There has to be a common standard for deletions and transfer

[lonelywombat]

It seems after nearly two years of butchered posts we have gone from one mad system to another.

Why should I go to a thread and find some or most have been junked.

Surfcrest this was supposed to have been overcome when Neal left.

What we need is a clear statement of when a post has been removed or transferred

[scottish-guy]

I have no issues with the current moderation policies.

It seems to me things are moving along just fine - it's a work in progress.

[bucknaway]

The way I see the board..... It's a car that had a flat tire. Surfcrest came and put a spare on the board and told us all that the board is back on the road and the spare will be changed but for now, we are roadworthy.

I'm waiting to see who the next mod or mod's will be?

I. An remember when Smiles was a mod. I hated him in that spot but I loved him as a poster even when he gave me the pointy end of the stick.

I liked elephant spike as a mod, he only exercised moderator controls when it was a last resort.

I look at message boars as a bank of thoughts and words where we all make deposits and as long as our deposits are kept safe and treated with some appreciation than we will deposit will grow in size and value. But if our deposits are mismanaged. Locked away or treated as if they are worthless, then deposits will fall in Size and value.

No one trusts a bank that mishandles deposits and the same is true for a message board forum. Who'll smiles continue to write stellar posts if his threads are often locked? Would Scottish guy share his best detailed lines of humor if his posts were often deleted or edited?

We have the board we have for many reasons, and now we are all waiting to see what the new management will bring.
Will this place be a safe place for words, thoughts and opinion, or will it be a moderators playground?

I'm sure many are watching and waiting.

(Typed from my iPad while in bed before my morning coffee!)

[Smiles]

." ... Will this place be a safe place for words, thoughts and opinion, or will it be a moderators playground? ... "
Well put Buck, that is exactly the issue.
I do not believe for a minute that Surfcrest in any way desires a 'personal playground'. Neal did, and look where it got him.
jinks is not Neal by a very large long shot, but he has proved many times in the past that he gives not a hoot for the Guidelines, nor the clause there which gives reasonable guidance to moderators: (i.e. (6) Moderating etiquette)

[jinks]

(6) Moderating etiquette

Which was written by Neal !

[christianpfc]

I am very sorry to read about ongoing deletions. I am against deletions (unless they are necessary to remove messages that violate the law) on this and other boards.

[Smiles]

(6) Moderating etiquette
Which was written by Neal !
No, it wasn't.

[Surfcrest]

It's quite a balancing act.

How do we go from say; gladiator games with enough blood to soak a parking lot to a football game where we are only talking about bumps and bruises?

I really dislike moderator ink, because quite frankly...the way it had been used in the recent past was both excessive and that it quite often altered the original post's meaning and intention entirely.

Clearly there is a large component of the membership that doesn't want a continuing war from thread to thread, with blood splattered all over their reseach and hard work.

Similarly so, there are those that demand free speach and the ability to defend themselves and their honour as far as it takes to be settled.

There will be times when things are calm and we'll be able to maintain that fine balance to keep the majority happy.

But during times of conflict....or as Scotty says, when the toilet is being flushed.....there is going to be some passion about threads and subject matter and inevitably moderation.

Please just be patient with us while we level off through the turbulence...can switch off the seatbelt sign.....and can get back on our way to Suvarnabhumi.

Surfcrest

[ftj_taw]

It's quite a balancing act.


Surfcrest

Balancing act my ass. It is simple. If you delete a post give a reason. What is hard about that? :dontknow:

[arsenal]

Delete someone's post and send them a pm to explain why or post your reasons on the open forum. I don't recall ever having had a post deleted before now. You two are here for five minutes and whoosh, there goes one of my posts. Basic good manners don't yop know.

[Brad the Impala]

Repressing comment ferments discontent. That's mitigated by explanations.

I think jinks feels that if you explain/justify the reasons that only leads to further unhelpful debate about the deletions, that may not be helpful or interesting, and may well be time consuming. He's probably right. However in the long term it does not encourage posters affected to feel that they are part of this forum, if, for what appears to be a whim of the moderator, their posts can be deleted or moved for a reason that is not at all clear.

As the title of this thread says: There has to be a common standard for deletions and transfer, and there should be an openness about the process.

