Future of "Moderators" and their role(s)?
 

Originally, after much discussion, we had three moderators appointed from among many applicants who were ultimately selected by Randy, with the expectation that their ranks would rapidly swell as other boards ushered moderators in. At least that was my understanding.

Cigarman ran, and was subsequently elected to the TB on a kinda' "platform" which included no moderators and he'd vigorously campaigned that he'd work to "...advocate the elimination..." of 'em.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum95/HTML/001374.html


Cigarman also then ran for TB President and was again successful here, as well, after again having commented steadfastly that he did "...not believe in moderators..."

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000017.html

---

Now

"I noted that among the most important first duties as President of TalkBoard, cigarman promptly assigned Vice President Mike (chexfan) the roll of research and implementation of new 'Moderators' on FlyerTalk. This immediate action by the Board is expected to bring about a more even application of posting procedures and policing of member TOS violations."

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000038.html

So... Is the elimination of moderators now "off the table", so to speak?

What is their future role and is it assured?

FWIW, as you probably well know, I actually favor them, since I feel that we have not all been able to effectively moderate ourselves! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif


And in an only very faintly connected issue, you also ran favoring the concept that satellite forums (FT Travel etc) break apart the community, rather than enhance it. And you said that you would encourage them to be added to the main (FT Miles) board.

Is this "issue" also now, in contrast to the early statements made, a "dead" one?

Just asking since Moderators will clearly be compelled to play a critical role, it would seem, in keeping things "orderly" on the various boards! Thanks! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

BTW, if the "Quiet Period" is finally over, then it would be truly great to hear from ya' all!

If not, I'll try to continue being patient!

Thanks again! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Should the TalkBoard members aggressively push their viewpoints, or should they solicit input from the community? Or maybe a mix of both?

My own interpretation (which may be completely bogus) was that Randy wanted to hear personal viewpoints of those he nominated, and the community viewpoint from the elected members.

[This message has been edited by PG (edited 03-06-2002).]

Perhaps we should be "lobbying" our elected and appointed officials to bring matters of personal interest and importance before the TB, just as we might write our Congresspeople here in the US! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Great post Doc. I'm glad someone actually read and wants to discuss SUBSTANCE. Yes, it is true I personally do not favor moderators. However, as you know, MANY times Randy has said they are coming. Since it's Randy's board, I have two choices. Play ball or complain and get in the way. I choose to play ball and do as Randy asks. Just as with segmented forums. I say my piece, when its clear I won't win, I do my best to achieve the will of the majority. Thanks for asking.

It may be a surprise to you that a lot more of us want to discuss SUBSTANCE. So fire away at things that you consider are substantive, and we'd be happy to give our opinion on where we'd like our elected reps to lead us.

I'm hoping the Talk Board will do its best to act on this issue. A strongly moderated board is a necessity as FlyerTalk continues to grow. Nothing is more off-putting than a growing legion of "trolls" feeding fires about non-issues unrelated to miles & points. Our new resident "troll" on the Continental board posts at a steady clip of over 200/month.

Will related measures be put in place to help guard against multiple posting identities?

Aha, another issue of SUBSTANCE. That is a really good question for cigarman to answer.

Or even a good question to me. I'm surprised to hear of this troll in the CO forum. I have yet to hear any complaint against them by email. I'd say that the substanance of all this is better communication. For instance, MatthewClements contacted me about two weeks ago about a multi-handle suspect. Within the day, i closed off their accounts from psoting, issued a desist warning to the person and have yet to turn any of their posting privileges back on since they have elected not to respsond to my email request for an explanation. That action would never had taken place if any member had not provided me with a complaint. And they work better when it's not a public complaint. Two weeks before that another member and three associated IP addresses were closed for similar infractions, again because a member privately emailed me some suspicions. I don't want this to be Big Brother, but communicating our "Neighborhood Watch" program is something that works. But again, without the support of the members, we simply can not be everywhere all the time.

And as long as we're on the subject of Trolls and substance, will the issue of cross-posting be as firmly dealt with as the others?

It is clearly against the listed Terms of Service to post the exact same content in multiple threads or multiple forums. Flyertalk's TOS even refers to that as "spamming" and says "we won't allow that".

If information about these infractions are privately e-mailed, will action to stop and remove them be taken?

That is another interesting question, and there has been some related debate about it.

First of all, sometimes a post may rightly belong in multiple forums. For example, if Radissson has a promotion for 10,000 United miles for 3 stays, should that be posted under Radisson or under United or under both? My own inclination (given the wording in the "Guidelines & Rules") would be to post under one of the two forums, and then provide a link to this thread in the other forum. I do not believe that this violates the guidelines and rules. Subsequently this may be discussed in both forums and there may be some duplication among the discusion.

Another interpretation that seems to hold some support among some members is that any "juicy" promotion should also be mentioned under MilesBuzz. Infact many of the multi-page threads under MilesBuzz are also discussed elsewhere. Is this a violation of the Guidelines and Rules? While Randy is the ultimate authority on the answer to this question, I'd be inclined to say that this does not violate the guidelines and rules. But, if I were to post under MilesBuzz in this situation I would post a link in MilesBuzz to the main discussion in the other forum.

