Re: Our stance on moderation

Superb post Jazzi - the only form of censorship it seems, is that I will ignore her totally - hope others feel strongly enough to do the same, if she talks to herself long enough - job done !

Re: Our stance on moderation

I was thinking the same, no matter how nice a person 'says' they are - you have to go by what they post and make your own mind up - what has happened here past couple of days has hit me hard and I wont be here as often, its no longer the distraction I needed

This post is out of context slightly - I answered someone on another thread and it has been moved here - understandable - no problem ........

Re: Our stance on moderation

Some wise words in season
But I have no reason
To want to leave this site
It has more things right
than other forums
So lets form a quorum
lt's LT's rallying call
Pack it in y'all.

Re: Our stance on moderation

We do but would you want to spend 24 hours a day every day sitting here in case someone says something slightly out of line?

It can be a very thankless task being a Mod having to read through countless posts knowing whatever you do people will complain about anything and everything.

Mods also spend a lot of time checking for and dealing with spammers and would be spammers something you rarely get to see because we have already delt with them .

We are not here as wet nurses , this site is for people over 50 and surely by that age people have learnt to behave or to tell others if they think they are not doings so and to do this politely without name calling.

Re: Our stance on moderation

I actually agree with you Meg - the problem occurred because of insults and racism - it can be that objections are raised to that person and then 'ignored' thereafter. I guess it was because reports were made - that's how I understand it to be - so it wasn't a case of you or another mod having to monitor the situation - you were alerted .......

Re: Our stance on moderation

The very great problem with moderation is that it is usually down to the opinion of the moderator when alerted to a post on whether to act on it or not, and as in most cases opinions will always differ. In this case I think the decision not to interfere was the right one as UJ can certainly stand up for himself and give as good as he gets.

Moderation is not an easy thing to do but an easy thing to criticise, but if we accept that moderation is essential than surely we have to accept the moderator's decisions, albeit we don't always agree with it.

Re: Our stance on moderation

Ah right so you want us to sit at a computer 24 hours a day in case an alert comes in .

As I pointed out previously we are a Mod down this week and with one away it isn't always possible to act immediately and if we don't threads have 'moved on' and replies have been made so to remove them all would cause its own problems because people hate having posts removed.
Members should be capable of dealing with the odd 'near the line' remark anyway.

Admin could of course appoint more Mods so there is someone here every moment of the day but who out of our members would wish to sign up to such a time consuming and thankless task and how many of them are suitably none judgemental when it comes to their fellow members.
I think the answer to the last question is demonstrated in this thread.

Re: Our stance on moderation

The run up to these altercations is so blindingly obvious, it is almost as if they are engineered. Imo

Re: Our stance on moderation

As I said - I agree with you
No one expects a mod to be there 24 hours either, but when a post 'is' reported, to be looked at and just an idea - let the reporters know, by posting on that thread - that it has been looked at and the outcome of that. Rather than prolonging the situation.

Re: Our stance on moderation

As I had no comment on that thread - maybe I should be quiet now - its simply I've lost a friend and I'm sad, so I apologise if I shouldn't have said my piece .......