[Closed] Forum Behaviour Update

“Play the ball, not the man.”

Apologies for the gender specific nature of that

Play the ball, not the player?

But, yeah, there does seem to have been a bit of a breakdown of Rule 1 of late.

I'll admit that I tend to get quite insulting if I feel someone is attempting to dehumanize a particular group. With that in mind I feel that the mods should take a zero tolerance approach to language that either explicitly or implicitly says that another group is less than human. This is obviously massively open to interpretation and the prejudices of the mods (and yes, the mods do have prejudices given that they are, I assume, human beings).

You could ban certain subjects but then that's a form of discrimination as well. It means you can speak up in defense of some minority groups but not others. Overall, policing discussion seems like an impossible task but I can see why you feel the need to do so.

For my part, instead of calling people out directly, I'll start using the Report button more. I do take pride in the fact that I don't say anything to people here that I wouldn't say face to face. Unfortunately, I've ended up in physical confrontations because I've told people exactly what I think of them after they've made unacceptable comments so that's obviously not going to go far enough to reduce insulting language.

There are posters on here who pop up on threads and repeatedly use dehumanising language. Often it's shrouded in some innuendo and individually the comments have plausible deniability but taken as a whole they paint a picture of bigots who take pleasure in taking potshots at minority groups. I think these are the forum members who need to be strongly discouraged.

All I will say is that if I report a post for dehumanising language and the mods let it stand I will tell the poster exactly what I think about them. If that results in a ban for me then I just have to accept STW is somewhere I'm not welcome anymore and that'll be that.

I will tell the poster exactly what I think about them

Bear in mind that we really don't know a person properly through an online medium. We think we do, but we really don't. You must remember this.

Bear in mind that we really don’t know a person properly through an online medium. We think we do, but we really don’t. You must remember this.

I accept that, and I accept that people can say something and it can come across wrong or they can be in a particularly bad frame of mind that day.

However, there are a few on here who seem to just like bashing minorities but instead of coming right out and saying 'I hate this group of people and consider them sub-human' they code their language in ways that, individually, aren't damning but when you've seen them do it for the fifth or sixth time then it becomes more difficult to pass off as a moment of thoughtlessness or a misunderstanding.

I'm not sure if the mods track how often a user's posts are reported but it might be worth doing. If a user knows how to walk the line of saying things that are almost bigoted but not enough to get a warning for and they do this all the time it can get incredibly frustrating.

I've posted plenty of dumb poo on here over the last 20 years (at a guess) but I doubt that the mods have the time or inclination to research people's posting history on a site that they get to use for free. Surely it's more productive to point out the error in peoples posts with reason and facts (LOL!)? The offender will probably be too ignorant to take notice, so to that end you are urinating in the wind, but others might learn something. I'm not sure that calling some random text on a screen a 'dog lobbing cock womble' ever really results in a positive outcome!

The vast majority of interactions on here are positive and healthy debate is not something we intend to discourage – but the house rules need to be followed by everyone.

Some of my forum experiences on here have been particularly unpleasant of late. As some of you will already know, I lost family to covid and comments made in response to my posts on the Sovereign Citizens and Anti Anti-Vaxxer threads caused very genuine distress here. I came very close to walking away from STW as a result.

There are a very small but quite vocal number of forumites with whom I chose not to interact with and in one recent instance I (twice) politely asked a poster to refrain from interacting with me due to their habitual poor behaviour and I won't hesitate to do so again if necessary.

I will tell the poster exactly what I think about them

Or maybe you could "play the ball, not the man" and tell them what you think about their opinions and attitudes.

A bit like what Mark suggested in the OP.

research people’s posting history on a site that they get to use for free

Well, some of us use it for free 😉

But I would say the most toxic users on this forum are the ones who know exactly where the line is and take pleasure in throwing stones while staying just the right side of it. If we get more active in using the Report button and the mods keep an eye on users who receive a lot of reports for borderline comments then that might help things. Or not.

I’m not sure that calling some random text on a screen a ‘dog lobbing cock womble’ ever really results in a positive outcome!

True, but I think calling a bigot a bigot is worth doing.

Thank You Mark, I'm glad this has been noticed and acted on.

I'm on here most lunchtimes, I used to really look forward to it, now sometimes it's with a degree of trepidation as to what I'm going to read.

