Poll on moderation of the BRS forum

Do you feel that the moderation on the BRS web forum is:

  • Too restrictive. Too many threads are closed, too many posts edited or removed.

    Votes: 7 7.1%
  • Not restrictive enough. Too many nasty, off-topic posts. Edit, warn, suspend, ban more often

    Votes: 9 9.1%
  • Seems about right to me. Good flow of info. Keep up the good job. I feel all warm and fuzzy here.

    Votes: 83 83.8%

  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .

Greg Hiller

BRS Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
BRS Member
Keep in mind that it takes time for posts to be read and edited or deleted, and for people to be warned. There are NO paid moderators on this forum, and even the forum itself has been granted to us for free (at the moment).

With that in mind:
 
Well...I'm beginning to feel more fuzzy by the moment!
Group-Hug2.gif
 
I think everyone is doing a great job.

I would like to see the lock function used only as a last resort mostly for threads otherwise without redeeming value. The recent thread about supliments comes to mind. I thought the topic was enlightening and would much rather have seen a moderator post something to the effect of, "X and Y you've had your say and it has crossed the line of civility. Any further posts by either of you in this thread will be deleted. Carry on everyone else." Then delete any further posts on that thread by the offenders regardless of their content.

Thats my only suggestion, I realize that time and patience contrubute to the use of the lock function.
 
I completely agree with Cindy and feel comforted knowing there are other(s) that feel the same way I do. There was very good information mixed in there. Edit/warn/ban, but don't close unless it's the last resort.
 
I think if you need to read a sticky to know how to post appropriately then maybe you shouldn't be posting at all. Just a simple line in the FAQ's about posting rules should suffice, although I feel that people should just use their heads when typing (I know that's a lot to ask for some) Overall I'm happy with how the board is. It's not overmodded like RC, where if you simply disagree with a mod they ban you:eek:
 
In regards to Cindy and Lam's suggestion that post deletion, general in-thread warnings, and private warnings by PM all be used and exausted before a thread is locked as a last resort - I think you've very accurately summarized the policy we try to follow, and that's pretty much what was done for the thread you mentioned.

I think because private warnings and post deletions are typically not seen by readers who are viewing a thread after the fact, it may often appear to them that these steps were not taken, and a thread was locked very quickly, when in fact it was only after repeated problems that a moderator chose to lock a thread.

Just thought that might be helpful to know, and also to assure you that we agree with your suggested strategy for handling problem threads in a gradual manner. :)

At any rate, it was good to see that someone gave the topic a fresh start immediately, so the discussion could continue.

Nate
 
Mr. Slippery said:
I think if you need to read a sticky to know how to post appropriately then maybe you shouldn't be posting at all.
That sounds a little drastic. I'd rather educate people who post inappropriately than tell then not to post. Although I wish some of them didn't post at all :D
 
I think the moderation is just fine. I also think that a sticky should not be wasted on common sense. Now that we have a few more moderators, people who post here often should get the idea on what is in good taste and what is not as the moderators do their job.
 
I'm still here, so I guess they aren't too strict. ;)
Not knowing what threads have been deleted is a little bothersome. But if I din't know about it I guess I won't worry about it. You can't please everyone all the time, but God did Heidi Fleis (sp?) try :D

Great job guys, from an occasional problem child :)
 
outstanding. I think tolerance was well tested in the past and because of it there is a baseline to which they can gauge themselves.
 
Lam said:
I completely agree with Cindy and feel comforted knowing there are other(s) that feel the same way I do. There was very good information mixed in there. Edit/warn/ban, but don't close unless it's the last resort.
I didn't even think about it until you sent me the PM, Lam.
It was a good idea, and one I'll try to enact in the future.
 
Censorship attempts to appease everyone's sense of appropriateness and is usually employed to ensure that no one is humiliated, insulted, hurt, or offended. But all of these are subjective and different for each member. One person's joke is another's insult. That is why broad censorship does not work.

On the other hand censorship IS required in extreme situations where a member may be threatened, racially insulted, slandered , continually harrassed, or similarly affected in other ways not mentioned here. No question that there are those times where the line is overstepped and censhorship is required. But these times are few.

Ninety nine percent of the time no one should be censored. Censorship puts control into the hands of a relatively small amount of people and forces the majority to accept the subjective desicions of the few. Clubs are set up to include everyone....and not to elevate a small few above the rest. Only through free, uncensored discussion can we learn together as a club. There should be no secrets, or "hands-off" topics that are within the scope of BRS matters, operations, finances, and topics relevant to reefkeeping.

Closing threads, deleting messages, etc are all forms of censorship that, in my opinion, should only be used as a last resort. Mediating is a better approach that has not been utilized enough in this forum. It is better to have a mediator post messages to attempt to quell a situation than it is to censor. The mediator should at least try to satisfy both parties on-line or ask them to discuss the conflict in another new thread or if appropriate, via PMs.
 
Unfortunately Chuck, we've seen that threads can go downhill quickly and become a trainwreck. The exchange of useful info goes out the window, and the discussion degrades into insults and swearing.
It's a fact of life on polite bulletin boards (or BB's that desire to be polite), there have to be moderators.
 
Just break fingers. If a warning is given and ignored, break a finger. If the F-Bomb is dropped, break 2. Problems persist, break more. eventualy they'd have to stop posting or type with thier toes. In which case, Break toes in the same manner as described above...except double penalty cause you really should know better at this point.
I know, I know, your thinking they could just type with a pencil in their teeth. Break thier teeth. AND the pencil.
 
Mods

Moe_K said:
Unfortunately Chuck, we've seen that threads can go downhill quickly and become a trainwreck. The exchange of useful info goes out the window, and the discussion degrades into insults and swearing.
It's a fact of life on polite bulletin boards (or BB's that desire to be polite), there have to be moderators.

Yes I agree, moderators not censors. The few posts above also agree that locks and deletes are forms of censorship that are required but only after moderation is utilized and only as a last resort.
 
Upcoming Events

April 21, 2024
Paul B
Club Meeting

Back
Top