How about a chance to withdraw a post before a yellow or red card?

hangon

Could a Mod not give a chance to a Poster to either withdraw a remark or delete their post before either?
There are so many forums with differing rules it is easy to say something that is acceptable on one but not on the other,it is easy to forget the particular forum rules when posting.

I know that there is only about forty eight hours to edit a post or remove a comment a person regrets.
It works in reverse in that posters receive their warning or infraction first along with a PM by a Mod pointing how they have breached the charter.

If i breach a charter i would like a chance to edit the offending bit with the proviser that it be compulsory to add reason for editing was "i unwittingly breached the charter".

A Mod just swooping in leads to resentment towards them and boards in general,with a lingering sense that Mods are an elite.
some posts i know are so outrageous they have to be dealt with on the spot.
for those who mean no malice and try to observe the rules it seems very heavy handed at times.
Cheers!

BuffyBot

Where is the line between one that needs action immediately and one that doesn't? Who decides on that? What happens if the original poster can't be contacted within the timeframe?

And that's just some of the issues involved. It just wouldn't be logistically possible, especially with the volume of posts on the site.

Malice

If posters read back over their post before hitting Reply, take the time to read forum charters and don't act the maggot then they won't get yellow or red cards so there would be no need to withdraw them.

Secondly there is already a facility in place where moderators can get yellow or red cards rescinded should they have been awarded in error or if the user pays the requisite €100 donation .

hangon

BuffyBot wrote: »

Where is the line between one that needs action immediately and one that doesn't?

well and honestly i am not trying to be clever,something to the effect that Hitler was a wonderful person would have to be dealt with swiftly.

And that's just some of the issues involved. It just wouldn't be logistically possible, especially with the volume of posts on the site.

Boards has proven that it can deal with logistics(software guys are a whizz)

i know there are many issues involved but the end result would be happier genuine posters and Mods not getting abuse for merely reminding people of the rules.

hangon

Malice wrote: »

If posters read back over their post before hitting Reply, take the time to read forum charters and don't act the maggot then they won't get yellow or red cards so there would be no need to withdraw them.

See there you go ignoring my point about how many forums with so many charters that only a Mod would know them of by heart!

Secondly there is already a facility in place where moderators can get yellow or red cards rescinded should they have been awarded in error or if the user pays the requisite €100 donation .

Ok what is your bank acc number?:)

stovelid

Talk about an unnecessary time/human resource overhead.

And could be used to act the bollocks without censure: for example, call somebody a cunt and then rescind it, even though the recipient will have seen it - and possibly will be goaded to respond to a by-then non-offence. The potential for 'skilful misuse' is enormous.

Malice

hangon wrote: »

See there you go ignoring my point about how many forums with so many charters that only a Mod would know them of by heart!

I wasn't ignoring your point deliberately. I just didn't address it. There are a few cross-forum rules that apply as in "Don't be a dick". Then there are some fairly obvious rules. I'm not going to go posting in the Vegetarian forum about how I love tucking into a nice juicy medium-rare steak for example.

The forum charters aren't massive tomes of stuff that's hard to understand. If you don't understand something about a forum charter or you're not sure if what you're about to post fits or has the potential to cause problems have you ever thought about asking one of the forum moderators if your proposed post is acceptable?

hangon

stovelid wrote: »

Talk about an unnecessary time/human resource overhead.

Unnecessary time/human resource as opposed to the constant dispute resolution forum that have to resolve the same issue's over and over again.?
A longer term solution would be far better for posters and mods IMO.
it would require 'thinking outside the box' i know.

And could be used to act the bollocks without censure

Yes it could i have acknowledged that,if you trust the mods so much you should also trust them to spot the difference between people who make a mistake and those who post to act the maggot.

hangon

Malice wrote: »

"Don't be a dick".

Yes Don't be a dick.
Hmmmmm what kind of a guideline is that?

