Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

blanch152 · 10-09-2020 1:36pm

DubInMeath wrote: »

In all fairness I don't think the mods are as thick or lazy as your post implies, and more likely the posters being a dick etc

I was not implying that the mods were either thick or lazy.

Beasty · 10-09-2020 1:37pm

blanch152 wrote: »

This is a definite issue in the forum. Some posters use the Report Post option as a political tool, reporting only those who they disagree with and doing so for the slightest perceived offence. Those reported are then seen as a problem and attract unbalanced attention from the mods. This is not the mods fault, they are just being used by a particular cohort.

We are fully aware of those looking for outrage at every opportunity. And there are some at both sides of the political divide. Personally I have little interest in their actual politics and I will look at reports whoever they are from. Some can be pretty much instantly dismissed. Some though can require a heavy investment into looking at background/build up

10-09-2020 1:42pm

blanch152 wrote: »

I was not implying that the mods were either thick or lazy.

" Those reported are then seen as a problem and attract unbalanced attention from the mods. This is not the mods fault, they are just being used by a particular cohort."

Certainly reads that way, if they are seeing people as a problem just because of the fact they are receiving reports and taking action against them. For someone to be used as you claimed they wouldn't be the brightest now would they.

EmmetSpiceland · 10-09-2020 2:41pm

I, personally, think removing the “report” function in the forum would be a great Idea. Too many sensitive, angry, oddball types running to the mods over the slightest things. It’s nonsense, let the mods get on with their “job” and let the forum flow a bit.

It’s fairly obvious that the basement has been given a “fumigation” of late. A number of angry misfits have gotten their marching orders, and then senselessly appealing this in that “Prison” forum.

Hopefully, this will restore a bit of “balance” to the place and mean the mods can focus more on the day to day running and not have to get involved in so many, petty, disputes.

10-09-2020 2:45pm

mike_ie wrote: »

Does that line of thinking take into account any of the following:
Poster's prior history in the thread (which may not be visible to everyone)

Poster's prior history across the forum as a whole (which again, may not be visible to everyone)

The gravity of the offending post - i.e. whether it's too dumb to action and it's better off just deleting?

Whether the poster has made any effort to self correct afterwards?

Whether the poster makes contact afterwards to discuss?

Whether the post has already been taken apart by other posters in the thread?

Whether the thread has moved on and there's nothing to be gained by going back over old ground?

...and so on? Not being smart - it's a genuine question - but these are all factors for me when considering if a post needs to be actioned and to what degree. You're never going to get a binary system where mods are just dialing in their responses, and I would imagine nobody wants that.

are those all factors that mods take into consideration when actioning a reported post then?

Baggly · 10-09-2020 3:21pm

Aegir wrote:

are those all factors that mods take into consideration when actioning a reported post then?

I would as well fwiw

Tokyo · 10-09-2020 3:29pm

Aegir wrote: »

are those all factors that mods take into consideration when actioning a reported post then?

Can't speak for others, but unless it's a very obvious breach of the rules, then for me, yes.

Tokyo · 10-09-2020 3:31pm

blanch152 wrote: »

This is a definite issue in the forum. Some posters use the Report Post option as a political tool, reporting only those who they disagree with and doing so for the slightest perceived offence. Those reported are then seen as a problem and attract unbalanced attention from the mods. This is not the mods fault, they are just being used by a particular cohort.

I don't claim to be the smartest person in the world, but do you really believe I see three reported posts and pound on the ban button without further consideration? It doesn't work like that, and it's quite reductive to claim it does.

blanch152 · 10-09-2020 3:46pm

mike_ie wrote: »

I don't claim to be the smartest person in the world, but do you really believe I see three reported posts and pound on the ban button without further consideration? It doesn't work like that, and it's quite reductive to claim it does.

Again, that is not what I was saying. I don't claim to be the smartest person in the world either, so maybe the point I made came across more clumsier than I meant. I'll have a go again.

The mods have a dreadful job in the CA forum, and I have every sympathy for them. I fully admit that I have come to their attention several times but I generally back off after a warning and I don't think I have ever wasted their time taking a card to the DRP forum as while I can lose sight of how to behave at times, I don't believe in wasting their time, and like any referee, the default should be to accept their decision.

