Agree with you, Christian, 100 %.Originally Posted by christianpfc
Agree with you, Christian, 100 %.
bobsaigon2 (October 24th, 2017)
bkkguy, thank you for analyze...
but first post is about another thing:
Originally Posted by arsenalJust workable ideas.......please.
given a comment such as this by a moderator and the arguing back and forth between moderators and posters in this thread perhaps Moses or arsenal can clarify what type of "workable" ideas you expect from forum visitors to "solve" the current problems - after all Moses you apparently have "years of experience" with discussions forums, if you can't formulate a workable set of posting guidelines, set up the forum software as required to control member postings and make sure the moderators understand the rules and the software what do you expect us to suggest?
bkkguy
aresenal wrote about fact, what internal control panels for moderation are new for him and he don't know it in full yet... it wasn't about "set up the forum software as required to control member postings"
Bali (Indonesia), Cambodia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam and Laos: gay guides and companions http://siamroads.com
arsenal (October 24th, 2017)
I think the phrase 'workable ideas' is pretty self explanatory and shouldn't require any further instructions.
Moses, the first I knew of the post which libeled Newalaan was when I saw Arsenal's subsequent thread entitled NEW MEMBERS (i.e. this thread)
On reading the thread I learned that an unidentified poster had posted "repulsive" content about Newalaan.
Being repulsive myself, my curiosity was understandably aroused - so I went to read the content (guessing it would be on his trip report thread), saw it was indeed grossly offensive and had been posted by SameBB.
Kindly bear in mind that, as I've made clear, this "repulsive content" was already known about, had already been dealt with (yet it was still there!) and that I'd effectively been directed to it by a Moderator.
So, given that the Moderator/s already knew about the post from SameBB, had decided it was "repulsive", but allowed it to remain - why would I click the "red triangle", as
a) It was already known about
b) It had allegedly been dealt with
Again, I don't want to split hairs, but newalaan2 was not libeled.
However, his post was certainly repulsive.
I am all in favour of a rule which would allow us to edit such comments. We are working on it.
But please understand that just as it is sometimes difficult to get four people together in a room in real life, it is far more difficult to get them together in cyberspace, especially as we live in different time zones.
We are not just sitting on our hands, ignoring everyone's concerns.
I don't know what Scottish is writing about but I can probably guess and edit it for you.
'You didn't make me moderator and I really really want to be'
Here’s my prediction:-- SGT will change very little or not at all, despite the best efforts of those charged with the change.
The “anything goes” nature of the board will not change because no one can decide on new posting guidelines that will limit the types of posts that are acceptable.
Owner/moderators will continue to say they cannot do anything about offensive posts because virtually everything is within the posting guidelines.
Once or twice a year there will be some posts that are so offensive and tasteless that the question of banning will arise. Several weeks may pass before the owner/moderators can come to a consensus about the ban. The ban will be temporary and the poster will return to post at will.
If it’s not an “anything goes” board, on what basis will posts be deleted and posters banned? Critical, demeaning, disparaging posts, posts that attack individuals rather than ideas, posts that are offensive by the standards of any community --- will these result in deletion or banning and how will the posting guidelines be rewritten to address these issues? I don’t know and it’s clear that no one else knows.
There is a desire to prevent egregious posts but I doubt the ability of owner/moderators to arrive at the means to prevent these, unless there is screening of all posts submitted by certain individuals.
Also, I suspect that moderators, whether volunteers or appointed or elected, will find their tasks too burdensome to bear for more than a few months.
The alternative to all of the above is to have someone with the authority to decide what posts are not suitable, or what posters are not suitable to the nature of SGT. It seems that on other boards, there is no need for the owner to refer to a particular posting guideline. If he doesn’t like a post, it’s gone. If he doesn’t like a poster, the poster is gone. Simple really. Anyone in favor of that type of control over posts/posters?
I really wish I had some valid suggestions to offer, but none come to mind. I must rely on the owner/moderators to find ways to make the changes that will satisfy most board members. I wish them good luck.
arsenal (October 25th, 2017), christianpfc (October 27th, 2017)
1. I think if someone had posted (and I paraphrase) that I probably miss the "good old days" in Sunee because in those days it was easy to molest children - I'd feel libelled - wouldn't you ? It's an error in law to think that one has to be specifically named or specific allegations made in order for a libel to be proven.
Think of Liberace who won libel damages from a newspaper columnist for being identified as being gay although the specific allegation was never made - it was all done by innuendo. The content which was posted by Samebb falls into the same category - making defamatory and libellous accusations by innuendo.
2. I'm having difficulty understanding this management by committee you seem to be working under - one person says that all 3 Moderators need to agree on stuff whereas you yourself posted yesterday that ONE person could delete posts. Which is it - it can't be both.
To be honest a447 I really don't care about the internal confusion amongst the moderation team - what I do care about however is that we, the members, are expected to swallow the incompatible codswallop being put out.
For the record, I am not interested in moderating this forum, but if I did then bearing in mind my previous unpleasant experience I'd make damn sure the moderation policies and processes were cast-iron before taking on the task!
I do understand that none of the three of you asked for the job but at the end of the day each has accepted it - so there is no point in one of you bitching about having to spend 3 hours actually doing the job you each chose to accept.
The good news is that I really don't care about this issue anymore - it's boring the tits off me, so I won't be commenting on it further.
Probably.
How true and totally agree. Couldn't have said it better myself. I always wondered why you had your name at the foot of all your posts as if we couldn't read that the post was in fact authored by 'surfcrest' I guess you just like the look of your own handle. But here it did come in handy as the perfect response to your very own 'remark'.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote