New Forums Part II

[Levo-Lon]

Another point which i feel has caused a concentration of fierce posting is the last year has been a very turbulent time..Brexit and the tory election catastrophe.
This in itself has caused so much anger as its such a big deal for everyone on both sides.

 

[Gary E]

Dammit your edit has ruined my gag.

Yeah, you just look daft now

 

[theclaud]

Yeah, you just look daft now

It's a look I've accidentally perfected over the years.

 

[stephec]

Dammit your edit has ruined my gag.

It took me a minute to realise what you were on about.

 

[User482]

[QUOTE 5053447, member: 9609"]there is a big difference to a bit of politics from time to time, to the full on Politics that some like to turn threads into, it just becomes unpleasant when certain people try to dominate others with their well thought out well rehearsed views and opinions.

[/QUOTE]
So you're saying that you want to make political points without having them challenged?

 

[User482]

It's a fair question. I'll try and answer it so long as you bear in mind that I'm one mod replying and I don't represent a 'mod view' which is precisely how the moderation works, on a consensus basis ie we don't all agree all the time and sometimes we exclude ourselves on the basis of not being objective, not having a clue about the subject or already being involved in the thread.

We respond to reports or we create the reports when we see things we know are going to create issues. That's a particularly fine line and must be tempered with caution. Behind the scenes there's a code of conduct we're expected to follow and to know the rules. No action is taken by a single mod without the agreement of others unless it's to lock a thread pending moderation. All that said, we're human and make mistakes sometimes.

Edit: PaCA worked slightly differently, in that all posts were read and checked. As a system it was pretty intensive but it did really help to untangle where threads had gone off track.

So, here is confirmation that the Mods were reading and checking every single post in P&CA. Does this strike anyone else as insane? Whatever happens in the future, I think we have to get well away from such an inherently unsustainable model.

 

[MarkF]

Slightly less than half of the threads that came up had any connection at all to cycling, so can we stop pretending please that there is any significant membership that only wants to talk about cycling?

I talk mostly in the cafe, but I read 100x more elsewhere on the forum.

 

[mjr]

So, here is confirmation that the Mods were reading and checking every single post in P&CA. Does this strike anyone else as insane? Whatever happens in the future, I think we have to get well away from such an inherently unsustainable model.

Yes. It's even worse than premoderating everything like in the helmet forum because there's nothing slowing the snowball of replies.

 

[Crackle]

So, here is confirmation that the Mods were reading and checking every single post in P&CA. Does this strike anyone else as insane? Whatever happens in the future, I think we have to get well away from such an inherently unsustainable model.

Actually I wasn't sure whether to mention that, which is why it went in as an edit. I don't want anyone to get to hung up on it. Don't forget, a lot of us would have been reading things as a matter of course, not because we had to. It's just a tick in a box and quite often, something we'd ticked off ended up being the thing we then had to go back and sort.

 

[Andrew_P]

Yes. It's even worse than premoderating everything like in the helmet forum because there's nothing slowing the snowball of replies.

Look for a problem you will find a problem. The most important thing about this would be the instructions to the Mods reading it. If they were given out freely to posters in that section then there would be a clear guideline on what was allowed and what wasn't. I cannot believe the instruction to the Mods was just read it, without an action list as that would be pointless and the actions would vary by the person reading it. Everyone is different, mods included. So there had to be a guide line list as laid down by the site owner or chief Mod or the person who thought it was a good idea. Personally had I been a mod at the time I would have retired immediately

 

[Andrew_P]

Actually I wasn't sure whether to mention that, which is why it went in as an edit. I don't want anyone to get to hung up on it. Don't forget, a lot of us would have been reading things as a matter of course, not because we had to. It's just a tick in a box and quite often, something we'd ticked off ended up being the thing we then had to go back and sort.

oops sorry cross posted.

 

[User482]

Actually I wasn't sure whether to mention that, which is why it went in as an edit. I don't want anyone to get to hung up on it. Don't forget, a lot of us would have been reading things as a matter of course, not because we had to. It's just a tick in a box and quite often, something we'd ticked off ended up being the thing we then had to go back and sort.

From what you're saying, it sounds like time expenditure without a great deal to show for it. I would note that in all the repeated complaints about reports and Mod workload in general, not once was it mentioned that all posts were being checked, even after a specific question to Shaun. More generally, I think it sets a framework for discussion that's not particularly healthy.

 

[Hill Wimp]

[QUOTE 5053447, member: 9609"]there is a big difference to a bit of politics from time to time, to the full on Politics that some like to turn threads into, it just becomes unpleasant when certain people try to dominate others with their well thought out well rehearsed views and opinions.

Sadly I don't think any stand alone forum / sub forum will ever work - Nobody is ever going to stand on a soap box in their own back garden, they want a busy park/ market square to broadcast from.

I hope Shaun is successful in what he is trying to do, but how he achieves it I have no idea, however I think the Mods are getting it right at the moment at keeping threads friendly. CC is a wonderful place 99% f the time[/QUOTE]
It's bloody fantastic when we have the Swallows back on the site

 

[mjr]

Tools at your disposal, do nothing, edit post, remove posts, leave a mod note, pm people (I already have), thread ban them, issue a reminder, ban them!

I would be liberally editing posts to remove offences and quotes of them, removing posts with nothing left and pming offenders warnings. Then repeat offenders get thread banned and if it spills out into another thread, banning for a while. BUT 22 years moderating various sites has made me the moderating equivalent of a hanging judge (inconsistent application can quickly look like favouritism IMO) and I would want a fuller set of tools than that ASAP and to revise the rules to basically discourage thread drift and spillover everywhere except the cafe and be even harsher against what are basically PMs in public because I think they rarely end well when there are opposing views - if people want to address messages to each other much, then use PMs.

And to address an earlier comment, I know I'm part of the problem. I know I've been moderated sometimes and sometimes it's warranted, a few times I still feel it wasn't (such as the recent accusation of politics for explaining part of how a headline which looked odd but could be correct) but mostly I've no idea because the whole post has gone and I've no idea which one it was. I would still like to help find a solution without all the recent doorslams.

 

[Hill Wimp]

We do. However I also come here for fun and it would be no fun at all if all discussion had to be about cycling. It would just be weird and/or dull. I just clicked new posts. Slightly less than half of the threads that came up had any connection at all to cycling, so can we stop pretending please that there is any significant membership that only wants to talk about cycling? It says at the top of the page that it's a community. Of course, it is a privately run community space with no 'free speech' rights, but if people don't feel they have the freedom to discuss things in good faith without undue interference or obstruction, and the support of the community in upholding that good faith, they will leave. Or simply stop participating, as Mickle has done. Sorry to dwell on it, but I miss him.

You make a good point Claud that people do come here for fun and that they should be allowed to discuss things in good faith however certain members of PACA dragged it down into the gutter, constantly. Nothing to do with their political leanings just down right rudeness, bullying and making comments that certainly did not add to the discussion or topic at hand.

If those posters stopped behaving like kids in a playground then none of this needed to happen.

I for one learnt a great deal from many of the threads but got totally hacked off reading all the childish bickering and sometime downright vitriol within them. I get enough of that in my day job. Quite frankly i got hacked off that such posters were spoiling something that i enjoyed.