New Poll - Shot On Site
Thu, 1 July 2004, 11:48 pmcrgwllms11 posts in thread
New Poll - Shot On Site
Thu, 1 July 2004, 11:48 pmNew Poll topic:
A recently contentious issue, and line of discussion, has prompted me to enter this new poll.
What do you think of censorship when it comes to totally offensive, unnecessary posts?
The Poll-tergeist.
[%sig%]
A recently contentious issue, and line of discussion, has prompted me to enter this new poll.
What do you think of censorship when it comes to totally offensive, unnecessary posts?
The Poll-tergeist.
[%sig%]
Re: Shoot for the moon
Fri, 2 July 2004, 01:47 pmHi Leah
Leah M wrote:
> I notice so far most people have pushed the decisions off on
> Grant. I have to admit I did too, but I don't know if it's a
> question any one person has the ability to answer. Sometimes
> you have to all agree to let one person to decide for
> everyone, rightly or wrongly. Not a responsibility I would
> want.
Imagine how things would grind to a halt if we had to wait for someone to review each post, every event before allowing it to be posted! But the responsibility is probably not as onerous as the potential for liability. If someone moderates some posts and not others, are they implicitly endorsing the ones they don't delete? Could the moderator be held at least partly responsible for other people's views that are not deleted? What of all the old posts? Should they be examined and moderated? How would you decide what to delete and what not to delete? Who's qualified to make these decisions.
Or maybe this is all about developing a slightly thicker skin, a higher tolerance level or better personal filters for dealing with the odd bit of nonsense?
Ms/Mr Dum posted a half dozen messages in the space of four minutes. The messages have disappeared from the home page. In the context of the thousands of contributions posted over the last few years, the number of idiot postings is really quite insignificant.
I'll confess I was worried for a while there at the rate that Sasha was churning them out and I did put a tempoary block in place that asked her to please contact me whenever she tried to post, but generally speaking the nuisance posts disappear about as quickly as they arrive - unless provoked. Please don't feed the trolls.
:-)
Some of the nuisance posters have returned to make worthwhile contributions further down the track. It really depends on the treatment they receive.
Which brings me to the teens. This group is really difficult to deal with because it is just that, a large number of people, not a few troublesome indviduals. For the most part these young people arrive here after searching for things like "teen model" or "12 year old audition" and without reading too much else, post their plaintive requests.
I think we all owe a huge debt of gratitude to the people that have patiently and politely responded time and again to these requests. I don't doubt for a minute that for every "please give me a part" posting that gets through there are probably a dozen young people that read the generous responses from our community and pursue some of the more constructive avenues suggested. But with 7,000 visitors per week generating 400,000 hits per week we're still getting daily teen requests coming through.
I've got a couple of suggestions that build on others made over the last few days and weeks.
Firstly, let's construct an FAQ for these visitors. What sorts of information is likely to be useful to be most these people?
Secondly, lets look at ways of directing these young people to the FAQ. We need quick responses to every teen request that appears on the site either reproducing or linking to the FAQ. For every teen request an FAQ post in response. This way there's a much better chance that the teens will read the FAQ.
Finally, once we get this FAQ up, we need to each ensure there is a link to it on our own theatre websites with a link like "Teen Actor and Model FAQ". If we can get a few links like this up pointing to FAQ this will push the page to the top of the Google search results for most of these words, directing people to the FAQ before the message board pages.
So, who's game to put up then first draft of the FAQ?
Cheers
Grant
Thou pox-marked onion-eyed measle!
[%sig%]
Leah M wrote:
> I notice so far most people have pushed the decisions off on
> Grant. I have to admit I did too, but I don't know if it's a
> question any one person has the ability to answer. Sometimes
> you have to all agree to let one person to decide for
> everyone, rightly or wrongly. Not a responsibility I would
> want.
Imagine how things would grind to a halt if we had to wait for someone to review each post, every event before allowing it to be posted! But the responsibility is probably not as onerous as the potential for liability. If someone moderates some posts and not others, are they implicitly endorsing the ones they don't delete? Could the moderator be held at least partly responsible for other people's views that are not deleted? What of all the old posts? Should they be examined and moderated? How would you decide what to delete and what not to delete? Who's qualified to make these decisions.
Or maybe this is all about developing a slightly thicker skin, a higher tolerance level or better personal filters for dealing with the odd bit of nonsense?
Ms/Mr Dum posted a half dozen messages in the space of four minutes. The messages have disappeared from the home page. In the context of the thousands of contributions posted over the last few years, the number of idiot postings is really quite insignificant.
I'll confess I was worried for a while there at the rate that Sasha was churning them out and I did put a tempoary block in place that asked her to please contact me whenever she tried to post, but generally speaking the nuisance posts disappear about as quickly as they arrive - unless provoked. Please don't feed the trolls.
:-)
Some of the nuisance posters have returned to make worthwhile contributions further down the track. It really depends on the treatment they receive.
Which brings me to the teens. This group is really difficult to deal with because it is just that, a large number of people, not a few troublesome indviduals. For the most part these young people arrive here after searching for things like "teen model" or "12 year old audition" and without reading too much else, post their plaintive requests.
I think we all owe a huge debt of gratitude to the people that have patiently and politely responded time and again to these requests. I don't doubt for a minute that for every "please give me a part" posting that gets through there are probably a dozen young people that read the generous responses from our community and pursue some of the more constructive avenues suggested. But with 7,000 visitors per week generating 400,000 hits per week we're still getting daily teen requests coming through.
I've got a couple of suggestions that build on others made over the last few days and weeks.
Firstly, let's construct an FAQ for these visitors. What sorts of information is likely to be useful to be most these people?
Secondly, lets look at ways of directing these young people to the FAQ. We need quick responses to every teen request that appears on the site either reproducing or linking to the FAQ. For every teen request an FAQ post in response. This way there's a much better chance that the teens will read the FAQ.
Finally, once we get this FAQ up, we need to each ensure there is a link to it on our own theatre websites with a link like "Teen Actor and Model FAQ". If we can get a few links like this up pointing to FAQ this will push the page to the top of the Google search results for most of these words, directing people to the FAQ before the message board pages.
So, who's game to put up then first draft of the FAQ?
Cheers
Grant
Thou pox-marked onion-eyed measle!
[%sig%]