Jump to content

CTO - The Future


Scotty

Recommended Posts

I have to agree with The Knowledge. If you can't at least try to post in English, using punctuation and grammar etc to the best of your ability, as well as posting in a normal manner (not this new line for every phrase nonsense), then you shouldn't even try at all.

This isn't a English class, if it's readable who really cares!

One thing i might suggest is when posts are either edited/deleted by mods/admins, it could be under the banner "CTO Staff" or something similar?. That way nobody knows who did it, therefore no personal attacks against the mods?

At the same time, like has been suggested before, no post counts and titles! I'm a member on several other sites and this does create a "I'm better than you mentality" especially with established members who think there views are the be all and end all, with a lot of 'established' members jumping on the bandwagon! And putting off new members??

This is a supporters website. Somewhere you can express your views and get other peoples points of view back. Not everyone will agree. But is that not the whole point of forums? Or have i missed something?

Edited by Mick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have to agree with The Knowledge. If you can't at least try to post in English, using punctuation and grammar etc to the best of your ability, as well as posting in a normal manner (not this new line for every phrase nonsense), then you shouldn't even try at all.

This isn't a English class, if it's readable who really cares!

That's the point though, sometimes it isn't and at the bare minimum, people should at least try and make an effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with The Knowledge. If you can't at least try to post in English, using punctuation and grammar etc to the best of your ability, as well as posting in a normal manner (not this new line for every phrase nonsense), then you shouldn't even try at all.

This isn't a English class, if it's readable who really cares!

That's the point though, sometimes it isn't and at the bare minimum, people should at least try and make an effort.

You have no point though. If someone makes a valid point, yet it isn't in proper english or has the correct grammer does it make it any less valid? I think not.

I've yet to see one post on this forum i've not been able to read!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We actually have had some users who's post were very difficult to read/understand. However, it is not for anyone to ridicule users for this and the moderators will tend to talk with these people privately to offer some friendly advice and guidance on how they can improve things.

We don't allow TXT Speak as a matter of course, and we do expect certain unwritten "forum etiquette" to be followed (no posting in all caps or large fonts all the time etc), but in the grand scheme of things it has never, and is not currently, a big issue and we seem to be slipping into the area of nit-picking when we need to be focusing on the larger issues.

Things have improved since this discussion started. We have had one or two who ignored the points raised here and they currently find themselves in moderated status (posts need approving by one of the team before they appear live on the forum) and one or two who have slipped as a result of the anger/frustration of events on the park, which we recognise and understand, and it's been dealt with by giving them a quiet nudge. We still have users sticking their nose in where these decisions have been made, and that doesn't help....but we'll deal with that.

Much is made of what moderators should or should not do and when they should do it. What I would add to that is the fact that each user on any forum is the first line of moderation. You have the power to review your own posts before hitting the submit/send button and taking a moment to read over something before you do so can make a world of difference.....not only for checking spelling/grammar, but for judging the tone/nature of your reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the same time, like has been suggested before, no post counts and titles! I'm a member on several other sites and this does create a "I'm better than you mentality" especially with established members who think there views are the be all and end all, with a lot of 'established' members jumping on the bandwagon! And putting off new members??

we will look at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

Edited by RiG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

I dont like Micks idea . If your going to censor someones post at least have the balls to put your name to it .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Micks idea of moderated posts appearing as "Edited by CTO Staff" in case the poster concerned thinks that they are being targeted by a particular member of the admin staff.

I dont like Micks idea . If your going to censor someones post at least have the balls to put your name to it .

It is not censorship DC, it is moderation and if your posts are deemed in need of moderation then perhaps you should take an introspective look.

I have had posts deemed by particular mods to be inappropriate which in hindsight probably were, but at the time I felt they were justified. For a short period I then took to scrutinising every post of that mod which I saw and picked fault where I could which is not only childish but detracts from the experience/purpose of the forum.

Personally, I believe it's an excellent idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the end of the day we will look at all suggestions put forward and consider them on merit .... we will not please everyone, that is impossible, but we will make a decision based on what we think will make life easier for all.

As regards moderation being by "the team" that is something we will consider but I cant say what we will decide yet as that discussion with the mods hasnt taken place yet and currently, the edit line automatically inserts the "edited by" part into it whether they want to or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a short period I then took to scrutinising every post of that mod which I saw and picked fault where I could which is not only childish but detracts from the experience/purpose of the forum.

Personally, I believe it's an excellent idea.

Glad it wasn't just me doing that. One thing that helped me appreciate the work the mods put in is when they started to use the "reason for edit" box. I realise it's no fun to have to moderate countless posts when you want to enjoy the forum yourself but when you are on the other side and believe you are in the right a wee explanation can make a big difference to how your attitude is affected. I think that the idea of removing the mods ID from the edit is good, it removes the personal element from any ensuing discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, what do you mean by respect? I certainly get offended by the Islamophobia spoken about by certain members on here. Should that be banned? If not, should anti-Semitism, homophobia, anti-black be ok too?

I can't believe anyone hates Renegade. I disagree with about 90% of his posts but certainly enjoy reading them probably more than anyone else's.

