****no personal attacks*****

Quoting jgilligan:

Quote:
The real solution to the biggest problem here is to get answers to the issues being discussed in the Contributions forum.  When we have opposing opinions on a situation and neither side has the authority to decide which one is right, or at least how it should be handled 'right now', we end up with ugliness.  I understand Ken and Gerri are busy people and can't always step in to resolve an issue, so maybe they need help.  I'm sure there are people here who would be willing to volunteer time to address some of these.  If they are given guidelines for authority, they can resolve disputes before they become arguments.  Or, they could at least filter the issues and then work with Ken and Gerri.  If the issue is raised and is being addressed, there is no need for the argument to continue (in theory!).

Well said! Of course we'd ALL (NO exceptions) have to learn to accept the "authorised" solution to the dispute, OR learn to just keep things local if we chose not to follow the given "official" solution. Either way, everyone would benifit from the clarity an official view would provide.

It might take some getting used to, for some people more than for others, but I don't see why it can't be done. All it takes is the willingness to accept we're a community with a more or less general goal and the ability not to constantly place ourselves above that community.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Can you have a blend of A+B = "Strong moderation and bring back feedback enforcements"?

I was wondering that myself. But maybe Ken means that only moderators can give negative reputation points? Which would be fine with me. Could we have a clarification on this?

Quoting Vittra:

Quote:
The current system isn't working though, I'll say that much. Without consequences, as many have stated, the removal of posts is nothing more then a slap on the wrist at best and users will continue their bad habbits only to have their posts removed once again.

Even without repercussions, I would consider that a working system. As I said elsewhere, this is a web forum, not a chat room. It is of no concern to the majority of users who visit a thread after it has been cleaned up, whether the removed posts came from one-time or repeated offenders.

That's not to say, there shouldn't be sanctions, but IF moderators act reasonably quickly, it is a secondary issue.

As for how to implement those sanctions: As far as I can tell, none of the repeated offenders (aside from spam) were non-paying users, therefore permanent bans *are* a possibility. I'm not sure a banned regular would face the embarassement of reappearing under a newly created account.

But permanent bans are a quite severe last shot anyway. Temporary bans seem a reasonable solution to me, and they should have some bite. That is, not only reduce the number of allowed posts per day, but rather prevent posting entirely for a few days. Especially on weekends or whenever moderators have their day off.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I do not believe that "off topic" posts should be edited or deleted at all.

I disagree. Keeping threads on topic is a very important part of moderation. Allow me to quote myself from another thread:

Moderation should accomodate the scope of the thread. Recreational threads or threads with a broader scope require less intervention, off-topic posts are not really an issue here.

However, goal-oriented threads that aim towards finding a solution for a particular problem should be moderated very strictly. Any off-topic or redundant  (same user repeatedly stating nothing more than the same opinion) posts should be deleted to keep the discussion on track. And these deletions should occur without leaving stubs of the deleted posts.

This is not only for the benefit of the initial participants, but for those who want to review or join the discussion at a later time. In fact, for most goal-oriented threads, heated real-time discussions are counterproductive. A prolonged and strictly moderated discussion is of far more value.

Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
I would much prefer to see a note from a moderator reminding people to stick to the topic.  Just a personal preference based on what I'm used to at other forums.  That's almost always enough to stop the nonsense.  I'm not opposed to the deletion of posts and have seen that as well, but I'd rather see a gentle reminder than things completely excised.

How would you handle a case like this thread?
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=371574&PageNum=1

At the time I took the snapshot, there weren't any personal attacks or off-topic posts.

Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
I would much prefer to see a note from a moderator reminding people to stick to the topic.  Just a personal preference based on what I'm used to at other forums.  That's almost always enough to stop the nonsense.  I'm not opposed to the deletion of posts and have seen that as well, but I'd rather see a gentle reminder than things completely excised.

How would you handle a case like this thread?
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=371574&PageNum=1

At the time I took the snapshot, there weren't any personal attacks or off-topic posts.

User
Dr Pavlov
GSyren
Unicus69
m.cellophane
surfeur51
Alien Redrum
DariusKyrak
DarklyNoon
Darkstorm
Forget_the_Rest 
goodguy
hal9g
Mark Harrison
Patsa
T!M

Posts 
11
5
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Percent
33 %
15 %
9 %
6 %
6 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %
3 %

Why does it need to be "handled"?

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:


Why does it need to be "handled"?

I was trying to figure that out too. Unless it's one user has many more posts than others in which case there's nothing wrong with that if it's polite & pretty much on topic.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Why does it need to be "handled"?

I had the exact same question.  What in that thread needs to be handled?

Well, maybe there really is nothing to handle. I admit that I have never had any experience as a forum moderator, I view it strictly from a user perspective. As such I don't find it beneficial to the discussion of a topic if that discussion is heavily dominated by (IMHO) largely redundant posts from a single user.

Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Why does it need to be "handled"?

I had the exact same question.  What in that thread needs to be handled?

Well, maybe there really is nothing to handle. I admit that I have never had any experience as a forum moderator, I view it strictly from a user perspective. As such I don't find it beneficial to the discussion of a topic if that discussion is heavily dominated by (IMHO) largely redundant posts from a single user.

Well, this is an issue that you will see in any forum, and one that should not be handled.  If someone wants to spend that much time posting, there really isn't anything we can or should do to stop it... as long as they are on topic and not posting personal attacks.

The problem we are seeing in this thread is the same problem we've seen in many of the others... People posting their opinions with no clarification from any Invelos appointed authority.  So, what we end up with is continuous repetition of opinion with no movement toward an end.