UK posts being made invisible

[cheeky^Wolf 0]

Why can't people just be suspended for acting like turds?

Because there would be nobody left

Racist etc I can understand, if people can't handle some straight words from complete strangers on a message board, I'd hate to see how they cope in real life.

If invisibility is a must, why not just remove the offensive parts rather than the whole post? All that does is piss the poster off and start threads like this

But then HA's posts were never made invisible and I see PlatyPius's post 7 ish back hasn't either, when it clearly should, so there's no point in this thread really.

It's not what you know, it's who you know?

[no name 1]

Why can't people just be suspended for acting like turds?

Because there would be nobody left

Racist etc I can understand, if people can't handle some straight words from complete strangers on a message board, I'd hate to see how they cope in real life.

If invisibility is a must, why not just remove the offensive parts rather than the whole post? All that does is piss the poster off and start threads like this

But then HA's posts were never made invisible and I see PlatyPius's post 7 ish back hasn't either, when it clearly should, so there's no point in this thread really.

It's not what you know, it's who you know?

I wonder myself, cheeky.

[no name 1]

Going forward, I'd like to see:

- invisibility as last result. It is big brother & unneccessary unless racist, threatening, etc.

- warnings to chill out

- consistency in which posts get censored

- less bias

-If a threadmust be name changed, say why. This thread had no business being renamed, or moved.

I do appreciate your work, mods!

Am I the only one who doesn't really give a sh!t what Devilette would like to see? I wasn't aware she had suddenly become board owner.

suggestions were asked for Platy.

Sorry.... I got through most of the first page and all I saw was "Me! Me! Me!" type stuff, and it really got to me.

Sorry to lal or me?

Edited June 23, 2007 by devilette

[Lansbury 19]

One possible thing would be to see if we can make a post invisible but have a place holder automatically inserted where the post was that says (post has been removed for "reason to be input by mod"). This would show that something was made invisible (and could be restored later) but also tell people why it was done so there is no mystery. It would also re-enforce the moderation having occurred and provide feedback to people to calm down or stop the objectionable activity.

All that said, this does not exist and would require a custom modification to the forums software. I am probably skilled enough to code this however before I even start I would want to get some feedback on this.

That is a good idea

[Ban Hammer 13,469]

Keep the suggestions coming!

Obtain a hat, Laura. Works wonders.

THAT is up to charles he is the hat supplier!

and here you are!

edited to add photobucket version

Edited June 23, 2007 by charlesandnessa

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

Captain Ewok,

I personally would not want the ability to do something that cannot be un-done. It can be difficult to make a good edit, what should be edited out and what should not is subjective (this whole thread is an excellent example of subjective opinion), and mistakes (unintentional deletion of the wrong thing with the jerk of the mouse) are easy to make.

I would not use the feature if it were available, unless I could abort or retrieve. I'll stick with the reversable invisibility, the placeholder with explanation being a good addition.

Yodrak

Yes I agree that editing out portions and leaving the "edited by" plus "reason why" is ideal however due to privacy reasons I did not enable that on the mod accounts (also because once it is deleted the evidence is gone forever) -- so this said, the mods are not to be blamed on that (blame me ).

One possible thing would be to see if we can make a post invisible but have a place holder automatically inserted where the post was that says (post has been removed for "reason to be input by mod"). This would show that something was made invisible (and could be restored later) but also tell people why it was done so there is no mystery. It would also re-enforce the moderation having occurred and provide feedback to people to calm down or stop the objectionable activity.

All that said, this does not exist and would require a custom modification to the forums software. I am probably skilled enough to code this however before I even start I would want to get some feedback on this.

What I am thinking is that when a post is set invisible (like can be done now) a place holder is put in its place that indicates that the text has been hidden versus totally not being visible. In place of the original message text would be a notice that it was removed by an admin/mod and possibly a reason. If the post is made visible again then everything would return to normal .

[Ban Hammer 13,469]

What I am thinking is that when a post is set invisible (like can be done now) a place holder is put in its place that indicates that the text has been hidden versus totally not being visible. In place of the original message text would be a notice that it was removed by an admin/mod and possibly a reason. If the post is made visible again then everything would return to normal .

that i believe would be an excellent compromise.

[no name 1]

What I am thinking is that when a post is set invisible (like can be done now) a place holder is put in its place that indicates that the text has been hidden versus totally not being visible. In place of the original message text would be a notice that it was removed by an admin/mod and possibly a reason. If the post is made visible again then everything would return to normal .

Good idea except in subsequent posts, it's still very much there.

[Ta Ta 1]

I can see a problem with a post going from invisible to visible later on because I believe the flame throwers

would sit and wait like vultures over the post to resurrect and to start or continue a fight.

Making posts invisible will cause problems because of " why did mine go and his/hers stayed " outcries.

If a whole pack attacks then there won't be much left of it anyway.

Questionable posts can reveal a lot about a persons character and I for one prefer to see who posted what. I would prefer

splitting the thread instead.

* warn * splitt * lock * suspend *

too much blah blah involved in making posts invisible in my opinion, mods explaining why this one was

locked and not the other etc. Reminds me of children whining : but he did it first ! Takes up too much time.

Overall the mods do a nice job. Sometimes I have the feeling that a certain group in a certain thread is being 'baited 'a bit by a mod and way too much monitoring is going on there when it is not needed and the mods are not regular posters in an otherwise daily ongoing thread. I don't think we need to be monitored that closely.

So I suggest less popping up monitoring and looking over shoulders and wait to move in if there is a post actualy being reported or if there is violation in progress.

I will be specific in a PM to Capt. Ewok if it continues and will leave it at that for now.

But as I said overall I like the jobs the mods are doing and the "please chill" advice seems to work nicely and people mellow out or leave the thread alone.

I also observed that sometimes the ones that cry the loudest about "big brother" censorship are the ones who

tell others what they can and can't say.

I for one was told not to say the word POOP in one of my posts ........ you know who you are !

Long story and I won't go there or the hat patrol will get me.

[RaspberrySwirl 20]

Eh.

Uh, I forgot what I was going to say.

[Yodrak 7]

Yes, sounds good to me.

Yodrak

What I am thinking is that when a post is set invisible (like can be done now) a place holder is put in its place that indicates that the text has been hidden versus totally not being visible. In place of the original message text would be a notice that it was removed by an admin/mod and possibly a reason. If the post is made visible again then everything would return to normal

[Yodrak 7]

No, but it is a very subjective and personal decision as to what is objectionable and what isn't, what is the intent of the writer and what are the perceptions of the different readers.

Yodrak

....

It's not what you know, it's who you know?

Edited June 23, 2007 by Yodrak

[Fandango 1,440]

Yanno, first people are screaming for mods, now it's censorship...

[smoke20 0]

Eh.

Uh, I forgot what I was going to say.

Edited June 23, 2007 by mike/jennilyn

[PlatyPius 5]

Going forward, I'd like to see:

- invisibility as last result. It is big brother & unneccessary unless racist, threatening, etc.

- warnings to chill out

- consistency in which posts get censored

- less bias

-If a threadmust be name changed, say why. This thread had no business being renamed, or moved.

I do appreciate your work, mods!

Am I the only one who doesn't really give a sh!t what Devilette would like to see? I wasn't aware she had suddenly become board owner.

suggestions were asked for Platy.

Sorry.... I got through most of the first page and all I saw was "Me! Me! Me!" type stuff, and it really got to me.

Sorry to lal or me?

Lal