Feedback on today's announcement

Kenai said:
There is no explanation for celebrating the death of innocent people, you got what you deserved (probably less than you deserved in many people's eyes)
Click to expand...

Hardly and then again that is yours and the moderators interpretation. Did I say those very same words? No I did not. I said it was Karma for Malaysia.
 
MichaelAwkward said:
I think it's funny to see to this announcement and commitment to consistency and fairness after the moderation yesterday in the memory card thread in the Photography section.
Click to expand...

If you think something has not been handled correctly there are routes to air this :)

Twirlywoos said:
Hardly and then again that is yours and the moderators interpretation. Did I say those very same words? No I did not. I said it was Karma for Malaysia.
Click to expand...

Actually, you didn't mention Malaysia at all.

Be that as it may, despite the recent announcement anyone else glorying in civilian deaths immediately after the news hits will be dealt with in the same way. It is not respectful or polite, to say the least, to be glad of hearing of the death of hundreds of people and to post about it here.

That sort of behavior is not welcome.
 
Gilly said:
You are right, of course, but unfortunately not everyone has the same amount of common sense.

I don't see any overkill. This is just us laying out openly what it is we are doing and what we are trying to achieve. How that will end up in us losing any identity but the negative aspect I'm not sure. Would you like to comment further on how being more open and transparent in our dealings with the member base will mean less openness and free range?
Click to expand...

I get the feeling that nothing much will change and you continue to close/delete various threads without any comment. If your actions are seen out in the open then all will be good. By open I mean not just in the Forum Content Discussion or privately with members.

If someone gets a suspension give the reason in their post for a start.

Being seen to act in the open has to be visible and the excuse of we're don't have time should not be used. If the team is not large enough to execute this openness then expand it.

Let's hope it is a success.
 
holymonk said:
Seems to me like a bit of overkill for common sense. There are less rules in a house of commons debate.
Click to expand...

Different people have different values and understanding of what constitutes common-sense and decency in relation to posting. Granted the majority of people generally form the center ground, either side you have exceptions. On the one hand people who will see a post being terribly offensive and way beyond their boundaries of common-sense and decency when general consensus would label the content harmless. On the other hand, someone may post something that is offensive, beyond the acceptable boundaries of common-sense and decency to the majority but see their post as harmless.
 
Cosimo said:
I get the feeling that nothing much will change and you continue to close/delete various threads without any comment. If your actions are seen out in the open then all will be good. By open I mean not just in the Forum Content Discussion or privately with members.

If someone gets a suspension give the reason in their post for a start.

Being seen to act in the open has to be visible and the excuse of we're don't have time should not be used. If the team is not large enough to execute this openness then expand it.

Let's hope it is a success.
Click to expand...

I don't find it right to expect a reason to be given in a post as to why someone has been suspended. The individual will always know, and if they take issue with it can discuss it with the moderator that issued the suspension and now recourse should they not be satisfied with the outcome of that is also clear.

Stating within a post what someone has been suspended for will only derail topics anyway, with people commenting on it when it's entirely possible the situation was nothing to do with them.

I don't think there would be anything to gain from leaving a message as to why someone has been suspended.

We have recently expanded the team :)
 
Many more important things in the world to worry over than a few overly self-important rules.

Back to life everyone.
 
Off Topic but nice touch there, closing down the forums.

It's things like that, that make OcUK a decent place to be.
 
Simply put - "treat others in the same manner you would want to be treated yourself"

Not sure a "member/forum charter" is needed - common sense, manners and consistant moderating is all that is required.
 
The issue is consistency, like the 3 strikes rule you brought to the GPU seciton, many people got given their 1st strike within days of a the rule being implemented, since then it seems barely anyone is given one anymore and the threads still go the same way as they did in the past.
 
Agree with this bit "I, myself, can be a challenging individual and am certainly opinionated from time to time." :D

As others say, it does feel like a refresh of the current rules/sentiments applicable to posters already here, which wont affect most and will make things clearer to new members.
 
JOSH86 said:
Off Topic but nice touch there, closing down the forums.

It's things like that, that make OcUK a decent place to be.
Click to expand...

I agree that members need flexibility to let threads wonder in places that they naturally will. That won't change. It's about stopping certain types of members derail thread purely to serve their own agendas.
 
I think there's an important distinction that needs to be made, and often seems to be missed, between:

- Posting something which others may find offensive

- Doing so in an offensive manner

I think this forum is largely very good at allowing the former, however does struggle on occasion with the later which is why I think the charter is a good idea.
 
All we're trying to do is just reinforce a level of expectation because unfortunately some people take it on themselves to be rude/abrasive when it is thoroughly unnecessary. And the "common sense" people are suggesting is not always all that common.

Believe it or not we don't want to delete posts or ban people because it causes such a backlash that it becomes counter productive. However people sometimes don't self moderate well and forget they are talking to a wide group of individuals, and lose the personal respect/empathy that is more natural in a face to face interaction.

The forums at times does descend to quite unfavourable depths in certain discussions, and whilst it doesn't help or add anything to just point black delete/suspend, if we share the expectations we can manage them better. It goes both ways.
 
Ayahuasca said:
The issue is consistency, like the 3 strikes rule you brought to the GPU seciton, many people got given their 1st strike within days of a the rule being implemented, since then it seems barely anyone is given one anymore and the threads still go the same way as they did in the past.
Click to expand...

The GPU section is awful. Embarrassingly so.
 
I think the real change should have been "we don't want to hear religious discussions or bashing of immigrants".

Seperately, though, I'm glad to see that you want to clamp down on rude people. When people say common sense, what they really mean is "I'm a rude right winger and don't like anyone who thinks that we should embrace immigrants etc."
 
It needed to be done

There is a vast difference between mods in my opinion. Some clearly don't follow the forum rules themselves. Then there are those who are brilliant.
 
No mention of safe spaces or trigger warnings. Also, calling the patrons "members" is insulting - it's like calling us all penises, which is a gendered insult.

It's nearly 2016 people, yet this looks like it was written in 2013!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom