counterproductive moderation.

[FlyingJesus]

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...20#post7442920

this is one i found extremely interesting, i have been edited for replying to a point flyingjesus made at my post and yet his post hasn't been edited yet his post is just a direct negative response to mine AS mine is to his?

in fairness, that post is probably borderline and could've got away or could be edited. but i just find it strange that in several occasions i have been edited yet flyingjesus hasn't. the forum filter avoidance where i said "dickwit" he said first, but managed not to get warned and i did.

are the rules different for him?

What are you on about lol my post was a direct response to yours in keeping with the rules ("or any previous post that is relevant") and still concerning the topic at hand. Yours was just an insult with nothing to do with anything.

I probably should have got PMd for dickwit but that again goes back to basic filter problems - I genuinely thought that would have been filtered anyway and hence was not attempting to avoid the filter, but because using wildcards in filters is problematic and best avoided, the word wasn't filtered in the first place which leads to it appearing that I was trying to subvert it. I guess the obvious and simplest response would be "don't type swear words in the first place" but yeah

[beth]

What are you on about lol my post was a direct response to yours in keeping with the rules ("or any previous post that is relevant") and still concerning the topic at hand. Yours was just an insult with nothing to do with anything.

I probably should have got PMd for dickwit but that again goes back to basic filter problems - I genuinely thought that would have been filtered anyway and hence was not attempting to avoid the filter, but because using wildcards in filters is problematic and best avoided, the word wasn't filtered in the first place which leads to it appearing that I was trying to subvert it. I guess the obvious and simplest response would be "don't type swear words in the first place" but yeah

i am merely interested in what you thinking i have **** taste in men has any relevance to the thread and positively contributes to conversation?

[Martin]

I think threads should be allowed to develop. I remember being comps manager and a feedback thread completely unrelated to competitions moved onto competitions through a natural discussion where someone said something that triggered a conversation about something else and as a result, changes were made to the department. Scott's posted the rule and that seems to be covered so it's not really an issue with the rules but the moderators enforcing it that should be dealt with.

Moderation hasn't just changed over the course of a few months, its been done like this since I started so I really have no idea what this sudden problem is all about. If there is a problem with moderation though, then it should have been noticed by management a long time ago and dealt with sooner.

At the end of the day if a moderator has made an incorrect decision (which can and does happen since some things can be VERY borderline and moderators have to make some kind of decision) then they should be told about it by Forum management individually and perhaps as a group so that the same mistake isn't made again and this was always the case really. A couple of the posts that are coming into issue in this thread are not those dealt with by moderators but dealt with by a member of general management, so I think its a bit unfair to just pin it on the mods, who in the majority of cases are just going by what impression they have of the rules. If thats incorrect then it needs to be brought up in the mod forums.

I agree with certain people that it is a lot less strict now than it has been previously, and I would say the number of edits has decreased. Pointless posting has always been a rule which throws up a lot of issues since its the one that requires the most discretion from moderators on whether something is related to the topic. The rule itself though is pretty clear. If anyone does have a problem with a post they feel has been edited incorrectly though then I'm sure it wouldn't take much for the Forum manager to look into it and reverse it- then make sure that moderator/AGM is aware so that it doesnt happen in future.

Of course threads should be able to develop, but as soon as someone posts something which is not on topic to either the Original post, or a post within the thread then thats where the rules are being broken, and it becomes the rule thats the problem and not the moderators who are using them as a basis on whether something needs to be edited.

[FlyingJesus]

i am merely interested in what you thinking i have **** taste in men has any relevance to the thread and positively contributes to conversation?

Could whip up an answer for this but since my post was actually concerning your music taste it would be kinda pointless. The idea was that I was actually making conversation rather than blindly posting an answer to the thread without any interaction with anyone as most do, and since it was still very much on the topic of what you like in a relationship (being, as I said before, a direct response to part of your answer) it certainly can't be counted as a pointless post. There was nothing off-topic about it

[Deeb]

To be fair I'm new and sometimes I am scared to post in a topic due to the edits I have seen in the same thread.

I might stick to the spam section so I don't go off topic accidently, but I don't like having to stick to one topic, like if someone asks a question like "how much do you pee a day" and then someone says "oh I go about 3/4 times" then someone replies to that with "awmg thats not much at all" ive seen situations like that were the 3rd person would be warned as it wasn't answering the OP's question directly.

But I can't speculate on how moderation or management is to blame as I haven't been here long.

[Samantha]

I remember ages ago I made a thread in HL&R and someone said something along the lines at:

When I get angry I throw a load of Plastic Pods out of my window

They got pointless posted for it even though it was answering the question directly. I thought that was stupid. I think it has improved slightly even though the past 2 times I have been modded weren't correct but Brandon does listen and fought for my side of the argument too and came to an agreement. The forum moderator learnt from his mistake and I saw that in the future he had changed his actions and modded correctly.

Anyway, I only see a few posts that are pointless, if I'm reading a thread I will pick up a post that I think is pointless, in some cases people may not be unclear that you have to link to the OP or something?

Also, with filter avoidance why isn't **** or boner filter? When **********s is?

[JerseySafety]

I haven't had any problems with this except 6 months or so ago when I got like 2 usernotes for pointless posting and they were the most on-topic posts in the thread.

Moderation on the forums has become a lot better over the past year, but there are still some slight improvements to be made - but really you can't impress everyone.

[Grig]

heya,

i haven't written a feedback thread in a long time but i've been thinking of doing this all week and then receiving a warning about general forum conduct last night makes me really feel the need to post this.

i think moderation on the forum at the moment is in overkill mode, really + truly. it's hard enough as it is on here at the moment to get a conversation about ANYTHING going because of poor activity. so a suggestion is oh shut the staff spam, well every other manager and his dog are against that so you have to deal with it basically.

it feels like every other post that i see has been edited in some form or another. just complete and utter overkill.

also: i don't understand the avoiding the filter when the word use is not in the filter. that's not exactly avoiding the filter is it, that's the filter not picking up on my word.

Tbh, I see where you're coming from with staff spam. However, it should be up to discretion of general departments, as I know smaller departments such as news have it as a good tool to bond. Also, I doubt shutting staff spam will severely increase forum activity. For radio, it would have worked as the spam serves less purpose than say for smaller depts. such as news etc. I would not have been against testing something like this out though.

I say remove staff spam and lets see if it integrates both staff and members together more.

[GommeInc]

I do wonder what new members think of red writing and mod warnings... Deeb has pointed out quite an interesting factor that could be putting of newly registered members. Pointless posting should be coming out with any old twoddle that is completely... pointless. I've seen a few instances where humour and related posts that are mildly bizarre be considered pointless when pointless generally means "lacks a point/doesn't have a point". If a post relates even slightly to the topic at hand, then it isn't pointless or off-topic.

Also, do the staff forums exist? You only need an announcement board and a "staff room"esque forum to discuss strictly private topics. Anything with forum-wide discussions really should be kept to the public forums - maybe then we could see staff actually engaging in threads rather than hiding away in their ivory towers

[FlyingJesus]

Yes, staff spam certainly exists and is insisted on by the majority of staff AND for some reason management under the pretence of "staff bonding", which actually equates to "non-staff exclusion". Obviously the lay people, newcomers, even community figureheads with years of forum experience, are not worthy of the presence of such deific creatures as Trialist DJs and Event Organisers, for we are just too mean and dirty to speak to those on high