Arbitrary moderation?

[idpromnut]

@Dave, Simon & Geoffs:

Being an administrator of a gaming group, I know the feeling. As always, the "correct" course of action is to do what you feel is the correct thing or close up shop and doing something different. Please don't close up shop just yet 

[GEuser]

If you ever need a moderator named the "Mechanic" pm me ..I'll fix em ..

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068931/

[nctnico]

I'm sorry for posting the airline thread. At the time I had no idea what had happened to make Iit crash. I was thinking that it could have been carrying li-ion cells or something.  I was interested in if it would give a clue as to

Don't be sorry. A good forum has room for offtopic threads as well otherwise  forum could 'die'. Maybe that thread would have gone into 'how to make your own anti-guided missile system'.

[ajb]

One thing that will help with the current structure is to give sincere explanations when closing a thread. Just stating 'non electronic content' where there are many other non electronic threads that are left intact looks disingenuous and arbitrary.

FWIW, this would be the only complaint I'd make about moderation here.  Ultimately, this is Dave's forum, so it's his prerogative to set the rules and none of us are owed any sort of explanation or even input.  But at the same time, transparency of the rules and criteria for locking/deletion fosters understanding, good will, and ultimately better compliance. 

As an example, I really like the way Ars Technica handles their forums.  They have a huge and diverse community with heavily trafficked off topic sections (even one dedicated to politics!).  Any moderation actions--even just reminders to get a thread back on-topic--are accompanied by an explanation in a clearly delineated "Official Moderation" notice, which helps to clearly indicate when moderators are acting in their official capacity or simply as individuals.  Pretty much the only thing that's ever deleted is outright spam (in fact it's against the rules to delete one's own post after there's been another reply to the thread), and on the rare occasion when a post is edited by a moderator the action is clearly noted with an official notice.  Threads that get out of hand are locked, with an explanation left by a moderator.  Individuals that misbehave are given a limited number of in-thread official warnings, followed by a temporary ban, and ultimately a permaban if they fail to shape up.  All in all it leads to a pretty good system, I think.  Maybe not suitable for every forum, but it definitely works there.

[SeanB]

Moderation here is fine. I have seen some where the topic got very off track ( and I saved it, and it was Australian, and I gave half of it the next day to the banned member when he was sober, not good posting when plastered) and caused a lot of friction.

There is a fine line between being too strict and not strict enough, and here it seems to be around the right level. When I ran a mailing list ( and had to approve all posts with the amount of canned mystery meat that came in) I was given both ways all the time. Kind of Sux but hey, you get a thick skin and can tell them to go sit on something and rotate, and as I knew most I could do so in person as well. Some you couldn't tell direct to their faces and expect to walk away with teeth, so there was sometimes diplomacy involved.

As to Rolandpen, there was nothing wrong with him that a few more years out in the real world, a lot of Ritalin and a straitjacket could not cure.

[zapta]

.  Ultimately, this is Dave's forum, so it's his prerogative to set the rules and none of us are owed any sort of explanation or even input.

I think that this is cleared to all. Nobody questions the legality of the moderation here. This thread is about it seemingly being arbitrary, non transparent and hard to predict.

BTW, I agree with your entire post.

[tautech]

As previously explained, a moderator doesn't have the luxury of ignoring forums, posts or users.

Well, you have certainly made that assertion before, but I don't recall you actually "explaining" the reason why EVERYTHING that happens on the board has to be monitored/moderated. If no other user flags a post for moderation, why get involved?

Why not just set up a 'sandbox' where the people here who know each other to some extent, can waffle on about anything? If we do not complain to a mod about any posts, then why not leave us be?

Surely the bandwidth isn't an issue? Maybe its a power thing?

Maybe, mods don't seem to muck around if there is something they think needs doing.
Received a PM from one recently, all very polite, conformed with his wishes, replied with a request.....reply?
No they are above us all it seems.
So we have to have a thread like this to air our dirty laundry.
Messy IMO
OP +1

Well, it's nice to see the Mod's watching this thread very closely and as a result they have put my little issue to bed.
He apologized for the oversight. 

Proves they are human. 

[johansen]

Proves the are human. 

yes, but cowards.

fess up, who deleted my comment.

[SirNick]

That was me.  I spilled some coffee on it, then tried to wipe it off, but that only made it worse.  So I deleted it hoping nobody would notice.  Sorry about that.

[johansen]

That was me.  I spilled some coffee on it, then tried to wipe it off, but that only made it worse.  So I deleted it hoping nobody would notice.  Sorry about that.

thanks, i needed the laugh.

[zapta]

It's not you. Many other non electronics thread are left intact, for example the Buzz Aldrin thread which evolved into what is art, when violence is justified and astronauts pay scale (and was a fine thread IMO).

Evolution is what makes these threads interesting, otherwise they go stale very quickly. What say you GeoffS? Why wasn't it closed?

Looks like this question will stay answered. Hopefully Management internalized some of the feedback and will be more transparent and consistent.

