Deal with the Individual, Leave the Thread Be

[Fandango 1,440]

Recently, Kathryn locked yet ANOTHER thread. Here was the given reason

This has gone far enough. These last few pages provide perfect examples of some of the attitudes that create problems here on Visa Journey, As this thread has now degenerated into an exchange of personal attacks and insults, I am closing it down.

Julian, you can now add to your official credit that your comments have contributed directly to a thread being closed for TOS violations.

Shouldn't moderation then deal with the poster who 'contributed directly' instead of stifling all discussion????

Edited August 17, 2010 by Happy Bunny

[The_Dude 1,142]

My biggest complaint is the closing of threads because they have gone off topic. Conversations are fluid in nature and can flow to introduce new ideas. There is no need to close a thread that has an interesting conversation simply because it has skewed from it's initial premise. I could understand it if there were people trying to hijack a thread to divert any discourse on the subject, but then that leads into your idea Lisa, deal with the individual, don't close the thread.

I think the moderators should go one step further and edit the offensive post to simply state post deleted by _______________ for violation of ToS __________________________. And then post if administrative actions have been taken. I think you'd see fewer ToS violations.

[Fandango 1,440]

My biggest complaint is the closing of threads because they have gone off topic. Conversations are fluid in nature and can flow to introduce new ideas. There is no need to close a thread that has an interesting conversation simply because it has skewed from it's initial premise. I could understand it if there were people trying to hijack a thread to divert any discourse on the subject, but then that leads into your idea Lisa, deal with the individual, don't close the thread.

I think the moderators should go one step further and edit the offensive post to simply state post deleted by _______________ for violation of ToS __________________________. And then post if administrative actions have been taken. I think you'd see fewer ToS violations.

Couldn't agree more with you, I made a thread about that one as well.

[mox 298]

Recently, Kathryn locked yet ANOTHER thread. Here was the given reason

Shouldn't moderation then deal with the poster who 'contributed directly' instead of stifling all discussion????

Moderating is not pushing buttons, which many on this team desperately need to learn. Moderating is not about making the problem go away quickly, which many on this team desperately need to learn. We all know moderating is hard work, that the mods are volunteers, etc, etc, but it doesn't excuse shoddy work. If you can't moderate effectively, then even your price tag of $0.00 is too high.

Julian's worst offense was that he was off-topic. The "mail order bride" bit wasn't PC, it was mildly offensive, but actually pretty tame for a site like this. And as much as I hate to defend the guy, what he said was a hell of a lot milder than 95% of the ####### that his target of choice, "Gary & Alla," get away with on a daily basis. If it hadn't been off-topic to the thread I'd even say that it was a good opportunity to help someone out who doesn't seem to quite "get" the VJ culture. We have plenty of members here who started off a bit clueless but then turned into great contributors, and I'd be willing to bet one of the reasons is because they weren't completely shut down by the moderators. Had Kathryn been interested in actual moderating, she would have sent a PM to tell him that he was dragging the thread off-topic, and to please drop it.

Just because you have a stick doesn't mean every problem can be solved by beating it with a stick.

[Fandango 1,440]

Moderating is not pushing buttons, which many on this team desperately need to learn. Moderating is not about making the problem go away quickly, which many on this team desperately need to learn. We all know moderating is hard work, that the mods are volunteers, etc, etc, but it doesn't excuse shoddy work. If you can't moderate effectively, then even your price tag of $0.00 is too high.

Julian's worst offense was that he was off-topic. The "mail order bride" bit wasn't PC, it was mildly offensive, but actually pretty tame for a site like this. And as much as I hate to defend the guy, what he said was a hell of a lot milder than 95% of the ####### that his target of choice, "Gary & Alla," get away with on a daily basis. If it hadn't been off-topic to the thread I'd even say that it was a good opportunity to help someone out who doesn't seem to quite "get" the VJ culture. We have plenty of members here who started off a bit clueless but then turned into great contributors, and I'd be willing to bet one of the reasons is because they weren't completely shut down by the moderators. Had Kathryn been interested in actual moderating, she would have sent a PM to tell him that he was dragging the thread off-topic, and to please drop it.