As an example the NW 10K promotion was widely discussed under the NW forum last year. Later on, someone posted this under MilesBuzz also, and a lot of FTers felt that it was very useful to be posted under MilesBuzz.

I feel that this is one area which could be further clarified in the "Guideline & Rules" section.

I agree that a hotel/airline promotion or event should be listed in the hotel/airline forum, and then perhaps a link like:

in either Buzz or Community (where applicable) is appropriate.

That is not the spamming that I am referring to.

I am specifically referencing when huge, half or full screen posts are cut and pasted in multiple threads and multiple forums. Or, when links like the one I sampled above are listed in 4,5 6 or more threads in a single forum. Or, when someone uses the "reply with quote" feature to essentially and exactly copy and repost a second time a very large post, to simply add a few words (like the old AOL "me-too" syndrome).

These are spamming and crossposting in the classic sense, and my question about it remains:

If information about these infractions is privately e-mailed, will action to stop and remove them be taken, and will repeated infractions be addressed with those doing it?



[This message has been edited by NJDavid (edited 03-07-2002).]

I can think of at least two very prominent FTers who have done this. Any guess on who they are?

I am not singling out anyone in particular, nor am I interested in accepting any flame bait today, thank you. Clearly, the "relevance" of any past transgressions on Flyertalk is moot, as there is enough mud to sling to go around for everyone.

This is a legitimate question, on topic in a legitimate forum that deserves an answer.

[This message has been edited by NJDavid (edited 03-07-2002).]

---

Prominent? Flyertalker? Two? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

I know only one "prominent" FT'er, and that would of course be Randy, and he surely seems to be "innocent" enough to me! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

FWIW, IMHO, "Moderators" should be moderate in their approach and actions(s) and substantively focus on the reason they were instituted in the first place - to protect FT'ers from "flaming" personal attacks that threaten the very existance of FT itself.

By analogy, should a police officer delay answering a homicide or rape call in order to properly issue summons' to half a dozen folks who neglected to wear their seat belts? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I don't think so - and I do wear mine, BTW! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

As has been stated so very often, by so VERY many in the past, simply SKIP posts that you do not like! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

it is inappropriate to be asked to "skip the posts I do not like", when they are clearly violations of Flyertalk's charter.

It is even more inappropriate to be asked to just skip someone else's TOS violations when being asked not to violate them myself.

It is still more inappropriate to infer ones own violations are minor, but others' are major.

So again, I ask the question, with full confidence that Randy will provide an answer:

It is clearly against the listed Terms of Service to post the exact same content in multiple threads or multiple forums. Flyertalk's TOS even refers to that as "spamming" and says "we won't allow that".

If information about these infractions are privately e-mailed, will action to stop and remove them be taken?

Seems to be some valuable input coming our way and i don't want to lose it. What will help us is staying to the topic. I'm not looking at anything but public comments on the topic.

[This message has been edited by Randy Petersen (edited 03-08-2002).]

Now how long has the TalkBoard been in place?? And how many times have I or the other moderators been contacted by the TB or included in their discussion?? ZERO

Great to see you Burkey! You've been seen far too little around here lately!!

But I'm a little confused by your post. I remember that when I was still with TB, I had asked Punki to head a fact-finding and opinion-gathering mission from the existing moderators for their input so that TB would have some idea of what the critical issues were from their perspective. I think if you check your email files around November/December, you should find some of those email exchanges.

If I recall correctly, you were most interested that moderators not be put into the position of enforcing policies that were drafted without their input. And I think that's valid. But I don't think that is happening.. though I can only speculate about priorities since my departure from TB, it's obvious that much has been unsettled there since the shift of participating members. It would seem they are now trying to quickly get some momentum and generate some output.

If I correctly read Randy's recent announcement posted here, Cigarman has given Chexfan the ball to re-address this priority. I can't imagine that effort would fail to include participation from the existing moderators...

I don't think we can over-emphasize the difficult situation you, Craig, and Samantha have been placed in. Nor can we adequately thank you for hanging in there during the "recent unpleasantness". I personally hope you all can endure the frustration long enough for TB to enhance your efforts.. and I hope TB makes it an urgent priority to do so.

I hope your residency is going well - it's great to see a post from you!

I think it would be a problem if Mr. Petersen and FlyerTalk recruited moderators who were to enforce (or guide adherence to) one set of rules, and then later the rules were made more stringent or difficult to enforce after the moderators agreed to take on the job. But anyone can read the current TOS and decide whether s/he is willing to abide by and enforce those rules, without having had input into what those rules are.

I think that one root of the "recent unpleasantness" was that as the level of moderation decreased, people "started fires" faster than the moderators and Mr. Petersen's staff could put them out. It's like William Brattain's (?) theory of policing: if graffiti are left unpainted-over, and broken windows aren't replaced, then people become more willing to deface walls and break windows. A little anarchy breeds more anarchy. Flames beget flames. So if FT should have effective moderation over most of the boards, flame wars won't start.

