I absolute agree with you PremEx and have often congratulated those moderators who have elegantly accomplish moderation, leaving the thread seamlessly in tact--Randy among them.

What is not invisible are those posts which require moderation but don't receive it. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif People are allowed to insult one another with impunity and disrupt threads at will, often getting very good threads closed down as a result of their disruptive efforts. I find that distasteful.

Welcome to the Internet.

It's never right is it, when moderators delete offensive posts people cry "censorship!!", if they leave them open people flame on and if they close them then they are bad people and useless moderators...

Sure makes me glad I'm not a moderator... Oh, wait. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mad.gif

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif It really does seem like moderators will never make everyone happy...

Excellent points Chuck and I hope you will get a response to your quoted posts, although i'm not betting on it http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

Thanks, Scott. Me too. If not, I'll assume that the lack of response means agreement.

Question seeing a number of moderators are posting here.

Is there a "preferred" policy for Moderating a Flyertalker's post.

I doubt anyone would have a problem with a highly offensive post being totally deleted.

What about the case of where a post might be deemed not in keeping with thread topic etc.

Is the preffered policy:

(A) To delete that post entirely leaving no trace whatever of it or poster.

(B) For Moderator to edit out part/all of post and leaving their "fingerprint" on the post, i.e. leaving it showing original poster and date and time etc.

(c) No policy guideline exists in this area.

Excellent question, there DOES seem to be some differing tactics on these matters...

I don't think it's possible to apply a rigid standard. If there were, you could conceivably write software that could decide what to do with a post (or hire some folks who work for HMO's deciding whether they'll allow your doctor to prescribe what he/she thinks you need, but I digress....)

Part of what Randy wants us to do is use our judgment, not simply apply a strict set of criteria. This means that sometimes moderators would have taken different actions in different situations. But I believe most of those are borderline ones.

I tend to (in this order) a) ask people to edit their own posts; b) )But when time doesn't allow or the example is egregious, I'll edit it out and leave a "fingerprint." c) Delete entirely in very urgent situations or where, e.g., a & b have been repeatedly tried and they haven't worked to stop a pattern of posting

Again, all of this is not just science, but art: The response one might give to a brand new FT'er who makes a rookie mistake is different from that given to a long-timer perhaps, etc., etc.

Guidelines have been published for moderator use on editing or deleting posts.

For the few times I've had to intervene on a post, I'd say I used "B" 95% of the time, unless the post was made by someone who was obviously using a duplicate ID (which happneded on the "old" OMNI quite often). I'd then totally delete the post.

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited 09-19-2003).]

I wonder if Randy would mind if they might be posted here?

I have actually seen very few examples where "B" has been used, hence my question. I personally would feel that option is fair and transparent - except as noted in clear cases of outright over the top language used etc.

A very recent thread (not involving any Mod. posting on this thread I should point out) had a lot of "A" occurring where the judgement calls were arguably very questionable and biased IMHO. And had the end effect of worsening the mess, not solving the problem. Which is surely the supposed benefit on Moderation?

Further to my thinking on option "B" being preferable in almost ALL cases.

It seems to be me where in Forums with multiple Moderators (i.e. most) this is FAIREST to all those concerned.

Not all Moderators have the same judgement. If "B" was used in nearly all cases except for profanity etc, all users of a Forum could see WHICH moderator was at work.

I think that an excellant consenus is being either developed or made understood here. I would like to thank all participants in this courteous discourse. How can we get more FTers to participate in this thread? I don't think that many FTers regularily read or post to Randy Petersen Forum? Thanks again for those that are involved.

------------------
dallasflyer

oz, IMHO, "B" is the best route to follow except in the case of a profanity being used. As a moderator, I totally disagree with the use of "A" for normal moderation practices, especially when it comes down to keeping a thread on topic.

When a topic is totally off topic for that board, I am in favor of locking and moving it to its correct home with a explanation of my actions. Unfortunately, there are several people on the DL board that are opposed to moving off topic posts that do not relate to DL to a more appropriate home. They challenge the moderators on that issue on a regular basis.

As a sidebar, one of the largest challenges that the moderators have to face on a regular basis is the presence of trolls on the boards. They intentionally post with a mission to incite flame wars and offer nothing that can be construed as a positive contribution to FT. Unfortunately, they usually manage to stay on the correct side of the TOS, and we have our hands tied as a result.

Let's be honest. While there have been "socks" who have popped up now and then making trollish posts, many of these so-called "trolls" are not new members, but rather long-time members who, due to post count or familiarity with moderators, seem to have a license to engage in this type of post activity when it suits them.

