Arbitrary moderation?

[EEVblog]

I believe that Dave got the picture and will incorporate the feedback in the periodic sensitivity and diversity training of his moderators.

I assume that was a joke?
If not, then, no, nothing will be changing.

[EEVblog]

I am still out of here because I refuse to speak on a platform where moderators get to choose retrospectively what I did or did not say. A point I made in my last deleted post in this thread.
I am effectively banning myself because the moderators don't have the bottle to do the right thing and ban me if what I said was really so objectionable.  My last post till moderation policy changes. It will be interesting to see if I still posted it tomorrow.

I went and checked on just what you had said that got deleted.
And for the record, you have not had a single post deleted from this thread.

Fortunately I have the option of buying 100% renewable energy where I live.

No you don't - idiot.

You are surprised that post got deleted?
It's against the one major rule on this forum - no personal attacks. And it's provides no other information, explanation, or adds any value at all.
And do you really think we should ban you instantly, someone who has made 1800+ posts, and a valued contributor to the forum, because you said that? Really?

[GEuser]

I am still out of here because I refuse to speak on a platform where moderators get to choose retrospectively what I did or did not say. A point I made in my last deleted post in this thread.
I am effectively banning myself because the moderators don't have the bottle to do the right thing and ban me if what I said was really so objectionable.  My last post till moderation policy changes. It will be interesting to see if I still posted it tomorrow.

Sorry to hear you are going Rufus, this is the first I have heard of it, and you certainly didn't raise it with me.
That being said, I do not agree with your view that it's either a free-for-all (you didn't say that, but that's effectively what the alternative is), or people get instantly banned for making one post that would otherwise have just been deleted and everything is right again.
The only wost possible moderation technique in my view would be to approve every comment.
Good moderation requires more than black and white rules, and instantly banning an otherwise good contributor because they might be having a bad day and say something shouldn't have once in a thousand posts, is one of the silliest ideas I've heard.
The only result of that would be either the said free-for-all (because you'd be afraid to use such a blanket rule), or an empty failed forum if you apply it eqally to everyone in every situation. Heck, I'd have to ban myself!
It has been demonstrably shown time and time again on this forum that the current system works, and works very well.
The moderation on this forum will not be changing, it has worked just fine for 5 years now, and I see no advantage in changing it.
Of course you are free to not agree, and also free to leave to leave if you so chose. And if that's the case thanks for your participation, I hope you got something of value out of it.

You stick too it Dave  , not only do you preside over a good forum but the mods also preside and do a real good job (and yes I have had comments removed and rightly so imo , its not geoffs fault he is the way he is and its not simons fault he is of English nationality either , they just cant help it  )

[GEuser]

And I would still like a Banana Button in the forum software ...>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's a red round button , not a banana , now if one can link a Banana button to something like this , but not here as its getting off topic and its my fault too ...

[Rufus]

I went and checked on just what you had said that got deleted.
And for the record, you have not had a single post deleted from this thread.

Yes I have and a response from mojo-chan was deleted. It was what prompted his subsequent claim of not "caring about political correctness and all that rubbish".

Fortunately I have the option of buying 100% renewable energy where I live.

No you don't - idiot.

You are surprised that post got deleted?
It's against the one major rule on this forum - no personal attacks. And it's provides no other information, explanation, or adds any value at all.

If it didn't need to be said I would not have said it. Mojo-chan first made that claim in another thread where it was debated. He obviously didn't accept the argument and repeated the claim. A claim which I find far more insulting than being called an idiot. I could not let the claim pass but saw little point in repeating the debate, you can't win an argument with mojo-chan because he is an .... well you know what I think. Others can decide for themselves which would be easier if some of his posts were not deleted.

He lives in the UK where I live. In the UK the majority of electricity from renewable sources is generated because the government mandates it (look up Renewable Obligation Certificates). All electricity consumers pay the substantial extra cost of this 'green' electricity. Mojo-chan claims paying one of the many small 'eco' energy suppliers a trivial 1 or 2% premium means he is buying 100% green electrons. A ridiculous claim, he gets the same mix of electrons as anyone else on the grid. Even if you accept that notionally green and brown electrons are routed separately on the grid the only way he can get 100% green ones is by stealing them from other people that are paying for them (me) and making them take more brown ones.

So Mojo-chan uses green electrons stolen from me to claim he is much greener and ecologically sound than I am - calling me an idiot would be much less insulting.

Anyhow while this has blown up around mojo-chan I didn't complain about him I complained about deleting posts. Moderators exercising their power to make people un-say things, the lack of visibility when it happens and forum contributors being unable to judge moderator actions because un-said things can't be seen.

