Jump to content

Conflict Between Mods


Recommended Posts

The content of a thread has been deleted and the thread renamed in Local News, with a message of apology to anyone who didn't post anything "trite or offensive or downright insensitive".

Firstly, I'm not sure being 'trite' should be grounds for a thread being locked, otherwise the forum would be empty, but this decision came within a short number of hours of a moderator, John Wright, saying there was nothing offensive or insensitive in the thread, other than one post by Barrie Stevens. Now a moderator has deleted the content and locked the thread, claiming there was too much offensive and insensitive content to 'prune'.

In situations where there is a public disagreement between Mods, like this, shouldn't there be a system for allowing members to appeal decisions made by one Mod which had been ruled out by another Mod just a matter of hours earlier?

Of course, there may have been some overly crass posts between 6pm, when I last saw the thread, and just after 8pm, in which case the decision in this case is entirely fair. Although given it was Ans it was probably an ill-conceived, self-righteous, knee-jerk reaction.

Regardless of the specifics in this case, what are members supposed to do when one Mod says everything is okay and another over reacts and bandies threats of bans around over exactly the same issue? Should we be submitting every post for pre-approval by a committee, to ensure we don't fall foul of the Mod who disagrees, or should Ans just grow up?

Because he is a petulant little girl, I fully expect Ans to prevent me posting again, and remove this thread, so I hope some people get to read it first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see why you should be banned for this as you haven't actually done anything mentioned to activate his threat. My only warning came from him i think? after I didn't bow to a similar styled 'do as I say' PM and posted on the same subject matter in general rather than the actual incident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're volunteers and this is a private forum. Putting in an MF Court of Appeal with Lord Justice Amadeus & colleagues sitting to decide on 'Ans v Barry' is hardly practical. The thread had some insensitive remarks in it for which there was no need. Not sure if I agree with nuking the whole thing but chances are it wouldn't have imroved in quality and it's not something you want the family of the poor man to read. So no great loss in seeing the thread gone. Case dismissed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're volunteers and this is a private forum. Putting in an MF Court of Appeal with Lord Justice Amadeus & colleagues sitting to decide on 'Ans v Barry' is hardly practical. The thread had some insensitive remarks in it for which there was no need. Not sure if I agree with nuking the whole thing but chances are it wouldn't have imroved in quality and it's not something you want the family of the poor man to read. So no great loss in seeing the thread gone. Case dismissed.

It's not about whether the thread was a great loss, it is about having some clue how to behave on the forums. We were told, by a mod, the content was fine, apart from Barrie Stevens' post, which could have been edited or removed. Then, a few hours later, another mod comes along, deletes the content, locks the thread and threatens fortnight bans to anyone who disagrees with him. If we cannot be confident that following advice posted by one Mod will keep us out of trouble with another, how can the forum fucntion?

There was one remark which was insensitive, and that is a view supported, in a public post, by one of your own volunteer moderators. Why did the entire thread have to be removed? Why do we have to be threatened with fortnight bans when, with one possible exception, no one had done anything wrong.

This is about not being able to be confident that you are not breaking the rules after a moderator has told you, categorically, that that is the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No great loss I agree, but the other recent fatality thread is still up and is there now a timescale before anything about a fatal incident an be posted? Bad taste is in most threads so can't really be a factor in itself

Edited by WTF
Link to post
Share on other sites

No great loss I agree, but the other recent fatality thread is still up and is there now a timescale before anything about a fatal incident an be posted? Bad taste is in most threads so can't really be a factor in itself

There's only one factor involved in the way this thread has been handled, and we all know what it is, but the non-Mods among us are too scared to say anything because we'll end up suspended or banned.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think this is a rather petulant topic that highlights the poorer side of MF. In real terms, why should you be worried about being banned if you use a little consideration of just what you are posting?

The thread that was deleted was initially a discussion about a local incident, but then became the usual MF bickering ground before Barrie completely overstepped the mark by making derogatory statements about someone (who happened to be the deceased). It would be foolish of anyone to make such statements on a forum about anyone alive, so why would it be ok to say so about someone who is not?

