A Thought Re Moderation Effects

[firesprite]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

having followed a couple of threads for the last day or two, there seems to be discontent amongst many folks as to the effectiveness of the moderators

this isnt a dig, gripe, poke , insult or nasty remark aimed at anyone b4 folks begin to raise their hackles.....

its a thought which MAY help or may not.....

if a member is repeatedly "guilty" if thats the appropriate term of postings which offend then apart form reporting it immediately which is step 1 what about then refraining from responding to the post?

If someone is posting to get a rise or reaction then its obvious they they enjoy the backlash of replies and discussions, perhaps interjecting again with provocative responses then we can deny them their opportunity.

Report to the mods and ignore the topic completely, it will quickly fall down the list into archive, lost and ignored. (and i realise "lost" isnt gone technically)

If repeated topics are totally ignored and replies not commented on within threads then that person will eventually get the point.

Their choice being to keep posting but be ignored until posts become civil or bog off to another site!

Kinda group moderation, sending someone to Coventry. (no offense to Coventry)

 

[~elizabeth~]

Kinda group moderation, sending someone to Coventry. (no offense to Coventry)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

That's an excellent idea, and very often it happens spontaneously once people spot that the poster is a troll. Unfortunately if the person in question hijacks a perfectly legitmate issue (of genuine concern to a number of people) it's a lot harder for people to put into practice.

 

[Ann Glews]

If there is a repeat offender can the moderators ban them from the site? :- "

 

[bardmand]

If  there is a repeat offender can the moderators ban them from the site? :- "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

From "The Rules" (My emphasis. Click "Rules & Disclaimer" in the top left menu for the full set of rules):

The Warning System

We operate a warning system for all members. Initially all Members have a warning level of 0%. Any Member found to be breaking any K9 Community rules or disrupting the Community in any way will have their warning level increased. The level of increase will be at the discretion of a Moderator or Administrator and will be tied to the seriousness of the problem. Any change in warning level will be notified to the Member and reasons for the change given. Any Member reaching 100% will be banned from the Community. If a Member is causing a problem, as well as an increase in their warning level other measures may be taken, such as preventing future posts for a period of time or the requirement that future posts be checked by a Moderator before being displayed on K9. If a Members warning level reaches 50% these additional measures will definitely be taken but they may be taken before that. There is no automatic method for a Members warning level to be reduced.

 

[Mark Roberts]

you see the problem is even this topic could be seen as inflamatory, the moderators do their best to be fair to everyone.

I know all the mods try not to be too heavy handed whilst at the same time keeping the forum suitable for all ages ect.

like i've stated before if anyone see's a post they consider unsuitable to be on k9 contact a few mods in case 1's not on or so that the 1st moderator on can take action.

 

[~Helen~]

there seems to be discontent amongst many folks as to the effectiveness of the moderators

If there is a discontent amongst many folks, then it would be a good idea to raise this via the PM system, because one of the rules of K9 is:

Users may not argue a Moderators or Administrators decision publicly. Any and all complaints directed at a Moderator must first address the Moderator in question via PM. If the problem can not be resolved, then the Moderator and user must send their positions to an Administrator. The Administrators decision will be final.

With regard to the way some things have been moderated, moderators moderate according the site rules set up by Admin. As has been said before - if you don't like the rules here, don't use the site. Using K9 isn't a right, it's a privilege which can be withdrawn at any time. We try not to withdraw that privilege unless absolutely necessary.

Mark is right - moderators do try not to be too heavy-handed. We all want this site to stay up so that we can carry on talking to each other, so mods try to tread a fine line between removing offensive content, and allowing freedom of speech (within the law).

We can't please everyone, although we do try to! If we start banning people all over the place then we will be guilty of pandering to the nanny state, and none of us want that.

Probably the best thing here is for the moderators to take on board the points raised in this thread, discuss them in a kind of 'moderator meeting', and see how we can do things better.

I'm going to close this topic because whatever the OP says, it could be inflammatory and be seen as a good excuse for anyone to have a go at the mods - who after all are only trying to keep the site going, giving up their free time to make sure nothing gets out of hand. :thumbsup: