T&C enforcement policy

[EM]

Unfortunately, when googling it appears the thread doesn't exist? Or has it been renamed or merged?

No explanation on this? Has it been deleted?

It was removed from public view becuase of legal proceedings instigated due to the large number of unsubstantiated accusations contained in the thread. By the time the material in question had been reviewed this new thread had started and there was little relevant content in the original thread that had not been reposted

 

As Njugle said....

Edit - Nor will Shetlink uphold unfounded allegations and will be forced to close the thread if they are submitted. Proven facts in the public domain or qualified opinion please. Not rumour speculation or hearsay, and I really shouldn't have to state this. You have read the T&Cs, of course.

 

OK, I think I can see the issues which are behind the way that T&C policy is being moderated. More or less the same justifications for thread locking and thread removal are provided each time. These seem to come down to the way that emotive and controversial topics lead eventually to postings being made which breach T&C, and particularly to breaches which could expose Shetlink to legal challenge. It has been stated several times that there is not enough Mod resource available to check things adequately, thus the only safe option is to just wipe out or lock the thread.

 

All of that is perfectly understandable and logical. I would suggest, however, that it is not the best approach, either for Moderation, or more generally. It seems to be like solving dental cavities by removing all teeth, rather than brushing teeth. The difference is that teeth don't grow back but emotive and controversial threads have a habit of turning up again, because they are emotive and controversial.

 

Surely the solution to this problem for Moderators should be to enforce T&C directly and fairly with the specific posts which do indeed breach the clearly stated rules. You have the ability to suspend users and if you did so I am sure the whole T&C enforcement situation would become so much easier. At present the typical sequence of emotive comments leading to progressively less civilised postings does not end with any censure of the people posting "Hang him" type comments. This does not provide any reason for people to refrain from doing so, so they keep doing it. If a user is barred for a period of time everything will become more compliant and the many valid, substantiated comments will remain.

 

Does this not make sense?

[Guest Anonymous]

I agree EM

A'm Geeng.

[Fjool]

Thanks for taking the time to post on this topic, EM.

 

Does this not make sense?

It makes sense, yes. But this approach is impractical from a workload point of view; it quickly becomes a 24/7 job. Particularly when each moderation action results in many behind-the-scenes PMs and other tasks. As much as we'd like to nurse topics through turbulent times, sometimes the only time we have available is for slash-and-burn.

 

Your comments here are very much appreciated and I'm sure it's something to aim for. We can but try our best.

[EM]

It makes sense, yes. But this approach is impractical from a workload point of view; it quickly becomes a 24/7 job.

I have no personal experience of forum moderation, so my opinion is perhaps somewhat naive. I do, however, feel that concentration on the specific posts and users would very quickly make your task much simpler.

 

My feeling is that the current situation must indeed be a real nighmare for you, but it will not improve or get easier without the real possibility of user suspension.

 

I don't see why it can not be tried out either. Keep doing what you are currently doing, challenge T&C violators to adequately justify postings which breach, and then suspend for a period if you remain unconvinced. See if that leads to a reduction in the Mod resources wasted on enforcement. Initially it does not need to be an either/or situation.

[Marooned in Maywick]

But anyone determined enough would have several user names on the go, thus making moderation even harder if concentrating on user names.

[Fjool]

Rest assured the users have been suspended in the past and will no doubt be suspended again in the future. It is not always so clearly delineated that a good decision can be made. The good decisions are rarely seen by Shetlink at large; the bad ones stand out like a sore thumb. Knowing which is which, at the time, is tricky.

 

Mostly the people who violate the T&Cs are those who don't really post here often. The regulars are pretty much all fine and upstanding. Most of them anyway.

 

Without going into too many details, banning or suspending can have all sorts of consequences depending on how the individual reacts. All I can say is that I'm quite glad not to wield the ban-stick as I'd probably have used it many times by now.

[Njugle]

EM what you suggest is a fine theory about 'weeding' and one which worked in the first years of Shetlink. There are also indeed users who have been banned temporarily and permanently. However the weeding issue and dealing with the details is a case of casting a bucket of water against a tidal wave and becomes very very time consuming in reality. If there were someone employed to watch the forum it may be practical but, as we have to say, the moderators are volunteers.

 

To illustrate the difficulty in 'educating' forum users I might draw your attention to your very own recent post questioning a moderation post that had been questioned and answered and lain to rest only a handful of posts previously. Now multiply that by how many regular users there are and how fast a 'hot topic grows and you can begin to imagine how difficult it is to educate users as to what the boundaries are and respond to every "freedom of speech" and "It's not fair" and "the mods are protecting the *****" post. And then....when it's aaalllll sorted out, you get three new users signing up for a hot topic and it all starts again, and the regulars join in, or don't read the posts properly.

 

That's a glimpse of why we have to just pull the plug sometimes. On users and threads.

[Para Handy]

Is it the whole point of moderation just that etc . That the ones who do it can tell you if, and when a post might be over stepping the mark some times. I quite accept. That I have done this in the past and have had it pointed out to me. I accept the slap on the wrist when I get it wrong. The mods are aloud to edit or deleat the post. Some time you get so emotive about something’s , and post something which at a later date just looks a bit racist or slandering someone. In the whole the mods do a good job. They don’t get paid for doing it as far as I know. And its done on there own time as well. So accept the mistake and move on.

[tlady]

I would like to thank our mods for the difficult, time-consuming and thankless task they perform on our behalf to protect Shetlink. .....crawl over ..

[Spinner72]

Do not forget, also, that the Moderators are simply enforcing the rules everybody posting on the forums have already agreed to by doing so.

 

While it may seem more logical from an individual members point of view for moderators to "concentrate" on specific threads etc, do remember that in a large forum community there could well be multiple threads contaning breaches, or potential breaches, of the terms and conditions we all agreed to, at any one time.

 

From my experience the average forum user follows between 5-10 threads regularly - moderators can have literally hundreds to read irrespective of whether they are of any personal intrest or not. Have a go, and see how much fun it is.

 

The most fundimental thing to remember is that on shetlink, as with any private membership based forum, there is no free speech. If you don't agree with the site terms and/or moderation, move on.

 

I hear notepad is a particularly receptive alternative