The forum charters aren't massive tomes of stuff

Have you read the Politics Charter(s)? it is more like a book.

MugMugs

hangon wrote: »

Malice wrote: »

"Don't be a dick".

Yes Don't be a dick.
Hmmmmm what kind of a guideline is that?

The forum charters aren't massive tomes of stuff

Have you read the Politics Charter(s)? it is more like a book.

The don't be a Dick rule is a broad sweeping rule which outlaws dickish behaviour. Nobody should ever have issues comprehending what it means.

In relation to Politics, its a forum that needs a large charter as so much can go wrong. I think you either post there or don't. I don't but you can be sure that its one charter Id be very vigilant of if I changed my mind. It kind of goes without saying.

stovelid

hangon wrote: »

it would require 'thinking outside the box' i know.

Thinking further outside the box might actually entail taking responsibility for your own posts and not whining for a get out of jail card for posts that you wrote as a adult and of your own volition?

hangon

stovelid wrote: »

Thinking further outside the box might actually entail taking responsibility for your own posts and not whining for a get out of jail card for posts that you wrote as a adult and of your own volition?

What is the point of feedback or dispute resolution i wonder?
forget i started discussion on this and close the threads please mods.
seems to be only mods or wish to be mods who have responded.

Malice

hangon wrote: »

Yes Don't be a dick.
Hmmmmm what kind of a guideline is that?

Are you honestly having trouble understanding that sentence?

hangon wrote:

Have you read the Politics Charter(s)? it is more like a book.

No, in fairness, I haven't. I don't post there. My frame of reference is specifically from the charters in the Music category since that's where I spend most of my time.

hangon wrote:

forget i started discussion on this and close the threads please mods.
seems to be only mods or wish to be mods who have responded.

Just in case you don't know this, outside of the forums they moderate mods have as much power as you do and should be considered regular users.

Ickle Magoo

Why do you think getting into PM tennis with posters who have not read the forum rules or decided to ignore them to decipher if they are just acting the maggot or innocently slipped over the line is going to make modding easier?

What makes modding easier is if posters read the relevant forum charters and post accordingly...

hangon

Malice wrote: »

Are you honestly having trouble understanding that sentence?

c'mon one persons 'acting the dick' is anothers idea of humour

No, in fairness, I haven't. I don't post there. My frame of reference is specifically from the charters in the Music category since that's where I spend most of my time.

it is very easy to slip up on that forum even without meaning to.
their is the problem that people get so fed up with getting warnings that they give up on Politic's and move to AH's.
it is like there is very little in between AH's and Politics other than Politics minded people tend to seem more educated and can outclever others by their excellent prose.
it is like people get tied in to being ever so serious or ever so silly depending on which forum they settle on.
people are more complex than that and i sense they feel a need to hide the full spectrum of their personality and choose one over the other

Insect Overlord

hangon wrote: »

people are more complex than that and i sense they feel a need to hide the full spectrum of their personality and choose one over the other

That's like saying you should behave the same way at a funeral as you would at a soccer match. Different forums have different requirements. Knowing when to show maturity/a sense of decorum/a sense of humour can come from trial and error, but can be picked up much more easily by a period of observation.

If an adult person couldn't be bothered to find out what's alright and what isn't on a forum, then they shouldn't expect their hand to be held when they slip up.

/opinion

hangon

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Why do you think getting into PM tennis with posters who have not read the forum rules or decided to ignore them to decipher if they are just acting the maggot or innocently slipped over the line is going to make modding easier?

What makes modding easier is if posters read the relevant forum charters and post accordingly...

Did you miss the bit were i said it would help both Boards and Mods image if it was possible for a PM by a Mod allowing a poster to retract and say the reason for editing was "i breached the charter inadvertently".

Mods are not liked in general,often without justification,i merely suggested a way to stop this going on forever and ever and ................

