Charter Policies vs. Common Sense

meep

All

Today Hosting365 servers went down spectacularly. All sites hosted by them as well as their own site AND all telephone services due to a power outage. There was no information available anywhere.

I logged on to boards.ie to find out what was happening. There, under tech > web > webmaster & flash I found a thread where very quickly a H365 rep. popped up and directed to a status page.

Quickly, however, the thread disappeared. I started another asking what had happened. Others looking for info piled in and the status info was posted again.

The local mod this time locked the thread (rather than deleting it) with the following comment;

From the charter

If you have a problem with your host - deal directly with them.

Furthermore, as customers of h365, I assume you would have already had the information related to that h365 status site.

Now, if that is the policy, fair enough. And I do see how such threads could descend into chaos and I do see why web hosting forum would have been closed. However, I would like to make a couple of comments;

1. In light of the seriousness of the situation where many web developers, site owners etc. suddenly lost their sites AND there was no way of contacting the provider, I think it was inappropriate to delete the thread.
The secondary fix where the thread with the relevant info as locked was a more appropriate action and should have been the first course of action (with appropriate reference to the charter/policy).

2. Boards.ie mods would benefit from exercising some flexibility in interpretation of policies in cases like this where user and public interest can be served.

3. The mod makes the point that H365 clients would have knowledge of the status page. This may be true but is not the whole story. I, for example, am not a client but several of my clients have their sites hosted there. So I was not aware of the status page and was desperate to find out what was up. That blanket mod comment was unhelpful, unnecessary and not thought out fully.

Boards.ie is a great site and provides a great service. Consistent standards of customer service and treatment would be appreciated.

6th

I do get where you are coming from but ....

meep wrote:

Consistent standards of customer service and treatment would be appreciated.

We are not Boards.ie customers, we don't pay for a servise. Those who are with 365 are 365's customers and should contact them for help.

meep

I neglected to mention: PLEASE don't use this thread to discuss the merits of H365, the outage etc. I'm using that as a case illustration of how there might be more flexibility in policy implementation here.

@6th: we are OF COURSE customers of Boards.ie. I see google ads up at the top of the page. Boards has an advertise with us link on its front page where it is stated;

Boards.ie is one of the largest websites and online communities in Ireland. In March 2007 we served over 8.6 million pages and had over 500,000 unique visitors.

If you would like to advertise direct with us, please send your contact details, details of your campaign and any questions you have.

Although the service is free to end users, we users are an integral part of the boards business model. It's in their interests to keep and grow the user base by offering what those users want!

Additionally, you suggest contacting the host for help. That is exactly my point. In this case, it was clearly stated in the first (deleted) thread that all means of contact with the service provider was down. It is the core of my argument that in circumstances such as these, some discretion should be exercised.

My first though when I realised what was up today was to come to boards.ie for information. That is a powerful position for boards to be in. Where do you go for news when something big happens? (Sept 11, London Bombs). Most likely your first though is to turn to Sky News? Boards can be in a similar position in the minds to its users if it wants to be.

Peter

The Hill Billy

meep wrote:

In light of the seriousness of the situation where many web developers, site owners etc. suddenly lost their sites AND there was no way of contacting the provider, I think it was inappropriate to delete the thread.

How was the mod to know that there was no way of contacting the provider?

meep wrote:

Boards.ie mods would benefit from exercising some flexibility in interpretation of policies in cases like this where user and public interest can be served.

It is unreasonable to expect that a mod of that forum would take the time to evaluate each instance such as this to see whether or not to allow such a thread develop.

meep wrote:

The mod makes the point that H365 clients would have knowledge of the status page. This may be true but is not the whole story. I, for example, am not a client but several of my clients have their sites hosted there. So I was not aware of the status page and was desperate to find out what was up.

Why should boards be a vehicle for solving other companies' customer service inadequacies?

meep wrote:

That blanket mod comment was unhelpful, unnecessary and not thought out fully.

Just because a H365 problem caused you a bit of hassle I think that it is unfair to take it out on a mod who was just doing what he/she felt was necessary in the circumstances.

seamus

meep, for clarity, boards.ie advertises to keep itself running, not make a profit.
You're not a customer, I'm not a customer, and neither is anyone else. Moderators are not "staff", they are volunteers, and boards.ie does not owe anyone anything in the way of customer service.

