Going Off Topic
- This topic has 16 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I don't wish to criticise, and am aware that Mods are implementing the rules as they exist and that similar rules generally exist on other web forums, but is going off topic really a problem? Some of the most interesting conversations I have ever had have been ones that began with one topic and then spun off in other directions. I understand that there is the possibility of discussions being deliberately de-railed, however I haven't seen that as an issue here. In reality, it's not like we're being overwhelmed with posts at this point in time. Could we actually be stiffening interesting discussion in order to deal with an issue that doesn't exist? Should we look at the rules for moderation and adjust them to allow variations in discussion but allow mods to act when there is misuse of this facility?
Tim Kilgallon wrote:I understand that there is the possibility of discussions being deliberately de-railed, however I haven't seen that as an issue here.Off topic shouldn't be mechanically enforced and yes great ideas do spring from tangents I agree. The problem is when posters use *every* thread as a platform for there current bugbear / obsession / singular interest.If you're worried about moderation why not volunteer to help moderate? Serious suggestion.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:I don't wish to criticise, and am aware that Mods are implementing the rules as they exist and that similar rules generally exist on other web forums, but is going off topic really a problem? Some of the most interesting conversations I have ever had have been ones that began with one topic and then spun off in other directions. I understand that there is the possibility of discussions being deliberately de-railed, however I haven't seen that as an issue here. In reality, it's not like we're being overwhelmed with posts at this point in time. Could we actually be stiffening interesting discussion in order to deal with an issue that doesn't exist? Should we look at the rules for moderation and adjust them to allow variations in discussion but allow mods to act when there is misuse of this facility?The issues and problems associated with off-topic posts have been discussed several times over the last three years. And each discussion eventually brought about changes in moderation. Currently, I only take any action on off-topic posts when its blatantly obvious that some posts are deliberately going off-topic by their lack of serious discussion. That said, I do allow some off-topic discussion when its opening up an item which is worthy of further discussion and provides insight on the human condition e.g. exploration of attachment theory on the 'Tories and disability' thread.The difficulty is deciding at what point do I need to draw the line? And what action is appropriate and acceptable for drawing the line? Presently any decision is mine to make but when there are two or three moderators involved in the decision making process then the deliberations and decisions become a shared process and proactive rather than reactive.If for instance I had some company on here then one of us would be in a position to devote some time laying out the welcome mat to new users. And also make good use of the PM facility to increase awareness of the socialist case so old and new users are encouraged to engage with the discussion.
Apologies for length of time between comments.Re taking up Moderation work, I would be happy to contribute what I can however, as my contributions in the last week or so have shown, I am currently working around 55 hours a week if not more, and my input would be sporadic at best.Re the difficulties outlined about what to moderate and what to not, whilst I understand your difficulties, surely it is the rule against off topic posting, not going off topic that is the problem. If the rules are applied in some cases and not in others, then it appears (and I fully understand the need to moderate some of the posts) that they are being picked on unfairly. if the issue is " when posters use *every* thread as a platform for there current bugbear / obsession / singular interest." the rules should address this, rather than going off topic. Again as Mod 1 says "I only take any action on off-topic posts when its blatantly obvious that some posts are deliberately going off-topic by their lack of serious discussion." this is to an extent a subjective judgement, which can appear to be picking on some posters unfairly as what is serious to one person might lack seriousness to another, and the rules state off topic, rather than lack of seriousness, so in effect someone being less than serious about a topic may, with some justification claim that they hadn't breached any rule.The point I am trying to make is that going off topic is not actually the problem that we face, however the off topic rule is being used to deal with other issues. Surely we should make the rules to suit the difficulties, and I don't see going off topic as being the main issue.
Glad to hear you are interested in becoming a moderator. Looking forward to your nomination going in front of the next NERB online meeting.If its not the 'off-topic rule' which you see as the 'main issue' but the way its being used to deal with "other issues" what actions do you suggest we take into consideration? Not that I agree its the way the rule is used which is the main issue. For me the main issue is: At what stage do I decide to take action, and once I've decided to take action what action do I take?Like I mentioned any action I take has to be appropriate and acceptable. It seems to me that any action I take under the rule will be for you inappropriate and unacceptable. Because I'm using the rule to deal with other issues. Past discussions on the moderation of the rules have, I may add, resulted in changes to the protocols and procedures and not to the rules. Hence the introduction of reminders, a 3rd and final warning, and last but not least removal of posts to the Off-topic or Rubbish section. Perhaps you have something similar in mind? If this is the case could you please post them on the 'Moderation suggestions' thread.On the other hand, if you are of the opinion a change in any of the rules is necessary, so its transparent that moderation is not being abused, the IC will gladly discuss them.