Ickle Magoo

hangon wrote: »

Did you miss the bit were i said it would help both Boards and Mods image if it was possible for a PM by a Mod allowing a poster to retract and say the reason for editing was "i breached the charter inadvertently".

Mods are not liked in general,often without justification,i merely suggested a way to stop this going on forever and ever and ................

Mods are volunteers, asked to help the site be a more pleasant place for the majority by letting posters know when they've breached the site/forum rules that all posters are asked to read prior to posting. I think making generalised comments on image is rather missing the point of why moderation exists and why so many posters choose to post on a site that has moderation Vs the many that don't.

PMing individually is really about having a minority of posters who haven't read/ignored the forum charters they were asked to read, breaking rules they were asked to follow and disrupting the site for other posters having even less responsibility for their own posts...makes no logical sense to me - as well as being a massive waste of time and resource behind the scenes...ie which of the multiple forum mods would PM? How do the other mods know that they've PM'd? How do you prevent a poster getting multiple PM's?

I think the requests to read forum charters and rules prior to posting plastered over the T&C posters must agree to while signing up and stickied at the top of forums leaves the ball in the posters court as to whether they wish to risk moderator action or not is the right way to do it, I think a get out of jail free card is just too time consuming to administer and it's open to abuse. I don't see why posters can't use the DRP to argue that moderator action was unjustified rather than expecting the moderators to hand-hold...?

K-9

hangon wrote: »

Did you miss the bit were i said it would help both Boards and Mods image if it was possible for a PM by a Mod allowing a poster to retract and say the reason for editing was "i breached the charter inadvertently".

Mods are not liked in general,often without justification,i merely suggested a way to stop this going on forever and ever and ................

Presumably this would only be a one time occurrence? As it would be reasonable that the user then reads the charter and gathers what is and isn't acceptable in the forum.

Blatter

I was instructed before that if I deleted my post that was infracted, the infraction would be removed.

hangon

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Mods are volunteers, asked to help the site be a more pleasant place for the majority by letting posters know when they've breached the site/forum rules that all posters are asked to read prior to posting. I think making generalised comments on image is rather missing the point of why moderation exists and why so many posters choose to post on a site that has moderation Vs the many that don't.

PMing individually is really about having a minority of posters who haven't read/ignored the forum charters they were asked to read, breaking rules they were asked to follow and disrupting the site for other posters having even less responsibility for their own posts...makes no logical sense to me - as well as being a massive waste of time and resource behind the scenes...ie which of the multiple forum mods would PM? How do the other mods know that they've PM'd? How do you prevent a poster getting multiple PM's?

I think the requests to read forum charters and rules prior to posting plastered over the T&C posters must agree to while signing up and stickied at the top of forums leaves the ball in the posters court as to whether they wish to risk moderator action or not is the right way to do it, I think a get out of jail free card is just too time consuming to administer and it's open to abuse. I don't see why posters can't use the DRP to argue that moderator action was unjustified rather than expecting the moderators to hand-hold...?

I very much appreciate your reply icky, but you must know by now most posters do not read the charters.

thank you for taking my post seriously as that is how it was meant.
perhaps feed forward might have been the better forum to post the OP on.
it was not something i thought could happen overnight but i have found boards will update their software ASAP when a reasonable request is asked for.

there was a time when it would not allow for an account closure,it responded to feedback and allowed for a closed account via email,now a person can close their account via their user CP.
Boards is surviving because it responds when it can to reasonable requests.
i would not underestimate what it may allow in the future.

hangon

K-9 wrote: »

Presumably this would only be a one time occurrence? As it would be reasonable that the user then reads the charter and gathers what is and isn't acceptable in the forum.

It is difficult to settle on one forum K-9(find your comfort zone so to speak)

Ickle Magoo

hangon wrote: »

I very much appreciate your reply icky, but you must know by now most posters do not read the charters.

No probs hangy.