Also, others can be encouraged to "pile on".

That said, I haven't noticed that things are any worse or better than any other time, but it is indeed there.

I don't agree here, a high post count or familiarity with moderators has never been a license to break rules of the TOS. Many people still think that "common trolling" is prohibited by the TOS, sadly it isn't.

I suppose you may be right. What do you mean by the second part of your post, "common trolling is not prohibited by the TOS"? Can you give an example of "common trolling"? I don't quite understand that term. Thanks.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ScottC:
I don't agree here, a high post count or familiarity with moderators has never been a license to break rules of the TOS. [QUOTE]

I disagree.

Whether it is because post count equals revenue, or moderators are afraid to take action against such members, I have seen that SOME members with a high post count are given HUGE amounts of latitude with the TOS.

I suppose this could be another thread, and I don't mean to hijack it, but I've always been curious about this (and here I demonstrate my ignorance):

Exactly HOW do post counts equal revenue in the financial scheme of things? I just don't get the connect between posting and generating revenue? If that were true, then why wouldn't Randy simply have a bunch of bots post every 60 seconds to OMNI or whatever? Can someone help me understand that?

While I am not regularly vociferous in my criticisms of moderation in the Delta forum, I want to point out the following examples as of late, as I look at page one of the Delta forum:

This thread is definitely off-topic for the Delta forum, but nobody seems to mind. It is the only off-topic thread currently active in the Delta forum, but Delta FlyerTalkers seems to be enjoying it. The moderators even contributed to that thread.

This thread was locked by gleff — and rightfully so. Nobody complained about this thread being locked — at least, to my knowledge.

Other threads that were either off-topic or contained heated debate eventually died of their own volition. Once in a while, they may be brought back to life, but that is the exception rather than the norm.

What I am trying to say is that the regulars of the Delta forum have often expressed how they feel about moderation through advice and opinions, as well as heated debate — and these moderators listened by adjusting their methods of moderation.

In light of the way the Delta forum has been moderated as of recently, it should be regarded as a prime textbook (web site?) example of how a forum should be moderated.

I would like to express my thanks and congratulations to Rssrsvp, obscure2k, gleff and bdschobel (in no particular order), the four moderators of the Delta forum, for an excellent job in moderating that forum. I have never been a moderator, so I am not sure as to the travails of that voluntary position. It must be a thankless job — but not at this moment. Thank you for listening, Delta forum moderators, and please keep up the good work.

This is my point, moderation is adjusted to the members of the DL forum. What a concept, have and use a reasonalbe TOS, moderators have the support (vote) of the members. If no one wants to run for moderator in a forum Randy can always appoint one from the various volunteers which have yet had an opportunity to serve. Annual elections insure that the moderation is supported by the members as they are electing the moderator(s) and there individual style and opinions as to how to use the TOS and moderation as a whole.

------------------
dallasflyer

I'm pretty sure there is one.

[This message has been edited by opus17 (edited 09-20-2003).]

Well, even if you don't know for a fact one way or the other, how would someone's post count factor into the revenue scheme? Speculate for me. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but I just really don't get how the two are connected. Those here who work on other IBB's can maybe shed some light?

More posts = higher posting traffic = higher viewer traffic = stronger position when selling advertising space.

Would FT be able to charge as much for a banner ad if it had only 200 members and 5000 posts total in comparison to thousands of members and two million posts?

FewMiles..

I own/operate/moderate several boards, some even larger than FT and to be honest I don't know of a correlation between post count and revenue stream.

Adviews/clicks=revenue. To get adviews you need visitors and someone with a lot of posts isn't always the one with the highest views. Lot's of POSTS in general from many members makes for a lot of views.

Not everyone with a high post count will get a lot of page views, and possibly it's quite the opposite, like here on FT I know one member with a LOT of posts but who's posts rarely attract attention as many just ignore them or skip the topic, if those topics are not read then they don't get an adview.

What will gather lots of views is issues like breaking airline news (program changes), games like the Word association thread etc... As much as many people hate omni I'm quite sure it's good for a very juicy percentage of Flyertalks traffic as it is the board with the most active posters. BUT, don't think that FT is a multimillion dollar ad business, even with Randy's traffic and 3000+ posts a day it's just enough to cover costs. IMHO it's not the active POSTER that generates the traffic, it's the active LURKER. The person that browses ALL the boards and threads will generate the most pageviews/adviews.

I would like to express my thanks and congratulations to Rssrsvp, obscure2k, gleff and bdschobel (in no particular order), the four moderators of the Delta forum, for an excellent job in moderating that forum. I have never been a moderator, so I am not sure as to the travails of that voluntary position. It must be a thankless job — but not at this moment. Thank you for listening, Delta forum moderators, and please keep up the good work.