Because the service is free, that makes you a user, not a customer. A customer is someone who pays for something. Advertisers are customers of boards.ie.

Now, on-topic.
It all boils down to one simple thing. Commenting on the service offered by an individual host leads a whole pile of other hosters to jump in and make snide comments, and generally brings the whole thread into a big pile of ****.

Mods do tend to exercise flexibility with application of rules, but this is one of the rules that we have been rigid on in the past, and will remain rigid on in the future. It's just not worth the hassle.

You can argue that these are extenuating circumstances, but not really. If another host went down, the thread wouldn't be allowed, so the thread can't be allowed, purely because it's H365.

I definitely see your point, but if it was any other topic there wouldn't be a problem. This is down to the fact that it's a hosting issue.

Ph3n0m

to repeat what I said in another thread:

The reason for such a blanket response from me is simply because there have literally been plenty of threads that all say the same thing

"my site is down with "insert host name""

"why is my site down with "blah""

etc, etc

And as such I made the decision to blanket all issues with peoples hosts with the same answer - contact your host.

It maybe unfair, especially in these unique circumstances, but meep, even in the original thread you said

Post details here please H365.

Which in itself is against the charter - sorry, it maybe harsh to you, but its fair overall

r3nu4l

There were threads about this exact topic left open in Nets & Comms and Business Management. Different fora have different rules, a quick look at other relevant fora revealed the status page link pretty quickly.

meep

Hill Billy wrote:

How was the mod to know that there was no way of contacting the provider?

The very first post in the deleted thread stated that the main site was down as were the telephones. A couple of posts later, a H365 rep. linked to a (useful) status page indicating all comms were down.

Hill Billy wrote:

It is unreasonable to expect that a mod of that forum would take the time to evaluate each instance such as this to see whether or not to allow such a thread develop.

As above, no development was needed. The issue was clear from the first post

Hill Billy wrote:

Why should boards be a vehicle for solving other companies' customer service inadequacies?

They should not. However, my case is that they have an opportunity to become the first and only port of call for information on major issue affecting their users.

Hill Billy wrote:

Just because a H365 problem caused you a bit of hassle I think that it is unfair to take it out on a mod who was just doing what he/she felt was necessary in the circumstances.

According to Boards.ie charter, the mod seems to have followed protocol. The whole point is that a little more discretion would have been useful. My 'hassle' is simply illustrative of the grey areas that exist and cannot be catered for by such blanket decisions.

The Hill Billy

meep wrote:

My first though when I realised what was up today was to come to boards.ie for information. That is a powerful position for boards to be in. Where do you go for news when something big happens? (Sept 11, London Bombs).

H365 outage = terrorist attack

meep wrote:

Most likely your first though is to turn to Sky News? Boards can be in a similar position in the minds to its users if it wants to be.

DeV as the new Rupert Murdoch?

6th

None of us are Boards.ie customers. If 365 customers have a problem then contact 365.

meep

Hill Billy wrote:

H365 outage = terrorist attack


DeV as the new Rupert Murdoch?

Those are examples illustrating behaviour types that I feel can be replication by an institution such as boards.ie.

If you would like me to explain it to you in greater details, please ask.

r3nu4l

Meep, I've already shown you where that information was available on boards.ie. It was easy to find, I saw it and wasn't even looking for it

As for modding onsistency, if the Webmaster and Flash policies were applied across the board then the information would already be gone from the site and if you were still looking for it you wouldn't find it!

meep

Ph3n0m wrote:

And as such I made the decision to blanket all issues with peoples hosts with the same answer - contact your host.

It maybe unfair, especially in these unique circumstances, but meep, even in the original thread you said



Which in itself is against the charter - sorry, it maybe harsh to you, but its fair overall

1. Apologies for the charter breach there. Need to spend a bit more time on boards, obviously!

2. As I responded to you previously, I agree that you need to carefully manage this hosting area due to past experience. However, it's the 'unique circumstances' bit that I'm really on about here. I actually came across this issue first not as a web dev. but as someone looking to make weekend travel plans using luas.ie!

