Site Moderation

Discussion in 'Site Issues' started by Bad CO, Oct 11, 2006.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Guys,
    I've noticed a few comments of late about the site moderation which I'm keen to understand. Unfortunately my work/home schedule means that I can't spend as much time as I'd like digging into to RR issues.

    Without any personal attacks or irrelevant posts can people make suggestions about how we should improve things. For instance do we need more mods or are some forums not being effectively moderated? On the other hand is the moderation too heavy handed?
  2. I think most of the posts on here --that I read anyway ---seem to be quite good-----yes there's bad language --but its nothing most of us haven't heard before.

    Personal attacks ---well surely that depends on the person being attacked--taking offence -----most of us on here can stand up for ourselves and most of us can usually laugh it off and give as good as we get .

    Suppose there must be a safety way out --maybe if a mod gets a PM from someone complaining that the postings are OTT then possibly there could be a case for mod intervention. Other than that let the dogs run loose :lol:
    As long as they keep to the rules [which are very easy going anyway]
  3. I agree with Geenie, unless someone complains directly to a mod it is better left alone. Banter is a huge part of what makes RR such fun, I guess most people, like myself have mental images of the members here as we all have a go at each other and wind each other up. It's good fun.
    Personaly if I was mecilessly attacked or offended I would defend myself or leave.
    I also think that unless a post is utterly offensive it should not be deleted ona whim.
    Great site.
  4. I think we need more people to behave a little better. We all know the do's an don'ts. Direct comments which seem designed to deliberately provoke a reaction are not helpful. Perhaps we all need reminding of the rules again.

  5. As Greenie and Lingyai say, we've all heard and seen worse than the stuff I've personally seen on this site. Unless it is a malicious attack I think it is better to be `Hands Off'. Saying that, the mods could always stick a post in a thread saying cool it.
    `If you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined'.
    As for me, I like it the way it is, a very enjoyable way of using up what time I haven't got to spare. :D
  6. I agree "if you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined" but there is a difference between standard banter and out and out personal & abusive attacks on individuals. I just think our comments need to be kept in perspective, if not moderation.

    Whilst still relatively small, our membership is growing. Many of our newbies have little or no experience of navy life and realistically can and will view some of the "tirades" as being a little too strong for their stomachs.

    I just think that if this site is to continue to expand it needs to encourage new membership, and, by default it's members must keep to the sites own code of practice.

  7. My comments. Firstly, I don't think there is much continuity of standards regarding moderation on here. On one thread you will see absolute foul mothed diatribe, with far left and right wing views, and all in between (which I have no problem with, I have my own Moderator, its an off/on switch) yet on another thread, suddenly out of the blue,bosh! Somebody writes something that upsets a mod, and gets deleted.
    Mods should stay Mods, set a standard and not get involved with the banter. That way they won't get their pants in a pucker when somebody hits on them.
    We are all fair game the minute we hit the "Submit" button. We know that.FFS
    RoofRat :x
  8. is it that time of year again, every so often we seem to have the modirator debate, it's never going to be solved like world hunger, to some it's funny to others it's not.

  9. Agreed Womps. It's all about concensus and many of us couldn't even agree the colour of an orange, let alone some of the stuff written about in here. The trick is to hold the line when it comes to Banter V Abuse.

  10. We all tried and failed to agree on a mascot, then it just got forgotten about, same as all the other mod debates, SOME will come on here, get there posts edited, throw the toys out of the pram, then declare they are leaving forever, truth is they are probably visiting the site hourly to get off on the hundreds of please don't leave comments.

    Kind of sad and makes you think how unforfilling their off line life must be.

    Not saying that UA is doing this just know that some do.

    Prepared for incoming abuse.
  11. As I said Womps,
    And you wrote,
  12. Like I said I'm just a girl what would I know about football, site issues, war, sex....................... well anything that doesn't have a full page pull out in womens weekly.
  13. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    I think that there is a case for more Mods, some have offerred and as far as I know have received no acknowledgement for doing so. The biggest problem is that threads are allowed to become jumbled up, with no apparant attempt by the Mods to shift items mis posted to a more appropriate thread.

    I agree in general terms with Roof Rat and his on/off switch remark. Any abuse shouldn't be taken to personally and if its going to far thats the time for a Mod to step in with a standard warning post, maybe something in red saying a post is pushing to hard, after that if it continues delete the posts.

    None of the above is meant as a crititisum of the Mods, I run a small site and know how time consuming it is, its also the reason why I can't offer to help out on RR.

    As one of the more mature members, its good to see the mixture of old and new growing, long may it continue, but there will always be the "Things were better/worse in my day" type posts, in 20 years time the youngsters moaning about them now will be posting them. A tighter control on whats posted where would go a long way to easing any problems there.

    Well done everyone, I think the sites starting to settle down and will continue to grow in popularity, don't let J-D grind you down, the hormones are still playing up from "That" Operation
  14. For the record - I am a volunteer for the job of moderator.
  15. silverfox

    silverfox War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Hera hear Janner.

    The issue is not one of whether abuse is good or not - its one of time and place. There is a problem with relevance on this site. As I said in a previous thread - if there is a forum entitled 'Grumpy old bigotted CMEM' then people will know what to expect. My issue is that there are some good discussions/potential debates that inevitably get dragged down the 'when I was...' route.

    I won't weep any tears over UA's departure - but its a shame that he (or anyone else) did not take the option of creating a little corner in RR where they could spout to their heart's content.
  16. Why not keep a list on site where interested parties can sign up for MOD Duties. This would make it easier for the existing MODs to identify new blood.

  17. In general I agree with Janner and those who have echoed his sentiments. Whilst I am not the greatest fan of the concept of moderation, I understand the need for iton a site like this and can only thank those who give up their time to do it.

    I think it is OK for warnings from the Mods to be sent by PM, and equally simple editing which is needed from time to time is visible to the reader, but when a post is deleted I do believe this should be recorded in the thread along with the basic reasons. I suspect most of us will agree and doing this will get the main body of us 'onside' which is I think important.

    Once again thanks to the Mods

  18. I'd help
  19. I am willing to help too, though I'd understand if I'm still persona non grata. Oooo my hair shirt's itching more than usual... :roll:
  20. Some interesting points been raised on here. I'm quite happy to accept that we haven't got moderation fully tied down - for instance some boards have no mods and some of the mods are no longer very active.

    Now someone once told me that 'Anyone who wants to be a politician should automatically be barred from being one.' That seems like quite a sensible philosophy to me. So have a look at the boards that aren't been well moderated and then drop me a PM with who you think should be the mod and why! I'll have a look at the responses I get and then see what I can do.

    Its probably also worth making the point that mods do not get any ability to mod articles outside their individual boards and this may explain some of the discrepancies that you see. I'll be asking the mods to put their policy up on each board.

    In terms of individual styles, well to a certain extent I think that is good as it gives the different boards unique flavours. We've found this works very well on ARRSE for instance where there is a world of difference between CA and the NAAFI. I see something similar on here.

    The final word on moderation is that if you do have a serious issue then please raise it to us via email [email protected]. Please bear in mind that except in extremis we always support our mods.

Share This Page