One small (Hopefully) request. If I report a post would it be possible to get some vary brief feedback or even just an acknowledgement? Just a one liner along the lines of "Thanks for reporting the post, the user was fund to have broken the forum rules and action has been taken", or "Whilst close to the line on this occasion the post didn't cross the line". On the few occasions when I've reported posts I've no idea if the report has been received or any action taken unless the post is removed. It's kind of made me not really bother.

True, but I think calling a bigot a bigot is worth doing.

I think actually pointing out the issues and problems raised by their bigotry is worth doing more.

Or maybe you could “play the ball, not the man” and tell them what you think about their opinions and attitudes.

There is a limit to the number of times you can explain to a particular bigot why they are wrong. There is also a limit to the number of times you can point out that their bigoted 'jokes' and innuendo aren't funny and are based on lazy stereotypes.

I could start playing the game of trying to stay on the 'right' side of the line while being insulting myself but I've got no interest in putting that much effort into an online forum. If someone's a bigot, I'd like to be able to report them and the mods take care of it, but failing that I reserve the right to call a bigot a bigot.

If I can't do that here and bigots are going to be allowed to keep playing their games then STW is obviously not the place for me.

I’m on here most lunchtimesoffice hours

🙂

but I think calling a bigot a bigot is worth doing.

And that's exactly what Mark is talking about, if you have a problem with something someone has written pull apart the comments, challenge the comment, explain why they are incorrect (in your opinion). Calling someone a bigot won't change them and it's possible you've misunderstood, they've posted clumsily or heavens forbid your view of the world isn't the only valid one out there.

Edit: this isn't going to end well is it.

There is a limit to the number of times you can explain to a particular bigot why they are wrong. There is also a limit to the number of times you can point out that their bigoted ‘jokes’ and innuendo aren’t funny and are based on lazy stereotypes.

I could start playing the game of trying to stay on the ‘right’ side of the line while being insulting myself but I’ve got no interest in putting that much effort into an online forum. If someone’s a bigot, I’d like to be able to report them and the mods take care of it, but failing that I reserve the right to call a bigot a bigot.

So you're saying that you'll do constructive debate for a bit, and then just do name calling?
Maybe just do the first bit, and when you've had enough, go and do something else.

EDIT:

Edit: this isn’t going to end well is it.

No, I sense the irony level of this thread will be strong.

One small (Hopefully) request. If I report a post would it be possible to get some vary brief feedback or even just an acknowledgement? Just a one liner along the lines of “Thanks for reporting the post, the user was fund to have broken the forum rules and action has been taken”, or “Whilst close to the line on this occasion the post didn’t cross the line”. On the few occasions when I’ve reported posts I’ve no idea if the report has been received or any action taken unless the post is removed. It’s kind of made me not really bother.

Can we just ignore all the stuff I said about calling a bigot a bigot and listen to boriselbruse instead?

The main point I was trying to make is that people might be less likely to resort to insults if they feel the Report button is more useful.

Mark has posted "the rules" above. If you're not prepared to abide by them then would it not be better to just leave and save yourself any future upset?

Mark has posted “the rules” above. If you’re not prepared to abide by them then would it not be better to just leave and save yourself any future upset?

If this place is going to become a game of 'how close to the line can I stray before I get a ban' then yes, I will.

However, as I said, I'd much rather use the Report button and have people who do treat this place as somewhere to play 'how close to the line can I stray before I get a ban' dealt with than call anyone anything.

But I would say the most toxic users on this forum are the ones who know exactly where the line is and take pleasure in throwing stones while staying just the right side of it. If we get more active in using the Report button and the mods keep an eye on users who receive a lot of reports for borderline comments then that might help things. Or not.

No, this is bang on the money.

There is a small selection of members who know exactly how to walk the line, always skirting the ragged edge of disaster but never quite falling in. It makes moderating them fairly and objectively a complete bastard of a job.

The "REPORT" button is both your friend and the Moderators' also, please use it. A reported post can very often be the tipping point in a grey judgement call, "well, we're not sure about this, but no-one's reported it so..." For my part, when in doubt I always erred on the side of letting things slide rather than an aggressive censorship approach. Knowing that someone else thinks something is out of order is invaluable in those cases.