Boston

I think you fundamentally fail to understand how boards works, or in fact any online community like boards.

Boards is a collection of independent users working together under a hierarchical frame work to provide a service. The service basically is access to content(user posts). This structure means that there is no "Boards.ie" management that can assert absolute control over boards. The Admins/Smods/Cmods/mods are just facilitators, people who guide users. If this was a business model, it would be a pretty ****e one as control over the user experience is completely out of the hands of the site owners.

I'll put it in another way, have you ever used the likes of Napter or Kazaa (I've no idea what the current ones are) if you downloaded a corrupt file from another user (i.e. problem with the service) there's little point contacting the people that make the kazaa software and complaining that "leetHaxor88" sent you crap.

If we are customers and the admins(owners) are service providers, then the service they provide is access to the Vbulletin software, nothing more. The content is user based.

But anyway thats that

As for the rule. If memory serves that was brought in due to boards being swamped by user complaints about various hostings companies. Its a solid rule.

Cabaal

I can see nothing wrong with what the mod did, if its listed in the charter and he/she enforced its all fine and well,

Can't believe I don't get paid by boards.ie...you mean I do this stuff for free?...I've been waiting on my pay cheque for months!!!

meep

r3nu4l wrote:

Meep, I've already shown you where that information was available on boards.ie. It was easy to find, I saw it and wasn't even looking for it

As for modding onsistency, if the Webmaster and Flash policies were applied across the board then the information would already be gone from the site and if you were still looking for it you wouldn't find it!

Thanks for pointing that out twice.

Maybe, the correct approach should have been to lock the original thread with a comment by the mod pointing out the policy and a link to the information so blaringly obvious elsewhere on the site.

monkeyfudge

6th wrote:

None of us are Boards.ie customers. If 365 customers have a problem then contact 365.

They can't. That's sort of the issue here.

My suggestion was that a brief locked sticky with a link to the H365 status page be put in the relevant forums. It is an issue that affects a lot of us.

I've had several sites hosted with them for about 3 years now and was unaware of the status page, so boards.ie saved me a lot of hassle this morning. And kudos to H365 to take the time to put a post up on boards telling us about it.

Boston

meep wrote:

Thanks for pointing that out twice.

Maybe, the correct approach should have been to lock the original thread with a comment by the mod pointing out the policy and a link to the information so blaringly obvious elsewhere on the site.

Why should all the work be place on the mod? An equally correct approach would have been to read and understand the charter, and post/reply to the topic elsewhere. Also boards isn't an institution of any sort, the mods and admins might make up one.

The Hill Billy

meep wrote:

Those are examples illustrating behaviour types that I feel can be replication by an institution such as boards.ie.

If you would like me to explain it to you in greater details, please ask.

Thanks for the offer, but no.

6th

monkeyfudge wrote:

They can't. That's sort of the issue here.

I suppose but if I can't contact my wife can I come on here and ask what I am getting for dinner?

People coming on and demanding (ok thats a bit strong) better customer servise is a load of crap.

meep

Boston wrote:

I think you fundamentally fail to understand how boards works, or in fact any online community like boards.

Boards is a collection of independent users working together under a hierarchical frame work to provide a service. The service basically is access to content(user posts). This structure means that there is no "Boards.ie" management that can assert absolute control over boards. The Admins/Smods/Cmods/mods are just facilitators, people who guide users. If this was a business model, it would be a pretty ****e one as control over the user experience is completely out of the hands of the site owners.

I'll put it in another way, have you ever used the likes of Napter or Kazaa (I've no idea what the current ones are) if you downloaded a corrupt file from another user (i.e. problem with the service) there's little point contacting the people that make the kazaa software and complaining that "leetHaxor88" sent you crap.

If we are customers and the admins(owners) are service providers, then the service they provide is access to the Vbulletin software, nothing more. The content is user based.

But anyway thats that

As for the rule. If memory serves that was brought in due to boards being swamped by user complaints about various hostings companies. Its a solid rule.

OK, a few things.

