EPTOn June 16 2014 07:19 KadaverBB wrote:
He got a warning, how did he walk away with it?
He got a warning, how did he walk away with it?
For the other post
Ukrainian Crisis thread - Page 6
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
For the other post | ||
Firebolt145
Lalalaland34490 Posts
On June 16 2014 06:44 Firebolt145 wrote: He was warned for the second of two warn-worthy posts, so yes it covers both of them. | ||
|
AlternativeEgo
Sweden17309 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
On June 16 2014 07:38 AlternativeEgo wrote: Just action all posts worthy of actioning if you are to sport a zero tolerance policy. Sure it takes a few extra clicks but it could save you from a few more. Also because it should be actioned. And maybe you should not let netizens continue to post in a thread if they have been banned in it six times already. That could also save a few clicks. It is completely redundant to action two posts from the same poster within a matter of seconds. If it is truly an issue, then the severity goes up (warn -->> temp or temp -->> longer temp.) It is completely within keeping of TL moderation to action one post of a few posts (but using all posts to judge severity), and giving the poster time to smarten up or else escalating. Two warns in a row does nothing, and escalating without giving a chance to amend is no good either. | ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
| ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On June 16 2014 19:24 nunez wrote: good night ukraine crisis thread, you were good to us. Not really | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
| ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
zatic
Zurich15325 Posts
| ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On June 17 2014 23:37 heliusx wrote: I've read every page of that thread and I didn't see much more than endless wrist slapping on the same users. Why not just ban them from posting there? I'm not trying to disparage what you guys do for free but I feel like current event threads like this are the best part of general. I like reading opinions from around the world. Yeah I kind of felt the same way. For what it's worth, my opinion is that the warnings were worthless. I would be in favor of much looser moderation standards (Let the banhammer fall!). Starting out with min 1 week bans should do the trick for the thread if you hand them out like candy. Since the thread has basically become the veiled insult/hidden jab thread, I would go with the "If in doubt, ban the lout" principle, even though I've been trying to report people who fall for flamebait and thus derail the discussion. The ukraine thread does seem ridiculously lenient. I would also say that posting stuff like Euromaidenpr, StateofUkraine, Itar-Tass, and russia today without proper 'this is likely bullshit' and 'this is exactly the part of the article which informs the discussion" disclaimers should be against the rules. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On June 17 2014 23:37 heliusx wrote: I've read every page of that thread and I didn't see much more than endless wrist slapping on the same users. Why not just ban them from posting there? I'm not trying to disparage what you guys do for free but I feel like current event threads like this are the best part of general. I like reading opinions from around the world. The problem is that in almost every case it isn't as simple as "just banning them from posting". In most cases, the people with the strongest opinions are also those most involved and most knowledgable on the subject. Take Cheerio for example; he has had several run-ins with moderation and has made a heap of questionable posts, but you'd be hard pressed to find users that have contributed more to the thread than he has. So what's the solution? Just banning him would indeed improve the thread in some ways, but it would also lose one of its (sometimes) best contributors. If we were to ban all of the people with strong opinions on the subject, chances are that the thread would have died down on its own because those users were the ones taking the time to investigate and keep up with the situation. On June 18 2014 00:37 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Goodbye Ukraine Crisis thread, formerly known as the Euromaiden thread, I will miss you. It was good and interesting thread for infomation when it started, but lack of moderation, (I saw blantant lies like someone claiming a video was faked when it wasn't)and that in the end it just seemed like none of the moderators wanted to moderate, since after saying you will moderate more harshly, you ended up making an example of one person, and sadly didn't extend that harshness to any other poster, with the effect that it ended up being less tolerance than a normal thread. Are you arguing that we were less harsh after the updated policy? I agree that quality of moderation waned the days before the thread was locked, but I protest against the notion that we made an example of a single user and nothing else. Please provide context and I'll see if I can address your concerns - I'm sure that if you feel like something was not properly moderated, there is a reason behind it. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On June 13 2014 06:18 Zealously wrote: The problem is that the Ukraine Crisis is an important issue. There is no "right" way to do this - we can and do try to moderate the thread to the best of all of our abilities, but it is difficult as all hell when people take subtle jabs at one another constantly and resort to reporting people they disagree with when others do not take their bait (backseat moderation and continuous offhand remarks about the quality of moderation with no constructive feedback does not help the issue). Closing the thread is just as bad, if not worse, a solution as staggering our way through a sea of reports none of us can handle perfectly or even make sense of most of the time, but if you have an easy solution to the problem I'm all ears. I'd be willing to handle all the moderation myself. That's easy (for you at least). also, in response to the post directly above; it seemed you were doing strong for a few days, then got lax again; at least that's my impression/recollection. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6284 Posts
Just go through the thread and see how many times you see 'well I'm objective' only for their following post to be the most one-sided devoid of reality country-bashing shitposting you can see on this site. And hey, just because I say I'm objective gives me the right to lynch anyone that doesn't agree with my twisted world view. Please mods, go through my report history and see how many times I have reported anyone in the Euromaidan thread, or how many posts I have made in the thread or anywhere else on TL asking for someone to get banned. I stand by my beliefs that everyone has a right to their own opinion and should have the right to express their opinion on this site if its expressed in an articulated and sane way. There are literally a dozen people who never meaningfully contributed to the Euromaidan thread ether through discussion/analysis or posting news. All these posters did was comment on how someone should be banned because they have an opinion different to their own, and in general shit up the thread. Surprise surprise they also post here because all they care about is backseat moderating and crusading against people they deem to have not fallen in line. | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15325 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On June 18 2014 02:16 Zealously wrote: Are you arguing that we were less harsh after the updated policy? I agree that quality of moderation waned the days before the thread was locked, but I protest against the notion that we made an example of a single user and nothing else. Please provide context and I'll see if I can address your concerns - I'm sure that if you feel like something was not properly moderated, there is a reason behind it. Well, you tempbanned Cheerio extremely quickly after the new rules, but after that action it was lax afterwards. Anyhow, isn't backseat moderating normally a warning or bannable action? You guys didn't really bother to enforce that ideal either, with the overal effect that it really felt like the thread had more tolerance than a normal thread even after the additonal thread rules.. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
Well, if they don't wanna do the moderation effort the thread would take so be it; time is limited after all, and that thread woulda used a lot of it. Too bad they didn't want to try other things though. I find your complaint funny zeo; though with plenty of good points. It's not surprising there's a rise in backseat moderation when there isn't enough regular moderation. | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
| ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On June 19 2014 09:21 Cheerio wrote: What killed the thread was that moderation failed at adhering to the spirit of law. When moderators feel like they need to go at great lengths to defend the "trolls" there is the problem right there. That would include you derailing the thread for taking minor flamebait way too seriously. | ||
| ||