Of course jinks does the moderating as a volunteer, which should be appreciated, but how much time/effort/care he is able/willing to put into the process is a factor in the quality of moderation. In those circumstances I would have thought that less moderation, and concentrating on actual abuses, would be the best way forward, leaving threads to meander at will, like conversations.

[a447]

If Jinks followed the guidelines published here, then there would be
an openness about the process.

If you deicde you don't want to follow the guidelines (but expect us to!!), then just change the guidelines.

Can't be all that difficult.

[scottish-guy]

Despite the continuing lies being spouted on other boards, the moderation policy used to be this:

Posts to be edited were edited in "real-time" and an explanation given - which was invariably for personal abuse or the use of racist terms.

Any posts "in danger" of being deleted were first moved to a "holding area" and reviewed by 2 out of 3 moderators before a decision was taken either to delete it permanently, or edit the post, or restore it unaltered. The sole exception which I was involved in, was a post by Fountainhall which I accidentally deleted - and Fountainhall accepts that was a genuine error.

Any suspensions or bans were purely in the hands of the Admin. but obviously were discussed.

Where that system fell down was in two respects - for edited comments, the explanation of the moderating decision often caused more debate than the post itself. For items to be deleted, firstly the Author thought his post had already been deleted and (rightly) got stroppy and secondly it took time, which caused more dissatisfaction, and of course if there was an edit that also caused an argument.

Later, when Lazarus started going into an (apparently continuing) mental meltdown, the editing gave way to him simply superimposing his opinions on other people's posts and anything to be deleted .....well, just was.


So, it's really not the simple matter it might seem - there has to be a system (and when the system breaks down you get the situation of a few weeks ago) and even when the sytem works and the rules may appear clear enough - the interpretation of the rules it's bound to vary from person to person - e.g. the recent debate about how private a private message should be.

The sytem at the moment (and I'm guessing) is that jinks is doing all the day-to-day moderation (and that may or may not change), thus it is one person's interpretation (or disregard if you want to be offensive) of the rules which we are presently getting.

Having said all that I am not in any way dissatisfied, and I await being torn to shreds by the Rottweiler and Lazarus's sidekick - both of whom I see are on the thread already. LOL

[timmberty]

i find a lot of what you write hard to belive ... as you might expect scotty ... when you modded you often felt the need to add bits onto peoples posts .. in fact you found it hard to leave many alone .. and often added your silly man in a hat ... you are now saying you had to have neals permission to add your bits on and the hatted man ?
how do 2 out of 3 mods now get to choose what to keep and what to get rid off ... when you consider there isnt a 3rd mod as of yet ?
the rules where and still are being made up as we go along .. there isnt and never has been any rhyme or reason to anything being deleted other than the fact jinks is having a bad hair day .. and being as that is the case everyday is a bad hair day and posts will go missing in combat (what did happen to him) for no reason other than our lovely mod seems incapable of being honest with the postings and posters ...
i note in the thread ** clearing the air ** jinks has added a book that he wants people to buy .. its just sorta like been put in the thread .. nothing what so ever to do with anything atall .. yet there it is ...
so i think if the mod hasnt a clue how to behave when posting, there is no chance things will get any better soon ...

[scottish-guy]

Right on cue:


i find a lot of what you write hard to belive... you are now saying you had to have neals permission to add your bits on and the hatted man ?

Read sentence #2 - EDITS were done in real time - i.e. by a single moderator. Anything in danger of deletion was first moved, and discussed. I have no doubt you find things hard to believe - you have an agenda to follow after all.



...how do 2 out of 3 mods now get to choose what to keep and what to get rid off ... when you consider there isnt a 3rd mod as of yet ? - that's exactly the point I'm making. That USED to be the system, now it isn't



...the rules where and still are being made up as we go along .. I don't believe thats the case, the rules are out there but what you are getting is one person's interpretation of them (but that's a guess - I know no more about the current system than anybody else)



... jinks has added a book that he wants people to buy ...No he hasn't - a comment was made that "someone" should write a book about Pattaya over the years. Jinks merely illustrated it had already been done.[/quote]


Now, where's the Rottweiler...

