- This topic has 255 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by Anonymous.
October 14, 2012 at 11:25 am #81544
The 'report to moderator' button in the forum and the 'bookmark' feature have been temporarily suspended in an attempt to decrease page loading times across the site.
I also intend to add functionality which will make it possible for posts from certain users to go into a moderation queue before being published. This would provide an alternative option to suspension for moderators. The feature could also allow for more permissions to be granted to users who wish to participate in editing and adding other content to the site in general.
I am also asking for further volunteers to come forward to assist in forum moderation. As traffic to the site increases this task will become increasingly more time demanding.October 15, 2012 at 12:33 pm #90320Young Master SmeetModerator
Does the forum software allow threads to be closed? This could be another alternative to banning, closing a thread that is getting fractious is quite common elseplace…October 15, 2012 at 12:38 pm #90321
That does appear to be an option. And doesn't add any extra drain on resources. Good thinking.October 15, 2012 at 5:21 pm #90322
We must be very careful if we go down this avenue. Just because this is "common elseplace…" does not mean it is appropriate for a website set up by a party that prides itself on it's freedom to express and and discuss issues.We must be very careful, lest the charge of censorship be levelled by others outside the party. It is the nature of politics and political parties that not everyone agrees. Is it not more hazardous to ban threads, than to deal with any fractious incidents on them?I would rather take part in frank and open discourse than go down the route of proscription.October 15, 2012 at 7:08 pm #90323DJPParticipant
Any moderation has to place within the framework of the rules. There are no rules that ban discussion of any topic, or the use of any particular words for that matter. It's the rules related to personal abuse and flaming that unfortunately have proven that they are the ones that need to be enforced.I think that anyone who puts up a charge of censorship against us is not really making a valid argument. Surely if you follow your argument to its logical conclusion we should print everything that ever gets sent to the Standard since not printing things amounts to censorship.October 15, 2012 at 7:15 pm #90324
I was replying to a post which suggested the possibility of DELETING whole threads. This would indeed be censorship. So I don't get the gist of your argument!October 15, 2012 at 7:20 pm #90325DJPParticipant
Ah I see. 'Closing threads' means that no further comments are allowed, not that they are deleted.October 15, 2012 at 8:23 pm #90326
Indeed DJP. : )November 15, 2012 at 5:48 pm #90327
Hi Admin,I notice there is now a, moderator 1, posting forum rules etc.This may sound daft, but I assume you (Admin) and moderator1 are separate entities? Meaning there are two individuals monitoring the conduct of this site?November 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm #90328
'Admin' is 'DJP' is Darren Poynton'Moderator1' is Dave Chesham who for the most part has been assisting in deleting automated spam posts but also has moderation rights.Also the internet department has a total of 5 members, 3 of which do not get involved in moderating directly but have been involved resolving the recent moderation issues. 'Moderating the moderators' so to speak.November 16, 2012 at 2:00 am #90329
Thanks for the clarification Admin (DJP).December 11, 2012 at 7:58 pm #90330
Hi Admin,I am lookingfor some clarification, regarding moderation of this forum.I see a member has had posts censored and is now suspended from the forum.I was under the impression that the whole idea of censorship on this forum was to stop the use of suspensions?Cheers.December 11, 2012 at 10:06 pm #90331
Hi AdminJust wanting some clarification? Suspension or censorship? Or is it to be both?admin wrote:I also intend to add functionality which will make it possible for posts from certain users to go into a moderation queue before being published. This would provide an alternative option to suspension for moderators.December 11, 2012 at 10:13 pm #90332
I don't understand what you're asking me. The functionality you have highlighted is not yet up and running.December 11, 2012 at 10:27 pm #90333
AdminI apologise for the misunderstanding but I think the last bit about an alternative to suspension is relative in light of certain recent events.You can delete posts now, so we can't see the offending material. So why is there a need to also suspend?I assume a moderation queue may result in partial or full censorship/deletion? So if the aim is to avoid suspension, why delete and suspend members now?Is not one method enough?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.