Suggestion: Moderator comment tag

blatantrereg

The policy of using bold text for moderation comments makes sense. It catches the reader's attention, and it distinguishes between a moderator's personal comments and their moderation comments.

There's one significant drawback with it though, and that is that it changes the tone of the comment. Makes it seem shouty in a similar manner to how TYPING ALL IN CAPS does. This can transform the most polite and reasonable comments into something seeming aggressive and rude.

Therefore I suggest moderators get an additional tag to use in their comments, which causes the tagged text to be clearly highlighted as moderator comments. This would provide the same benefits as the bold text policy, and more - and also avoid the drawback.

Overheal

More of a question of technical possibility than anything. I wouldn't even be sure it could be limited to use by the mods.

moved to site development

Boards.ie: Danny

To use a crude real-world analogy, you wouldn't expect a Garda to warn you in a tone like "Ah sure jaysus would you stop or you'll be in trouble", you expect it to be a bit more blatant with more emphasis like "Do that again and there'll be consequences" - the tone/emphasis has changed, but that is the point.

The whole point of a moderator making comments as a moderator is that people will stop, read and take on board what the mod says.

I'm sure there'll be people who disagree with my own interpretation of it, but I can't see us spending time investigating if this is technically possible or worth doing with just one user floating the idea to do it the completely opposite way it's been done for years. If the community collective wants a change, we can revisit. There's only one place to find out...

Punting to Feedback.

blatantrereg

I can't see the bold text effect on tone having a positive effect.

Moderators aren't guards. People might be cowed by a guard being aggressive and rude. I can't see them being cowed by a forum moderator using bold text. The consequences there might be of aggravating a guard are somewhat different to what a forum moderator can effect. Silly comparison tbh.

I think people are much more likely to react confrontationally or negatively because of the bold text really. Moderator tags would make it more official, less personal - I think it would result in a much better response, and would give a better overall impression in general.

Steve

The same argument can be applied to whatever means is used to indicate that a mod is posting in an official capacity - be it red text, highlighted pink or bold or whatever - on boards, it's generally bold text thanks to the efforts of our resident tamed wildman. Some say his tears are adhesive, and that his favourite philosopher is Immanuel Kant. All we know is, he's called The Wibbs.

The point is, we only do it when we want it to be noticed - and it works.

Sometimes I'll post as a mod without necessarily drawing attention to it - a bit like Danny explained where "Ah sure jaysus would you stop or you'll be in trouble" is all that is needed. If that doesn't work then I'll post "If you persist in posting *X* then I'll take action "

Horses for courses, the objective is to be clear, help the user concerned see why there is a problem with what the are posting, and alert them to the fact that if they continue then bad things will happen.

P. Breathnach

blatantrereg wrote: »

I can't see the bold text effect on tone having a positive effect.

Moderators aren't guards. People might be cowed by a guard being aggressive and rude. I can't see them being cowed by a forum moderator using bold text. The consequences there might be of aggravating a guard are somewhat different to what a forum moderator can effect. Silly comparison tbh.

I think people are much more likely to react confrontationally or negatively because of the bold text really. Moderator tags would make it more official, less personal - I think it would result in a much better response, and would give a better overall impression in general.

I see it quite differently, and take a view closer to Danny's. Moderators should, in a sense, be allowed a louder voice than the rest of us when they are reminding people of how they should behave. Some moderators do not boldface their mod interventions, and that sometimes comes across to me as rather too low-key.

If anybody reacts badly to a mod intervention in a thread, then that person probably should not be posting in that thread.

Wibbs

blatantrereg wrote: »

I think people are much more likely to react confrontationally or negatively because of the bold text really. Moderator tags would make it more official, less personal - I think it would result in a much better response, and would give a better overall impression in general.

I get your point B. The main reason I came up with it was because I myself had fallen foul of missing a previous mod note. So I reckoned the bold text would stand out where italics etc might not particularly in a fast moving thread. TBH I never considered tags. Didn't know about them at the time. they may well work, but they'd need to be equally visible and we may be back to the same issue with it looking like shouting? My original idea was "if I'm typing in bold you are being and if I'm typing in red you're dead". I did that for three posts and thought eh no. Dial it back ya eejit. :)

Steve wrote: »

The same argument can be applied to whatever means is used to indicate that a mod is posting in an official capacity - be it red text, highlighted pink or bold or whatever - on boards, it's generally bold text thanks to the efforts of our resident tamed wildman. Some say his tears are adhesive, and that his favourite philosopher is Immanuel Kant. All we know is, he's called The Wibbs.

I think you spelled Kant wrong. There's a U and C missing.

The point is, we only do it when we want it to be noticed - and it works.

Sometimes I'll post as a mod without necessarily drawing attention to it - a bit like Danny explained where "Ah sure jaysus would you stop or you'll be in trouble" is all that is needed. If that doesn't work then I'll post "If you persist in posting *X* then I'll take action "

Horses for courses, the objective is to be clear, help the user concerned see why there is a problem with what the are posting, and alert them to the fact that if they continue then bad things will happen.

+1. I feel it's down to the individual situation/mods/forum. Some forums where people are better known to each other and the traffic and the potential hassle from drive by people is lesser may operate very differently to a high volume forum with more "strangers" involved. I think it's how the thing is phrased too. I know I've defo gotten that wrong more than once and have been heavy handed, or didn't take the nuances into account. For me if it's a gentle nudge back to the topic I try to depersonalise it. I might say OK folks let's remember we're all friends here
or a similar kinda thing. Speaking again personally there have been mod notes aimed in my general direction and the bold mattered less than the overall tone. The bold part just made me spot it at a glance.

TL;DR? for me it's more an interface enhancement/flag than tone, or should be.