There is also a limit to the number of times you can point out that their bigoted ‘jokes’ and innuendo aren’t funny and are based on lazy stereotypes.

Don’t tell them they aren’t funny, ask them why they are.

Hobnob anyone?

You know the thread is only going one way! 😬

Hobnob anyone?

You know the thread is only going one way! 😬

My fault. I came in trying to play billy big bollocks when I should have just said 'We should use the Report button more.'

Sorry.

One small (Hopefully) request. If I report a post would it be possible to get some vary brief feedback or even just an acknowledgement?
...
It’s kind of made me not really bother.

... and a couple of other posts in a similar vein.

There's a couple of issues here. First is resource, providing a personal reply to every reported post would require a lot of extra time from volunteers. Second, the moderation team knows from bitter experience that this causes more problems than it solves, a reply of "on this occasion the post didn’t cross the line" is an open goal directly into a protracted argument.

Please, please believe me when I say though, every reported post is investigated and users reporting potentially problematic posts is a massive help to the moderators. Just because you don't see a response does not mean that there hasn't been one.

Clicked on this genuinely hoping it was going to be about cookies 😀

Just to add.

Thanks to TJs thread, the replies on there and recent reports we had a discussion about this over the weekend. Yes we have exciting lives.

Please remember to report to use if you think someone may be breaking the rules and Wes will review it. We may not always agreed with but with your help of reporting we help eased out the toxic offenders.

Thanks guys.

I didn't do nuffink.  wisnae me

*hides*

My fault. I came in trying to play billy big bollocks when I should have just said ‘We should use the Report button more.’

Sorry.

Fair play

I didn’t do nuffink. wisnae me

It's always you 😉

Reported!

The “REPORT” button is both your friend and the Moderators’ also, please use it.

I welcome Marks OP, but I suspect I'm not the only one that feels some people get treated differently. I've just hinted on TJ's thread that amongst the STW community some people are treated different. FWIW, I've used that Report button 3 times - once where I felt I was being insulted - and twice where I felt comments were racially inappropriate. Nothing happened on any occasion.

More helpfully put, I'd like to ask that the Mods take all requests seriously and don't consider based to expected stereotypes when considering those requests, which I feel has happened in the past. Not picking on TJ but he is a recent example that I can remember, where we've been told to accept insensitivity because "well thats just TJ". No, that isn't acceptable, generic good standards of behaviour should be expressed by all and that goes for all of us.

Who is Wes? A member of the forum police? 😳😉

If you think TJ receives special preferential treatment then I'm afraid that you're -very- wide of the mark there.

Not picking on TJ but he is a recent example that I can remember, where we’ve been told to accept insensitivity because “well thats just TJ”. No, that isn’t acceptable, generic good standards of behaviour should be expressed by all and that goes for all of us.

I agree - the general point and the particular

Clicked on this genuinely hoping it was going to be about cookies 😀

And the 502 errors, pop ups etc

Actually, I'm almost offended by that.

I always strived to be impartial as a moderator (despite sometimes being an argumentative shitbag as a user) and I have little doubt that the rest of the team weren't likewise. To insinuate that we were playing favourites or that we didn't take some reports seriously is pretty galling.

You say you reported three post in your twelve year tenure and "nothing happened" - perhaps that was the case, perhaps someone got a warning (likely) or a ban out of it, but you wouldn't be notified either way. The mod team may have disagreed with you - I've no idea what you're referring to and I don't overly care - but I can assure you that it won't have been intentionally ignored.

Sorry TJ to single that out, but its the latest I can remember.

The same applies to me, amd with hindsight maybe i should have tried harder to generalise!

Im going to ban myself for 20 minutes...

@Cougar, I appreciate the mods are part time and busy, but... the frequency within tenure does not change the seriousness of the issue reported, and if I recieve no reply, the offender is still posting and the offending comment remains what am i supposed to assume?

don’t overly care

Do you think that commwnt encourages used of the Report button?

Given that providing individual feedback to every reported post is too onerous, would it be possible to provide Moderator feedback within a thread. No need to call out individuals but a general warning that some comments have crossed the line and the thread is likely to be locked unless things improve. Or perhaps a post explaining that a member has had a 2 day ban based on behaviour within a certain thread, it could show that action is being taken without needing to go into detail and keep everything within that problem thread.

