Forum Moderation?

Months ago there was a great discussion about the nature
of forum moderation and there were many people who
were deeply appalled by the content of other people's posts.

Have the forums become neater and clearner as a result?
Are these people hitting the 'alert' button now to call
attention to offensive posts?

My answers: no and no.

Just look at the debates forum. I stopped counting at 10
the words I wouldn't say in front of my grand mother
on the first page of threads alone, and I stopped at 20 the
explicit references to gross sexual acts.

Can anyone explain this phenomenon? Did the righteous
calling for the stricter moderation leave RHP?

Nemesio

Originally posted by nemesio
Months ago there was a great discussion about the nature
of forum moderation and there were many people who
were deeply appalled by the content of other people's posts.

Have the forums become neater and clearner as a result?
Are these people hitting the 'alert' button now to call
attention to offensive posts?

My answers: no and no.

Just look ...[text shortened]... n this phenomenon? Did the righteous
calling for the stricter moderation leave RHP?

Nemesio

While I can't rec ur post, I agree 100% with you.

-J

Originally posted by nemesio
Months ago there was a great discussion about the nature
of forum moderation and there were many people who
were deeply appalled by the content of other people's posts.

Have the forums become neater and clearner as a result?
Are these people hitting the 'alert' button now to call
attention to offensive posts?

My answers: no and no.

Just look ...[text shortened]... n this phenomenon? Did the righteous
calling for the stricter moderation leave RHP?

Nemesio

To answer your last question,yes and nothing has changed.

I think there's too much of a big deal. There's greater things to worry about in RHP, like cheaters, multiple account users, frauders, etc. . . I do know I got banned for a month from the forums for sarcasticly threatening to kill G.W Bush, and the only reason why this happened, was according to the mods, "I am under pressure to ban you", ie: they made no judgement call and they knew I did nothing wrong, a bunch of conservative sissies just rallied up silently to try and get me banned because they didn't like me or what I say, and they succeeded. I told him if you are going to ban me for wanting Bush dead, then ban all the ppl who want Saddam, Arafat, Palestinians, Muslims, Iraqis, communists, etc. . . dead, I'm willing to bet the debates forum would be pretty empty then.

I got banned simply because of my political viewpoints and this AMERICAN SITE banned me because I was anti-Bush and I probably offended their main wallet payers. For that, I think a middle finger is due.

Originally posted by mateulose
I think there's too much of a big deal. There's greater things to worry about in RHP, like cheaters, multiple account users, frauders, etc. . . I do know I got banned for a month from the forums for sarcasticly threatening to kill G.W Bush, and the only reason why this happened, was according to the mods, "I am under pressure to ban you", ie: they made ...[text shortened]... Bush and I probably offended their main wallet payers. For that, I think a middle finger is due.

You never got banned for a month,you posted every day.
The first ban is always three days,stop spreading crap all over the site.

Originally posted by mateulose
I think there's too much of a big deal. There's greater things to worry about in RHP, like cheaters, multiple account users, frauders, etc. . . I do know I got banned for a month from the forums for sarcasticly threatening to kill G.W Bush, and the only reason why this happened, was according to the mods, "I am under pressure to ban you", ie: they made ...[text shortened]... Bush and I probably offended their main wallet payers. For that, I think a middle finger is due.

Stop whining. You made a death threat to the President
of the US. Regardless of whether you were joking, this
shows a profound lack of judgment. If you got banned,
you deserved it.

I don't and have never disputed that there are bigger
problems than moderation. I thought the moderation
that people were clamoring for earlier was extreme.

However, as I said, I don't think the forums are any
cleaner (if anything, it's gotten worse) and I'm surprised
that our resident 'censors' have not been complaining
about the state of the forums, given their vociferous
objections in times past.

Nemesio

The odd thing is this.

If people were offended, and they alerted the posts as intented, then the posts would be hidden. If a post contains offensive content, then it might be penalised by the mod bot initially, and then even fewer alerts would be required to remove it.

But if this isn't happening, then we have a problem. There is now just far too much content to sift through, the responsibility has to be with the community. (sorry guys, shifting my work load your way) but if you don’t like a post because it contains inappropriate content - PLEASE ALERT IT!

-Russ

Originally posted by Russ
There is now just far too much content to sift through, the responsibility has to be with the community. (sorry guys, shifting my work load your way) but if you don’t like a post because it contains [b]inappropriate content - PLEASE ALERT IT![/b]

Obviously the community has to bear a degree of responsibility, I
don't deny that.