The fact is that there are a huge number of posts in that forum, and there are a large number of those posts which stray close to or over the line. However, in my opinion, (and I admit it is an uninformed opinion as I don't have access to the posts reported) there is a tendency among certain posters and certain groups of posters to take offence at the smallest slight and go running to the mods about it. As the mods don't have the time to go through each and every post on a thread or on every thread (as is frequently stated on here and elsewhere), and they can only deal with what is reported, it is inevitable by sheer force of numbers that there is a susceptibility to repeated reports of particular posters even though their behaviour, if viewed in a broader context, is little different to the generality of posters. Viewed through the lens of reported posts only, the appearance can be very different. That is all.

I would stand over that view as being correct, what I could well be missing is any behind-the-scenes actions being taken to counter-balance that. We may both be correct. I could be correct that there is an issue with concerted and repeated reporting of certain posters, you could be correct that the systems are suitably robust to deal with such occurences. Without knowledge of the latter, there is nothing wrong or incorrect with me raising this in a Feedback thread, and if nothing more, it serves as a reminder to mods to keep an eye out for such behaviour.

10-09-2020 4:19pm

Baggly wrote: »

I would as well fwiw

mike_ie wrote: »

Can't speak for others, but unless it's a very obvious breach of the rules, then for me, yes.

so two posters could write the exact same insult, but you would take in to consideration who the poster is before taking action?

Loads of posts are deleted in the IMHO and Politics forums. there is no indication if these also include a warning or not. This makes it very easy for a moderator to show clear bias because it means posters they may agree with, but who acted a dick will just have their posts deleted, whereas posters they may not usually agree with receive a warning and this will therefore have a knock on effect for any future warnings issued.

I have serious reservations about the moderating in the IMHO forum.

Tokyo · 10-09-2020 4:31pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Again, that is not what I was saying. I don't claim to be the smartest person in the world either, so maybe the point I made came across more clumsier than I meant. I'll have a go again.

The mods have a dreadful job in the CA forum, and I have every sympathy for them. I fully admit that I have come to their attention several times but I generally back off after a warning and I don't think I have ever wasted their time taking a card to the DRP forum as while I can lose sight of how to behave at times, I don't believe in wasting their time, and like any referee, the default should be to accept their decision.

The fact is that there are a huge number of posts in that forum, and there are a large number of those posts which stray close to or over the line. However, in my opinion, (and I admit it is an uninformed opinion as I don't have access to the posts reported) there is a tendency among certain posters and certain groups of posters to take offence at the smallest slight and go running to the mods about it. As the mods don't have the time to go through each and every post on a thread or on every thread (as is frequently stated on here and elsewhere), and they can only deal with what is reported, it is inevitable by sheer force of numbers that there is a susceptibility to repeated reports of particular posters even though their behaviour, if viewed in a broader context, is little different to the generality of posters. Viewed through the lens of reported posts only, the appearance can be very different. That is all.

I would stand over that view as being correct, what I could well be missing is any behind-the-scenes actions being taken to counter-balance that. We may both be correct. I could be correct that there is an issue with concerted and repeated reporting of certain posters, you could be correct that the systems are suitably robust to deal with such occurences. Without knowledge of the latter, there is nothing wrong or incorrect with me raising this in a Feedback thread, and if nothing more, it serves as a reminder to mods to keep an eye out for such behaviour.

I appreciate the considered response.

FWIW, I'm very aware that certain people reporting posts are bending over backwards to be offended. And they are seen and treated as such.

I guess the best answer I can give you is this.

Do we see every potential personal dig, dickish comment, flagrant breach of the rules in every single thread? No, of course not. As you said, it's an extremely busy forum, and it would simply be impossible for any mod to read through every single post. (the same can be said for any other busy forum by the way)

Do reported posts bring potential issues to our attention quicker? Yes, of course. It's the equivalent of firing a flare inviting us to take a look.

What I *can* say is that if a situation comes to our attention, it's still given proper consideration, irrespective of the number of reported posts associated with it. It's not just a blind reaction of "reported post = card".

Now you and others might feel that this provides an advantage to a particular side of an argument, and maybe sheer numbers on one side means that certain posts come to our attention quicker, or conversely, certain posts on the other side of the argument slip through the cracks. But this is user driven, not mod driven, and I'm really not sure what we can do better than to try and ensure that any issue that *does* come to our attention - be it though reported posts, or encountered while reading through the forum - irrespective of the side of the argument it falls - is treated as fairly as possible.

Baggly · 10-09-2020 4:31pm

Aegir wrote: »

so two posters could write the exact same insult, but you would take in to consideration who the poster is before taking action?

