Bait threads

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed (wo)man is king. But guess what? It's still the land of the blind. There is no way anything thoughtful ever comes out of this mod team. The ingredients simply are not there.

The perception I have is one of a culture of secrecy where people are free to make questionable, clearly biased decisions and then not actually engage with forum members when they question it.

The moving of the CEHST being an example of that - mindless enforcement of the rules for it's own sake.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Oh, you are right. Family friendly now bans Richard Cheney.

And you are right that if the mods followed through on their own declarations and used common sense than this wouldn't happen. Better to ban chinese communists as a word but let sentiments of hate for a nationality from someone who has had other similar hate speech removed get a pass.

Because if you can hide your racism behind some special words, then the team will get confused and forget the context of previous behavior.

This is true. If you remove the questionable content it's as if the person never wrote it. So the mod team are for all intents and purposes covering it up for them.

Something else though. If the mod team only respond to reported posts (rather than read the whole thread to see what the context is and where the drama started, it effectively means that the moderation team are being used to carry out personal attacks on other posters for the purpose of ruining their enjoyment of the forums. I'm pretty sure that's not what they would intend, but are they actually aware of it?

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

Are you asking me to review or asking why the original mod made that decision? It sounds like Kathryn already PM'd you. Have you asked the original mod via PM?

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Are you asking me to review or asking why the original mod made that decision? It sounds like Kathryn already PM'd you. Have you asked the original mod via PM?

Why would anyone want to hear some lame-brained justification for their own ineptitude made after the fact? It's rather easy to make justification for whatever point one has, no matter how asinine.

I am waiting for Kathryn to come back from holiday or wherever she is. She can recognize hate speech, especially when it says "hate" and the poster was warned by her previously about the same sentiment.

[mota bhai 2,675]

She can recognize hate speech ...

That's funny. Without elaborating too much, this image comes to mind.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Are you asking me to review or asking why the original mod made that decision? It sounds like Kathryn already PM'd you. Have you asked the original mod via PM?

Both please.

I said I got a general reply from Kathryn, it was more along the lines of 'this could be why'. However she wasn't involved in the decision the close the thread nor the report I made about the Sweden thread.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Are you asking me to review or asking why the original mod made that decision? It sounds like Kathryn already PM'd you. Have you asked the original mod via PM?

Neither of the two mods in question have ever replied to a PM I have sent them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

This is true. If you remove the questionable content it's as if the person never wrote it. So the mod team are for all intents and purposes covering it up for them.

Something else though. If the mod team only respond to reported posts (rather than read the whole thread to see what the context is and where the drama started, it effectively means that the moderation team are being used to carry out personal attacks on other posters for the purpose of ruining their enjoyment of the forums. I'm pretty sure that's not what they would intend, but are they actually aware of it?

There's a blatant example of this in this thread:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/506630-russia-to-reopen-spy-base-in-cuba/

[mota bhai 2,675]

There's a blatant example of this in this thread:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/506630-russia-to-reopen-spy-base-in-cuba/

My post was removed for pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes.

[JohnR! 5,495]

My post was removed for pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes.

If it were removed there wouldn't be a link to it. Click the link you posted and you'll be taken to your thread.

[mota bhai 2,675]

If it were removed there wouldn't be a link to it. Click the link you posted and you'll be taken to your thread.

A post was removed. Not the thread.

I responded to Ryan's announcement that he had changed the title with "what would we do without you?". That response was deemed in violation of TOS by His Highness, the most esteemed Tbone.

[JohnR! 5,495]

A post was removed. Not the thread.

I responded to Ryan's announcement that he had changed the title with "what would we do without you?". That response was deemed in violation of TOS by His Highness, the most esteemed Tbone.

Got it. You were disrespectful of a Mod and expected to be +1 for it. Sometimes a cylinder of two misfire...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A post was removed. Not the thread.

I responded to Ryan's announcement that he had changed the title with "what would we do without you?". That response was deemed in violation of TOS by His Highness, the most esteemed Tbone.

The problem here is that this isn't participative moderation, it's moderation by copy-editor. There is no thought to the big picture - only we've done this before, so if we do it again we are consistent.

As I say, the problem here is that if someone doesn't like the person who posted the article they can report the thread knowing that the moderators will slavishly change the title because that's what they do. The motivations of the person reporting the thread aren't taken into account at all. Don't like a poster - report their thread to mess with them and watch as the mods effectively make a personal attack against them on your behalf.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[mota bhai 2,675]

The problem here is that this isn't participative moderation, it's moderation by copy-editor. There is no thought to the big picture - only we've done this before, so if we do it again we are consistent.

As I say, the problem here is that if someone doesn't like the person who posted the article they can report the thread knowing that the moderators will slavishly change the title because that's what they do. The motivations of the person reporting the thread aren't taken into account at all. Don't like a poster - report their thread to mess with them and watch as the mods effectively make a personal attack against them on your behalf.

'Slavish' is an apt description of most members of the moderation team. They've got all the processing power of the pimply teenager who takes orders at the local fast food drive through.

[JohnR! 5,495]

The problem here is that this isn't participative moderation, it's moderation by copy-editor. There is no thought to the big picture - only we've done this before, so if we do it again we are consistent.

As I say, the problem here is that if someone doesn't like the person who posted the article they can report the thread knowing that the moderators will slavishly change the title because that's what they do. The motivations of the person reporting the thread aren't taken into account at all. Don't like a poster - report their thread to mess with them and watch as the mods effectively make a personal attack against them on your behalf.

The Mods change topic titles, in accordance to TOS.

Conversely the argument can be made that using a baiting title on a thread should be considered trolling. Why not expect honesty in the title of a topic? IMHO it is only fair to the community.