[timmberty]

stick your tongue out and lets see what colour it is .. thought so .. any futher up and it would be tonsils touching ...
wasnt that long ago you used to defend neal the way you are now defending jinks ... is history repeating ?
what has a book about boys town got to do with p.m's on this board ? i dont quite get the link you belive there to be.
and now you are saying what ? under neals leadership there was a system that worked well .. but now there isnt one .. yet a few posts back you had no problem with how this is all going so far..
the troble when you switch sides is you need to cover all bases ... you seems to have left most bare .. but carry on its fun to watch you squirm.

[scottish-guy]

Yes I have previously defended Neal - you won't find me saying that everything he did was evil and nasty, just a lot of it.

Yes, there was a system of 3 Moderators that worked reasonably well - until he broke the system and went completely off the rails.
Once he had binned me he ought to have put a replacement in to maintain that system. Instead he chose to do 90% of it himself (no disrespect to Butterfly) and the moderation became increasingly erratic and personalised

I told you why jinks put up the pic of the book - why don't you engage your brain?

I'm not on any "side" - I'm happy with the way things are moving forward, I think it's an improvement, but I realise it's a process and some eggs might get broken making the cake.

Now, go back over to BB and get your instructions. I'll await your response. :occasion9: (hatted man just for you)

[timmberty]

i did engage my brain .. hence the fact i didnt find a link between a book about boystown and someones suggestion about keeping p.m.s .. but then im not trying to score points with the current landlords like yourself..
why dont you just admit you are trying to cosy up in the hope of getting your old job back .. so much easier than all the pretence.
i think the reason he binnen you, as you so well put it, is because you went totally off the rails yourself .. and im sure there are many here who would agree with that .. im sure many would agree that it was his decision to take you on board in the first place that send the board into melt down ... lets indeed hope history doesnt repeat.
pbb .. you still have your friend keeping you informed of whats going on over there .. and in real time too .. very impressive . who is it?

[scottish-guy]

Firstly, the "book" - it stemmed from this:


..keep the PMs..one day the whole story might be turned into a book. Posted: Sun 19 May, 2013 5:44 pm

Immediately (Sun 19 May, 2013 5:48 pm) followed by:

PIC OF A BOOK ABOUT PATTAYA GAY SCENE

And you don't see a connection? :dontknow: To me the connection is that the PM furore just encapsulated Gay dramas generally, and a book has already been written years ago which no doubt gives insight into that . But, maybe jinks will come along and tell me he has the publishing rights, 50,000 copies in his attic, and that'll blow my explanation out the water, but that's the way I saw it - not an attempt to sell a dated book as you suggest

Next, of course there are ppl who didn't like my moderation - there are ppl who didn't like Neal's moderation, or who don't like jinks moderation. And what about Gaybutton??? You're never going to be popular and you'll always get criticism. Provided you do it within the policies in force at the time (and the policies are not necessarily the same as the rules - we were taking a "hardline" during that time) then there is no need to reproach oneself, and I don't.

You also need to be careful what you believe - remember your speechwriter has his own agenda, a large part of which involves painting himself as a victim - why, he even compared himself to Jesus Christ recently!! And whilst we don't want to stray into his dealings with Surfy, many might think that Judas would have been a far more appropriate comparison

[timmberty]

now here you go again making totally ridickulas allegations, im sure if jesus wanted to take you on he would get himself a bright shiney new name and do it himself ...
just cant help yourself can you .. im really clever enough to write all my own stunts .. does it scare you so much you have to accuse someone else of doing it for me ..
what did you say engage brain before typing ?? you really are as daft as you seem ..
either be big enough to take me on one to one or best just keep quite . as you dont need to make yourself look any dafter than you already do.
as you are editing as you go so will i .... i dont belive anything .. i dont need neal to tell me how things where or how they are ... i saw what a fuck up you made when given a bit of power ... ive seen jinks performing for the last couple of weeks he reminds me a bit of yourself ... as for surcrest .. i have no problem with him what so ever .. we have exchanged a few p.m's and im happy with most of what hes doing .. other than his choice of mod as is pretty obivious ..
he and neal have there own agenders, which have nothing to do with me .. and being as you are so so clever you might have realised that ??
so over to you, try and get out of that without moving.

[scottish-guy]

Why should the organ-grinder stand in the rain holding the cup when he has a monkey to do it for him?

[timmberty]

Why should the organ-grinder stand in the rain holding the cup when he has a monkey to do it for him?
ive no idea ill ask jinks ,.. as im sure you dont know why you are getting wet.

