment, once this has been confirmed/clarified a notice will be placed in here explaining.

Hope that makes a bit more sense?

Stuart

[Tiamat]

remove the TB rehash - fair enough, but there was some GOOD stuff in there and it's just been all wiped away!!!

I'm absolutely livid right now, I've never seen power wielded in such a way, and on a CAR FORUM.

I agree there is some interesting points on there, but sometimes we have to wipe whole posts because we do not have the time to edit entire threads then remove additional posts, its very time consuming and not always possible.

If you have anything specific from there that you want brought back, I am happy to do a repost in this thread if it will contribute towards things.

[michael]

Why not just use the "split topic" tool available and move content into it's own "on topic" thread that way?

The same amount of work as removing individual posts but without the cloak and dagger "secret hiding place for naughty things" IMOC is getting a reputation for.

[Tiamat]

Why not just use the "split topic" tool available and move content into it's own "on topic" thread that way?

The same amount of work as removing individual posts but without the cloak and dagger "secret hiding place for naughty things" IMOC is getting a reputation for.

Because it was not a case of just splitting posts, it was having to edit posts as well.

In consideration of the comments, I will review the removed parts of the thread again and look at reposting the comments into this thread, however I will not have a continuous block of time to do the same until the weekend. Can do this if people want me too.

[michael]

Why all the editing and moving of posts these days? What are IMOC (mods / committee - not "IMOC the club") scared of?

[luthor1]

Ok, so I've highlighted a problem I have, and the mods have said they'll look at taking some of the relevant posts and put them in here, however it will take some time - which is fine - so that's good.

[Tiamat]

Why all the editing and moving of posts these days? What are IMOC (mods / committee - not "IMOC the club") scared of?

Micahel the site is busier than it has ever been, hence we have to do more moderation. If you look at the amount of traffic and postings recently you'll probably see that the amount of moderation has expanded in accordance with those.

With regard to editing of posts and moving them, with regard to situations such as IMOC vc TB because of the lack of information, the reasons for which have previously been clarified, there are two entrenched sides who are unable to see the others view as they do not have the necessary information to consider the same.

This creates a "war" on the forum which is counterproductive to the image of the club, and does not do much for inter-member relations of that between the Committee and the members (yes Committee are members too, but you know what I mean). Often this means a bogged down slanging match, so its is preferable to remove the same as it goes nowhere and acheives nothing.

[luthor1]

Everyone - please don't bring TB onto my thread, this is about mods and members of IMOC. If you're 50/50 about your IMOC 'loyalty' (I don't mean loyalty, but can't think of the right word) and it's dependent on some more info regarding TB, then you are fresh out of luck.

This thread is supposed to rebuild a relationship between the mods and members, discuss moderation and how that can all go forwards. I have felt that moderation has been sledge-hammer recently, and I don't care if it's TB moderation or 'other', that's my point, so please no TB.

FYI: I talk to Tim regularly on MSN, I buy stuff from him when appropriate, and I am completely on the fence so please don't think I am anti-TB. On MY thread here, it's about IMOC.

Thanks

[michael]

I see that the number of members has increased but the type of thing being posted is no different to what has always been here and on other similar forums, it just seems odd that simple trader feedback threads get taken away and people's personal opinions are taken from them no matter if it's 100% fact that's being posted or speculation. It's not about the amount of moderation, it's the type of moderation that worries me.

I guess I just don't see the harm in letting members express themselves until something comes to a natural end while I also know that constantly "nipping it in the bud" just causes them to start all over again... as has been demonstrated with this very subject.

Moderation should be about keeping the spammers away, not robbing members of the opportunity to discuss issues that have an impact on the community as a whole. I appreciate that some issues may have legal implications but IMOC needs to ensure these implications lie with the poster not the club and where necessary do reactive moderation rather than the current proactive "what if" type that seems to annoy so many members. Perhaps then the people posting things will consider the impact it might have on *them* if they twist the truth, at the end of the day nobody tends to end up in trouble if what they post is 100% fact.

All in my opinion of course...

[Tiamat]

I see that the number of members has increased but the type of thing being posted is no different to what has always been here and on other similar forums, it just seems odd that simple trader feedback threads get taken away and people's personal opinions are taken from them no matter if it's 100% fact that's being posted or speculation. It's not about the amount of moderation, it's the type of moderation that worries me.

I guess I just don't see the harm in letting members express themselves until something comes to a natural end while I also know that constantly "nipping it in the bud" just causes them to start all over again... as has been demonstrated with this very subject.

Moderation should be about keeping the spammers away, not robbing members of the opportunity to discuss issues that have an impact on the community as a whole. I appreciate that some issues may have legal implications but IMOC needs to ensure these implications lie with the poster not the club and where necessary do reactive moderation rather than the current proactive "what if" type that seems to annoy so many members. Perhaps then the people posting things will consider the impact it might have on *them* if they twist the truth, at the end of the day nobody tends to end up in trouble if what they post is 100% fact.

All in my opinion of course...

I agree. Which is why you will see some changes to the IMOC set up in the not too distant future.

The problem with the internet forums is, it is too easy to come on here, get half the information and then wade in. Its also too easy to refer to a problem you have with a member that does not apply to the matter at hand - this happens a lot with the trader feedbacks.