However, as you well know, there are rivalries in this community.
One recent one, between pcaspian and kirksey, was discussed in
some detail in a thread.

Given that both pcaspian and kirksey both have friends, they could,
conceivably, influence those friends to alert posts, not because of
the intrinsic offensiveness of the post, but because a particular poster
posted it.

For example: which post is pcaspian more likely to 'alert?'

1) From Kirksey: Kiss my butt you commie pig.
2) From SVW: Kiss my butt you commie pig.

If the answers in all cases are 'neither,' then we have a working
system. But everything I know about humanity and rivalries tells
me that pcaspain would be more likely to alert #1 than #2 (and,
of course Kirksey of pcaspian as well).

The fact that offensive language and inappropriate thread topics --
which were the basis for ModBot and forum bans -- remain tells
me that 1) either the community is becoming more tolerant; or
2) the claims being made by those community members were focused
not on content, but personal.

I lean towards #2, just based on the appalling state of the language
and topics in the forums in the past month.

Nemesio

This is a really difficult thing. In life, squeeky wheels get grease. Back during the time of the troubles some people got it in their heads that one person was the cause of all the innappropriate material found in the forums. In response to this, they squeeked...then they were greased and the 'one person' is now gone. The squeeking stopped because the problem the squeekers had identified was gone. I think, ultimately, that the problem was originally a concern about the content of the forums and then 'moved' to simply a problem with the 'one person'. With the removal of the one person the problem was also removed, even though the 'original' problem still exists.

For what it is worth, I STILL disagree with the removal of the 'one person' because it was not an action aimed at solving any 'real' problems but an attempt (an effective one, I might add) to grease a group of squeekers.

I have since calmed down about this issue after putting myself in Russ' shoes (I guess you could call him the 'greaser'😉. He was getting lots of complaints from people that paid to be here. The complaints we costing him time, which limited the advancement of the site for even MORE people that paid to be here. It was easiest to sacrifice one person than to try to tell all the squeekers that their reason for squeeking is dumb and they should just stop. It seems to me it was an unfortunate, but necessary, decision.

As we all know, one of the more vocal squeekers is now 'gone for a bit'. So, it is hard to say if there would not be more squeeking about the current state of the forums under normal circumstances or not.

Since talk on this subject has caused me to be accused of not loving the site as much as I should; I would like to add that I have supported a couple of 'former' non-stars since the time of the troubles and will continue to do so as finances permit. I really do like this site, and I see no reason why I should not have an opinion about what I think would make it better.

TheSkipper

How many mods are there on this site ? maybe it needs just one or two more.

Originally posted by nemesio
Months ago there was a great discussion about the nature
of forum moderation and there were many people who
were deeply appalled by the content of other people's posts.

Have the forums become neater and clearner as a result?
Are these people hitting the 'alert' button now to call
attention to offensive posts?

My answers: no and no.

Just look ...[text shortened]... n this phenomenon? Did the righteous
calling for the stricter moderation leave RHP?

Nemesio

I can explain it. The Debates forum has always been the garbarge dump of the Forums therefor things are either more tolerated in there, or more likely people who don't wish to be offended steer clear of the Debates forum.

Originally posted by Exy
I can explain it. The Debates forum has always been the garbarge dump of the Forums therefor things are either more tolerated in there, or more likely people who don't wish to be offended steer clear of the Debates forum.

Would you like me to point to offensive language and
posts in the General forum as a demonstration? I assure
you, I can.

Your classification of the Debates Forum as the 'garbage
dump' is unfair. There are a lot of very interesting posts
there. Compare with 'Word Association.' The reason that
there is less of what you call garbage in the General Forum
is because of the great deal of playful innanity that goes
on there. When you are dealing with the tensions that
are often created in the context of a debate, tempers are
going to fly.

However, the question is: have things gotten better or worse?

I say worse. Your post does not provide an explanation for
why this has happened.

There are a few possibilities.

1) Most people are more tolerant.
2) Certain people who objected before have left.
3) Certain people who objected before didn't really care in the first place.

Do you care to provide a theory, or just make more biased observations?

Nemesio

I feel that you can probably see parallels in the state of world politics, current affairs etc. and the level of tension in posts on a public forum. Considering there is a whole world of turmoil happening out there at the moment, people are carrying a lot more on their minds these days. Also, the majority of people on RHP forums are either American or British I believe and there will obviously be some disagreement there on a lot of issues. Certainly in the debating forum there is going to be a meeting of opposing views and as Nemesio says, there is bound to be tension.

