Highlight mod posts

Ludo

I know this has been mentioned before, but would it be possible to somehow highlight posts by a moderator in a thread. Mods should have the ability to highlight their posts if they are making a mod post as opposed to just a normal post in a thread. It would certainly make warnings and stuff a lot more noticible.

I have always thought this should have been done but have a look at this post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60679617&postcount=37

It is a posting in a very moddish manner pointing out that a certain other mod has no powers in that forum.
On first glance it appears to be an official mod post by its tone and content, but it is only when you look at the long list of forums the poster moderates that you see that they also have no right to mod that forum...confusing to say the least as the other official mod posts in that thread are much more subtle (i.e. short and sweet)

Simple highlighting would help make mods jobs easier and make it easier for users who quickly scan a thread to spot warnings before wading in themselves with a comment which has already been warned against.

Ponster

Ludo wrote: »

It is a posting in a very moddish manner pointing out that a certain other mod has no powers in that forum.
On first glance it appears to be an official mod post by its tone and content, but it is only when you look at the long list of forums the poster moderates that you see that they also have no right to mod that forum...confusing to say the least...

I understand what you are asking for but your example isn't confusing (to me at least). Thaedydal was just explaining how the Board works and not giving he impression that they were a mod of the R&R forum.

May be possible to come up with something where a mod who posts instructions in a thread aimed at the other posters could choose to have the post highlighted in some way (text colour change maybe?)

Nevyn

I was being helpful, that poster was racking up infractions at a mad rate and I was hoping they would listen and learn and not get site banned, unfortunatly it turned out to be a futile exercise as they ended up site banned .

AlmightyCushion

I remember raising this before ludo and I think the developers said it was a very big job that required a lot of hacking. Might cause strain on the database too I believe but maybe I imagined that part. Personally I think it's a great idea (when a mods posting as a mod their post is a different back ground colour or something to distinguish a mod post from a normal post) but if it's a big job or adds strain to the servers or both it may not be worth it from a resources point of view.

Red Sleeping Beauty

It'd be savage if some forum moderators didn't post in an authoritative or patronising manner toward other people on forums they're not moderating.

It might cut out some of the confusion.

eagle eye

Type your message in bold:

I am warning/advising posters/a poster to cut out what you are doing.

<Moderator name here>

I think that should suffice to show that its a moderator post.

Ludo

Thaedydal wrote: »

I was being helpful, that poster was racking up infractions at a mad rate and I was hoping they would listen and learn and not get site banned, unfortunatly it turned out to be a futile exercise as they ended up site banned .

I know you were being helpful Thaed. Sorry if my OP came across as "giving out" about your post...that isn't what I meant.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I remember raising this before ludo and I think the developers said it was a very big job that required a lot of hacking. Might cause strain on the database too I believe but maybe I imagined that part. Personally I think it's a great idea (when a mods posting as a mod their post is a different back ground colour or something to distinguish a mod post from a normal post) but if it's a big job or adds strain to the servers or both it may not be worth it from a resources point of view.

Database strain rings a bell alright. There seems to be a lot of that going around lately

eagle eye wrote: »

Type your message in bold:

I am warning/advising posters/a poster to cut out what you are doing.

<Moderator name here>

I think that should suffice to show that its a moderator post.

Yep...I have seen a few mods do this and it certainly does make their posts stand out. Of course the problem with this is that some users will start doing it also in the hope of conning people. into thinking they are mods :-)

Quazzie

Ludo wrote: »

Yep...I have seen a few mods do this and it certainly does make their posts stand out. Of course the problem with this is that some users will start doing it also in the hope of conning people. into thinking they are mods :-)

Back seat modding is an infractable offence on most forums. I see that Javaboy and Dr.Bollocko followed Wibbs lead and now use this method and its very effective.

Imposter

Wibbs does something similar in PI - He posts in bold when his mod hat is on and normal when it isn't. I think it's worth suggesting to moderators and admins and also put some measures in place to stop people pretending to be mods where they aren't. Yes Thaedydal was trying to be helpful here which I don't see the problem of but in general I think this is a good idea.