The “REPORT” button is both your friend and the Moderators’ also, please use it. A reported post can very often be the tipping point in a grey judgement call, “well, we’re not sure about this, but no-one’s reported it so…” For my part, when in doubt I always erred on the side of letting things slide rather than an aggressive censorship approach. Knowing that someone else thinks something is out of order is invaluable in those cases.

Really helpful and useful post 👍

Who is Wes? A member of the forum police? 

It's been fairly well known that some of the mods go incognito. But it looks like Wes's cover has just been busted.

No need to call out individuals but a general warning that some comments have crossed the line and the thread is likely to be locked unless things improve

This already happens.

I recieve no reply... what am i supposed to assume?

I've no idea what you're 'supposed' to assume. I'd like to hope that you'd trust that it'd been dealt with. If you genuinely believe that not to be the case you can always email moderator@ to request clarification or escalate the issue to mark@. Hell, there's a phone number on the Contact Us page. You might not get anywhere - certainly if your opening gambit is all guns blazing - but a genuine polite query would likely solicit an explanation. It's simply impractical to do that for every report.

Do you think that commwnt encourages used of the Report button?

I don't overly care about that either (-: My point was, I see little merit in dragging back up whatever complaint you may have had from however long ago you may have had it. Not least because there's bugger all I can do about it now anyway, but it's also a distraction from the discussion.

True, but I think calling a bigot a bigot is worth doing.

There's a big difference between saying 'that's bigotry' and 'you're a bigot'.

Given that providing individual feedback to every reported post is too onerous, would it be possible to provide Moderator feedback within a thread.

First off, this already happens. Drac and (historically) I often posted updates in threads as the non-anonymous members of the team.

However, this just moves the same problem. It takes time and it opens the door for arguments. I'm absolutely in favour of transparency but there are some for whom dragging a moderator into several pages of he-said-she-said tossbaggery would be considered great sport. It's almost always a lot less aggro all round just to not reply, let it die and move on.

There’s a big difference between saying ‘that’s bigotry’ and ‘you’re a bigot’.

There's arguably a very weaselly difference.

(Because gods know, I've used that defence myself often enough. 😁)

Given that providing individual feedback to every reported post is too onerous, would it be possible to provide Moderator feedback within a thread. No need to call out individuals but a general warning that some comments have crossed the line and the thread is likely to be locked unless things improve.

We discussed that. The decision was not to as it can lead to arguments about someone being banned, whataoutism and possibly them being targeted (it wouldn’t take a lot to work out who it was. We do sometimes ask for threads to get back on track or they’ll be closed other time we will just close them.

More helpfully put, I’d like to ask that the Mods take all requests seriously and don’t consider based to expected stereotypes when considering those requests,

We review all reports it may be that we don’t agree with you, that the person has had a warning or banned. Deleting the said post would depend on a few factors such as the extent of the post.

And no we do not have any favourites we are aware of offenders and will maybe have less tolerance due their history.

Love the way this thread has developed, surely current front runner for ‘comedy thread of the week’ come Friday

I am also enjoying the irony of a thread where we are bickering about bickering. Or maybe we aren't. I can't tell anymore!

We review all reports....

Thank you for the clarity. I will assume that no news is good news in the future.

Certainly posts of mine have been deleted when I've crossed the line, so I'm fairly confident that posts I report in turn get considered and dealt with.

There’s a big difference between saying ‘that’s bigotry’ and ‘you’re a bigot’.

There’s arguably a very weaselly difference.

Not weaselly at all. They're fundamentally different and which of those lines of argument you choose to pursue is likely to have a significant effect on the outcome of a discussion.

Thank you for the clarity. I will assume that no news is good news in the future.

Yes essentially just that we may see things in a different context or not understand how it’s effected someone more personally.

<logs in>

I'm not banned. Cool!

There’s a big difference between saying ‘that’s bigotry’ and ‘you’re a bigot’.

I do try to see it this way and to separate the post from the person, but we do have one or two forumites who've made their inability to present facts with citations and/or to accept when the weight of evidence goes against them without segueing into non-sequitur a performance art. Personally, I would like to see a function so that users may two-way block those individuals, thus improving our forum experience.