Just because you have a stick doesn't mean every problem can be solved by beating it with a stick.

agree with that also.

Btw, I used this most recent example purely as an example....this thread is about the whole practice of shutting down threads, not this one isolated incident.

[Nik+Heather 121]

I think the moderators should go one step further and edit the offensive post to simply state post deleted by _______________ for violation of ToS __________________________. And then post if administrative actions have been taken. I think you'd see fewer ToS violations.

Actually, once I posted more information in a post (draft of a letter including our address!) and when I reported it and requested that a mod please simply remove the information, I was told their only option was to invisible the whole thing. Only Ewok has the ability to edit other people's posts. The mods simply don't have the option to do as you suggest.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Actually, once I posted more information in a post (draft of a letter including our address!) and when I reported it and requested that a mod please simply remove the information, I was told their only option was to invisible the whole thing. Only Ewok has the ability to edit other people's posts. The mods simply don't have the option to do as you suggest.

Then Ewok could simply grant them the authority to do such.

[^_^ 5,021]

When I was a noob, I recall seeing posts during a search where moderators were able to do that. Moderation, as I have been led to believe, was dismantled at some point after. When I joined VJ, there were no moderators.

[The_Dude 1,142]

When I was a noob, I recall seeing posts during a search where moderators were able to do that. Moderation, as I have been led to believe, was dismantled at some point after. When I joined VJ, there were no moderators.

There weren't moderators in May of 2010? Whoa dude, this must be some sort of hallucination or nightmare then.

I am not familiar with this message board software, but I know most others allow the administrator to grant varying levels of authority to moderators and other personnel.

[mox 298]

I'm not sure I'd want to see moderators have the ability to edit posts, for several reasons:

- There is no history of the original post if it's edited. Thus, there's no way to appeal the removal. (and a solution such as having the mod post the original contents somewhere else is way too open to abuse.)

- We've seen in the past organizers abuse their ability to edit their own posts even days later. The potential for a moderator to abuse this ability is high.

- Your post belongs to you, nobody else. Nobody else should be posting under your name, even if it's an edit to say the post was removed.

[^_^ 5,021]

Your post belongs to you, nobody else.

Is that true?

From VJ's Privacy Policy:

VisaJourney.com is the sole owner of the information collected on this site.

[The_Dude 1,142]

BTW, lisa, fix your signature file.kkthxbai.

[mox 298]

Is that true?

From VJ's Privacy Policy:

VisaJourney.com is the sole owner of the information collected on this site.

Well if Visa Journey owns my words, then the next time I re-open a locked thread, Ewok should suspend himself.

[TBoneTX 46,276]

Realistically, the VJ TOS are unlikely to be overhauled to an extent that will completely mollify those who are currently dissatisfied with them.

Therefore, here's a radical thought: Rejuvenate Expatgroups, and post away to heart's content. (That's what it was created for, right?) Or, forsake VJ in favor of a more general social-networking site with moderation that's more palatable. Either approach might make some people happier than continuing to tilt fruitlessly at the VJ windmill, si man?

[mox 298]

Realistically, the VJ TOS are unlikely to be overhauled to an extent that will completely mollify those who are currently dissatisfied with them.

I don't think anybody is unhappy with the TOS, or wants it to be overhauled. It's actually a good TOS, and were it enforced evenly and fairly, and were all sub-forums and all members--even moderators--held to it, I think things would be pretty darned peachy-keen around here.

Therefore, here's a radical thought: Rejuvenate Expatgroups, and post away to heart's content. (That's what it was created for, right?) Or, forsake VJ in favor of a more general social-networking site with moderation that's more palatable. Either approach might make some people happier than continuing to tilt fruitlessly at the VJ windmill, si man?

Two problems with this: Expats, ugh. What an absolutely horrid pile of shite that was and is. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Second, this sounds like the "if you don't like it here, go away" argument. What's the alternative if we actually do like it here, and don't want to go somewhere else? Do we just go against our principles and stay silent about the abuses we see? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just hope you understand that myself and others aren't complaining because we hate it here, we're complaining because we know it can be better. If I didn't care about VJ, I wouldn't be making such a ruckus.