Doctor DooM

I used to write mod tags to show when I was in mod mode like this:

<MOD>Blah blah blah do what I say BANNED 4EVA!/<MOD>

But now I do the highlighting thing as it's one click and therefore much easier.

I don't think Boards would "enforce" mods doing this though as different mods have different styles (some mods never take their mod hat off).

PS that post from Thaed was trying to be helpful. She clearly stated she wasn't a mod and referred the poster to both the correct mods and the sitewide rules which everyone- including Thaed- has to obey. She didn't tell the poster what to do, so it's not backseat modding.

Tom Dunne

I think the Wibbs Method of Conveying Mod Instructions is the best.

No ambiguity, nobody left wondering where they stand, straight to the point.

Unlike Wibbs' regular posts.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Dades

I use one of these (see subject line icon) if things are "serious".

But other than that, I think subtlety and 'suggestion' should be preferred over guns blazing. Highlighted posts break threads and develop the "them & us" perception, imo.

stovelid

I always prefer the look to the left and check the list of forums that the poster in question actually moderates method. Although it requires gargantuan effort, it can be very rewarding.

Imposter

Dades wrote: »

But other than that, I think subtlety and 'suggestion' should be preferred over guns blazing. Highlighted posts break threads and develop the "them & us" perception, imo.

But if a mod needs to intervene for whatever reason there is a "them and us" situation. Not in a fight the power way but in a way that the us's should listen to the them's. A lot of people don't understand the whole mod of a forum not mod of the whole site thing and while the concept isn't exactly rocket science, catering to such ignorance, if you will, might help prevent some of the spats we've seen in forums (especially feedback) over the years.

Same comment goes for Stovelid's post.

Ludo

stovelid wrote: »

I always prefer the look to the left and check the list of forums that the poster in question actually moderates method. Although it requires gargantuan effort, it can be very rewarding.

While you may be well used to doing that it is no in way user friendly. Any basic form of usability would provide an obvious distinction between normal posts and a moderator comment/command.

Thanks for the sarcasm though...helpful.

The Hill Billy

I bold my mod posts & think that it is effective in DCN. No complaints so far anyway. * crosses fingers *

orestes

Wibbs-mod-posting ftw. Nice and simple.

Alan Rouge wrote: »

It'd be savage if some forum moderators didn't post in an authoritative or patronising manner toward other people on forums they're not moderating.

It might cut out some of the confusion.

We're users outside of our forums and are free to post however we see fit, just like anyone else. If you have a problem with a post, report it.

Imposter wrote: »

But if a mod needs to intervene for whatever reason there is a "them and us" situation. Not in a fight the power way but in a way that the us's should listen to the them's. A lot of people don't understand the whole mod of a forum not mod of the whole site thing and while the concept isn't exactly rocket science, catering to such ignorance, if you will, might help prevent some of the spats we've seen in forums (especially feedback) over the years.

Why should the site cater to ignorance? Educate and assist people wherever possible, definitely, I'm begind that 100% (the FAQ is awesome and incredibly useful for that) but I don't think catering to ignorance is ever a good idea.

My name is URL

Would it not be possible to remove the mod status from underneath the user-info box on forums which people are not mods?

I don't mean mask their post info or anything, just remove the boldiness etc

everyone bangs on about how they're only users outside of the forums they moderate so it wouldn't be that big of a deal would it?

gandalf

My name is URL wrote: »

Would it not be possible to remove the mod status from underneath the user-info box on forums which people are not mods?

I don't mean mask their post info or anything, just remove the boldiness etc

everyone bangs on about how they're only users outside of the forums they moderate so it wouldn't be that big of a deal would it?

Its been suggested but it would cause an additional workload on the processing power of the servers so it hasn't been deemed worthwhile. I think people would prefer faster browsing than having mods details removed off the forums they moderate.

orestes

My name is URL wrote: »

Would it not be possible to remove the mod status from underneath the user-info box on forums which people are not mods?

I don't mean mask their post info or anything, just remove the boldiness etc

everyone bangs on about how they're only users outside of the forums they moderate so it wouldn't be that big of a deal would it?