Thanks, Canarsie for the kind words.

I agree, great job! The board has a few trolls who make your job twice as hard as it should be. A pat on the back for all of you!

One definition might be someone who posts deliberately provocative threads, usually with equally provocative thread headings, knowing full well that post will ensue in a riot on that board.

It is a presumably sad, attention seeking person, socially maladjusted, who would need to resort to this daily behaviour, but nonetheless, some such persons do exist on FT.

Often the poster has little or no actual or practical experience or patronage of the airline involved, which makes it even more common trolling. And elicits an even angrier response for that very reason.

Personally, I think the moderator's "business" and even reaction to moderator actions, should not be a public subject of FlyerTalk.

I believe FlyerTalk should be about travel and points, and not about "the business" of FlyerTalk.

Got a concern about moderator's actions? Email the moderator and/or Randy.

Wanna know the moderator "Guidelines?" That's nice, but is it really any of your business unless you are a Moderator?

Too many folks want to know too much about backstage stuff, IMHO. Like they want to moderate the Moderators or something! "See here. I got a copy of your guidelines and I don't think you're doing your job right!"

IMHO, these "business" issues should remain transparent to the general membership, and function in the background without becoming subjects of the public FlyerTalk bulletin board itself.

Email...or become one yourself. All, IMHO.

If I think a moderator has done something that might be out of line or wrong, I email the moderator. If I still don't agree after hearing back...then I'd push it to Randy.

I would never even consider making a public post about it. No matter how wrong I might think their actions were. That doesn't belong on FlyerTalk, IMHO.

[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 09-21-2003).]

Thanks Rssrsvp - pleased to see another moderator post that is their preferred option. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif

My view is that particular option is open and transparent, and I hope it becomes universal policy - if indeed it is not already.

The furtive total deletion of posts that I witnessed recently by one Moderator - for quite some days on one thread [which were not off-topic at all] was not best practice nor desirable. IMHO of course.

PremEx, I don't agree. There are other boards with which I'm familiar which operate this way, with moderation largely hidden from view/mysterious, and what I find happens is that the lack of discussion and openness can lead to charges that the moderators are being unfair/preferential/arrogant. And when one of the known guidelines is simply "don't piss off the moderator," you know you're somewhere where moderation is less than professional and arbitrary.

I don't think that's the kind of board we want here, though I suppose I could be in the minority.

Perhaps someone should create a manual called;
Moderation for Dummies http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

PremEx sez:
I am pleased to get feedback and respond to 99% of the emails to me as promptly as feasible, even the hate mail http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif.




[This message has been edited by Moderator2 (edited 09-21-2003).]

Ditto Moderator2.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif

Canarsie, very well said and I agree 100%! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif

------------------
Vasant

[Edited for UBB]

[This message has been edited by vasantn (edited 09-22-2003).]

Oz, would you be kind enough to provide the details of those deletions by private email?

---

Is it possible that other FT's may hold different views than yours?

Please recall:

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/001928.html

Just a thought! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

-Mark

I thought we were talking about stalking here. Or were we? What with the advancing Alzheimers I am getting more and more confused lately.

------------------
Continental Airlines and bankruptcy: The third time will be the charm!

Rssrsvp - gladly. I posted detail earlier in fact so no need to make it private email http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I noticed this thread below recently - which for about a week was not on topic at all, and I sadly think the Moderator did indeed fail in his job.

We have exchanged polite emails on that, which Randy was copied into (not my choice) so these comments of mine here simply echo those concerns raised:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum.../003985-2.html

It went on and on for 2 pages and 63 posts that we could see. The Moderator deleted in its entirely any post he did not "like" and made that clear more than once, so it may have really been 5 pages long.

I do not agree with posts being totally deleted. Unless of a totally obscene or really abusive nature etc. I saw one post making a very valid point that was deleted entirely in this thread. I still have a copy of that post as I retained it, anticipating its fate.

I think for transparency sake in any Forum the TEXT being objected to should be deleted, and the comment: "deleted by moderator because of ....." added in that place. It shows the original poster and time then. (i.e. Option "B" above)

Surely that might be one of the "consistency" things to be set by Talkboard as mentioned earlier by chexfan. To do otherwise is rather poor moderation IMO.

The thread referenced above was to me a clear example of where an Moderator should recuse himself publicly on thread due to a friendship with the thread starter.

Had that NOT been the case, the thread starter would surely have had his comments deleted by the other Moderators, as at least eight Flyertalkers called for it on the thread?