But what about offensive stuff that isn't debate-based? Well, swearing is a tricky one and I guess it depends what your levels are. Me personally, I swear like a trooper, just one of the products of living in London for so long. However I do try and moderate my own use of it.

One man's sarcasm is another man's insult. I am certainly guilty of this, I made a post about rohypnol a few weeks back, at the time I thought it was sarcastic, cutting, but funny in a dark way. Others made it clear they did not agree and I apologised. Was I wrong to post it in the first place? Well I don't think so, I believe humour is an entirely subjective thing, dependant on timing, the people you are with, the wording and the cultural biases that you and others have. Sometimes I overstep the mark, but the important thing is that I apologise when I do. Moderation is not always necessary if people accept that the post was in error and often an apology is equally effective.

I agree to some extent that the debate forum is seen as a dumping ground more often than not. With posters like Texas Cowboy and STANG flooding threads with intensely opposing views and very little real substance to their debates it is not surprising that things degenerate. I am occasionally guilty of rising to the bait, but only bacuse I become annoyed at a lack of communication. I have always admired people like prn who can be disarming and insightful under any occasion. I much prefer to read and be invovled in debates with people such as prn, nemesio and bbar, where intelligent and insightful comment can yield not only undestanding but also respect. Something the likes of Texas Cowboy may never achieve.

I like the general forum having a playful feel and have a certain amount of pride in 'Word Association Game' which I started and looks set to carry on forever 🙂 as I think it helps relieve the tension and builds relationships with other RHP'ers. This in turn reflects on how people are treated in situations of higher tension. When I first encountered Darvlay (in the debating forum), I thought he was an arrogant and opinionated person with a rude sense of humour. However, by further discussion in the general forum over topics of less substance, I have learned my initial reaction was wrong, I now count him as a friend and take every opportunity to lose games and therefore points for his clan 🙂

The clan forum has it's own different level of what should and shouldn't be taken as offensive. Myself and Darvlay recently took on No1 and Crowley in a goading match which yielded some amusing results. It was utterly offensive from the start, but all people concerned where obviously up for it so there was no problem. So i do think perspective is an issue.

Basically the most important thing I believe is to respect that others may be offended by your opinion and if they are, an apology should be forthcoming. If people were mindful of this, tensons would not always rise so high. Moderations should be a last resort in almost all cases. If people really are offended and no apology seems forthcoming, then reporting the post is obviously the correct thing to do.

As to whether things have gotten worse, I find that hard to tell, I have only been using the forums for a couple of months. I would like to think that if they have, it is a result of the shift in public concerns the world over and not something to which RHP is either responsible for, or alone in suffering. I also hope that it will change as the world does. Perhaps a slightly naive and holistic view, but a reasonable one given the circumstances. I look forward to a calmer world in the future and to RHP continuing forever 🙂

Originally posted by Starrman
I feel that you can probably see parallels in the state of world politics, current affairs etc. and the level of tension in posts on a public forum. Considering there is a whole world of turmoil happening out there at the moment, people are carrying a lot more on their minds these days. Also, the majority of people on RHP forums are either American or Bri ...[text shortened]... circumstances. I look forward to a calmer world in the future and to RHP continuing forever 🙂

This is a very insightful post and I think it reflects what
I would call tolerance. You are distinguishing between
what the expected norms are in, say, the General, Debates
and Clan forums, where we see little, some, and a lot of
'tension.'

However, there was a period in RHP History where 'tension'
was deemed the tool of the devil and that 'everyone should
just get along.'

Your observations about the Debates and Clan Forums demonstrate
that, while you may disagree and even get a little hot sometimes,
that you don't consider tension to be some sort of insidious evil
which will 'ruin the RHP Forums.'

Some months ago, there were oh-so-many posts about how we
should all hold each others' hands, be a big happy family. The
forums, people alledged, never had any tension before, so why
should we accept tension now?

It was absurd then, but now I don't hear people clamoring for
the moderation of offensiveness. I don't hear people saying
'I smell something in the air, and it's not spring.'

People get wrapped up in the moment, using rose-colored
glasses to look at the past, and deem that things are worse
today than they ever were. They don't realize that people
have been saying things like that since the beginning of time.

Your post, while insightful, doesn't quite answer my question.
When the 'moderation movement' was at its peak, there were
claims that the forums were in a shameful state. Now, I don't
see that anything has changed, but I certainly don't hear any
significant complaining.

Have people grown to tolerate that which they once called
intolerable? Have they left?

Nemesio