A lot of people find forums they wouldn't normally know existed through seeing the mod-tags under a mods name so they can be handy for that. I think something like that could be a bit of a drain on the database too, could be wrong on that one though. I'm good either way though, I've no strong feelings towards either side.

Wibbs

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I think the Wibbs Method of Conveying Mod Instructions is the best.

No ambiguity, nobody left wondering where they stand, straight to the point.

Tnx. TBH, the main reason I started doing it was to spot my own previous mod stuff at a glance and it does stand out. But then you do sometimes get people who think you're shouting at them.

Unlike Wibbs' regular posts.

Git:D that's the other reason actually, because I tended to post a lot, I wanted the mod stuff to stand out among my usual guff. Though generally if it's under a paragraph someone is getting a warning.:)

6th

Yeah Wibbs is a visionary, I use his system too ... I call it Wibbing.

delly

I understand Ludo's point, but Thaedydal specifically states the Mod's of the forum in her post. In this case there shouldn't have been any confusion imho.

Gary ITR

6th wrote: »

Yeah Wibbs is a visionary, I use his system too ... I call it Wibbing.

Wibbed for your pleasure?

Stabshauptmann

Wibbs wrote: »

Tnx. TBH, the main reason I started doing it was to spot my own previous mod stuff at a glance and it does stand out. But then you do sometimes get people who think you're shouting at them.

You could try colour tags instead

Terry

stovelid wrote: »

I always prefer the look to the left and check the list of forums that the poster in question actually moderates method. Although it requires gargantuan effort, it can be very rewarding.

Works for me.

I don't use the Wibbs method (Or Wibbing as 6th has named it).

I do this:

Stop screwing around.

---

Yes, I have noticed that there are more people on the dole.

Ludo

So you "moderate" and post a normal thread comment in the one post

Surely that is not a good practise?

My name is URL

orestes wrote: »

A lot of people find forums they wouldn't normally know existed through seeing the mod-tags under a mods name so they can be handy for that. I think something like that could be a bit of a drain on the database too, could be wrong on that one though. I'm good either way though, I've no strong feelings towards either side.

It's not a big deal anyway imo, just throwin ideas out there. I didn't actually mean remove the mod-tags or list of forums they mod, just the bold usernames. I've also seen some guy who has a red user-name, maybe a color change for modded forums would be better. As you said though it would probably place undue strain on the servers so best leave it

Gary ITR

Ludo wrote: »

So you "moderate" and post a normal thread comment in the one post

Surely that is not a good practise?

Why not?


You would often see messages like this

Mod warning yadda yadda


Back on topic; I agree with the op because xyz

Ludo

IMHO there should be a clear distinction between a mod post and an opinion on the topic being offered by a poster who also happens to be a mod. Mixing the two in the one post just isn't clear and can lead to confusion. It would seem to be better practice to keep mod instructions as clear and concise as possible.
I would definitely class it as the worst possible way to give mod comments.

smashey

How difficult would it be for everybody to take a quick glance under the Mod's name and see what forums they mod and then another quick glance at the forum you are in?

Ludo

smashey wrote: »

How difficult would it be for everybody to take a quick glance under the Mod's name and see what forums they mod and then another quick glance at the forum you are in?

In fairness if you are reading a long multi page thread, people just tend to scan a lot of the posts. If you spot a post telling someone to stop doing something, then you have to look over to see what forum he mods and does he actually matter. Then some mods have loadsa forums listed so you have to read through those. It simply is not a user-friendly system.

Any piece of software, be it a desktop application or internet forum should aim for consistency and usability to make it a better experience for the user.
Trade-offs have to be made obvoiusly for performance and other factors so that has to be taken into account.

There is zero consistency in how moderators post currently. I don't see the harm in coming up with some standard to make it clear across all forums.
I'm not saying my suggestion is the best or anything. Even if every mod adopted the bold method it would help and cost nothing.

But I guess some people will never be open to even considering changing things in any way and rely on the old "but it's always been done this way"...and that is human nature I guess.

Ponster

Ludo wrote: »

There is zero consistency in how moderators post currently. I don't see the harm in coming up with some standard to make it clear across all forums.