Well, that's their choice and thus surely any action that results from that choice is on their shoulders? Failing to read the rules not an excuse and all that...

hangon wrote: »

thank you for taking my post seriously as that is how it was meant.
perhaps feed forward might have been the better forum to post the OP on.
it was not something i thought could happen overnight but i have found boards will update their software ASAP when a reasonable request is asked for.

there was a time when it would not allow for an account closure,it responded to feedback and allowed for a closed account via email,now a person can close their account via their user CP.
Boards is surviving because it responds when it can to reasonable requests.
i would not underestimate what it may allow in the future.

Sure - but you seem to be essentially asking to increase the workload of boards volunteer mods and trying to get the site to spend time and money installing software to giving an extra helping hand to those who don't bother to take the time to read the charters they are asked to read or make the effort to get to know the how specific forum operates...just for the sake of such posters keeping a clean profile &/or avoiding the DRP process already in place.

Would a more reasonable request not be that posters just read the charters or accept they chose not to read the site rules/forum charter and their voluntary ignorance of the forum/site rules has led to them being actioned?

K-9

hangon wrote: »

It is difficult to settle on one forum K-9(find your comfort zone so to speak)

So it could lead to several of these posts on different Boards?

It's a lot of leeway for posters who are having difficulty abiding by the standards, thousands of posters have no problem like this everyday.

stovelid

Maybe just have two charters: one for normal people and one for slow learners.

hangon

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

No probs hangy.

Well, that's their choice and thus surely any action that results from that choice is on their shoulders? Failing to read the rules not an excuse and all that...

trying to remember them in the heat of debate is the problem!:D

Sure - but you seem to be essentially asking to increase the workload of boards volunteer mods

in the short term it would increase the workload but i think in the long term mods would get more respect.

Would a more reasonable request not be that posters just read the charters

It surely would but they don't often!
also when reading latest posts during election i responded to a post on AH's on the Politics forum.
the two posts were side by side and as i read the thread title and eyes moved to see which forum i was responding to i posted on politics instead of AH's(which as you know has a less strict charter:o

hangon

K-9 wrote: »

So it could lead to several of these posts on different Boards?

I am talking about new members of boards finding their 'comfort zone' forum K9

It's a lot of leeway for posters who are having difficulty abiding by the standards,

Standards are one thing,making a forum so elitist that it excludes genuine posters who may not be as eloquent as others is another.

LoLth

@hangon: this thread was only started just over 4 hours ago, its a bit quick to assume that all the mods that are going to respond have already done so. Also, if you give feedback, dont feel you have to respond to every response that diagrees, you'll only end up backed into a corner defending your position , possibly just for the sake of defense

@stovelid: feedback is welcome, please try to keep your responses constructive and not let it descend into a personal confrontation. its just an opinion.

regarding the original suggestion:

the yellow card warning is exactly that, a warning. thats the notification that the post has breached the charter. The red card is an infraction for a post that breaches the charter in a way that the user should really have known better (an obviously wrong act like abusing another user or ignoring a prior warning) and serves as a warning that a ban is an option that just wasnt taken this time.

Users dont read charters? well they should. There are basic rules on boards that apply to all fora regardless of the charter rules and these should have been read at sign up (the user agrees to them on account creation). Apart from that, the forums have subsets of rules, like bylaws at a train station for example. If a user doesnt read the charter then thats a choice they made, if they fall foul of a rule contained in that charter, then ignorance cannot be accepted as an excuse when that ignorance is a result of the users own choice. The mods cant do everyhting for the users, at some point some responsibility has to be taken.

retracting a post: the issue with that is, anyone subscribed to the thread has already received an email containing the post. Damage is done. The better option is to filter and check before hitting the submit button. One of the long standing bits of advice on boards has been to not post as an angry reaction, take the time to step away from the keyboard and review your post before responding.

tl;dr:
the warning alreayd exists in the form of the yellow card.