Its a pity Mark has had to start this thread but the beaviour from a few on some threads has been very close to the line recently so can understand why he's done it.

In an ideal world moderators would not be needed but even Mumsnet with its very lax attitude to swearing etc has to have them. Here is very much a place where the modding can effect the feel of the place and for that I'm happy with how the mods deal with us lot in here on the whole. I've never been on the recieving end of any mod action but have reported span posts at 1-2 am and seen them actioned within the hour, pretty impressive for volunteers!

Drac and (historically) I often posted updates in threads as the non-anonymous members of the team.

That was my first thought after reading about feedback wanted, closed threads got a little explainer as their last post and some users' posts would get altered with the offensive bit removed and replaced with a "NOPE! - Mods" in its place. Maybe thatxan be looked at, not for every time but as a way to show thngs are reviewed regularly.

I love this place and a lot of the 'feel' of it is down to exactly how hard or lax the moderating is, it isn't random.  There is just enough rope to allow 'life' in discussions without overdoing it.  Some people are very skilled at going right up to the edge but this looks like a good move imo.  Likes (if we had a like button of course)

There’s a big difference between saying ‘that’s bigotry’ and ‘you’re a bigot’.

I agree. If someone say's something that's off then I think it's fine to say, 'That's a bigoted thing to say' and back it up with your reasoning.

However, there are some users who repeatedly pop up and make comments that either on the line or just a bit over it. If you challenge them they've deliberately left enough wiggle room to say, 'What I said is factually correct.' Technically what they say is true but if they are saying things that are 'technically' correct but bigoted on every contentious thread eventually debating them becomes pointless because they will once again point out that they are 'technically' correct and therefore it can't be bigotry.

However, from now on I won't bother engaging and just hit the Report button.

Just to show that the moderators job is thankless and basically impossible, I think there should be double standards and mods should be given as much leeway as possible to interpret what is being said and who is saying it.

If someone is having a bad day and it's a particularly contentious issue (such as ankle socks or airbnb reviews, for example) and someone say's something they shouldn't then I don't think it's a big deal and I'm sure a quick warning is all that's needed.

However, if there is a user who repeatedly pops up making borderline comments and their posts are getting reported every week then I think the threshold for a ban should be far lower.

TBH, being a mod seems like a really crappy job so thanks for doing it 🙂

TBH, being a mod seems like a really crappy job so thanks for doing it

Genuinely, hear! hear!

In the past I was a mod on a big online forum (150k+ members). The modding attitude there was similar to here - fairly informal and tolerant to encourage debate but with some pretty firm lines.

The only thing we would always try to do that I don't see at STW was (as mentioned a couple of times here), make it really obvious in a thread where posts had been edited or deleted by a mod. This was basically in place of the thankless task of responding to individual concerns and reports. I also felt it was a nice reminder that someone was watching (albeit in the least Big Brother way possible). We did have a fairly large team of mods though that made this easier - no idea how big the STW team actually is due to all the (alleged) secret police floating around!

Having said all that, I must be reading the wrong threads as my perception of the atmosphere of this place hasn't changed much over the time I've been here.

I’ll admit that I tend to get quite insulting if I feel someone is attempting to dehumanize a particular group.

The difficulty with that approach is "if I feel". If you misinterpret the post you may end up insulting someone who wasn't doing what you thought they were. If they respond in kind, the thread goes downhill.

@BruceWee can you give an example of something which is 'technically correct' but 'bigoted'? Genuine question, because to my (simple) mind the two are mutually exclusive?  Happy to be corrected though.

they’ve deliberately left enough wiggle room

and

can you give an example of something which is ‘technically correct’ but ‘bigoted’? Genuine question,

Compare... Let's use the word "demographic" to represent whatever your preferred Group Du Jour may be. Immigrants or homosexuals or brexit voters or singlespeeders or gingers or vegans or cellists or whatever. Compare the two statements:

"All Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island."
"I think that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island."

See how one is presented as 'fact' and the other merely expressing an opinion? Or similarly:

"You're an arsehole because you believe that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island."
"Anyone who believes that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island must be an arsehole."

This is the sort of judgement challenge the moderators face on a daily basis and the people who are most fond of tying these linguistic loophole minefields are so very practised at it.