IMO posts should not be deleted unless they are bad enough to justify banning the poster. If you don't like 'one strike you are out' then use a warning/infraction scheme. It looks like SMF has one built in.

[EEVblog]

Yes I have and a response from mojo-chan was deleted.

I do not see it in the deleted posts section of the forum where all deleted posts automatically go.

If it didn't need to be said I would not have said it.

You broke the rules, your post got deleted based on moderator discretion who happened to read it.
This will not be debated any further, it ends here. That goes for you, Mojo-chan, and anyone else who wants to debate who was right and wrong or why a comments was justified etc.

IMO posts should not be deleted unless they are bad enough to justify banning the poster. If you don't like 'one strike you are out' then use a warning/infraction scheme. It looks like SMF has one built in.

We do give warnings, and users can be put on a watch list. Warnings are still a method we chose to use at times.

Let's say an otherwise excellent contributor with thousand of great posts, can't help themselves venting once of twice in a thousand posts.
Which is better:

- (how it currently works) Simply deleting the offending post so that no one has to read that crap. (They almost always contain no useful information, or a post is edited to remove the personal attack or whatever but leave the useful stuff). The forum continues to run smooth as silk, newbies don't get to see the vitriol, and hence don't think either the forum is crap because of that, or it's ok to write that stuff. And regulars get a hint that if you step out of line too far, your post could be removed. Serial offenders get banned as per usual, usually after a warning or two.

- Three strikes and you are banned, no questions asked, no taking into account your standing or contribution, all for the occasional small outburst many can't help.

- Ban the user immediately

Door #1 is what I chose, and it's proven to work well for 5 years now, I have no plans to change it.

[TheBorg]

I feel that temporary bans work well in these kinds of situations. E.g two people get in a heated debate that spills into the forum. Both are temporarily banned, given warnings, and potentially their offending posts are edited by a mod to include the notice that the user was put in "Time-out".

I definitely do not agree with the idea that peoples posts should be removed. To me that seems arbitrary and a wanton use of power from the mods. People shouldn't have to come back here be afraid that their post will be deleted.

On another forum I frequent, offenders are put in a temporary ban for a while, then released back to the forum. Repeat offenders get longer time out times, and the real trolls get banned altogether.
With threads, the posts always stay. Forever. For everyone to see. But if the discussion gets heated, the thread is locked. Pending moderators discretion, the thread is either unlocked, or closed forevermore.

It encourages people to stay on fairly good behavior because not many people want to be the guy that kills the thread. And those who consistently break the rules are banned.

I know this is Dave's forum, and I have no power to change it, but it's just a thought.  Carry on...

[IanB]

I think the deletion question is not complicated. Spam posts get deleted completely, as if they were never there. Posts from regular forum users do not get deleted outright, but the offending content is removed and replaced with a moderator message: "content deleted because it broke the rules" kind of thing.

On another forum, I have occasionally got a PM from a friendly moderator saying, "please consider editing your post, because if you leave it there it is going to get moderated". That gives a chance to fix things up before other moderators come along and do their thing.

[EEVblog]

I feel that temporary bans work well in these kinds of situations.

That's exactly what Mojo-chan was given, as have others.

I definitely do not agree with the idea that peoples posts should be removed. To me that seems arbitrary and a wanton use of power from the mods. People shouldn't have to come back here be afraid that their post will be deleted.

It won't be if you stay on-topic and don't personally attack anyone.
Those things have no place on this forum, and you risk them being deleted.
Don't post crap and it will never risk being deleted.

On another forum I frequent, offenders are put in a temporary ban for a while, then released back to the forum. Repeat offenders get longer time out times, and the real trolls get banned altogether.

That is exactly how this forum works now. Temporary banning is an option that can and does get used.

With threads, the posts always stay. Forever. For everyone to see. But if the discussion gets heated, the thread is locked. Pending moderators discretion, the thread is either unlocked, or closed forevermore.

As stated, there are disadvantages to leaving vitriolic or personal attack etc posts on the forum.
What value do they add? The only think I can think of is so that someone has a record of whether of not someone "deserved it"? Want an example of that,  look no further than Rufus's post above.
No thanks, I do not want that game played on this forum.

You'll notice that we do let a lot of stuff slide, but ultimately the moderators reserve the right to edit or remove posts that contain personal attacks or other vitriolic or grossly off-topic stuff that are against the forum rules.

[EEVblog]

I think the deletion question is not complicated. Spam posts get deleted completely, as if they were never there. Posts from regular forum users do not get deleted outright, but the offending content is removed and replaced with a moderator message: "content deleted because it broke the rules" kind of thing.