Again, there will be some changes coming shortly.

We also have to monitor what people are expressing, not in a Nazi Big Brother way, but because we need to be fair to all the members and keep personal attacks off the Forum. We have to try and treat all members equally and often that does mean nipping things in the bud, or stopping threads because people will not behave.

I do agree though, I would like to see more freedom for people to express themselves, but it is also down to the individuals posting to moderate themselves, which people are often reluctant to do.

On a closing note, before I leave work, I would add that there are also defamation laws to do with publishing comments, which catches internet forums as well. Therefore for the protection of IMOC and to keep her running sometimes there are edits to try and remove this liability. In this regard, please bear in mind that the Committee Members would be personally liable for anything awarded.

[luthor1]

Perhaps when you start taking moderation slightly more seriously (heavily?) you start taking away peoples freedoms, and the reaction is to get what you have to get in quick and sharp... perhaps giving some of the control back to the members, allow them to express themselves a little more will empower them and allow them to make the DECISSION to keep it within boundaries.

The more 'nanny state' you make it, the less people monitor their own activites because they don't have to, someone else will do it for them.

I know it's a chicken and egg situation, the members need to back off and the mods need to stop over-moderating, and who goes first, but perhaps the first step might be for a little power to be given back to the members and initially you may have a slight increase in poor behaviour before the members realise actually it is *our* forum again and have some more respect for it?

I know it would be a ballsy move, because initially you might see things you want to moderate early, perhaps edit the post with "...I should be moderating this comment..." and allow the poster to see it's happening.

My hunch is that moderation requirement will reduce with time as the warm snuggly feeling comes back?

[EarL]

Perhaps when you start taking moderation slightly more seriously (heavily?) you start taking away peoples freedoms, and the reaction is to get what you have to get in quick and sharp... perhaps giving some of the control back to the members, allow them to express themselves a little more will empower them and allow them to make the DECISSION to keep it within boundaries.

The more 'nanny state' you make it, the less people monitor their own activites because they don't have to, someone else will do it for them.

I know it's a chicken and egg situation, the members need to back off and the mods need to stop over-moderating, and who goes first, but perhaps the first step might be for a little power to be given back to the members and initially you may have a slight increase in poor behaviour before the members realise actually it is *our* forum again and have some more respect for it?

I know it would be a ballsy move, because initially you might see things you want to moderate early, perhaps edit the post with "...I should be moderating this comment..." and allow the poster to see it's happening.

My hunch is that moderation requirement will reduce with time as the warm snuggly feeling comes back?

...somebody listen to this man.

[Steve Horrocks]

Perhaps when you start taking moderation slightly more seriously (heavily?) you start taking away peoples freedoms, and the reaction is to get what you have to get in quick and sharp... perhaps giving some of the control back to the members, allow them to express themselves a little more will empower them and allow them to make the DECISSION to keep it within boundaries.

The more 'nanny state' you make it, the less people monitor their own activites because they don't have to, someone else will do it for them.

I know it's a chicken and egg situation, the members need to back off and the mods need to stop over-moderating, and who goes first, but perhaps the first step might be for a little power to be given back to the members and initially you may have a slight increase in poor behaviour before the members realise actually it is *our* forum again and have some more respect for it?

I know it would be a ballsy move, because initially you might see things you want to moderate early, perhaps edit the post with "...I should be moderating this comment..." and allow the poster to see it's happening.

My hunch is that moderation requirement will reduce with time as the warm snuggly feeling comes back?

...somebody listen to this man.

spoken like a true, er, thingy.

well put anyway!

[tonigmr2]

That's an ideal world situation, but the reality is harder I think.

The one thing that does annoy me, is if bad feedback is given against an affiliate, all that affiliate has to do is make it an argument and the whole thread is removed - ergo the complaint is removed. I've seen it happen more than once now and that needs addressing.

I do think the Earl moderation thread was over-pruned also, I think there were relevant things in there about PMs and false information which contributed to the overall picture.

T

[LimeyMk1]

I personally find the line between leaving well alone and moderating is difficult to see sometimes, a slagging, name calling b1tch fight is going to be in obvious need of some intervention. But some times things are said where you wouldn't think any offence could be taken until it's reported by the offended party.

I'm quite happy to let most things run their course and just keep an eye on them as Andy and Michael suggest, makes my life easier.

The less work we as the mods/admin have to do the smoother it means this site is running, bar the obvious we don't actually have to do that much (IMO) other than shuffling posts to the correct forum and trying to help members sort out issues with undelivered parts. Always happy to be corrected tho.

Toni, feedback forum is imminant, bad and good will remain.

[luthor1]

like I tried to say above, if you see something that you think needs moderating, perhaps edit the post to add "..I should moderate this.." then PM the person to ask them to re-phrase it themselves. You're doing the same amount of work as if you'd edited it for them and PM'd them the reason, but the difference from the members point of view I think is mammoth. This way round they are given the responsibility and they have to 'engage brain'. I think 99% of the time people will calm down and edit their own inappropriate post.

[LimeyMk1]

Quite agree and will suggest that we give it a go.

Although I do remember one incident where I politely asked a member to edit his comments about another. This request was bluntly refused, so his post was bluntly moderated. I know now I overreacted to the refusal but we live and learn, and must try not to allow emotions to lead in such matters.