Loads of posts are deleted in the IMHO and Politics forums. there is no indication if these also include a warning or not. This makes it very easy for a moderator to show clear bias because it means posters they may agree with, but who acted a dick will just have their posts deleted, whereas posters they may not usually agree with receive a warning and this will therefore have a knock on effect for any future warnings issued.

I have serious reservations about the moderating in the IMHO forum.

If its abuse its abuse. Without a specific example (so this is general guidance) in your example the consideration would come in terms of what level of sanction would apply rather than whether a sanction is applied or not.

EmmetSpiceland · 10-09-2020 4:44pm

Aegir wrote: »

so two posters could write the exact same insult, but you would take in to consideration who the poster is before taking action?

Loads of posts are deleted in the IMHO and Politics forums. there is no indication if these also include a warning or not. This makes it very easy for a moderator to show clear bias because it means posters they may agree with, but who acted a dick will just have their posts deleted, whereas posters they may not usually agree with receive a warning and this will therefore have a knock on effect for any future warnings issued.

I have serious reservations about the moderating in the IMHO forum.

Are you serious? The moderating of the forum is difficult as hell and the “team” does a good job of it.

Don’t tell me you’re one of those who wants more bans in there. That will only lead to AH taking in the angry “refugees”.

Of course a user’s “history” comes into it when the mods are going to take action. Someone with a clear “record” will always get the benefit of the doubt.

You see a load of morons whining because they feel they are being “targeted” by a mod. If you get on the wrong side of a mod then you’d better keep your nose clean. If you get done for a certain way of posting, you don’t do it again.

And, if you do, you can’t really complain, or say you didn’t see it coming.

uptherebels · 10-09-2020 4:45pm

Aegir wrote: »

so two posters could write the exact same insult, but you would take in to consideration who the poster is before taking action?
.

Where are you picking this up from?

Overheal · 10-09-2020 4:49pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I, personally, think removing the “report” function in the forum would be a great Idea. Too many sensitive, angry, oddball types running to the mods over the slightest things.

blanch152 wrote: »

This is a definite issue in the forum. Some posters use the Report Post option as a political tool, reporting only those who they disagree with and doing so for the slightest perceived offence.

Sorry but what is y'all's evidence for any of these accusations

10-09-2020 4:53pm

Baggly wrote: »

If its abuse its abuse. Without a specific example (so this is general guidance) in your example the consideration would come in terms of what level of sanction would apply rather than whether a sanction is applied or not.

It’s obviously hard to understand what abuse and trolling are sometimes. Maybe you could provide some feedback on the post I reported today?

10-09-2020 4:59pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

If you get on the wrong side of a mod then you’d better keep your nose clean. If you get done for a certain way of posting, you don’t do it again.

And, if you do, you can’t really complain, or say you didn’t see it coming.

that's my point exactly.

When mods post in threads on politics they are going to have an opinion. If your opinion differs to theirs, then you are, by default, on their wrong side.

Overheal · 10-09-2020 5:03pm

Aegir wrote: »

that's my point exactly.

When mods post in threads on politics they are going to have an opinion. If your opinion differs to theirs, then you are, by default, on their wrong side.

What CA/IMHO mod is posting politically in CA/IMHO?

10-09-2020 5:05pm

Overheal wrote: »

What CA/IMHO mod is posting politically in CA/IMHO?

I thought we weren’t allowed to name names?

10-09-2020 5:06pm

think everyone moaning about mods should self declare their own political leanings

and everyone complaining about reported posts likewise

be interesting to see if everyone balances out

possibly weight it against ratio of posts of each leaning on the site to ensure its not just a dumb "50/50"

i mean results would still be meaningless but it might stop this thread being moan central for an hour

EmmetSpiceland · 10-09-2020 5:08pm

Overheal wrote: »

Sorry but what is y'all's evidence for any of these accusations

Ah, you hear them bleating about how the posts they’ve reported not getting “actioned”. Hell, you even see them moaning about it in the “Prison” forum after they’ve been banned.

Aegir wrote: »

that's my point exactly.

When mods post in threads on politics they are going to have an opinion. If your opinion differs to theirs, then you are, by default, on their wrong side.

You don’t get on the wrong side of the mods by having a “different opinion” to them. You get on the wrong side of them by breaking the rule or wasting their time.