That is how the forum currently works. If the post contains no value except for the personal attack then it will just get deleted, because there is nothing of value left to keep.
I've added a module that now gives the moderators the easy option of automatically replacing the deleted message with a note if they think that is the best option.
Once again, having the forum filled with "post deleted by moderator" messages does nothing to encourage new people to join.

Once again, people forgot that this is one of the most popular and biggest electronics forums out there, and has been working great for 5 years now with very few complaints about how it is run.
I am not going to suddenly jump and change direction because a couple of people who have posted questionable stuff are having a whinge.

Carry on.

[vk6zgo]

I went and checked on just what you had said that got deleted.
And for the record, you have not had a single post deleted from this thread.

Yes I have and a response from mojo-chan was deleted. It was what prompted his subsequent claim of not "caring about political correctness and all that rubbish".

Fortunately I have the option of buying 100% renewable energy where I live.

No you don't - idiot.

You are surprised that post got deleted?
It's against the one major rule on this forum - no personal attacks. And it's provides no other information, explanation, or adds any value at all.

If it didn't need to be said I would not have said it. Mojo-chan first made that claim in another thread where it was debated. He obviously didn't accept the argument and repeated the claim. A claim which I find far more insulting than being called an idiot. I could not let the claim pass but saw little point in repeating the debate, you can't win an argument with mojo-chan because he is an .... well you know what I think. Others can decide for themselves which would be easier if some of his posts were not deleted.

He lives in the UK where I live. In the UK the majority of electricity from renewable sources is generated because the government mandates it (look up Renewable Obligation Certificates). All electricity consumers pay the substantial extra cost of this 'green' electricity. Mojo-chan claims paying one of the many small 'eco' energy suppliers a trivial 1 or 2% premium means he is buying 100% green electrons. A ridiculous claim, he gets the same mix of electrons as anyone else on the grid. Even if you accept that notionally green and brown electrons are routed separately on the grid the only way he can get 100% green ones is by stealing them from other people that are paying for them (me) and making them take more brown ones.

So Mojo-chan uses green electrons stolen from me to claim he is much greener and ecologically sound than I am - calling me an idiot would be much less insulting.

Anyhow while this has blown up around mojo-chan I didn't complain about him I complained about deleting posts. Moderators exercising their power to make people un-say things, the lack of visibility when it happens and forum contributors being unable to judge moderator actions because un-said things can't be seen.

IMO posts should not be deleted unless they are bad enough to justify banning the poster. If you don't like 'one strike you are out' then use a warning/infraction scheme. It looks like SMF has one built in.

In Western Australia,should I care to,I can buy gas from two different suppliers.
The gas comes from the same well,travels along the same pipeline,is distributed to my home in the same pipes,& if I had gas appliances would be fed to the same stove,heater,etc.

The new "competitor" claims they can sell me the gas cheaper,even though there is no way to label the molecules as to which "supplier" they come from.

My wife's mobile phone is with Virgin,but uses Optus' network.

The question is,if Optus can sell their service to Virgin,who resell it at a profit,why can't they offer that price to their own customers?

It is obviously a widespread business practice---are Virgin customers not "stealing" service from Optus ones?

PS: I know this is off-topic,I will shut up now!

[EEVblog]

PS: I know this is off-topic,I will shut up now!

This thread is not the place to carry on this discussion.

[Rufus]

Yes I have and a response from mojo-chan was deleted.

I do not see it in the deleted posts section of the forum where all deleted posts automatically go.

Then I will repeat it as best I can from memory

IMO it is completely unacceptable to delete posts without also banning the poster.

I would refuse to take part in a recorded debate where the host told me he would cut anything I said which he didn't like before broadcast. The forum will likely become read only for me.

As for Mojo-chan anyone should be able to see his blatant politically correct game play posts for what they are or would be able to had they not been deleted

Within an hour Mojo-chan posted asking me to delete or edit my post saying something about because he no longer had the right to reply.

An hour or so later both posts were gone.

If it didn't need to be said I would not have said it.

You broke the rules, your post got deleted based on moderator discretion who happened to read it.

I had noticed my 'idiot' post got deleted and was a bit annoyed but didn't complain or comment then days later mojo-chan started complaining about his posts being deleted and I posted the above and it was deleted and I am complaining.

It is your platform and you can choose who you allow to use it but I and I think some others are not happy with you or your moderators getting to choose what the people you allow to use the platform have said. There is no visibility, no justice being seen to be done.

[SgtRock]

Dear Rufus:

--It seems to me that you have made you wishes known, and that unfortunately Dave's carefully considered judgement does not fall in line with your desires. I really do not see how further restatement of your position is helpful. As a general matter of argumentation, when one understands and can repeat the argument of the opponent, it it pure harassment for him to keep repeating the thesis statement. The referee was asked for a call, and a call was made. I think that when someone threatens to leave, moderation should impose a 30 day suspension. So they then can avoid further hassel for 30 days. This movie is getting really repeditive. No one really wants you to leave, so please just let it go.