The whole 'customer' thing arose from a comment I made expecting better 'customer service'. Let me rephrase that and state that what should be expected would be 'user service'. Ideally, if a thread is deleted, _I_ would like to know why. If there had been a note referring to the policy, I would have been happy and would likely not have posted the second thread and we would not be here and you would not be hassled by me and we would all be happier users!

Secondly, I agree that this is a good rule. I'm just saying that in some exceptional circumstances, some rules should be flexible.

Finally, although I appreciate that advertising pays costs and profit is likely negligible if existent at all, it is still in the interests of boards.ie to attract and keep users as they are selling advertising on unique user basis.

r3nu4l

meep wrote:

Thanks for pointing that out twice.

Maybe, the correct approach should have been to lock the original thread with a comment by the mod pointing out the policy and a link to the information so blaringly obvious elsewhere on the site.

Your welcome.

In fairness, the mod is only concerned with what's happening in their fora and shouldn't have to go on a search for information that you want! Now if the mod had happened to notice those threads then maybe they could have lnked them for you but that would have been out of helpfulness and courtesy only, not because it was their duty.

meep

monkeyfudge wrote:

They can't. That's sort of the issue here.

That's exactly the issue here. In an exceptional circumstance, perhaps rules could be relaxed.

( . )( . )

@meep - it's friday, don't bother wasting your time here, H365 will be back when it's back.

meep

r3nu4l wrote:

Your welcome.

In fairness, the mod is only concerned with what's happening in their fora and shouldn't have to go on a search for information that you want! Now if the mod had happened to notice those threads then maybe they could have lnked them for you but that would have been out of helpfulness and courtesy only, not because it was their duty.

You are right. Wouldn't it be great for users if that could happen? (user service).

meep

I seem to on the losing side here :-(

I do take on board most points and absolutely appreciate the difficulties the hosting discussion area in particular has.

Thanks for engaging. I'm off to see if Luas.ie is back up so I can plan the rest of my day.

monkeyfudge

6th wrote:

I suppose but if I can't contact my wife can I come on here and ask what I am getting for dinner?

People coming on and demanding (ok thats a bit strong) better customer servise is a load of crap.

As lovely as I'm sure you're wifes dinners are.. they aren't of any great concern to a large percentage of people working in web development in Ireland and the people who use that forum.

If RTÉ radio went off the air for the morning, should I not allow people mention this fact in the radio forum, and tell them they should take it up with RTÉ?

damalo

Although there was a "breach" of charter I think a simple sticky could have been set up to say "go here for more info yadda yadda". Someone commented that mods aren't here to do that...well they are. Imagine all the hassle that would have saved.

Alot of people have got on their high horse in this thread about charters and understanding same. The bottom line is that sh** hit the fan and boards users looked to this great site to get some assistance. People should understand there's people loosing cash from this event and are a little frustrated / desperate for information and to add to the pain 365 couldnt be reached.

That is all.

( . )( . )

damalo wrote:

Alot of people have got on their high horse in this thread about charters and understanding same. The bottom line is that sh** hit the fan and boards users looked to this great site to get some assistance. People should understand there's people loosing cash from this event and are a little frustrated / desperate for information and to add to the pain 365 couldnt be reached.

That is all.

v good point.

Boston

meep wrote:

OK, a few things.

The whole 'customer' thing arose from a comment I made expecting better 'customer service'. Let me rephrase that and state that what should be expected would be 'user service'. Ideally, if a thread is deleted, _I_ would like to know why. If there had been a note referring to the policy, I would have been happy and would likely not have posted the second thread and we would not be here and you would not be hassled by me and we would all be happier users!

Secondly, I agree that this is a good rule. I'm just saying that in some exceptional circumstances, some rules should be flexible.

Finally, although I appreciate that advertising pays costs and profit is likely negligible if existent at all, it is still in the interests of boards.ie to attract and keep users as they are selling advertising on unique user basis.

You where told and there is a note referencing the policy, its called the charter. The mod can't help if it you decide not to read the charter. Using any forum, oblivious of the rules surrounding that forum, is at the users own risk. If you won't do the smallest amounth to help yourself, why should the moderator take time out to deal with you individually? Their not paid like.

meep

6th wrote:

I suppose but if I can't contact my wife can I come on here and ask what I am getting for dinner?