[scottish-guy]

Is that your best shot? Poor stuff. Even with another edit.

Anyway - I'm going out now - so you're on your own.

Don't forget to take the Rotweiller out for a walk - he's been sitting at the door for at least an hour now.

:hello2:

[timmberty]

oh goody, mind you dont get lost or stolen.

[newalaan2]

Why isn't this thread on the front main page instead of being shunted off to a dark corner (anywhere on the board apart from the front main page).It is popular, well posted on and well read, current and lively. All these damned sub forums are a pain. As soon as ANYTHING goes off the front page it's likely to be missed. There are 7 gay thailand forums out there now, here, gaybutton, gaythailand, Baht-stop, gayTingTong, Criusing and Bitchy.....people dont have that much time to spend looking at all the various forums contained in each Board. I only rediscovered this thread when I popped onto BitchBoard to get the latest chapter in Neals breakdown. A bit of common sense would see to most of the 'problems' on forums/boards.


Once he had binned me
If anyone had any doubts during Neals ownership of his complete disregard or empathy toward actual people (as opposed to anonymous cybernet handles)it was this episode. Here was what must have been one his closest allies on the board so much so Neal made him moderator, yet was a victim of one of the worst acts of treachery or betrayal witnessed. While I thought Scottish-guys appointment as moderator was very ill-advised in terms of its general implications for the forum, which has always been my first priority when commenting, Neals handling of the reversing of that decsion let me really know what he was all about.

I've seen the pathetic excuses already here and now over at BB about how there was 'no time' to contact SG........and it was just a load of bull, Neal knows that himself, even if he did panic with the negative press and popular opinion surrounding scottish-guy, what difference would a day have made, his treatment of SG was way past disgraceful....it was abysmal and thoughtless. The message I got from this was clear........if he was prepared to treat a 'close friend' like dirt where would the rest of us stand in his line up. It was then I knew all hope was lost for Neal's tenure as owner, his ability to be trusted again was too far gone. Had it been handled correctly there would have been no fall-out.


Balancing act my ass. It is simple. If you delete a post give a reason. What is hard about that?
Yep my sentiments exactly. All this faffing about, creating drama about "moving forward" "balancing acts" just make the whole process 'sound' more complicated and difficult than it is. Make any change to anything someone takes the trouble to post and all you have to do is say why. A line of red giving a reason next to the post. That's it.


Delete someone's post send them a pm to explain why or post your reasons on the open forum. Basic good manners don't yop know.
Add the reason in red on the post which has been changed by the mod. Then everyone can see the reason for any changes. PMs are alot more effort for everyone and then the rest of the forum is in the dark. Transparency is the key, PMs just get used for manipulation.


I am very sorry to read about ongoing deletions. I am against deletions (unless they are necessary to remove messages that violate the law) on this and other boards.
This is my view, rather than delete....manage it. I think nothing should be deleted bar potential legal problems or posts in extremely bad taste such as underage and wishing members dead. Nothing else should be touched except where threads are interupted with drivel and/or taken seriously off topic by arguements between members. Then simply split the thread. Threads which go slightly off topic or take a 'natural course' to another side topic but is relevant to some posts in the thread should just be allowed to continue.

[scottish-guy]

Newalaan2, thank you for your comments relating to that matter.

[timmberty]

i dont belive there was any great falling out between scotty and neal over the demodding ... the fall out was because of the return of a certain memeber .. who has since been flushed .. but by then things had got a little strained ..
i like many others just want to see a bit of fairness on the board, i see no reason for anything to be deleted, if it isnt illegal then why delete it?
thats the thing that bothers me .. i have no agender like im accused of having, i dont care who owns or mods the board, just do it fairly .. how hard can that be?
if you allow a post by poster A calling poster B an arsehole .. then i dont think poster B should have his reply of youre a bigger arsehole than me deleted. it matters not who poster A or B are ... just be level with everyone .. all the bitching, well most of it will stop and the board can then move on and we can all share candy floss again.

[scottish-guy]

Final comment (hopefully):

The modding issue and the ill-fated return of the BB prodigals, was pretty much the same issue.
If you don't get it, don't ask for an explanation - it just keeps the pot boiling.

[timmberty]

Final comment (hopefully):

The modding issue and the ill-fated return of the BB prodigals, was exactly the same issue.
If you don't get it, don't ask for an explanation - it just keeps the pot boiling.
no it wasnt .. you and neal where happy to be getting along after you got demoted .. it was only after the bb's joined/returned that things took a turn for the worse .. if you was so upset at being demodded you would have left there and then, but you didnt .. you stayed on the board for a while longer.
you stick with your version ill stick with mine .. and as you often say before making another 10 replies .. thats me done on the subject.

[scottish-guy]

No, Timmberty - I won't let you stick with telling me what my issue was.

In both cases MY issue was that of a supporter (me) being stabbed in the back whilst he kow-towed to those who had either shown little support, or who (in the case of PBB) had published vile and abhorrent personal abuse against him.

And those issues weren't even the final straw.

Anyway, moving on...

[Smiles]

Balancing act my ass. It is simple. If you delete a post give a reason. What is hard about that?

scottish-guy replied: Yep my sentiments exactly. All this faffing about, creating drama about "moving forward" "balancing acts" just make the whole process 'sound' more complicated and difficult than it is. Make any change to anything someone takes the trouble to post and all you have to do is say why. A line of red giving a reason next to the post. That's it

Absolutely. And it's right there, in the Guidelines ... and was there during Neal's nasty little regime:


(6) Moderating etiquette

Moderating actions or decisions on Sawatdee will be based solely on the Posting Guidelines. Examples of Moderator actions covered in this Guideline are:
deleting a thread or post[/*:m:v6j3q2pr]
editing a post[/*:m:v6j3q2pr]
moving a thread[/*:m:v6j3q2pr]
locking a thread[/*:m:v6j3q2pr]
loss of posting privileges[/*:m:v6j3q2pr]
A Moderating action/decision will be clearly explained in red within the post or thread in question, and the explanation will include a reference to the specific Guideline deemed violated. (An exception will be made in the case of 'loss of posting privileges'.)
Once the explanation has been published, all further correspondence with the violator(s) regarding the action/decision will be by either PM or Email. The Administrator or Moderator will not undertake further public discussion after the initial explanation.

[a447]

Timmberty wrote:
if you allow a post by poster A calling poster B an arsehole .. then i dont think poster B should have his reply of youre a bigger arsehole than me deleted.

Agreed.

If the mod wants to deter posters from having a go at each other, then all he need to is delete the reference made by poster A about poster B, especially if it is out of context.

For example, Sooty, in a reply to Kjun12 in another thread suddenly and without warning introduced me into his post. Totally irrelevant to his complaint against kjun. I hadn't even posted on the thread!
If he had not mentioned me, I would not have replied.

Mind you, I enjoy having a go at Sooty whenever he gives me the opportunity; he's such an easy target. I just aim for the "L" on his forehead.

Mind you, I enjoy having a go at Sooty whenever he gives me the opportunity; he's such an easy target. I just aim for the "L" on his forehead.And he enjoys yanking your chain, he tells us. Sounds as if you're both having a swell time.

[a447]

It seems that if you reply to a negative post about yourself, you are having your "chain yanked."

If that were the case, very few would have time to post on this forum - they'd be forever yanking each other's chains!


Sounds as if you're both having a swell time.

I certainly am! But I'm not too sure about Sooty. He tends to run back to his kitty litter box and then he refuses to come out.

[Sooty]

I certainly am! But I'm not too sure about Sooty. He tends to run back to his kitty litter box and then he refuses to come out.Discouraging stalkers is an ever-present activity.

[a447]

For example, Sooty, in a reply to Kjun12 in another thread suddenly and without warning introduced me into his post. Totally irrelevant to his complaint against kjun. I hadn't even posted on the thread!

So, who is stalking who??


But I'm not too sure about Sooty. He tends to run back to his kitty litter box and then he refuses to come out.

What I'm saying is, don't start something you can't finish.

[Brad the Impala]

Although there's been a lot of subsequent blether on this thread, there were also some valid points, but "the management" haven't commented at all. Any chance?

[Sooty]

What I'm saying is, don't start something you can't finish.Clearly you have missed reading The Gospel According To Kjun12, Chapter One, Verse One where it is written "Thou art not superior to me therefore I owe thee no explanation whatsoever".

[a447]

And clearly YOU have missed the fact that you are....

having your chain yanked! :sign5:

(Where did I hear that expression??)

Now, let's move on, shall we?