[electronics man]

i have noticed when dave contributes to an ot thread it doesn't get locked, but when he doesn't it does get locked, maybe we should implement a rule that says threads that directly point out that they are ot are less likely to get locked, like the mh17 thread shouldn't have got locked it wasn't like every one was getting angry, i think that was a step too far for mods, plus threads should only be locked at users request (within reason)

[deth502]

i heard its all a money making scheme.

the mods keep locking threads for a reason.

they are trying to get loc-tite as a forum sponsor.

[miguelvp]

i heard its all a money making scheme.

the mods keep locking threads for a reason.

they are trying to get loc-tite as a forum sponsor.

Makes sense, after all they own multicore solder and they are going to try to push that onto us.

[vk6zgo]

Of course,you don't only get "aggro" on non-Electronic threads.

If you dare to say analog Oscilloscopes are better than DSOs at some things,(or vice versa),the "true believers" will come out on both sides.
Both us "Greybeards" & the "Thoroughly modern Millies" are stuck in our positions like quicksand!

[zapta]

i have noticed when dave contributes to an ot thread it doesn't get locked, but when he doesn't it does get locked,

That's a kin observation. The Russian thread has a Dave post in it so it keeps going discussing how trust worthy are Russian vs. Ukraine women. Of course now they will close it to show that your rule is wrong

[Prime73]

That's a kin observation. The Russian thread has a Dave post in it so it keeps going discussing how trust worthy are Russian vs. Ukraine women. Of course now they will close it to show that your rule is wrong

But that thread just started to get interesting

[johansen]

I, like I imagine Dave and many others can feel a certain "vibe" about when a thread will attract the utterly self indungent minority who just want to repeat  their own religiously held opinions ad nauseum. THAT's when the threads get shut down. When they just become a waste of threadspace in the forum. All heat and no light.

no, threads get locked down whenever a few open minds challenge the religiously held opinions of the masses.

[zapta]

no, threads get locked down whenever a few open minds challenge the religiously held opinions of the masses.

In several occasions the past Dave closed or deleted posts that contradicted his personal believes, be it on religion, global warming, guns, subsidies and things like that. Haven't noticed it this bias recently so it got better in this respect.

[GeoffS]

no, threads get locked down whenever a few open minds challenge the religiously held opinions of the masses.

In several occasions the past Dave closed or deleted posts that contradicted his personal believes, be it on religion, global warming, guns, subsidies and things like that. Haven't noticed it this bias recently so it got better in this respect.

I don't see the problem with closing threads  on global warming, religion, guns, etc. After all, this is an electronics forum.

[PedroDaGr8]

Personally, I am fully OK with Dave being biased if he wishes on non-electronic topics. His forum is not a politics forum, a funny forum, a conspiracy theory forum, etc. If he wants to cull these threads when they get out of hand so be it. I don't always agree at the point in which he closes threads (often i'd kill them sooner ) but I like that its not an outright ban. It allows the flow of the forum to be more natural not so prison like.

[EEVblog]

Agreed, and "went off topic" or "someone mentioned religion" is arbitrary. Ban those things outright if you like, but don't use them as arbitrary reasons based on the moderator's own opinion. Rules let everyone know where they stand, and keep the moderators from making these kinds of arbitrary decisions without any oversight.

The problem with such rules is that they don't allow any flexibility.
OK, I could have a rule that says "no mention of religion".
So what if someone throws in a religious joke at the end a technical post or something, and it leads to no further discussion.
Is that user supposed to get banned? get a warning?
Should the post be edited or deleted to remove the reference?

What I'm getting at is that rigid rules don't totally work in practice. A workable forum must include some form of moderator discretion in order to work and not make it appear that forum is not overly policed, which IMO is worse than it appearing "arbitrary".

[EEVblog]

It's not you. Many other non electronics thread are left intact, for example the Buzz Aldrin thread which evolved into what is art, when violence is justified and astronauts pay scale (and was a fine thread IMO).

Evolution is what makes these threads interesting, otherwise they go stale very quickly. What say you GeoffS? Why wasn't it closed?

It wasn't closed because there is no history of Buzz Aldrin/NASA history talk leading to a 50 page thread filled with extremely opinionated posters.
But a thread on airline crashes does have a history of such a thing.
There is a big difference.

[EEVblog]

Don't be sorry. A good forum has room for offtopic threads as well otherwise  forum could 'die'. Maybe that thread would have gone into 'how to make your own anti-guided missile system'.

Well if someone had quickly posted that took it in a technical direction, how guided missles worked, or whatever, and people started talking about that, then the thread wouldn't have been closed.
This forum is what you make it.

[EEVblog]

It's a two way street. It's Dave's forum, of course, but it's also worthless without lots of good contributors so it's in his interest not to piss them off.

I'm not.
Look at the numbers I posted before, there is in practice very little moderation on this forum, bordering on bugger-all.
Some people like to complain and start a big thread like this in the rare case when it happens in way they don't approve of, but they forgot the countless times the forum works just fine with what is ultimately very little moderation.