That’s just my take on it but I doubt a mod is going “target” you because you don’t think like they do. Sure they’d have different opinions to each other, hardly going to see them banning fellow moderators.

Overheal · 10-09-2020 5:11pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Ah, you hear them bleating about how the posts they’ve reported not getting “actioned”. Hell, you even see them moaning about it in the “Prison” forum after they’ve been banned.

So based on inference from banned accounts, re-reg trolls, etc. - is that a robust source?

10-09-2020 5:13pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

You don’t get on the wrong side of the mods by having a “different opinion” to them.

Yes, you do.

Quantum Erasure · 10-09-2020 5:14pm

Overheal wrote: »

Sorry but what is y'all's evidence for any of these accusations

...

Beasty wrote: »

We are fully aware of those looking for outrage at every opportunity. And there are some at both sides of the political divide. Personally I have little interest in their actual politics and I will look at reports whoever they are from. Some can be pretty much instantly dismissed. Some though can require a heavy investment into looking at background/build up

Overheal · 10-09-2020 5:16pm

Aegir wrote: »

I thought we weren’t allowed to name names?

My point is, if it's who I'm thinking of, they aren't a mod in CA/IMHO and that doesn't really apply to this conversation. I haven't seen any CA/IMHO mods on the forum engaging in political debate or espousing political opinion. I couldn't rightly tell you the political beliefs of the CA/IMHO mods.

10-09-2020 5:19pm

Overheal wrote: »

My point is, if it's who I'm thinking of, they aren't a mod in CA/IMHO and that doesn't really apply to this conversation. I haven't seen any CA/IMHO mods on the forum engaging in political debate or espousing political opinion. I couldn't rightly tell you the political beliefs of the CA/IMHO mods.

there is a huge overlap between Politics, CA and other threads. There is always bound to be overspill of grudges from one to the other.

Overheal · 10-09-2020 5:21pm

Aegir wrote: »

there is a huge overlap between Politics, CA and other threads. There is always bound to be overspill of grudges from one to the other.

Then, that has little to do with feedback for the CA/IMHO forum and it's mods. Your problem sounds like perhaps a help desk or dispute resolution one.

There is no overlap between the forum mods for Politics (ancapailldorcha, Chips Lovell, johnnyskeleton, Quin_Dub, Seth Brundle) and for CA/IMHO (Baggly, Beasty, dudara, hullaballoo, Ken., Kimbot, mike_ie, Mr E, Sephiroth_dude, Skylinehead, Ten of Swords).

Baggly · 10-09-2020 5:23pm

Aegir wrote: »

there is a huge overlap between Politics, CA and other threads. There is always bound to be overspill of grudges from one to the other.

There is no overlap in terms of the mod teams for CA/IMHO and Politics though.

CA/IMHO
Baggly, Beasty, dudara, hullaballoo, Ken., Kimbot, mike_ie, Mr E, Sephiroth_dude, Skylinehead, Ten of Swords

Politics
ancapailldorcha, Chips Lovell, johnnyskeleton, Quin_Dub, Seth Brundle

So unless ive mistaken your point, i think the point is moot.

Baggly · 10-09-2020 5:27pm

Aegir wrote: »

It’s obviously hard to understand what abuse and trolling are sometimes. Maybe you could provide some feedback on the post I reported today?

I know this may be perceived as a cop out but no. It is not fair for me to review a report about another poster here.

I say this to people who i am discussing mod actions with via PM - i would no more discuss action or lack of action against another user with you than i would discuss you with another poster.

Actions get discussed by the mod team; and they get discussed with the poster in question. That's the fairest way, imo, because what happens or doesn't happen to a poster is no ones business except for that poster and the mods.

Tokyo · 10-09-2020 6:14pm

Aegir wrote: »

so two posters could write the exact same insult, but you would take in to consideration who the poster is before taking action?

I'm pretty sure you are well aware that's not what I said, but are willfully ignoring it just to nail your predisposed opinion home.

What I was explicitly clear about in my post is that I don't blindly see post, hit big button. If I see a shítty comment from a poster who has a relatively clean record, and seems to have crossed the line, then they may get a verbal warning to get back in line, If I see a shítty comment from a poster who has a months long history of shítty posts, including multiple cards, then yes, they're going to be receiving a ban.

The point being, do I take into account who a poster is? No. Do I take into account that poster's history up until that point? Yes. But I'm pretty sure you knew that the first time around.

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Comments