Valid points LawLord, and if it were as easy as it sounds to moderate all posts to be TOS-consistent, then I would completely agree. However, my experience is that it can be much less objective than one might think. Taking input from our beta group of moderators (so to speak) as to specific guidelines, interpretations, approaches, policies, etc. seems to be common sensical to me.. at least at this point in the development of the concept.

I also think part of the 'recent unpleasantness' was that a great deal of it occured on unmoderated forums. We certainly need, at the very least, MORE moderators to prevent things reaching that level of disruption.

svpii, I strongly agree with you that if FT has more moderators, it will have fewer flame wars, and those that start will be stopped quickly. (And a good thing, too.)

No two moderators are going to react exactly the same way to every problem, but as long as each moderator maintains a consistent approach, and the moderators overall have similar approaches, it won't matter that they aren't identical. Consider baseball: it's okay for different umpires to have different ideas about where the strike zone is, as long as the different ideas are similar and each umpire is consistent about calling balls and strikes within a particular game.

I certainly don't disagree with anything you said. My only possible point of departure in your earlier post was that it would be useful to gain the insight from these first group of moderators to formulate formal policies, etc as it may relate to administering the moderation..

Burkey, I don't think your post is as fair as it could be. First, we really have only settled the who is president issue last week. Second, it is a two way street. Would it not be fair to say, "how many times have you contacted US, with ideas..." Same answer ZERO. Now, rather than starting a finger pointing contest, I would be happy to present any of your ideas to the Talkboard. Email them to me and I will post the email in the Talkboard forum. Fair offer?

svpii, I agree with you on that also - we and FT may as well learn from the current experience with moderating - what works and what doesn't.

And the current experience suggests that the best answer is to clone Craig6z.

OTOH if a number of moderators have different styles, over time the results and feedback are going to result in the moderators gravitating toward a fairly coherent style, with those that can't do so, retiring from the post.

------------------
"Yes, but at least mine will be found in a first class seat." -- Peattie and Taylor

Any new thoughts on this, by chance, in view of this current thread?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000067.html

Doc, this is getting annoying, please don't see this as a flame (unlike what a different member is doing at the moment) but what makes you think we don't see the other thread? It's way up on top in the list of active threads so I doubt anyone will need another link to it.

The thread in question has had enough people posting their opinions without needing to bump yet another thread about it...

Besides that, I doubt this is an issuse to put forward to the Talkboard, whether or not FT needs Moderators is afaik not something we need to discuss any more.

Just my 2 cents, imho etc...etc... and adding a smilie to let everyone know I am not angry http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Scott:

Please forgive me. I saw it a bit differently - naturally! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Had this issue been addressed before, perhaps
we would not have the current "problem"?

And, perhpas wrongfully, I thought that the TB was the proper place to go with this question, particularly since we no longer have an "Only Randy" forum.

Are we going to have more moderators?

Are we going to have more published guidelines?

Just curious! Thanks! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

-Mark

Apology Accepted Mark (of course http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif)

Here are some of Randy's quotes from his recent chat on FTlive:

A million miles!!!

That got my attention for sure!

Please keep me posted!

And thanks! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Doc,

You assumed correctly... TB is the place for the discussion...

You never know what we talk about... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

OH WAIT... some people seem to have a way.

William

Randy needs to request to someone he can post in CC? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

------------------
~ Glen ~

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000069.html

---

Hurrah! And thanks! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

doc, is there really any need to quote Randy's post here, when we can all read it for ourselves in the other thread (which is moreover in the same forum as this thread)?

IMHO, it is completely unnecessary and adds nothing to the discussion in this thread, which effectively ended several weeks ago. Even doctors recognise that sometimes letting the patient go is the right thing to do. How about a DNR on old threads, please?

FewMiles..

------------------
[ FlyerTalkers' Resources on the Web ]
[ Unofficial Guide to AAdvantage ] [ Unofficial oneworld Info Desk ]

Please excuse me! As you so well know, I'm "illiterate!" http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Second time around http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

As posted above:

"I noted that among the most important first duties as President of TalkBoard, cigarman promptly assigned Vice President Mike (chexfan) the roll of research and implementation of new 'Moderators' on FlyerTalk. This immediate action by the Board is expected to bring about a more even application of posting procedures and policing of member TOS violations."

--

So what gives, if anything, chexy? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Anything new at all? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Anybody? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Thanks! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I would hope that the moderators will enforce ALL aspects of the TOS. Including that oft ingnored paragraph about off-topic posts and topics.

---

Yep, we both seem to be in agreement, as I concur most heartily! For example, we surely need to stop "stuff" like this:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum.../002044-2.html

Hopefully we can all learn from our past mistakes! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

What do ya' think should be done when someone simply pops in, seemingly only to throw gas on a fire, just as it seems to be subsiding?

Any suggestions? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif Anyone! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

That is IMO a rather toxic thread Doc, I agree, and have said so elsewhere.

And I am not referring to any comments by you OR Camera Guy in it either. One rather preditable participant primarily derailed it IMO. And if TB or Chex or Cigarman etc ever do suggest threads to close, that would be one candidate. And reflect WHY it was closed.

------------------
~ Glen ~