I've noticed your first point. I noticed a few months ago, one poster came out with a seething anti-Islam stance. Was anything done about it? No. If he'd said the same about Catholics or Jews or some other minority group, they'd be banned for life on sectarian grounds.

On your last point, I must have had the most attacks on me than any other poster on the this forum, and once on P&B, where I was referred to by a regualar poster on here as a "retard". But on here I've called everything from a halfwit, to a County supporter, numerous parts of the human anatomy, numerous different names for human waste, an idiot, stuck in a pre-war era, had a thread calling for my dismissal and even a Gay Crusader! Seriously unbelieveable stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On your last point, I must have had the most attacks on me than any other poster on the this forum, and once on P&B, where I was referred to by a regualar poster on here as a "retard". But on here I've called everything from a halfwit, to a County supporter, numerous parts of the human anatomy, numerous different names for human waste, an idiot, stuck in a pre-war era, had a thread calling for my dismissal and even a Gay Crusader! Seriously unbelieveable stuff.

I sympathise with you Renegade. I have been called many things, I was even called a Jaggy once but I could live with most if not all of them but a C*unty supporter? Man, that must hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed your first point. I noticed a few months ago, one poster came out with a seething anti-Islam stance. Was anything done about it? No. If he'd said the same about Catholics or Jews or some other minority group, they'd be banned for life on sectarian grounds.

I dont recall the post in question but I have one simple question for you ..... did you use the report button ?

The FIRST line of defence in any moderation on the site is always going to be the users themselves. If you are offended by a post you report it. Mods and Admin may not read every thread so might miss it. If it is reported we will certainly discuss it and either agree with you or disagree with you. If we agree with you we will then do what the team have decided is the best course of action (edit, warning, deletion, ban etc). quite simple really ...

Our forthcoming golden rules, much of which have been written/suggested by site users rather than mods will make it clear that you are the first line of defence in deeming what is acceptable or not. If we can get to a stage where the users are more self-moderating than they are right now it will be a better place for us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

But here's another idea. Why not change a few of the moderators around periodically. Theres's one or two moderators who are quiet good, there's one or two that are a bit hasty, there's one or two that are a bit high and mighty and there's one or two that seldom seem to be around. So, I suggest, you keep the admin as they are and install one or two as "permament moderators", whilst changing a few of the mods every month or so. That way, other possible trouble makers see what it's like to deal with trouble, and may create a greater all round respect on this site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you say, we have a wide range of moderator "types" and that's fairly intentional as it provides a more balanced view. Not all moderators are active in terms of physical participation in moderating the forums, but they are there as they provide valued input to discussions and the like.

There's no way we would consider any form of random moderator appointments either. Moderators have a lot of responsibility and they need to be trusted. They have access to tools on the site that, in the wrong hands, could cause a lot of damage. They also have access to information which we simply could not, and would not risk just any old person getting their hands on.

Also, just as you need a fairly consistent starting 11 in football in order to put together some consistency in play, we need to use that same principle when it comes to the moderators to ensure a consistent approach to moderation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not change a few of the moderators around periodically. Theres's one or two moderators who are quiet good, there's one or two that are a bit hasty, there's one or two that are a bit high and mighty and there's one or two that seldom seem to be around.

More a subjective account than a scientific one though eh Renegade? One man's 'hasty' is another man's 'firm' etc etc.

Due to everybody's different work patterns, some people can be off the site for a good spell then very active for a spell. Some are on during the day, others at night, etc.

One thing you can be sure of is that the team reads, on the moderators' forum, the reports of what's happening and decides as a team what action should be taken. So often it's immaterial which mod has warned you or raised your warning level or deleted your post or smacked your botty. It's usually a team decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

My question remains ... did YOU use the report button? If the answer is no, then the whole point you are making is moot.

As a moderation team there may be some discussions we think are near (or have gone beyond) the knuckle and we may intervene, but there may be some where we let them roll unless we receive a complaint. Its a judgement call and a balancing act between over and under moderating and as I said above, the first line of defence is with the users and their ability to report a particular post and why they think it is unacceptable.

If we get a report it may tip our own opinion about a thread one way or another. If we dont get a report from you then, sorry, please dont complain about the thread several months or years later and hold it up as an example.

Rotating Moderators ? - sorry, no. They would get dizzy.

As Mantis said, one man's "hasty" is another's "firm" etc. One of the factors in choosing the mods we have now was to choose people we trusted to act responsibly but who might have differing opinions on things and I think we succeeded. In fact, I know we succeeded if you are able to categorise them as you did.

Any discussions we have as a mod team tend to offer up different opinions and that is exactly what we wanted. We didnt want a bunch of clones, we wanted people who would throw their opinion into a mod discussion even if it was an unpopular one. We wanted mods that would say "Hey Scotty ... you are over-reacting" or "you are wrong" and thats what we got. We are not perfect, and never will be, but we do make better decisions because we have that wide range of views within a team who are not scared to voice their opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've yet to see one post on this forum i've not been able to read!

I have.

IIRC, a couple of mods were involved in that thread, and would've have seen what I mentioned, but did nowt about it or didn't think it was bad enough to moderate.

My question remains ... did YOU use the report button? If the answer is no, then the whole point you are making is moot.

I didn't but did think about it at the time. How good it would've done is another thing though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy