Moderation Update

[Lamb]

How many banned members are you expecting??? LOL

 

[Josiah]

How many banned members are you expecting??? LOL

HOPEFULLY, none. But then the protocol that this entire thread is addressing is about that exact point.... the process of counseling, warning, and (if it leads to it) banning.... the "six offensives and then a ban" issue.

It is MY belief that the vast majority of the time, rules that are few, fair, intuitive and known.... combined with moderation that is not heavy-handed... REDUCES the number of bans. And I expressed my frustration that virtually all sites COME to reject that, thinking that MORE rules (less intuitive as well).... MORE power.... MORE heavy-handedness will decrease the problems when .... well.. I shared my OPINION. I'm hoping CH stays the course in the things you and I are praising, and does NOT go the way of virtually all such sites (as I think you too have witnessed).

Perhaps I'm wrong.



- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

My point is that there are still those who wish there were more. And there are those (100% of those reporting) that are glad we have the rules that we have. If someone got 100% of a vote, there'd be dancing in the street.

If the site is CF then it is not true that 100% of those submitting a report like the rules that exist there.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

My point is that there are still those who wish there were more. And there are those (100% of those reporting) that are glad we have the rules that we have. If someone got 100% of a vote, there'd be dancing in the street.

I was never polled. 100% reporting can be as few as 10. I wonder what a true response rate/opinion might be. But that might be beyond what advisors are willing to do elsewhere. At least CH seems interested in the opinions of those who post.

 

[Hammster]

I was never polled. 100% reporting can be as few as 10. I wonder what a true response rate/opinion might be. But that might be beyond what advisors are willing to do elsewhere. At least CH seems interested in the opinions of those who post.

Did you ever report anyone?

 

[Hammster]

If the site is CF then it is not true that 100% of those submitting a report like the rules that exist there.

If they didn't like the rules, then they wouldn't report.

 

[MoreCoffee]

If they didn't like the rules, then they wouldn't report.

poppycock

 

[Hammster]

poppycock

How so?

 

[Lamb]

If they didn't like the rules, then they wouldn't report.

People don't report other people because they like the rules. People will take advantage of any rule available. I could give plenty of examples but I don't wish this to be a CF bashing thread at all, nor do I wish for that to happen anywhere on this forum.

So why do people report other people? Because they see someone doing wrong and hate that wrong is one major reason. Another is because they want a member to get into trouble (spite reporting). Then you have those who report because they feel that they're being helpful by policing the site, not because they like the rules in particular but the rules are available for them to look for something to do. And then you have people who are just bored and enjoy pressing the report button.

If the rules are kept simple then the site doesn't get too complicated. It's the people who might make it complicated because they are too indoctrinated from other sites thinking that those other rules are necessary for it to thrive but that isn't the case. I myself have struggled these past 6 months while on staff as I attempt to get out of the strict rule mentality that I thought had to happen. Those who had never been to CF were actually the ones (thanks MarkFL and my CaluNET friends) to allow me to see a brand new world. With a complicated rule set you then have to have a complicated punishment and then a complicated ban set and a complicated appeals set. I'd much rather enjoy the site for what it is and not force everyone to be who I want them to be.

 

[Hammster]

People don't report other people because they like the rules. People will take advantage of any rule available. I could give plenty of examples but I don't wish this to be a CF bashing thread at all, nor do I wish for that to happen anywhere on this forum.

So why do people report other people? Because they see someone doing wrong and hate that wrong is one major reason. Another is because they want a member to get into trouble (spite reporting). Then you have those who report because they feel that they're being helpful by policing the site, not because they like the rules in particular but the rules are available for them to look for something to do. And then you have people who are just bored and enjoy pressing the report button.

If the rules are kept simple then the site doesn't get too complicated. It's the people who might make it complicated because they are too indoctrinated from other sites thinking that those other rules are necessary for it to thrive but that isn't the case. I myself have struggled these past 6 months while on staff as I attempt to get out of the strict rule mentality that I thought had to happen. Those who had never been to CF were actually the ones (thanks MarkFL and my CaluNET friends) to allow me to see a brand new world. With a complicated rule set you then have to have a complicated punishment and then a complicated ban set and a complicated appeals set. I'd much rather enjoy the site for what it is and not force everyone to be who I want them to be.

