Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 11:37 AM

This isn't a complaint. This is a request.

Why can't mods do this more often?

http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...cation-photos/

Clean up threads?

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 11:49 AM

Because then we're accused of "abusing" mod powers.

tooki

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 12:09 PM

I don't think deleting forum abuses as abusing mod powers. But ok.

seanc · Nov 15, 2006, 12:12 PM

While we're on the subject, is it possible for users to delete their own threads and posts? Is there a feature that is just turned off?

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 12:13 PM

I don't mind CONSISTENCY.

Same application of rules for everyone and every thread.

-t

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

I don't mind CONSISTENCY.

Same application of rules for everyone and every thread.

-t

I agree. If a mod can delete personal attacks in his threads, which is what tooki did, then they should delete them all. And not just the ones against mods.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I agree. If a mod can delete personal attacks in his threads, which is what tooki did, then they should delete them all. And not just the ones against mods.

And here we come back to the resource issue.

And since the mods don't have time to clean up every thread, they will only clean up those that they have personal interest in.

And this leaves a sour taste in some people's mouths.

-t

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 01:16 PM

Yeah getting personally attacked is a bit different when it's happening to you.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yeah getting personally attacked is a bit different when it's happening to you.

I agree. And I understand tooki, and why he did it.

But I think the correct way would have been to report those, have a different mod / admin give warnings, and if it continued to get out of hand, close the thread and / or ban the members.

THAT has been the accepted practice in the past.

-t

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

I agree. And I understand tooki, and why he did it.

But I think the correct way would have been to report those, have a different mod / admin give warnings, and if it continued to get out of hand, close the thread and / or ban the members.

THAT has been the accepted practice in the past.

-t

I'd rather just the offending posts get deleted. People will more than likely not post those things if they think it will be gone anyhow. Because even if a thread is locked, people can go back and read the smarminess.

This also keep those that purposely derailing threads TO get them locked because they don't like the nature of said thread from doing so.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'd rather just the offending posts get deleted. People will more than likely not post those things if they think it will be gone anyhow. Because even if a thread is locked, people can go back and read the smarminess.

That is true. Hateful comments should be deleted.
But again, there are tons of hateful and racist posts that were allowed to stick around. Consistency.

But in the case of tooki's thread, not all were that that hateful and malicious.
Sure, it's subjective. But I think he went a little overboard with it.

-t

Dakar² · Nov 15, 2006, 01:34 PM

Think of the post counts!

epluth · Nov 15, 2006, 01:36 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

Because then we're accused of "abusing" mod powers.

tooki

You abusing powers? Never.

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 02:09 PM

I've never abused powers. Some people just view the fact that we don't (can't) get to every thread as "inconsistency" and thus cry foul. The fact that an offense goes unpunished sometimes does not mean the rule in question is invalid, nor does it invalidate instances where that same offense has resulted in punishment.

tooki

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

I agree. And I understand tooki, and why he did it.

But I think the correct way would have been to report those, have a different mod / admin give warnings, and if it continued to get out of hand, close the thread and / or ban the members.

THAT has been the accepted practice in the past.

-t

We have a lot of latitude on how to deal with things here, I am not required to drag another admin into it. The fact is, that thread got horribly derailed by rude people, and it is within my rights and duties as a moderator-administrator to deal with them as I see fit.

In the past, we were a lot more reluctant to delete posts because it removed evidence of misbehavior. Now that vB supports soft-deleting (where you can't see the deleted posts, but we mods and admins can), thus making it possible to hide undesirable posts but preserve them as evidence of misbehavior, we do it more.

tooki

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I agree. If a mod can delete personal attacks in his threads, which is what tooki did, then they should delete them all. And not just the ones against mods.

We try, but the sheer volume of posts here vastly exceeds the capacity of the mod/admin team. That said, if someone brings a trouble thread to our attention, we will deal with it as needed.

tooki

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

In the past, we were a lot more reluctant to delete posts because it removed evidence of misbehavior. Now that vB supports soft-deleting (where you can't see the deleted posts, but we mods and admins can), thus making it possible to hide undesirable posts but preserve them as evidence of misbehavior, we do it more.

Ok, fair enough. I didn't know that there was a change, and that this would also affect the way you would deal with these sort of posts.

-t

seanc · Nov 15, 2006, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

We try, but the sheer volume of posts here vastly exceeds the capacity of the mod/admin team. That said, if someone brings a trouble thread to our attention, we will deal with it as needed.

tooki

Which brings up the subject of adding more moderators.

Kevin · Nov 15, 2006, 02:23 PM

Yeah if there isn't enough man power, get more. It's not like you guys can't afford a new one since no one gets payed anyhow.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 02:36 PM

Maybe we should have a thread in the Lounge for nominations for new mods.

Let's see if someone gets many votes and is willing to do it.