K-9

Not really sure of this tag thing, do you mean the Title line?

I've seen mods post bold or [mod] test [/mod] as another way.

I think a tag is just another method that will be ignored by trolls same as bold or [mod] type posts and a genuinely innocent poster might miss it too.

Thinking about it, a big bold Mod title could work. Whatever about not knowing what bold text is about and a noob could well not know, same as [mod] stuff, a big Mod bold title to a post is rather unmissable!

Steve

K-9 wrote: »

Not really sure of this tag thing, do you mean the Title line?

K-9, do not post in this manner again, next time will earn you a ban.

I bet that got your attention..:)

I think a tag is just another method that will be ignored by trolls same as bold or [mod] type posts and a genuinely innocent poster might miss it too.

We can, 99% of the time, tell the innocent posters from the trolls - part of the job so to speak - if the trolls ignore the in-your-face bold warning then we've done our best and they can't really complain when they have their access removed.

K-9

Steve wrote: »

K-9, do not post in this manner again, next time will earn you a ban.

I bet that got your attention..:)

Yeah, because I know what it means, as do you! That's the whole point!

We can, 99% of the time, tell the innocent posters from the trolls - part of the job so to speak - if the trolls ignore the in-your-face bold warning then we've done our best and they can't really complain when they have their access removed.

Just add a Mod tag while editing the post to be in bold. A simple step, takes 2 seconds, eliminates the little doubt left. And less time pointlessly debating in the DRP!

Dades

blatantrereg wrote: »

There's one significant drawback with it though, and that is that it changes the tone of the comment. Makes it seem shouty in a similar manner to how TYPING ALL IN CAPS does. This can transform the most polite and reasonable comments into something seeming aggressive and rude.

I agree to a point. Unless a mod post is to a particualrly unruly poster/thread, I'll use the bold sparingly. Maybe a few words or a line of a post bolded. That and I'll use the icon in the headline. All bold can - at times - come across a bit shouty. But the important thing to note it isn't a Boards' mods rule, it's a choice.

blatantrereg wrote: »

Therefore I suggest moderators get an additional tag to use in their comments, which causes the tagged text to be clearly highlighted as moderator comments. This would provide the same benefits as the bold text policy, and more - and also avoid the drawback.

I'm not sure what a tag would do that couldn't be done using the options within the advanced reply box. Do you have examples from other forums?

I don't see the problem with using bold font
sometimes i do post things in bold like "lads give it a rest will ye" and it's fine, because a heavy hand isn't needed, but the bold font is just enough to make them take notice
sometimes a more strict warning with the bold font is also called for

i don't think it is shouting like caps, but it does draw attention, which it's supposed to

PHB

I must say, as a mod, it would be great if every time somebody viewed a thread they were automatically directed to a mod warning.

It could be something simple like when a mod wants to put in a mod warning, they check a box, then instead of automatically directing to the last post or the last post it was looked at, it directs to any mod warnings since they've last looked at the thread.

It would certainly help in big fast moving threads that happen in the soccer forum, where often in a match thread, a mod warning could occur and there'd be 200 posts within 30 minutes of it so it's never seen.

I'd find it a lot easier to mod and I'd expect to see a change in how those threads develop.

dr.bollocko

MOD NOTE:

See? You noticed that. And I still sound quite reasonable. Well... sometimes.

Raphael

It's worth noting that I was skimming through this text on a completely brain dead Friday afternoon right before I left wsork, and while I missed almost all of it, I read every single bold word. So I guess it works pretty well as is.

The OP has a solid idea, and I can completely see their point, but the fact is that the easiest way to make something instantly noticeable is bold text. Any less shouty or more exclusive thing just wouldn't be as effective.

LoLth

If it's technically possible, I would like to see a "mod comment" tickbox for when a mod makes a mod comment. the tickbox would frame the response in red or whatever colour best suits the various colour schemes and bolds the text contained within it.

I'd also like it if mods/cmods/admins could search for official mod comments in a forum as opposed to just searchign for posts by a mod.

oh, and if there is a mod comment on the thread, it gest a red dot in the thread list until it is read by the user.

if its technically feasible / possible / worth the dev time required.

Taltos

As a regular poster I differentiate my normal posts from my mod posts in Bold font.

If the offending poster sees that as rude or pulling the thread off topic then there is little I can do. This is really to give posters a clear message - stop faffing about. By all means challenge or argue a regular post - however if you challenge or argue a mod intended post on thread then when infracted this can lead to disputes.

Personally I hate having to storm in as I see it, however if a poster has posted something inappropriate or if I have to respond to a reported post I want to make it 100% transparent that I am doing so as a mod and not as another poster.

In terms of tags or red dots - hey whatever works - but until there is a clear system controlled plugin I myself will continue to use Bold to flag my mod posts from my regular ones to avoid any misunderstandings. All too easy to skip a post header, not easy at all to miss that the post is all in Bold.

Just my two cents...

blatantrereg

Just to clarify: By tag, I meant markup tag to cause custom formatting for the text. Eg: [mod]mod comment here[/mod]

El Weirdo

blatantrereg wrote: »

Just to clarify: By tag, I meant markup tag to cause custom formatting for the text. Eg: [mod]mod comment here[/mod]

And how do you suggest the [mod] tags format the text?

What if the [mod] tags made the text bold? That'd be a good idea, wouldn't it?

But wait, isn't that what the [bold] tags do?

Sparks

El Weirdo wrote: »

And how do you suggest the [mod] tags format the text?
What if the [mod] tags made the text bold? That'd be a good idea, wouldn't it?
But wait, isn't that what the [bold] tags do?

And it's what most of us use now; but to be honest, if [mod] flagged a post a different way (like some of the suggestions above), it'd be more useful than [bold] is...