Moderation TLC?

[ctrlbrk]

@Ozzy

This is a suggestion:

I have noticed that on UKBF there is a small but significant portion of the user base intent on wasting other users' time.

Whether it's the guy asking for feedback on something and then criticising the very feedback he sought, or the snively kid that has "billions to invest " with ridicolous proposals, these type of contributions have the only effect of draining people's attention away from more useful topic.

Imagine if wastefult topic xyz is viewed 300 times. That means that potentially 300 people wasted their time on a topic they could do without.

I have seen people being banned here for much less.

Suggestion
There are communities out there where moderation of such topics is swift. Running a tight ship actually increases the quality of the total contribution.

How about reviewing UKBF moderation policies, with a view to raise the bar of contributions.

For example

• threads that are an obvious waste of time are going to be closed
• offending users are going to be warned and either temporarily or permanently suspended

I realise that people may object on what exactly constitutes a waste of time but if you have been a moderator for longer than 6 months you're likely to have gained a sharpened view about user behaviour.

 

[WaveJumper]

@Ozzy

This is a suggestion:

I have noticed that on UKBF there is a small but significant portion of the user base intent on wasting other users' time.

Whether it's the guy asking for feedback on something and then criticising the very feedback he sought, or the snively kid that has "billions to invest " with ridicolous proposals, these type of contributions have the only effect of draining people's attention away from more useful topic.

Imagine if wastefult topic xyz is viewed 300 times. That means that potentially 300 people wasted their time on a topic they could do without.

I have seen people being banned here for much less.

Suggestion
There are communities out there where moderation of such topics is swift. Running a tight ship actually increases the quality of the total contribution.

How about reviewing UKBF moderation policies, with a view to raise the bar of contributions.

For example

• threads that are an obvious waste of time are going to be closed
• offending users are going to be warned and either temporarily or permanently suspended

I realise that people may object on what exactly constitutes a waste of time but if you have been a moderator for longer than 6 months you're likely to have gained a sharpened view about user behaviour.

Very well put

 

[DontAsk]

Whether it's the guy asking for feedback on something and then criticising the very feedback he sought,

You can't moderate those users until after the fact, by which time people have already wasted their time.

or the snively kid

The only ones really wasting time are those who choose to reply to the "snively kid", and keep on contributing to the ensuing thread.

I could say I wasted my time reading this thread but, so far, there are only two posts

On my experience, light touch moderation is always better for a group.

 

[ctrlbrk]

You can't moderate those users until after the fact, by which time people have already wasted their time.

That is true, but once the deed is done you as mod are able to target that user, in which case you have the ability to stop the nonsense, as opposed to letting it go on.

Case in question, one of these guys has posted two threads which attracted views, people and contributions, turning out to be wasteful.

 

[Ian J]

I look in on forums for all types of products, services and hobbies and they all have their share of daft questions. It's the nature of the beast

 

[ctrlbrk]

they all have their share of daft questions

Agree to disagree Ian. There are sites out there where moderation takes an active role, either via the mods themselves or via the self-policing community, in which case a deterrent exists for trolls and the like.

I am not saying this is a problem that can be eliminated but it can certainly be minimised so that it does not interfere with your enjoyment of the forum too much.

 

[fisicx]

Where you think a thread is getting out of hand hit the report button. The moderators don’t see or read everything so we might miss something. A lot of these threads get moved to timeout anyway so all you need to do it ignore that forum.

 

[cjd]

Ozzie needs members and member's posts, the last thing he'll want to do is get heavy with people just because they seem to be wasting time somebody else's time. If the post is rubbish, just stop reading.

I've been on two forums lately where political discussions have been banned. But then they realised that more than half the activity of the site had disappeared and along with it a few advertisers. They soon changed their minds.

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

threads that are an obvious waste of time are going to be closed

Whether a thread is a waste of time is a personal opinion. To the OP and possibly commenters, it might not be!

offending users are going to be warned and either temporarily or permanently suspended

Based on the rules, this action is taken! HOWEVER, in many cases, action can only be taken if a mod sees the post or members report the issue!

 

[ctrlbrk]

Whether a thread is a waste of time is a personal opinion.

Paul, you are not suggesting that UKBF is immune to trolls, are you.

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

Paul, you are not suggesting that UKBF is immune to trolls, are you.

Never seen one here!

 

[ctrlbrk]

Never seen one here!