I'll illustrate to make my point. If there was no rule against flaming, then there would be no reason to report insults. But everyone who reports a flame is glad that the rule is there.

And I already pointed out that this site and the other site have very similar rules. Six versus 10. Two of the other site's rules could be combined. So that's nine. One rule is the safe haven rule. Not a bad or cumbersome rule. One is for not giving out personal info. Not a bad or cumbersome rule. So the only rule that's terribly different is the one about topics requiring special consideration.

But my point when I started in this thread wasn't to defend or bash any site. It was to point out that whether you have one rule or a hundred, there will always be people who have temper tantrums when warned. So it really doesn't have anything to do with the amount of rules. It has to do with the members who don't think they ever do anything wrong.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Sometimes I wonder why we can't have a rule against stupidity but then I notice why that cannot be so.

 

[Lamb]

I already stated that the rules here are the basic rules you'll find on most other forums / message boards. That is why there is a similarity.

I agree that you'll have members on any site who act up. There are sites who will just outright ban a member.

For this site I'm glad that the rules are basic. We have low reports and one formal staff action so we're doing very well. Out of the reports we receive, those from members who were at CF still have that rule mindset, but this is not CF and some of those rules do not apply here. None of my non-CF (non staff) friends have reported anyone.

I actually had a nice conversation with two of them concerning reporting and even though we had all been on message boards for over 20 years, pressing a report button was somewhat alien to them. You see, not all users outside of CF do the constant report thing unless it is a really major issue. They let things slide or they let members handle each other within the threads. Or the offending member is ignored and not responded to. Bullies who don't get attention tend to go elsewhere.

No one is suggesting a site without any rules, yet people I've heard from in the past 8 months want a site with less stifling rules, less heavy-handedness and fairness from staff members. That comes from people who frequent all kinds of message boards.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I already stated that the rules here are the basic rules you'll find on most other forums / message boards. That is why there is a similarity.

I agree that you'll have members on any site who act up. There are sites who will just outright ban a member.

For this site I'm glad that the rules are basic. We have low reports and one formal staff action so we're doing very well. Out of the reports we receive, those from members who were at CF still have that rule mindset, but this is not CF and some of those rules do not apply here. None of my non-CF (non staff) friends have reported anyone.

I actually had a nice conversation with two of them concerning reporting and even though we had all been on message boards for over 20 years, pressing a report button was somewhat alien to them. You see, not all users outside of CF do the constant report thing unless it is a really major issue. They let things slide or they let members handle each other within the threads. Or the offending member is ignored and not responded to. Bullies who don't get attention tend to go elsewhere.

No one is suggesting a site without any rules, yet people I've heard from in the past 8 months want a site with less stifling rules, less heavy-handedness and fairness from staff members. That comes from people who frequent all kinds of message boards.

There's no value in beating up naughty people. The real value is to see them decided to be good people.

 

[George]

I'll speak from my personal experiences from serving as a Moderator and later Supervisor on CF. There were quite a few people actually I heard that enjoyed having rules to cover everything. And then you had those who felt CF had way too many rules. And then you had those who agreed on both spectrums.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I'll speak from my personal experiences from serving as a Moderator and later Supervisor on CF. There were quite a few people actually I heard that enjoyed having rules to cover everything. And then you had those who felt CF had way too many rules. And then you had those who agreed on both spectrums.

I suspect that in most places there comes a time when there is a power struggle between decent people who do not want power and jerks who lust for it. It is often the case that the jerks win.

 

[Hammster]

I suspect that in most places there comes a time when there is a power struggle between decent people who do not want power and jerks who lust for it. It is often the case that the jerks win.

Perhaps. But not always. And not even most of the time. At least in my experience as a mod/supervisor/admin.

 

[TurtleHare]

I'll speak from my personal experiences from serving as a Moderator and later Supervisor on CF. There were quite a few people actually I heard that enjoyed having rules to cover everything. And then you had those who felt CF had way too many rules. And then you had those who agreed on both spectrums.

How did they agree with both spectrums?