And to be honest, I don't disagree with Ans' action - they are there to moderate. If it is easier to delete than prune, then posters should be more thoughtful about what they post. The majority of normal, general topics require no moderation whatsoever - why all the fuss about 1 small topic that had gone past its sell by date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In real terms, why should you be worried about being banned if you use a little consideration of just what you are posting?

Because a Mod had just told us it was all okay, but it turns another Mod felt very differently - how do we know when we risk being banned, especially if we are following one Mod's advice?

If it is easier to delete than prune, then posters should be more thoughtful about what they post.

Again, one Mod had pointed to a single post which may have been considered insenitive and suggested the poster may like to remove it. Another Mod came along and, in typically petulant style, ignored the stance of another Moderator, ignored the fact there was ONE post which needed amending and took the unjustified, knee-jerk reaction of removing all the content and threatening bans for anyone who defies them.

I agree moderation is sometimes needed, but just as posters should exercise consideration, so should Mods, rather than treating it like a private fiefdom in which to take out the day's frustrations.

My complaint isn't about defending this thread, it is about questioning the way it was handled by the moderators.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The mods have their own forum, or discussion area where they decide these things, so while one thought there was no major problem after further discussion perhaps it was decided mutually to shut it down?

 

As nearly everytime someone dies a thread about them normally manages to degenerate into mindless bickering and people getting 'upset' over frankly non-upsetting posts I wouldn't be surprised if the mods aren sick of it and frankly can't be bothered. They do do this for free. I know I couldn't be arsed.

Edited by alibaba
Link to post
Share on other sites

The mods have their own forum, or discussion area where they decide these things, so while one thought there was no major problem after further discussion perhaps it was decided mutually to shut it down?

Then this thread is a n opportunity to confirm this was a mutual decision
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then this thread is a n opportunity to confirm this was a mutual decision

Why does it matter? Because you want to hang Ans out to dry? They do the moderating voluntarily and I wouldn't blame them for not wanting to sit and analyse every little word. If it looks dodgy - bin it! That would be my method, but like alibaba, I couldn't be bothered. Shouldn't you be grateful that some people will give up time to do the role, rather than whinging that they aren't doing what suits you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no disagreement. Barrie did not remove or edit his post as requested by me, several posters had quoted it by the time Ans decided action should be taken, after discussion in the mods forum, and in the end the view was taken, by Ans, with which I agree, that prunuing the topic would be too difficult and too longwinded and result in anomalies

 

We delete or set invisble very little, only when we absolutely have to

 

We don't warn or ban just because we get criticised, nor do we delete.

 

So sorry to disappoint, no mod fall out or contradiction or ill will. We generally do not enter into correspondence or debate about decisions, and will not do so nw. Mods decisions are final.

 

There are some of you want more and procative modding, which apart from time constraints on volunteers is legally dangerous as it would make us common law editors and potentially liable for posts and lose us a statutory defence and those who don't want any modding at all, which is equally dangerous. We can't please either of you with the reasonable middle way we adopt.

 

I can't see that a debate about modding style will cause anyone to be banned or warned, its not how we work, BUT do read and observe the T&C and remember we cut many posters slack, so please cut us some

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We're volunteers and this is a private forum. Putting in an MF Court of Appeal with Lord Justice Amadeus & colleagues sitting to decide on 'Ans v Barry' is hardly practical. The thread had some insensitive remarks in it for which there was no need. Not sure if I agree with nuking the whole thing but chances are it wouldn't have imroved in quality and it's not something you want the family of the poor man to read. So no great loss in seeing the thread gone. Case dismissed.

 

Errr, no it's not m7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

]Then this thread is a n opportunity to confirm this was a mutual decision

So you got your confirmation from John, but ....

and so the ranks close...please delete this thread

... you still want to stamp your feet in temper. Not sure you're in a position to be calling Ans a 'petulant little girl' ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...