-t

seanc · Nov 15, 2006, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Maybe we should have a thread in the Lounge for nominations for new mods.

Let's see if someone gets many votes and is willing to do it.

-t

We'd probably get 1 million Rob nicks.

I vote w_t_h makes the thread.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by seanc

We'd probably get 1 million Rob nicks.

I vote w_t_h makes the thread.

Yeah, and next thing I know is I'm getting banninated for starting a thread about members

But seriously, the initiative has to come from the admins / mods.
They have to agree / decide / acknowledge that they are understaffed and start the search. By what means, that's up to them.

-t

seanc · 03:08 PM

Well we can sit here all day and chat about it but the sad truth is nothing will probably ever happen. I PMed one of the mods the other day about making a sticky about the PM G5 recalls, no reply.

turtle777 · Nov 15, 2006, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by seanc

Well we can sit here all day and chat about it but the sad truth is nothing will probably ever happen. I PMed one of the mods the other day about making a sticky about the PM G5 recalls, no reply.

Yeah, well, if posting in the FEEDBACK forum doesn't help, I don't know what else to do...

We could obduct the hampstor

-t

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by seanc

Which brings up the subject of adding more moderators.

Which we have been doing.

tooki

Gossamer · Nov 15, 2006, 07:26 PM

So if we report a derailed thread, non-constructive posts will be deleted?

tooki · Nov 15, 2006, 07:58 PM

If it makes sense, yes.

tooki

seanc · Nov 16, 2006, 01:18 AM

Originally Posted by tooki

Which we have been doing.

tooki

I know but it would seem from your previous post that there still aren't enough. IMO, a lot of the mods/admins aren't active enough.

Kevin · Nov 16, 2006, 04:23 AM

Hey they are making progress. I wont bitch while progress is still in the making.

Why? Because if we continue to bitch while they are attempting to make better, they will see no reason to do so if no matter what they do, people bitch.

OB1 · 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by tooki

that thread got horribly derailed by rude people, and it is within my rights and duties as a moderator-administrator to deal with them as I see fit.

tooki

One person was admittedly, pointlessly, very rude to you. A few others made fun of you. You didn't like it. So you censored it. That's lame.

The fact that stuff like this happens is, by far, the worst aspect of MacNN.

Has MacNN considered a "digg up/digg down" type, positive/negative voting system on each post? - Seems to work quite well on other forums I visit. I would've undoubtedly "voted down" the guy making nasty comments about tooki in the aforementioned thread.

Kevin · Nov 16, 2006, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by OB1

One person was admittedly, pointlessly, very rude to you. A few others made fun of you. You didn't like it. So you censored it. That's lame.

If it wasn't off topic and not so darn petty I would agree.

But it was both so....

Has MacNN considered a "digg up/digg down" type, positive/negative voting system on each post? - Seems to work quite well on other forums I visit. I would've undoubtedly "voted down" the guy making nasty comments about tooki in the aforementioned thread.

In the forums I have been in that had this system it simply didn't work. Mob rules. People gang up and silence what they don't what others to see. Breaking the rules or not.

OB1 · Nov 16, 2006, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

In the forums I have been in that had this system it simply didn't work. Mob rules. People gang up and silence what they don't what others to see. Breaking the rules or not.

I've been reading MacNN a while, through various incarnations of your usernames. You're concerned that you'll be "ganged up on". There are only maybe two or three others with the same level of infamy as yourself.

Of course, any system can be abused, but with only one vote per username, just how much can it be abused? Overall, vote-up/down systems on forums do a good job of weeding out the really nasty people. Far better than a few of people with all the power, who admit they haven't the time to police the whole site...

turtle777 · Nov 16, 2006, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

If it wasn't off topic and not so darn petty I would agree.

But it was both so....

I disagree. tooki posted pictures of his with his earrings, so how is a discussion about it off topic ?

-t

Kevin · Nov 16, 2006, 09:27 AM

But the topic wasn't about his earings.

But I kinda agree, with rings like that he should EXPECT comments.

turtle777 · Nov 16, 2006, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

But the topic wasn't about his earings.

The topic was his pictures. How could he expect discussion only about some aspects, and not the others ? He should have not posted those piccs in the first place.

That's what makes this seem like censorship. You were allowed to discuss the nature aspects, but not some of the people aspects.

Originally Posted by Kevin

But I kinda agree, with rings like that he should EXPECT comments.

Tooki knows the Lounge. How could he NOT expect a discussion about this ?
This is beyond me...

-t

mac128k-1984 · Nov 16, 2006, 11:38 AM

I'm coming in late but that never stopped me from giving my $.02 before

I read the tooki thread but I either missed the offensive/of topic replies or they came after I initially perused the thread.

Here's my take on this whole post deletion thing. It seems to me, that some mods, like Tookie are quick to close some threads that have offensive posts or is derailed, yet he kept his thread going and instead of locking it he just deleted the offensive posts. by doing that it smacks of a double standard.