"I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled."
P. G. Wodehouse 1881 - 1975

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[zapta]

Rufus, Mojo Chan claim about green energy cost is ridiculous and yes he keeps repeating it, but  calling him idiot justifies a (visible) deletion IMO.

[Rufus]

I really do not see how further restatement of your position is helpful.

Dave publicly resurrected my 'idiot' post claiming it was my only deleted post. I didn't ask him to. I  felt I had to publicly justify it.

I resurrected my other deleted post because the forum owner not being able to see all deleted posts would seem to be a problem. I can't help it also stated my opinion. This is my 4th non-deleted post in this thread - hardly harassment.

Rufus, Mojo Chan claim about green energy cost is ridiculous and yes he keeps repeating it, but  calling him idiot justifies a (visible) deletion IMO.

I don't think the quality of the forum is improved by letting people post crap without challenge. When you can't have a reasoned argument with a poster is it pretty hard not to end up criticising the poster instead of their argument.

Maybe I should have just told him:-

Reasoning and is clearly not your top skill!

[Richard Crowley]

I don't think the quality of the forum is improved by letting people post crap without challenge. When you can't have a reasoned argument with a poster is it pretty hard not to end up criticising the poster instead of their argument.

IMHO, this is a growing problem in several online technical forums.  Now certainly there are forums that cater to (for one example) audiophools, and you expect to see unsupported stupidity regularly expounded as "fact".  But those people are self-selecting and a world unto themselves.

However, most forums (such as this one) are expected to be a source of reasonably accurate technical detail. And allowing clearly incorrect (or even questionable and unsupportable) information to stand in the archives unchallenged and uncorrected dilutes the value of the forum as a source of dependable information.  While we end-users can attempt some of this policing ourselves, it is ultimately up to the management (and his official representatives) to ensure the integrity of the forum as a useful source of information.

[rolycat]

I don't think the quality of the forum is improved by letting people post crap without challenge. When you can't have a reasoned argument with a poster is it pretty hard not to end up criticising the poster instead of their argument.

IMHO, this is a growing problem in several online technical forums.  Now certainly there are forums that cater to (for one example) audiophools, and you expect to see unsupported stupidity regularly expounded as "fact".  But those people are self-selecting and a world unto themselves.

However, most forums (such as this one) are expected to be a source of reasonably accurate technical detail. And allowing clearly incorrect (or even questionable and unsupportable) information to stand in the archives unchallenged and uncorrected dilutes the value of the forum as a source of dependable information.  While we end-users can attempt some of this policing ourselves, it is ultimately up to the management (and his official representatives) to ensure the integrity of the forum as a useful source of information.

This is an electronics forum with a high proportion of experienced engineers and designers. Any instances where electronic technical content is incorrect or questionable are almost always quickly challenged and debunked - no intervention on the part of 'management' is required.

The 'crap' to which Rufus and others object tends to have a political, nationalistic or religious component - and experienced engineers and designers are not nearly so objective when their beliefs in those areas are challenged. Regrettably the 'technical detail' is subject to manipulation by both sides and one individual's obvious truth is another's blatant lie.

Expecting the moderators to make value judgements about 'clearly incorrect' information of this sort is a slippery slope which I doubt they want to venture down. The current policy of discouraging such discussions altogether and removing posts when they become unduly acrimonious is surely preferable.

[miguelvp]

Yup, 7 billon opinions and none of them match.

Of course out of all of those only mine is right, because it's based in facts and I'm the only one well informed and the rest don't know a thing, sometimes I feel lonesome being the only sane individual in the whole planet.

Makes perfect sense to me

[Richard Crowley]

I should point out that from my perspective the people denying what I am saying are crazy, and it's not like any of them offered any actual evidence

The "actual evidence" is the gap between how much "green" energy is actually produced and fed into the distribution grid vs. the amount of "green" energy being "consumed" and paid for at a premium rate.  I have the evidence extraordinarily close to home of companies paying for such large amounts of "green" energy (for PR purposes) that there isn't enough "green" energy produced to even meet that ONE customer's load.  Presumably, the excess premium $$$ is being ploughed back into green energy R&D.  But I hope you aren't holding your breath on that one.

[EEVblog]

The "actual evidence" is the gap between how much "green" energy is actually produced
*snip*

Please do not discuss this in this thread.

[PA0PBZ]

It seems to have gone.

Did you actually see it in there or did it never show up?

[zapta]

Am I the only person here who was hoping this thread would die so finally that even Dr Frankenstein couldn't revive it?

I also wish we wouldn't need it.