I don't see the harm either but it's up to each mod as to their style of modding and is not something that the admins could enforce.

Wibbs

Ludo wrote: »

IMHO there should be a clear distinction between a mod post and an opinion on the topic being offered by a poster who also happens to be a mod. Mixing the two in the one post just isn't clear and can lead to confusion. It would seem to be better practice to keep mod instructions as clear and concise as possible.
I would definitely class it as the worst possible way to give mod comments.

Regardless of bolding or colour tagging, I do think that distinction would be better. Separate post at least. Personally I think a mod instruction in the same post as a (Mods) user opinion is confusing.

To be fair, I can see the other side of it too though. It does make the mod more like the part of the community that he or she is. So someone like Terry who is a hugely popular and well respected mod around here is clearly doing lots of things right and I figure he's got his style right too. For him and his community. I'd last ten seconds in AH before I hit the valium.

As ponster said each mod and each community differ and have their own styles which I reckon is a good thing.

Another reason I personally went the bold route was because it was PI. PI is probably the most heavily modded forum on boards. If someone misses a heads up and keeps going, it may have more personal repercussions for someone looking for advice.

Doctor DooM

smashey wrote: »

How difficult would it be for everybody to take a quick glance under the Mod's name and see what forums they mod and then another quick glance at the forum you are in?

The answer is clearly "suprisingly".

Ludo wrote: »

There is zero consistency in how moderators post currently. I don't see the harm in coming up with some standard to make it clear across all forums.
I'm not saying my suggestion is the best or anything. Even if every mod adopted the bold method it would help and cost nothing.

I personally agree but you have to appreciate- mods don't work for Boards. We're not paid to do this. I would assume the Admins are loathe to formalise the modding process too much in the fear they would lose good moderatzis.

It's quite difficult in any case I would guess to go "you must all do X this way now!!!" when you have no legal or financial control over the people being ordered.

Ludo

I there was still a thank you button I would give you thanks Wibbs and SDoom. Good logical explanations and reasoning.
Feel free to lock this one off or let it fade away down the pages and die.

Gordon

The Wibbing method is good but time has shown so far that different communites can have different flavours of mods and hence differently viewed moderating styles to the users is seen if not standardised. So it'd be nice to have Wibbing uniform across the board, but at the moment it isn't standardised. I sure will try to use Wibbational speech more in the future because of this thread though.

Stay on topic

stovelid

While colour tagged moderator comments are a good idea, much of the inspirational nature of Wibidinal moderation - stemming as it does from the interplay of bold as font style and bold as the disobedience that requires the chastisement therein - would be lost.

Wibbs

Onkle wrote: »

Wibbed for your pleasure?

Darn tootin...:pac:

Well originally my tagline was going to be, "If I'm typing in bold, you have been. If I'm typing in red, you're dead(tad antagonistic to be sure) If I'm typing in italics"..... well that's where it went south...

I do post the username I'm referring to in red as I found some even missed the mod post in bold. Again I will echo what gordon said and what I said earlier, each mod and forum have their own style. Some are more obvious and more hands on than others and have to be too.

orestes

I'm so tempted to go and act the maggot in one of wibbs' forums so I get a bold post and I can say I've been wibbed

5starpool

Ludo wrote: »

IMHO there should be a clear distinction between a mod post and an opinion on the topic being offered by a poster who also happens to be a mod. Mixing the two in the one post just isn't clear and can lead to confusion. It would seem to be better practice to keep mod instructions as clear and concise as possible.
I would definitely class it as the worst possible way to give mod comments.

Usually when there is a post that has an element of mod and an element of on topic stuff to it, it is not a big issue, but more like a 'back on topic please' or 'everyone calm down ffs'.

As has been said, different mods have different styles, some even between different forums they mod. Horses for courses and all that.

eagle eye

5starpool wrote: »

Usually when there is a post that has an element of mod and an element of on topic stuff to it, it is not a big issue, but more like a 'back on topic please' or 'everyone calm down ffs'.

As has been said, different mods have different styles, some even between different forums they mod. Horses for courses and all that.

The thumbs up button is missing so I have to post it instead.