Hi again folks,
Thanks for all those who gave their opinions. Like someone said, all ideas are welcome.
I saw that my suggestion were understood as an eventual censorship, which isn't my aim. Lets say that indeed a pre-control could slow down the forums. When I did it myself few years ago, it worked well, but it was about a thread concerning opinions about events (mostly political and judicial). Perhaps setting this system here is interesting in theory, but technically it is difficult.
No worries. The solutions are there.
I- Forums's moderators shouldn't be the same ones who moderate the chatroom.
II- Forums's moderators wouldn't be allowed to post any thread or to reply to anyone. Their duties is just to control.
III- The site owners will set rules about posting and the moderators will just see if they weren't broken. Only in that case, they can reject the post.
IV- This site needs to recrute too many professionals to do this. I know it may take a while, but I think it is to be considered seriously.
I hope what I've argued woud convince this time.
Kind regards,
Jeff
Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.
Well said Bob. It's the lack of moderation that makes this site so good.
This system is fine when TT is on the ball.
NF was control , you were lucky if your post appeared in less than 24 hrs,
and when it did appear, half of it was missing.
If that happens here, me and my 5 thousand posts will be long gone.
NO! It is not "admin" fault!!!That idiotic thread would have died instantly if fools did not keep posting to it.And yes, I was one of the fools who kept it active.
As was I, but I do believe it *IS* admin's fault !
If there was active moderation, it wouldn't have happened at all, or been
thwarted early on.Yes it was Admin's fault. They could have stepped in and deleted the garbage going on. That is evident for thier ability to delete the "Suspending my Donations" thread. When it is your site, you control the content, top to bottom and right to left.
Agreed !!
Obviously, they do have the ability to remove entire threads.
Whether they have the ability to moderate is still an open question.Well said Bob. It's the lack of moderation that makes this site so good. This system is fine when TT is on the ball.
We disagree !
Proper moderation would kill the trolls, insults, lock irrelevant and useless threads, limit the most agregious offenders, and such.NF was control , you were lucky if your post appeared in less than 24 hrs, and when it did appear, half of it was missing.
And that could happen here as well.
If *I* were a forum moderator, it's easily probable certain folks would have wisdom and relevant comments posted, with insults and flames removed.
Censorship ? Perhaps, but 14 pages of flame war which buries what starts out as a relevant and informative thread is just not acceptable.
Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual.RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of SiamI've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved.With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.
NudeInMA
Ultra Super Nudist Level #2
Joined: 10/19/2009
Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts
6330 postsCongratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual.RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of SiamI've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved.With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.
NudeInMA Ultra Super Nudist Level #2 Joined: 10/19/2009 Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts 6330 posts Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.
What's the point if sending this post???????
Still, where is any use of power, there always is abuse of it. People given authority tend to abuse it, no matter how well-intended it is.
Absolutely! But we should try, as much as we can, to avoid the abuse of power. As I said before, police andprosecutors abuse their powers, how so an internet moderator ... Some people are sentenced while they are innocent, even though that the jury and the judge had good intentions. If it happens in such cases, it is not a disaster if it would happen in internet.
If there was active moderation, it wouldn't have happened at all, or been thwarted early on.
If the pre-approval system existed, it would have never been posted.Proper moderation would kill the trolls, insults, lock irrelevant and useless threads, limit the most agregious offenders, and such.
I 100% agree with you. But it should happen before it is posted, not after. You indeed all know the proverb: ''Better safe than sorry''.If *I* were a forum moderator, it's easily probable certain folks would have wisdom and relevant comments posted, with insults and flames removed. Censorship ? Perhaps, but 14 pages of flame war which buries what starts out as a relevant and informative thread is just not acceptable.
It is better to have them removed before they are posted, believe me. Get this proverb too: ''An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure''.
What's the point if sending this post???????
If you have to ask the question, you won't understand the answer.
The question was not for you. I asked it to the one who has quoted you and copied/pasted infos about without any comment.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!