People coming on and demanding (ok thats a bit strong) better customer servise is a load of crap.

That's funny!

Anyway, you've hit on my hobby horse and I fundamentally disagree with you. We should all demand STRONGLY better customer service in this country from all service providers. We are crap at it everywhere. I've just started working with a startup company where we have principals natively experienced in business in Canada, US, Spain, Croatia and Australia as well as having extensive experience in a variety ofm other countires. With the exception of Spain (:-)), they have ALL said that levels of customer service here are the worst they have encountered. Delays in service provision. Failure of large organisations to have any semblance of a customer charter or customer care policies. It's embarrassing. Topic for another day!

Boston

damalo wrote:

Although there was a "breach" of charter I think a simple sticky could have been set up to say "go here for more info yadda yadda". Someone commented that mods aren't here to do that...well they are. Imagine all the hassle that would have saved.

Alot of people have got on their high horse in this thread about charters and understanding same. The bottom line is that sh** hit the fan and boards users looked to this great site to get some assistance. People should understand there's people loosing cash from this event and are a little frustrated / desperate for information and to add to the pain 365 couldnt be reached.

That is all.

The charter is there for a reason, the particular rule actually protects hostings companies from unfounded absue. The discussionin question was allowed on other forums. This is not about the orginal topic, its about whether or not the user should be allowed to A) Ignore the rules of a forum and moan about said rules later.

Meep: You're requesting individual service. A mod to go an do for you what you're capable of doing for yourself. Theres hundreds of forums and thousands of posts a day, that type of service isn't practical.

meep

Boston wrote:

You where told and there is a note referencing the policy, its called the charter. The mod can't help if it you decide not to read the charter. Using any forum, oblivious of the rules surrounding that forum, is at the users own risk. If you won't do the smallest amounth to help yourself, why should the moderator take time out to deal with you individually? Their not paid like.

Point taken. Though I should have said 'a note referencing the policy in the statement advising why the thread had been locked'.

This would have the further advantage of enlightening other users like me stupid enough to use a forum without reading the rules. It's likely that users would remember a specific policy more when they see it in action rather than as one of many many rules in one of many many charters from one of the many many many internet forums to which they belong.

(obviously luas.ie is not back up yet :-( )

damalo

damalo wrote:

Alot of people have got on their high horse in this thread about charters and understanding same.

Go increase your post count on some other thread (Boston)

Boston

meep wrote:

That's funny!

Anyway, you've hit on my hobby horse and I fundamentally disagree with you. We should all demand STRONGLY better customer service in this country from all service providers. We are crap at it everywhere. I've just started working with a startup company where we have principals natively experienced in business in Canada, US, Spain, Croatia and Australia as well as having extensive experience in a variety ofm other countires. With the exception of Spain (:-)), they have ALL said that levels of customer service here are the worst they have encountered. Delays in service provision. Failure of large organisations to have any semblance of a customer charter or customer care policies. It's embarrassing. Topic for another day!

You get what you pay for tbh. Actually substancially more. Look at the amounth of feedback your query has received.

The Hill Billy

meep wrote:

That's exactly the issue here. In an exceptional circumstance, perhaps rules could be relaxed.

As you've got nowt to do this afternoon apart from surfing the Luas.ie site, why not do something more constructive such as define a set of "exceptional circumstances" for which the rules of each fora's charter may be suspended.

I'd suggest starting with the exception circumstances which would override the "no free speech" rule. That will help the mods a lot.






Still no cat pics?

seamus

meep wrote:

Secondly, I agree that this is a good rule. I'm just saying that in some exceptional circumstances, some rules should be flexible.

Most are though. There are only a handful that are "regardless of circumstances", and this happens to be one of them. I realise you bring this up because it affects you, but then, well tough to be honest.

There's also another immovable blanket ban on discussion of gigs promoted by a certain company. If a huge festival from this company was cancelled because of some spectacular catastrophe, the ban would still remain in effect. You may not consider that a huge deal, but someone else would. The rule would still remain in effect though, regardless.