Surely we can do away with the formalities and have Tim simply co-opted by the IC and immediately start moderating. Any requirement that he requires being nominated by NERB can be completed at the later date, espcially since we acknowledge the difficulty of NERB meeting and achieving quorums. I don't recall any moderator being "proposed" by a branch but i may well be wrong. If Tim is willing then give him the keys to the forum and let him get started. You and he can exchange private e-mails for consultation purposes. I also hope that if any rule changes are being suggested that it will not only be the IC who will discuss them but that the forum members have some in-put too.
Sorry for the delay in getting back. Work and family commitments. I would be happy to do what modding (is there such a word?) as I can, however, as stated my input would be sporadic.As to the points about current use of the rules, I am more than happy to put together a few proposals, however my view (and I accept that this is only my view) is that the whole issue of the use of the internet (How it fits into the democratic processes of the party, where it fits into the administration of the party, how it is effectively administered, where it fits into the party's rules on publishing materials, etc) is a really huge area.I also think it is one that is going to require us to look at all of these areas in great depth if it is not going to cause us great problems in the future. I have started putting some ideas/proposals together, which members of our Branch have indicated they feel is necessary for an Item for Discussion for ADM and think it is a better idea to examine the whole thing, rather than make adjustments to a system that I think needs overhauling.
Mod rules that result in the permanent suspension of a party member for going 'off topic' is absolute rubbish. Or as Dickens wrote:"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass – a idiot".
Tim Kilgallon wrote:and am aware that Mods are implementing the rules as they existbut they have not and when it is pointed out they silence and censor those who point it out What we need to look at – motives?
Reminder: 15. Queries or appeals relating to particular moderation decisions should be sent directly to the moderators by private message. Do not post such messages to the forum. You must continue to abide by the moderators’ decisions pending the outcome of your appeal.
Hello mod. Why cant all comments and opinions be out and open to scrutiny for all to see? Open democracy. Why not?Where is your right to censor opinions? I have worked for many community organisations ', welfare rights, unions and age UK and they take in all opinions without censorship.
lindanesocialist wrote:Hello mod. Why cant all comments and opinions be out and open to scrutiny for all to see? Open democracy. Why not?Where is your right to censor opinions? I have worked for many community organisations ', welfare rights, unions and age UK and they take in all opinions without censorship.All comments and opinions posted on this forum are open to to scrutiny. I do not censor opinions but I do take appropriate and acceptable action when there's a clear breach of the rules. The introduction of the rules states: "Forum rules and guidelines SPGB Web forums registration agreement (adopted by the EC 1st June 2013, amended 7th Dec 2013 and 6th July 2013) This agreement spells out the rules that participants in these forums are expected to abide by. These rules may be revised occasionally. The forum administrators will post a conspicuous notice of any changes on the forum, but it is the responsibility of participants to ensure they are familiar with the latest version. Forum aims and scopeThe SPGB web forums are operated by the Socialist Party of Great Britain (SPGB) and are intended to promote discussion of matters related to the SPGB, the World Socialist Movement, and socialism in general. Everyone may read the forums, and posting access is available to all registered users who accept and abide by this agreement. Registration is free. Forum rulesYour use of the forums indicates your agreement to abide by these rules, to abide by the decisions of the moderators in interpreting and enforcing these rules." From my own experience and knowledge all community organisations have rules of conduct which outline what behaviour is and not tolerated from the members who join that particular organisation. We are no different here in that the moderator ensures the code of conduct is followed.
A h I see, just following orders. Can't argue with that. Rules ar rules. They are there for our own good.Even if it means censorship. Not something I wish to be part of, thankshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
Seems i committed the same crime by replying to the wrong thread…My apologies …I'll delete the first part and place it where it should be
Quote:Why cant all comments and opinions be out and open to scrutiny for all to see? Open democracy. Why not?Linda, there is a time and place for everything.However, it is disrespectful to other forum contributors to purposefully derail and detract from a thread with extraneous comments to the topic. The role of a moderator is to remind members of the forum of that and to take action when his warnings are ignored.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.