Perhaps an even better way is, if a member actually spends time seeking and following another member just to persistently confront his posts (and they will typically knit pick content to find something to confront… exaggerate the point), it’s a pretty evident behavior for a mod to detect. If we’re a mod. I would simply ban the member with little due process.
1 Like
yeah, I’ve seen that before. Older tek was to block ALL responses!
1 Like
What would be the point of that? The OP would be talking to himself.
Rich
This reminds me of some of Juniatha’s threads on the old forum, where (at least at some point) she claimed to have the ability to delete posts selectively because it was ‘her’ thread. This seems to me to be an option in addition to ‘block, mute, and report’ for some situations.
Finer granularity of the ‘ignore’ feature so it only applies to particular threads might be a useful refinement.
1 Like
precisely.
1 Like
I very much like the ‘time out’ provision that temporarily suspends a thread for four hours “while everyone calms down and rethinks what they said”
This becomes a problem, though, when it is repeatedly reset (with another four hour timer running) six or seven times in succession… and then the thread disappears anyway.
I would recommend that if this kind of suspension is used, the exact post(s), issue(s), and users be mentioned, and that PMs be sent to the ‘culprits’. Same procedure might be applied for flags that cause removal or suspension of posts
I’ll digest the feedback over the weekend and provide next steps in the next few business days.
In the meantime, I researched how users can block other user:
- Go to someones profile
- Click the button with the Bell
- A dropdown is presented with 3 options for notifications type. The 3rd option will hide all content
1 Like
I will repeat what I posted earlier.
A better way to deal with that issue would be to give the OP the power to block other members. That way, the blocked member(s) couldn’t even post on that thread.
Personally, I would not choose to block any existing forums member. But it would be a more effective option for an OP than merely hiding posts from the OP’s view.
Rich
1 Like
I think whatever Nick decides to try and do it will be a case of having no good path to follow. It is a case of trying to choose a solution, none of which are very likely to solve the issue.
Looking back over twenty years here, the mods would keep things pretty much focused on the subject that brought us to the forum in the first place. Threads would stray at times but often found their way back to the topic at hand. However, once you saw a thread go off topic it would get a reminder and then locked if it deteriorated further.
Having the Diner is great as we can chit chat about whatever and include the group. The Diner is somewhat self policing as over the years some of the more belligerent guest have given up if ignored, with a few of the more serious cases removed by the magazine. Usually those involved racism, political and/or religious opinions.
What I would try if asked would be to have what we had in the past that seemed to work well.
- Have member mods to help keep things on topic with a gentle reminder and then either remove offending post(s) or lock the thread if need be.
Have an off topic thread such as the Diner to discuss whatever, except for those topics mentioned in the pre-amble at the start of each month.
2 Likes
That’s what I have been doing all along. Two, with a third teetering on the edge.
Makes life…easier. I see all these “hidden replies”, and based on previous experience, I can just imagine. Plus I think those two like the sound of their gums flapping.
I don’t know what the issue is. You don’t want to block members. What’s the difference to you if can’t see it or nobody can? Let them spew. You don’t have to worry, because you won’t see it.
Unless you can’t sleep at night if you haven’t responded to every jerkwad, seen or not.
If you and everybody else block/ignore the miscreants, they will eventually go away as no one will be feeding their ego.
Bet you haven’t tried Nick’s suggestion.
I can aLmost guarantee up to 4 hidden replies as the juveniles try to defend them selves.
TOC
1 Like
I will ad one thing. When we had a hand full of member mods monitoring things and some action was required with a thread or individual they would often consult each other on what action should be taken before implementing it.
1 Like
With member mods, the current Discourse feature that hides ‘flagged’ threads for some specified time (pending review) could be reduced, perhaps to a few hours, which might help with that aspect of the flag problem. Members could also easily PM the ‘member moderators’ with concerns or questions.
I would NOT have member moderators making final decisions about actually removing posts or threads – only advising Firecrown moderators to take those steps. In my opinion that would encourage people to edit offending content (or agree to remove posts if others do so) shy of the ‘you know perfectly well how the trick is done’ consignment to the memory hole.
One problem with member moderators is that the idea of neighborhood policing can appeal to the wrong people – the ones who think ‘handing out the bans’ is an ideal way to start draining a swamp. Another problem is the sort of ‘race condition’ where one mod makes changes and another mod reverses them (this was a fun thing to watch when Quora first tried to implement bot moderation). Again, there should be some dedicated procedure to appeal moderation – now with the added stage of ‘appealing to an established higher court’ at Firecrown if any member mod starts abusing privileges.
Outside of office hours Firecrown staff seems to be off the clock when it comes to the forums. Select member mods should be able to make the decision and police threads as appropriate and be able to take action. Once Firecrown staff clock into work they can do a quick review and reverse any action taken by the member mods.
Years ago we had a individual posting porn videos starting on a Friday night and lasting through the weekend until staff came into work. This stopped once member mods were put in place as they had the power to remove the offending content.
She also went completely unhinged because someone dared have “juniata” in their user name. I doubt she ever had the ability to delete posts:
Finding a good volunteer and objective moderator is very difficult and it will not resolve the situation because posters will claim the moderator is biased…once again Firecrown will be called in to referee a problem that grown adults should be able to deal with. Also this forum is the public facing part of Firecrown and there is risk with volunteers.
Some legal liability concerns as well. Moderation opens up parts of the software where you have access to some private information. You lose control with a volunteer.
Something to remember is that there is essentially no case where someone is completely unbiased. You’re biased, I’m biased, Firecrown is biased, everyone is.
1 Like
There are fixed limits usually to how many people can be banned via IP address. At least with the older discussion forum software, they might have got around that via email registration. However, a ban is not permanent with an email address because email addresses can easily be spoofed with Linux software and new accounts setup.
There will never be an ideal solution here in my view. It is a pick your poison choice.
I remember when they put a MR member mod in charge of the big trains forum.
Did not end well.
2 Likes
I can see why. The member mods would most likely be the complainers who already go around flagging everybody else’s posts or being the stick in the mud who complains while everybody else is enjoying the discussion. Making them mods would just give them a badge to enforce their Draconian beliefs on everybody else.
Either that or you’d get the wanna-be tyrants who would use their authority to let themselves and their buddies be bullies and punish everyone they have grudges with and stomp down anything they don’t like. Too much potential for abuse.
Kind of like why HOAs are a terrible idea.
1 Like
I did a bit of moderation once. Printed guidelines and all. Nobody was happy, including me.