Question 4: Purview Over Policies of Moderation

 

Old Nov 12, 07, 11:22 am
  #61  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN CP & A-list preferred, Interstate BBQ at MEM B17, Hotwire, Priceline, tent
Posts: 19,312
Punki, it's clear that your view of the Terms of Service differs from the view of moderators, who typically confer with each other on suspensions. How could we correct this problem? By making the Terms of Service more explicit, precisely what I propose in my platform!

Another idea, and one that would likely fall outside TalkBoard authority, would be to let the software trigger a reviewable posting speed limit or short-term timeout if an unusually high percentage of a member's posts are deleted. A small number of members is responsible for a large percentage of moderators' workload, including deletions.

My point is that if you're looking for a workable solution to this problem and if you're willing to compromise, there is probably a solution to be found.

If the price of perfect justice for every FT member who skirts the edge of the Terms of Service is forum pollution that drives away hundreds of valuable members who never get anywhere near the line, that price is too high IMHO.

I have a constructive plan for specific action: clarifying the TOS. Nobody else running has a plan that has any chance of resolving your concern.

Last edited by nsx; Nov 12, 07 at 11:24 am Reason: quotes of deleted post removed
nsx is offline  
Old Nov 12, 07, 11:48 am
  #62  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,688
Hey, nsx, you have already sold me. I think your ideas are sound and would go a long way to creating greater equity on FT.

This whole debate has been a fascinating and edifying experience. Thanks for the fish.

It will be interesting to see what the general FT public decides by way of their votes.
Punki is offline  
Old Nov 12, 07, 4:08 pm
  #63  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Commuting around the mid-atlantic and rust-belt on any number of RJs
Programs: TSA Random Selectee Platinum, * Gold, SPG/HH/MR mid-tier, and a tiny bag of pretzels.
Posts: 9,255
Originally Posted by nsx View Post
I have a constructive plan for specific action: clarifying the TOS. Nobody else running has a plan that has any chance of resolving your concern.
Not true. I plan on letting Randy continue address that specific concern To wit:

Originally Posted by Randy Petersen View Post
As for the specific things you mention? Well, unlike all other travel communities like FlyerTalk that have sprung up, isn't it pretty cool that we actually have that type of plan already built in other than suspensions and bans and if you want to compare, i don't believe most other travel communities even have an appeals process. If that is your concern, i think over the next 3.5 years that will be resolved to your satisfaction. It might relieve you to know that we have as an advisor for this issue, a recently retired appeals judge with 18 years of experience in such matters and he is graciously donating his experience and time to further our efforts in this area.
I'll let Randy run down this road, and if he asks for input, give it. I'm not going to assume (as some have) that there actually is a problem (I don't believe there is) and that Randy wants or needs unsolicited help in solving it (checking out the entire post in the link above will prove what I have been saying--he's got it well in hand, and this business of his demise is highly overblown strictly for a political platform grab). If he asks the TB to give it a once over, so be it--but until that time we should allow the guy who built the house to do his thing.
ClueByFour is offline  
Old Nov 12, 07, 4:13 pm
  #64  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN CP & A-list preferred, Interstate BBQ at MEM B17, Hotwire, Priceline, tent
Posts: 19,312
That sounds like a revision of the appeals process. I'm talking about making the rules themselves (TOS) more explicit, so that posters and moderators are less likely to disagree on whether or not a rule was broken. The goal is to head off the dispute before it even occurs, not to deal with it way after the fact with the appeals process.
nsx is offline  
Old Nov 12, 07, 4:17 pm
  #65  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Commuting around the mid-atlantic and rust-belt on any number of RJs
Programs: TSA Random Selectee Platinum, * Gold, SPG/HH/MR mid-tier, and a tiny bag of pretzels.
Posts: 9,255
You know, I asked this in another thread and did not get an answer, so I'll try again in this thread, as it seems to be more apropos:

Originally Posted by Punki View Post
I guess I just don't see how the TalkBoard has anything to say about what folks post in any forum.
Originally Posted by Punki View Post
What I specifically don't understand is why TalkBoard, rather than the moderators and Randy, would be involved in making forum content decisions.
So, I ask: how are we to take those quotes in light of what has been said in this thread?
ClueByFour is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread