What action should Mods Take?

[tim west]

With threads being locked because of the actions of a few forum members and as this seems to be a hot subject of contention at the moment
Should the Mods get harder on those that disrupt posts?

Make your choice.

 

[tim west]

Looks like the current method is the least liked so far mods please take note of the voting.

 

[Space cat]

I would like to see a fifth option in the list, namely leave the thread open and just remove offending posts, inserting instead a comment such as "Offensive post removed as served no purpose". Locking the thread prevents the rest of us from adding replies that DO serve some purpose and so the original poster loses out. It seems that I could, at the risk of being thrown right off the forum, get any post I don't approve of locked by flooding it with worthless replies. That can't be right.

 

[Shutpa]

I could, at the risk of being thrown right off the forum, get any post I don't approve of locked by flooding it with worthless replies.

Isn't that what is happening at the moment and what this poll is all about. So come on guys, exercise your right and make your choice.

 

[oilman]

Stop having the mods being anonymous. If they were seen to be more "real people" then they would have more respect from users. At present they are seen as power hungry riot police. Other forums seem to survive without this masked-faced, black-shirt approach.

Stop having the mods being anonymous.

Moderator3
The problem would be who's going to moderate the moderators if we know each other

 

[tim west]

I apologise for not thinking of more options at the time but I think it would be unfair to those who have already voted if I added an option now.

 

[oilman]

Life's not fair. Ask those who get replies from Softus, (or ask a mod).

 

[tim west]

Life's not fair. Ask those who get replies from Softus, (or ask a mod).

What I mean is those who have already voted cannot change their minds if I change any of the options.

 

[Softus]

It's all to easy to forget that it's only the mistakes, and the controversial actions, that are conspicuous - the moderators (with one obvious exception) succeed in doing a difficult job, impartially, and exceptionally well.

IMHO it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference what the rule is - the problem occurs only when a rule is either unpublished or is applied inconsistently.

But we're all human, and it's an imperfect world.

 

[tim west]

Interested to have some Moderator feedback on how the votings going, do you have any views on the opinions of those that have voted so far?
Would Admin take the final result on board?

 

[big-all]

Stop having the mods being anonymous. If they were seen to be more "real people" then they would have more respect from users. At present they are seen as power hungry riot police. Other forums seem to survive without this masked-faced, black-shirt approach.

Stop having the mods being anonymous.

Moderator3
The problem would be who's going to moderate the moderators if we know each other

i mod on 3 forum 2 active 1 in development

i will only mod if my name is known
i believe people respect a decision from a person they can put an internet face to even if they don't have any respect for my personal views

i also wont mod a thread i have actively taken part in a "heated debate "except an emergency quarantine if no one else is about
and leave it for someone impartial to mod and return to the forum as appropriate

 

[Richardp]

our mods do a good job, not easy.

 

[Thermo]

especially with this lot!

 

[BoxBasher]

I would like to see a fifth option in the list, namely leave the thread open and just remove offending posts, inserting instead a comment such as "Offensive post removed as served no purpose".

Same here. Sometimes whole topics get locked just because of one or two idiotic comments.

 

[Zampa]

Freedom of speech to a degree providing it doesnt deliberatly offend someone as in referring to black people as ...well you all know the words!..gay people as..blah blah blah...

Whatever someones view point they should be alowed to express and debate/defend it as long as it isnt just a sweeping stupid and unfair generalisations as in 'all so an so's are criminals etc.

Many good subject matter on here has been wrecked by crap and personal insults/slurs etc..

We are adults and should be able to allowed to debate things without the nanny state treatment

And anyone who says any different smells!