From Wikipedia: (emphasys mine)

In internet slang, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community.

https://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/...ssinesses-that-make-billions-for-sale.414549/ 2,074 views

https://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/...ffilate-marketing-what-is-this-called.414702/ 439 views

These are just a couple of examples, started by the same person.

 

[japancool]

I doubt other threads have suffered because people have been replying to these ones. Most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

[ctrlbrk]

Most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Good for you.

 

[fisicx]

The whole point is a thread may initially seem to be a reasonable question, it’s only after a few responses that suspicion of troll emerges. If this is the case report it and the moderators will take action. A thread can be moved, closed or deleted. But you have to report first.

 

[ctrlbrk]

But you have to report first.

Appreciate what you're saying, I fully understand there is no expectation mods read everything, nor should they, although I see a few mods being quite active.

I also do realise this is not a straightforward topic, given stricter moderation may lead to fewer users, which generally isn't good business for online communities.

It all hinges on whether the loss of a few troublemakers makes any community a better place for the rest.

 

[fisicx]

We usually defer to @Ozzy on these matters. We will discuss but it’s usually Ozzy that wields the ban hammer. There are big plans afoot for the forum and if all goes well the pointless threads will become a rarity.

 

[Ozzy]

[[sorry I actually started a reply and then got called into a meeting, then another and then life took over - thank heavens this forum saves your progress so all wasn't lost!
Anyway this thread has moved on a few posts since I started writing this but anyway...]]

I thought I'd not respond to this question immediately as I did want to see what others thought.

the guy asking for feedback on something and then criticising the very feedback he sought

My immediate feeling on this one is that there isn't really anything viable I could do about this. Someone asks a question, people reply, they then don't like the replies...what do I do then, delete the thread?
No point banning the person, they already left of their own accord. No point deleting the thread because the responses are actually useful for others.
Although I agree with your sentiment, it is frustrating, I don't feel there is anything viable that could be done in this scenario.

or the snively kid

This I think is subjective. What is one persons "snively" kid is another persons future millionaire. The people who have been here a while will remember Mark Pearson, a young kid who kept coming with with hair brained ideas on UKBF, constantly trying this and that. He then formulated MyVoucherCodes with feedback from other members who entertained him still with their time, he sold that mega millions, was on TV Secret Millionaire and now runs a venture capital investment company.
I wouldn't want to crush someone's spirit just because their head is in the clouds, but I would want to give them honest and sometimes direct guidance based on my own experiences.

I have seen people being banned here for much less.

Hopefully not since March this year.

threads that are an obvious waste of time are going to be closed

I've been on two forums lately where political discussions have been banned. But then they realised that more than half the activity of the site had disappeared and along with it a few advertisers.

It's the nature of the beast

There is a risk I'd run with over moderating that could end up stifling conversation, and also potentially driving people away before they even contribute. As @cjd and @Ian J both say, everyone wants to be their own boss and run their own business, there are lots of TV shows that glamorise it and we're on the Internet. Put all that together and we're going to get some posts from some people who have their head in the clouds and no idea, but think their idea will make them the next Peter Jones. Some of those will go on to be very successful in their own right and some of them won't, and some of them will waste time in the context in which you refer...but I don't believe it would be fair to judge them on the quality of their first question. Poor questions get picked up by the community who advise the person to add context, and an email from me is now being sent to every new member who registers (automatically) and part of that email advises them to add context to their questions...but not everyone reads the emails as we see.

I am not saying this is a problem that can be eliminated but it can certainly be minimised so that it does not interfere with your enjoyment of the forum too much.

Honestly, and it is still early days, I feel a lot of what could be reasonably expected is already being done to minimise threads like the one that probably instigated this post. Things will evolve over time, and in the not too distant future I'll be kicking off our marketing campaigns to build more membership so it'll likely increase a bit, and when that happens we'll look at what we can if things become a problem. The bottom line though is I genuinely don't believe aggressive moderation or banning will be the answer. If anything we have become a little more relaxed on moderation and banning, less people being banned now than before.

 

[DontAsk]

These are just a couple of examples, started by the same person.

Look also at the overlap in people who responded. Trolls only survive by being fed.

 

[ctrlbrk]

Honestly, and it is still early days, I feel a lot of what could be reasonably expected is already being done to minimise threads like the one that probably instigated this post.

Thanks Ozzy, I do see and respect your point of view. I don't moderate UKBF so I don't know what may go on behind the scenes.

Mindful of the above I will revert to putting members I personally don't see adding value (to me) on my ignore list.