Boston

meep wrote:

Point taken. Though I should have said 'a note referencing the policy in the statement advising why the thread had been locked'.

This would have the further advantage of enlightening other users like me stupid enough to use a forum without reading the rules. It's likely that users would remember a specific policy more when they see it in action rather than as one of many many rules in one of many many charters from one of the many many many internet forums to which they belong.

(obviously luas.ie is not back up yet :-( )

I'd go with monkey fudges approach about a sticky. Thats not saying the moderator did anything wrong, he was perfectly correct in his actions. Just that it would have saved alot of hassle.

monkeyfudge

Boston wrote:

You get what you pay for tbh. Actually substancially more. Look at the amounth of feedback your query has received.

And not a single cat pic... he should feel a bit short changed.

( . )( . )

Boston

Hill Billy wrote:

Still no cat pics?

User has come on here with a genuine query/complaint. Don't agree with the user buts he's conducted himself with manners and respect for the site and the owner and really deserves to be treated with the same respect in return. so yea no cat picture, rather we've all talked to the user like a person and I believe trashed out some form of understanding.

_feedback_

Hill Billy wrote:

As you've got nowt to do this afternoon apart from surfing the Luas.ie site, why not do something more constructive such as define a set of "exceptional circumstances" for which the rules of each fora's charter may be suspended.

I've a very similar thread in this forum, where I did explain in detail some exceptional circumstances to take in to consideration before a Mod making a decision. However, I've given up on there because it just resulted in the same rubbish as here.

The OP makes a very valid point , and monkeyfudge compliments it perfectly:

monkeyfudge wrote:

If RTÉ radio went off the air for the morning, should I not allow people mention this fact in the radio forum, and tell them they should take it up with RTÉ?

meep wrote:

I seem to on the losing side here :-(

Mate, you're making a valid point in the feedback forum. Of course you'll end up on the losing side :rolleyes:

meep

Hill Billy wrote:

As you've got nowt to do this afternoon apart from surfing the Luas.ie site, why not do something more constructive such as define a set of "exceptional circumstances" for which the rules of each fora's charter may be suspended.

I'd suggest starting with the exception circumstances which would override the "no free speech" rule. That will help the mods a lot.

And since luas.ie is STILL down, I do have a gap in my schedule....

Anyway, a prescriptive set of exceptions is nonsense as of course there will be circumstances not anticipated! That's why I argue for discretion.

Take this precise case. The particular charter item in this case is as follows;

If you have a problem with your host - deal directly with them.

That is a fine rule. It is well worded and looks good on screen. However, from the first post in the original thread and certainly after about half a dozen contributions, it was patently obvious that customers (or even non-customers like me) could not take it up directly with the hosting provider as ALL of their communications were down.

That is the exceptional circumstance in this case and the fact that I feel should have given rise to the ability of the mod to use discretion, not delete a useful thread without trace!

Boston

I see no rubbish in this thread. I see people pointing out how the user is wrong. You're mixing the issue here. If you disagree with a rule you don't just break it / ignore it. That what the user is basically seeking the ok to do. " I broke the rules, but it was a crap rule in the first place" doesn't cut it.

The Hill Billy

Boston wrote:

User has come on here with a genuine query/complaint. Don't agree with the user buts he's conducted himself with manners and respect for the site and the owner and really deserves to be treated with the same respect in return. so yea no cat picture, rather we've all talked to the user like a person and I believe trashed out some form of understanding.

Alright, we know how you feel about the cats pics.

You're right though that Meep has put his case forward in a decent, albeit mis-guided, manner.

Boston

meep wrote:

That is a fine rule. It is well worded and looks good on screen. However, from the first post in the original thread and certainly after about half a dozen contributions, it was patently obvious that customers (or even non-customers like me) could not take it up directly with the hosting provider as ALL of their communications were down.

That is the exceptional circumstance in this case and the fact that I feel should have given rise to the ability of the mod to use discretion, not delete a useful thread without trace!

