Them good ol' moderation blues...

Thank you Eliot for your slightly suspicious attitude. While I understand that many may, have and possibly do suspect that those with power here may be tempted to abuse it, I attempt to remain impartial and do not take advantage of any access I have, except when I have to. I use the same facilities as all other registered members have access to. In fact, I have abstained from voting all together in some instances, like now.

As for moderating comments, if I think something is unfair or lacking in substance, I may moderate it down regardless of the focus and usually with only a poor rating. Purely offensive and clearly Trollish comments will get a Complete Rubbish, and obvious SPAM I will take more direct administrator access with.

When all is said and done, when you have a voting system like that which exists on this site, then it is important that you have more people voting equitably. It is human nature to react to things that offend, yet we do not acknowledge that which we like. As I have access to the logs, I can tell you and anyone else who reads this that the number of negative votes that get posted far out-weigh the positives by a league and a half. Occasionally, there will be a flurry of positive voting for certain threads, and there are really only a handful of consistent positive voters of which I am one of.

In addition, results of voting for Comments and Replies (which I do not have access to by the way) I assume are, based on apparent trends, far less suported than voting for entire threads. Negative votes however appear to be far more abundant than anything else.

The system is provided to give users the power to regulate content on the site and in order for it to work effectively, it needs to be used effectively. Currently, it is not, in my personal opinion, as we have a distinct lack of regular supporters and a large number of rebels.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

I confess a desire for a more Utopian world where people respected each other in moderated measures, and I mean that sincerely. Truth is another matter. It is very hard to avoid bias in any form. It is a fact of life that we will all have often wildly different opinions which will influence what we say, do or write. Playing fairly is a subjective issue as the definition is very much dependant on one's point of view.

On the whole, the 'fair' players on this site do not play enough which leaves the site open to abuse by those whom fall into biased behaviour more often than not. If those that had a stronger sense of fairness, honour and equality participated more than they currently do, then the system would work just fine.

In defence of the honest WPs, I think it is an odd comment to make when you say "obviously anyone not willing to sign their name/on-line identity, but hide under a nom-de-Plinge, is not to be taken remotely seriously" when the number of 'anonymous' comments that remain viewable far out weight those that have become hidden. Being able to post anonymously is a Troll's playground delight, and certainly many more WP comments have faded than have registered user comments, yet there are still more constructuve WPs comments than not, including the hidden ones I am sure.

When you have been exposed to threats of violence and death, vicious slander and attempts to defame through association of unlawful practicies by impotent misguded Trolls, you develop a healthy respect for the democratic power of moderation. Sure, it can be abused. So can anything if it is not used effectively or correctly.

Everyone has and is entitled to an opinion. A moderation system is a method of expressing that opinion as much as the ability to post your opinion in words. If more people were to use it more frequently, then there would be a more balanced impact upon the content of this site. Maybe that is expecting too much, it is however the truth.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

So your problem is with those that choose to remain anonymous (which potentially leads back to the old ONLY REGISTERED USERS debate) - Well on that point I totally (personally) agree with you and as is often the case, we find the most abusive attacks are perpetrated by those who attempt to hide their identity.

Thus, in order to ba able to control the non-constructive, bigoted commentary that is (let's face it) unavoidable in this day and age, while maintaining a service that anyone can use, what solution is there? The moderation service is one.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

Just for an interest fact at this point in time, there have been for votes cast for this thread, all of them Excellent. Clearly people see this as an important or interesting topic for discussion. Now that I have posting this, I am certain it will bias further voting in some way, if there is any that is.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

I have been mulling over this for some time now, you always present a great argument... First, Hey Nev, it's been a while.

With specific reference to this line "...and I too believe only a registered person should be allowed to post. Under their real name. In full public glory. We are after all presumably all adults here and of at least basic intelligence."

Two things here. 1. Enforced Registration does not equate to Full Disclosure, or even honesty. We have previously had a hard time with users who create false accounts to falsely vote up threads just so they appear on the home page. Now if someone can do that, then how can you trust that the ID of a Registered user is an honest representation of the Carbon Based form using it? Truth is, even when you have a site which requires a sign-up process, it will not stop the TROLLs, SPAMMERS and deceptive tacticians. It may make it a little harder for them, but if they are determined, then it is a very small barrier to overcome. It also creates additional work from an administrative point of view as, which is not a complaint, just a factual statement.

2. We are not all adults here. Many users are under the age of 18 as has been witnessed in recent months with some unfortunate events where the age of a certain young user was assumed to be older.

On the next part of your post, "If you disagree with someone, WHY?! Spend 30 seconds thinking..."

I completely agree with you, consider what you are reacting to. This is where the Trolling, Spite, Slander and so forth really takes hold, when the intended target (or targets) "react" and feed the offender with more ammunition. Then the situation escalates.

Some people enjoy baiting Trolls and that is great for them. For others, such as myself, an awareness that certain posts are made simply to intentionally upset, or provoke a reaction, would help to curb any offence or injury. Having been a target many times myself, I do understand the hurt and offence that these types of comments can cause. However, responding to them in any way may just simply be giving the provoker another shot. Being able to restrain yourself and evaluate (as you say) using logic and reason will help to curb the cycle of Trolling.

You may or may not be aware of a recent incident where an EBook Author was reviewed in a not completely positive light, yet in a constructive and respectful way. The author took offence and clearly reacted posting a rather nasty comment, which was then immediately set upon by other users, to which she then reacted further and slowly resorted to more offencive terminology. A classic example of the cycle of which I refer to above.

Having comments and threads disappear if voted poorly may not meet to everyone's approval, yet having such posts disappear from public view can protect against litigation and defamation.

As stated in the disclaimer (in the FAQ)

Comments posted in the various forums are wholly the responsibility of the person posting the information.

• If you post libellous comments you may be sued.
• If you cause to be published material you are not authorised to publish (e.g. infringement of copyright) you may be subject to court action.
• If you cause to be published material that is illegal (e.g. child pornography), you may be prosecuted.

Anonymity is no protection as everyone leaves a trace that can be tracked back to its source by the appropriate authorities, and if a court order is presented to us or to any associated Service Provider for that matter, we are obliged to provide those details. Having born witness to several instances of this, I can vouch for its truth. 

So I say again, having these items disappear can be of legal benefit. The examples of items being removed at the request of someone (such as some of the threads on specific Talent Agencies) is a low brow example of that.

To Moderate or Not To Moderate. Registered or Free Use. It really makes for little difference in the end because either system is dependant on the manner in which it is used. If it used to its full and fair capacity, then it will work. If it is not used correctly, then it will be open to abuse by those that seek to sow disruption. If more people used the Moderation and Voting Services correctly, them Admin could tweek the settings so that it would take a higher level of votes before something 'disappears' or is promoted to the front page.

My personal thoughts on this matter is that registered users that have demonstrated a high level of participation through the current points system could be granted a higher influence in Voting. In other words, once you have proved yourself a reliable and trustworthy user, you get to have a greater say in what happens. However, for that idea to work, the needs to be more users regularly voting and moderating.

These are my personal opinions and in no way reflect that of the policies of this site or adminstrative team.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

'nuff said. ;-)

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!