Ickle Magoo

hangon wrote: »

trying to remember them in the heat of debate is the problem!:D

I think that's when getting to know how a forum operates before jumping right in if you don't know the rules well, comes in - again, I think that really falls under poster responsibility...

hangon wrote: »

in the short term it would increase the workload but i think in the long term mods would get more respect.

I disagree - in fact, I think hiding conversation with problem posters in PMs and allowing someone who has flamed, insulted or broken forum rules to renegade on their post on the sly would cause many more issues in terms of posters being dissatisfied than the current system. I don't think moderation should concern itself with placating a minority of posters who disrespect moderators for daring to ensure the rules of the forum/site are adhered to as per the wishes of the majority...

hangon wrote: »

It surely would but they don't often!
also when reading latest posts during election i responded to a post on AH's on the Politics forum.
the two posts were side by side and as i read the thread title and eyes moved to see which forum i was responding to i posted on politics instead of AH's(which as you know has a less strict charter:o

Before you post, look up at the top of the page and what forum the post is being posted in, is shown both in the top bar and again on the reply post page. If you want to post in a manner that is only acceptable in a specific forum then you need to ensure that is the forum you are posting in.

Any changes to be made are not up to me obviously but personally, I don't think laziness or haphazard posting by a minority are very good reasons for altering how a site operates in general.

hangon wrote:

Standards are one thing,making a forum so elitist that it excludes genuine posters who may not be as eloquent as others is another.

Some forums are formal discussion areas - the antithesis of other very informal forums, I don't think lack of eloquence when genuinely trying to make a worthwhile contribution to a forum should ever be punished. Text speak, profanity, lazy generalisations and stereotypes, inflammatory language, etc, are a different matter altogether and have no place in rational, formal discussion. Again, reading the forum charter makes it clear what is or is not acceptable in a specific forum - if posters chose to post blind then it's hardly lack of respect for moderators at the heart of the issue, it's lack of respect for the forum and the other posters that post there within the rules.

Overheal

As I got to the bottom of reading this thread I had a few talking points in mind, but then I got right above LoLth here and tried to report a post which - conveniently - no longer existed by the time I scrolled down the page.

This is the said post - original post #30 to this thread:




You cannot reasonably expect people to take your request seriously when you seem to abusing the system. If you feel the need to type out personal abuse, type it out, and dont click post. Jesus, I've done it a few times myself; rather than put posts out there that someone will see, regardless of how long the post was actually up for. A Minute? Long enough for someone to click into the thread and try to read through a version of the page in which your abusive post still existed. And if I had read that about myself should you be allowed to get away with firing personal abuse at me or anyone else just because you expunged the record of it? I would have still seen it, and it would have still delivered its message across to the intended target of the abuse.

Personally this is an absolute no for me. If you get seen doing it that should really be enough. Most mods are not going to click into the Edit history of a post but in all seriousness to ninja-edits if you're seen ninja-editing out abuse I see no reason a mod shouldn't feel justified in infracting or banning you for the incident. If they had seen it someone else could have likely seen it. And I have been banned for it before, in a much younger age when lolcats ruled the skies. And mods will of course make exceptions but its on a case by case basis. For personal abuse I would think absolutely not, that sort of thing needs to only be read once to have had its effect.

Irony of above post, is your earlier post:

hangon wrote: »

stovelid you may think it was a childish suggestion,in fact it would make posting and modding easier IMO.

throws bottle from pram,is that the best feedback you can do?
If people do not agree they can at least be civil about it.

Seriously.

You mentioned earlier you wanted this up in Feedforward and you know what if you want to reboot the conversation and leave all the personal crap out of it thats completely fine by me, but the **** I saw just now is not going to fly or see daylight.

LoLth

I'm tempted to edit Overheal's post because it quotes a post I already removed for making the issue personal but , and I would ask stovelid to ignore the jibe please, it perfectly demonstrates why the "retraction" option isnt a flyer. once posted the damage is done. Prevention is better than cure and all that.

@stovelid: if you want me to remove the quoted post, let me know.