Recent approach to forum moderation has reduced thread quality + fun factor

[Armageus]

I have this viewpoint too. I can never be bothered to question things though. Sometimes I see threads locked / deleted for being pointless according to the mod who took action only for a mod to start a totally pointless thread not long after. Life's too short to worry about it though, the dynamics of the forum will change over the years that's just how it is and if we don't like it we don't have to use it.

If you don't raise questions then we can't take on board any criticism you might have. We don't always get it right, but behind the scenes we do discuss a lot of decisions and actions and are critical of ourselves and each other.

Having moderators from different backgrounds and that change over time, there will always be differences in opinion and interpretation of the rules, but on the whole I think we are relatively fair and we do take on board constructive criticism.

 

[Malt_Vinegar]

BAN.

Where are the mods when you need them?

BAN (tam) all!

In all honesty, I have never found a forum (let alone one with such a huge active membership) where some members do not feel the need to question the moderation every now and again.

Fact is, OcUK is a long standing forum with a constantly higher standard of posting than almost all other forums out there.

This (in my opinion) is the key to its longevity and continuing popularity. Dross members get fed up of what they see as "excessive" moderation and usually leave of their own accord.

 

[Dis86]

BAN (tam) all!

In all honesty, I have never found a forum (let alone one with such a huge active membership) where some members do not feel the need to question the moderation every now and again.

Fact is, OcUK is a long standing forum with a constantly higher standard of posting than almost all other forums out there.

This (in my opinion) is the key to its longevity and continuing popularity. Dross members get fed up of what they see as "excessive" moderation and usually leave of their own accord.

Helllll no!

Oh wait yeah, forgot there's places over than GD.

 

[adolf hamster]

Helllll no!

Oh wait yeah, forgot there's places over than GD.

well, Gd and the graphics sub-forum.....

 

[Edrof]

I can't believe anyone would fall fowl to that rule.

Sadly, some of our members are less than sane and a handful are completely quackers.

 

[NoobCannon]

As a suggestion I think the forum would be vastly improved by anyone saying "bought item from the river" or "the jungle" "or the rainforest" instead of Amazon receiving an automatic ban from this point on

Edit to include "the rainforest"

 

[Armageus]

As a suggestion I think the forum would be vastly improved by anyone saying "bought item from the river" or "the jungle" instead of Amazon receiving an automatic ban from this point on

You missed "rainforest"

 

[wildman]

The moderation on here is generally OK. It's just when certain mods take it upon themselves to make up their own rules as they go along and lock/delete posts/threads purely because they disagree with them personally rather than them being in contravention of any forum rules, or when certain members are allowed to get away with posting things that others get warnings for that it starts to be a problem.

This has been happening way too much of late. The mods are simply not being rigorously impartial and allow their own views to bleed through way to much into their moderation.

 

[NoobCannon]

You missed "rainforest"

Fixed thx

 

[semi-pro waster]

This has been happening way too much of late. The mods are simply not being rigorously impartial and allow their own views to bleed through way to much into their moderation.

Past history is taken into account as well when determining what action to take so while you might think two posters have fallen foul of the same rule if one has twelve usernotes for the same (or similar) offences and the other is a first time offender then the former is much more likely to be banned. As a non-moderator you can't see usernotes so would only be able to guess at how many times a poster has broken a rule or been warned/infracted/suspended for it.

Moderators won't always get it right and it is to a certain extent subjective but moderation decisions, especially where it might be contentious, are often discussed to try and be as fair and impartial as possible by getting a wider range of views from within the moderation team. It's not always possible to do that in advance of taking action because sometimes what has been posted probably shouldn't be allowed to stay visible while it is debated but it's still done afterwards and if the wrong action is felt to have been taken then it'll usually be reversed and any appropriate apologies will be issued. Equally not every RTM will require action, each one will be looked at (often by more than one moderator) so it is always helpful for posters to report what they think are rulebreaks but just because you feel a rule has been broken doesn't mean it has or that it is necessary for action to be taken. I'm not sure how you choose to measure rigorously impartial but moderators do try their best to be fair - you might not agree with the end result but that's not the same as them not trying to treat everyone equally.

 

[wildman]

Past history is taken into account as well when determining what action to take so while you might think two posters have fallen foul of the same rule if one has twelve usernotes for the same (or similar) offences and the other is a first time offender then the former is much more likely to be banned. As a non-moderator you can't see usernotes so would only be able to guess at how many times a poster has broken a rule or been warned/infracted/suspended for it.

Moderators won't always get it right and it is to a certain extent subjective but moderation decisions, especially where it might be contentious, are often discussed to try and be as fair and impartial as possible by getting a wider range of views from within the moderation team. It's not always possible to do that in advance of taking action because sometimes what has been posted probably shouldn't be allowed to stay visible while it is debated but it's still done afterwards and if the wrong action is felt to have been taken then it'll usually be reversed and any appropriate apologies will be issued. Equally not every RTM will require action, each one will be looked at (often by more than one moderator) so it is always helpful for posters to report what they think are rulebreaks but just because you feel a rule has been broken doesn't mean it has or that it is necessary for action to be taken. I'm not sure how you choose to measure rigorously impartial but moderators do try their best to be fair - you might not agree with the end result but that's not the same as them not trying to treat everyone equally.

Thats all well and good but the bottom line is the Mods are not being impartial and more than often they are allowing their own personal opinions to adversely affect their moderating decisions. I am not the only person saying this. So either a whole bunch of us are liars, or the mods are not doing their jobs correctly. Based on OCUK forum mods past history i'll go with the mods not doing their jobs correctly, but feel free to call me and others who say this liars.

 

[dowie]

To be fair I got a suspension relatively recently, posted in FCD and had it reversed.

On the other hand on more contentious threads or when it comes to borderline stuff it seems they're less likely to be interested.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

I'd ask for evidence to support that claim tbh.

 

[Rroff]

well, Gd and the graphics sub-forum.....

Graphics cards is almost civilised compared to what it used to be.

 

[adolf hamster]

Graphics cards is almost civilised compared to what it used to be.

haven't been in there in a while, but last i was there it was the good ol' amd/nvidia slagfest, although i remember the clamp down

 

[atpbx]

Someone asked why there has been so many thread necros recently. Let me tell you why. It's because threads from 3+ years ago were so much better than what we get today. Delete/lock-happy forum moderation has made GD a shell of its former self and lacking in both fun and soul.

Seriously... What is the last good thread you remember? Mine was probably the guy crying from listening to Thunder Child and that was god knows how long ago.

It's still a million times better than when MYB and Fruit**** were doing their best to wreck the place.

Imagine getting banned for something that someone literally made up on the spot, or having a bad language policy so strict that ANY kind of colorful language would result in a suspension.

When it gets as bad that we have a problem.

However OCUK goes in phases of being one of the more interesting places to post on the internet, to being somewhere you just don't want to be, for the past couple of years it's been a bit meh but not too bad.

 

[semi-pro waster]

Thats all well and good but the bottom line is the Mods are not being impartial and more than often they are allowing their own personal opinions to adversely affect their moderating decisions. I am not the only person saying this. So either a whole bunch of us are liars, or the mods are not doing their jobs correctly. Based on OCUK forum mods past history i'll go with the mods not doing their jobs correctly, but feel free to call me and others who say this liars.

You're missing at least a third option here (and quite possibly more options) that doesn't involve you being a liar or the moderators not doing their job properly and that's simply that you (and they) don't agree on where the line is to be drawn. That doesn't imply there has to be a right or wrong to every moderation decision but we each view an action differently according to our perspective. So perhaps it's worth being clear - what would satisfy you that moderation is impartial and how do you judge what is impartial?

 

[Pawnless Endgame]

I did post in the private section but got no response. So I'm replying on here for now, although I might make my own thread if no responses on here.

Question to the Dons: Is it possible to reinstate the points system please? (infractions)

I've had just the one infraction a couple of years back for using a banned word. It was something like 10 points which expired after x amount of time. Over a certain amount of points = suspension. A Don writes a reason next to it why it was an infraction, so I found it useful as it sets the boundaries. Most readers would then learn from that.

So is it possible to reinstate the points system please? This comes off the back of me posting an Irish joke recently which got me a 2-day holiday. The joke was in fact sent to me by an Irish relative in the first place No points or warnings whatsoever. So this is the other question I have: where does jokes cross the line on GD? I.e. stereotypes not allowed? What about jokes that start with "An Englishman, a Frenchman, a Scotsman" etc? The Irish joke I posted to be frank would have been classed as pre-watershed TV comedy like Fawlty Towers e.g. "when the Germans come, DO NOT MENTION THE WAR!"

So I'm after some clarifications please. Summary is: 1. reinstating points system and 2. jokes crossing the line.

P.S. I have posted the joke before in the random image thread without further ado, so again it's about setting boundaries and consistency.

Thx

 

[KNiVES]

I've been here for years and I honestly can't say the moderation has gone downhill, seems just fine to me.

 

[Uther]

I've been here for years and I honestly can't say the moderation has gone downhill, seems just fine to me.

Same. Some people seem to revel in breaking the (quite simple) rules of the forum, as though getting a ban is some sort of badge of honour. It's really not.