Having said all that, I must be reading the wrong threads as my perception of the atmosphere of this place hasn’t changed much over the time I’ve been here.

I've said this too.

Compare… Let’s use the word “demographic” to represent whatever your preferred Group Du Jour may be. Immigrants or homosexuals or brexit voters or singlespeeders or gingers or vegans or cellists or whatever. Compare the two statements:

“All Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island.”
“I think that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island.”

See how one is presented as ‘fact’ and the other merely expressing an opinion? Or similarly:

“You’re an arsehole because you believe that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island.”
“Anyone who believes that all Demographics should be rounded up and dumped on an island must be an arsehole.”

This is the sort of judgement challenge the moderators face on a daily basis and the people who are most fond of tying these linguistic loophole minefields are so very practised at it.

That is interesting Cougar and I can see how that would be a challenge to moderators - but the examples you give are still of opinions worded slightly differently, not statements which are 'correct' which is what I asked based on what @BruceWee said.

Without going into too many details because I don't want to have to start fighting battles all over again, but the first one that springs to mind is when someone referred to a group as being 'abnormal'.

Now, technically, this was correct. Culturally this group has some difference when compared to the 'average' UK citizen so technically referring to this group as abnormal was correct (although, you could refer to pretty much any group as being abnormal).

Of course, the real reason they called them abnormal was to 'other' them and dehumanise them, but because this user was technically correct they were able to argue the technicalities rather than the substance of what they were saying and no amount of pointing out that the language was dehumanising was going to make a bit of difference. The purpose was not to debate with facts but to appeal to emotions, specifically our fear of people who are different.

This was about the fourth or fifth time I'd seen this user using this tactic.

There have been several threads where similar things have been said. The language used is always 'neutral' and often scientific sounding so at a glance it looks like merely stating 'facts'.

However, if you actually dissect the statements, using dispassionate or scientific language just disguises the fact that what they are saying is incredibly vague and meaningless but still has the effect of othering or dehumanising a group of people.

Abnormal means nothing in this context. Technically it's correct but the intention was nothing but bigotry.

See how one is presented as ‘fact’ and the other merely expressing an opinion?

We do have a forumite who habitually posts their personal opinion as though it were fact in a manner that's often quite challenging. When they eventually paint themselves into a logical corner, the non-sequiturs are deployed like chaff. To the very best of my knowledge over the past thirteen odd years of my time here, I've never once seen a retraction, apology or even an acknowledgement from the person concerned.

There’s arguably a very weaselly difference.

It's pretty big. When we speak, we all make mistakes from time to time. We all shoot from the hip, get annoyed, try to be funny, get drunk, and/or experience other negative emotions. Or sometimes we just don't understand. I've made plenty of racist and sexist jokes in my time and called it 'joking' or 'banter'. However, I've never knowingly been racist or sexist and I've always sought to correct my mistakes either straight away or over time as I learn and grow.

So yeah please pull me up and say 'that was racist' but accusing me of being a true racist person is a completely different thing.

some users’ posts would get altered with the offensive bit removed and replaced with a “NOPE! – Mods” in its place.

To be honest, I think 99% of those posts are written by the actual poster for comic effect.

@blokeuptheroad

All Lives Matter?

the examples you give are still of opinions worded slightly differently, not statements which are ‘correct’

To be honest, that's likely my fault for a fairly lame "off the top of my head" example. The point is that with a bit of thought it's quite easy to diplomatically / indirectly call someone a See You Next Tuesday and that's really difficult to police because they know exactly how they can then turn it 180' if you pull them up on it. We have a few masters of this particular craft on here.

[EDIT: Bruce just explained it better than I did. This is what I meant by weaselly - throwing a dead cat (weasel?) (catweasel, heh) onto the table and then going "well I think you'll find, what I actually said is..."

TL;DR - it's a trap.]

All Lives Matter?

A good example thanks, but obviously context dependant. Used to denigrate or downplay 'black lives matter' then absolutely.

@BruceWee & @cougar thanks, I see what you mean.

Ahhh big fan of pitchforks and flaming torches to drive out the opposition...

Joke folks just a joke

Thanks Mark for the announcement.

TBH it’s about time it was said and everyone, not singling anyone out for special mention, takes it as a gentle nudge to reign their behaviour in a bit. I’ve seen more language and behaviour used recently that has overstepped the mark than ever before and we can all take some responsibility for that.

I recently had a post removed, one where I’d overstepped, but I had no email from the mods, mine and a few others posts just weren’t there. It would, in my mind, be better to delete the post contents but leave the posters details up for all to see. Those that read the post would know the jist of it and then see that action had been taken, rather than it erased and some people non-the-wiser. I wasn’t aware I’d overstepped until I went backwards and forwards trying to pick the thread back up.

Something as simple as “Post removed because of Rule#1” would do.

Something as simple as “Post removed because of Rule#1” would do.

Generally we do just that in the form of a warning. Not laying blame but make sure your email is up to date and it hasn’t gone to trash.

Having said all that, I must be reading the wrong threads as my perception of the atmosphere of this place hasn’t changed much over the time I’ve been here.

I’ve said this too.

There are certain posters who only appear on certain threads on certain subjects at weekends and cause trouble. They're the ones I've spotted but there must be more I don't see as I don't follow every subject on here. I can see how it would be easy to never see these posts as the posters home in on one subject or poster to try and ruin it, if you never see those threads then you'll never see what happens away from the main topics.

@Drac

I meant on the post rather than an email.

Eg:

Drac
Full Member

POST REMOVED BY MODS, BREACHING RULE#1

Posted 29 minutes ago
REPLY | REPORT

Got you.

Something we may consider.

Something as simple as “Post removed because of Rule#1” would do.

I'm thinking of changing my forum name to Rule#1boy 🤔

Many thanks to Drac and Cougar for explaining the process. I totally understand the reason for not replying to reports as it just invites discussion. Maybe however just an automated reply along the lines of "Thank you for reporting a post, the report has been sent to the moderators who will investigate accordingly". Then at least people would know that the report hadn't just disappeared into the ether. Just a thought.

Another quick question if I may:

At what level of offense would a post be deleted or a user sanctioned? Inevitably I'm quite sensitive around language when it comes to gender identity. Some time ago I reported a post which I found very upsetting but the post was left. Would it ever be enough that it offends a person who is sensitive and personally connected to the subject, or do you go for the would a "reasonable person" be offended? I've not got a particular axe to grind on this, but was just curious. And I appreciate it's a question which doesn't have a simple answer!

Thanks for your continued work and patience.

"Something as simple as “Post removed because of Rule#1” would do."

<furiously stabs at imaginary "like" button>

All Lives Matter?

A good example thanks, but obviously context dependant. Used to denigrate or downplay ‘black lives matter’ then absolutely.

But it's never used to denigrate anything! It's always deniable.

Me, officer? Why, I was just saying that everyone's lives matter! Because they do, surely? I mean, the phrase Black Lives Matter isn't very inclusive, and that's not right, is it officer? I just say All Lives Matter out of my boundless love of all humanity!

TBH I like the Rule#1 rule.

Maybe however just an automated reply along the lines of “Thank you for reporting a post, the report has been sent to the moderators who will investigate accordingly”. Then at least people would know that the report hadn’t just disappeared into the ether.

But what would that gain you? All it'd tell you is that it'd hit the moderator mailbox. This is how email works, if it hadn't been delivered then you'd get an NDR to tell you it'd failed.

If you received an automated boilerplate reply you'd be no nearer in knowing that anyone had seen it, let alone actioned it.

At what level of offense would a post be deleted or a user sanctioned?

I'll let you into a little secret. They're winging it. (-:

There are no levels, there is no rulebook outside of the clearly documented forum T&Cs, the whole process is subjective. Rather, the checks and balances are via peer review*. I would routinely second-guess others' decisions and by turns I was equally reliant on the rest of the team doing the same with me. In questionable areas - of which there were many - there would be a discussion before any action was taken. When in doubt we'd usually favour leniency over censorship, but again that was never a rule but rather just kind of how it fell out over time.

* - That said, Mark of course has casting vote here, it's his bouncy castle. He respects and defers to the moderators' decisions (more often than he probably should 😁) but ultimately he will intervene if a bollock is seen to have been dropped.

If you genuinely feel aggrieved then as above, drop out an email. As you suggest, it's far from simple.