Ah yes, but if you look at the reasoning behind the rule, its plain to see that this is not an exception to the rule. The topics are not desired on the forum due to past experience of topics being a lot of hassle. there's lots of ways this could have been handled, the locked sticky suggestion seems the best compromise, but a discussion of the topic on the forum was never going to be given the green light, and rightly so in my opinion.

All that said, users probably wouldn't have read the sticky, since most don't even check if a topic has come up recently or if it's posted elsewhere.

Cake Fiend

meep wrote:

We should all demand STRONGLY better customer service in this country from all service providers.

You're absolutely right, and I agree with you 100%. As soon as mods start getting paid a wage, you'll be well within your rights to tell them to do their jobs.

DeepBlue

elviscostello wrote:

The OP makes a very valid point , and monkeyfudge compliments it perfectly:

Mate, you're making a valid point in the feedback forum. Of course you'll end up on the losing side :rolleyes:

QFT.

This is a prime example of those feedback threads where a valid argument is made and the usual myopic suspects come along to nitpick and try to derail it with their kneejerk reactions :rolleyes: .

The OP has a valid point. There are occasions where the charter can be ignored for the greater benefit of the users. Nobody is asking for rules to be changed but simply for some flexibility to be exercised.

There are plenty of feedback threads where mods argue that the charter is a guideline and not some legal text.
Clearly the status page was something of interest to users of the Web forum and common sense would have dictated leaving it available to users of the forum.

Boston

This is probably one of the least derailed threads on feedback in along time. It would be nice if you left whatever personal agenda you have at the door. The charter isn't a legal document, but that doesn't mean its to be ignored. Its a guide for the users and not something that binds the moderators.

bonkey

elviscostello wrote:

The OP makes a very valid point , and monkeyfudge compliments it perfectly:

MF only compliments it fully in that he too seems to be missing teh point.

Yes, if RTE went off the air, you should be allowed mention it in the radio forum unless the radio forum's charter explicitly says not to post asking why your choice of radio station has gone off the air.

The basic complaint here seems to be that although the charter says "don't ask about your provider", the OP is of the opinion that their particular provider is large enough and important enough that this rule shouldn't apply to them.

Rather than suggest that the rule be changed to say "except for H365", they're calling it common sense or flexibility, wanting some ill-defined line to be allowed where some provider stuff should be allowed and some not.

The problem with such lines is that they are ill-defined. Once you allow some of the queries, how do you figure out when to say such-and-such a provider/outage/event/whatever just isn't important enough to be permitted, but this other one is.

The OP wants better customer service, but it seems to me that this hasn't been thought through.

If you allow all such comments, you return to the situation before this rule was put into effect. Given that this rule was put into effect to improve the quality of the forum it would be hard to see how one is improving customer-service to reduce quality by taking it back out.

If you allow some such comments, then you put the mod(s) in the position where they make a judgement call, and each and every judgement call is open to calls of bias. Again, not conducive to customer service.

Or you leave the rule as it is, and you point out that it is not a failing of customer service when a user cannot read and follow the rules of a specific charter. It is, in fact, the upholding of customer service levels which had the thread closed - the service being to the other customers rather than the ones transgressing the clearly-defined rules.

Reading through this thread, there seems to be two main lines of thought. Those demanding flexibility are employing eye-rolling smileys and other such typical tactics to show their displeasure because their wants aren't carrying the day (or haven't thus far at least). Now, imagine where tehy're the ones who feel their topic is important enough to merit flexibility byt the mod disagrees...or they feel the mod is too lax and too flexible. What do you get? More eye-rolling and such.

It would be nice if we lived in a world where you could keep all people happy all the time, but some ill-defined notion which is little more than "the mod should allow stuff that I think is important enough to break / set aside the rules for" isn't it.

Borzoi

Boston wrote:

I see no rubbish in this thread. I see people pointing out how the user is wrong.

The user isn't wrong, his initial actions were (Presuamably from frustration). However that isn't the point of his thread. The initial post refers to Charters, and where Mods might make exceptions - common sense ones. In fact you seem to be in agreement with the OP:

Boston wrote:

The charter isn't a legal document, but that doesn't mean its to be ignored. Its a guide for the users and not something that binds the moderators.