Now here's the qualifier, I don't read each and every thread so I have no idea how many posts the mods delete instead of lock.

From this post (and I concur) the concensus is that deleting posts isn't bad just as long as it can be applied consistently. I'm all for threads that don't get derailed or spiral out of control

tooki · Nov 16, 2006, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

But the topic wasn't about his earings.

But I kinda agree, with rings like that he should EXPECT comments.

But they weren't "comments", they were blatant insults, worded in unacceptably rude terms. It was well outside our stated rules of conduct, to the point that me picking how to deal with it was entirely called for.

tooki

tooki · Nov 16, 2006, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Tooki knows the Lounge. How could he NOT expect a discussion about this ?
This is beyond me...

Because the thread was about PHOTOGRAPHY, not my jewelry. And regardless, the point was that the comments made were FAR afield of normal etiquette, falling squarely in the realm of the obnoxious.

tooki

tooki · Nov 16, 2006, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

Here's my take on this whole post deletion thing. It seems to me, that some mods, like Tookie are quick to close some threads that have offensive posts or is derailed, yet he kept his thread going and instead of locking it he just deleted the offensive posts. by doing that it smacks of a double standard.

There's no double-standard: we are granted the latitude to decide on a case-by-case basis how to deal with a problem.

tooki

vmarks · Nov 16, 2006, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by seanc

Which brings up the subject of adding more moderators.

Which brings up the problem of consistency.

With a smaller number, we can all act consistently. With a larger organization, it gets harder.

seanc · Nov 16, 2006, 03:23 PM

Well clear rules need to be set and understood for all the moderators. As long as everyone abides by them it shouldn't be that hard.... in theory.

tooki · Nov 16, 2006, 03:36 PM

We do have clear rules for members to follow. It's their own fault if they break the rules and then get upset at the consequences.

We mods/admins have procedures, too, but one of our guiding principles is to give a relatively free hand to deal with things on a case-by-case basis.

tooki

seanc · Nov 16, 2006, 03:39 PM

Slightly more on topic and I asked earlier, is there a feature so that members can soft-delete their posts so that members can't see them but admins can if they need to?

tooki · Nov 16, 2006, 03:50 PM

I don't think so. Members have no access to any form of deleting.

tooki

macintologist · Nov 18, 2006, 10:13 PM

If you don't like Tooki's photography (or his earings) then simply DO NOT POST in his threads. Voluntary action is quite possible on this forum and can go a long way in fostering a friendly productive forum environment.

tooki · Nov 19, 2006, 12:42 PM

Indeed. A lot of people here have gotten into the habit of being antagonistic just for the sake of being antagonistic.

tooki

MRTrauffer · Nov 19, 2006, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

Indeed. A lot of people here have gotten into the habit of being antagonistic just for the sake of being antagonistic.

tooki

Just to add my 2 cents...

I really don't understand why so many topics get derailed here. How hard is it to stay on topic?

Take this thread for example...the topic is a question about why Macs are better for GRAPHICS work...yet somehow the conversation is now about RELIGION.

I think the moderators are doing the best that they can given the amount of moderating that is required for this forum. I think common sense should be applied more often by the members here. If someone has something of substance to offer to the topic, then post a response...otherwise...move on or start a new topic.

Oisín · Nov 20, 2006, 09:45 AM

I really don't understand why so many topics get derailed here. How hard is it to stay on topic?

It's quite difficult, actually, for good or bad. The natural evolution of a conversation is for it to develop—to start off one place, move on to another, associatively, and from there to a third one, etc.

Online conversations are quite the same, albeit written. Even threads in which no one ends up arguing about the usual suspects are usually derailed in one way or another. Once the narrow topic of the original post has been exhausted, you move to other related subjects, or you make an associative leap from some part of the thread to another topic.

The question isn't so much why threads are derailed—it's more why on earth so many people find it so utterly necessary to respond to the same people over and over again, in every single thread they crop up; even though they know they've been through the same things with the same people dozens of times before, and will never agree with them about it.

I just can't figure out what's so hard about agreeing to disagree, and just ignoring it when others keep posting the same crap [from your own perspective, of course, not 'objective crap'].

tooki · Nov 20, 2006, 01:20 PM

I wish I had an answer. I have a theory of my own: it's that people don't post because they want to discuss the thread topic, they post because they want to harass another member, and they don't care if they ruin yet another thread to do it.

tooki

tooki · Nov 20, 2006, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by MRTrauffer

Take this thread for example...the topic is a question about why Macs are better for GRAPHICS work...yet somehow the conversation is now about RELIGION.

I just cleaned up that disgrace of a thread, which meant deleting fully half of it, and I issued infractions to every perp. The infractions system should help make it a lot easier to track this kind of thing and nip it in the bud.

tooki