Should the rules on UKBF be relaxed a bit?

[Ray Newman]

UKBF editor here. Lots of interesting thoughts in this thread. I'll just pick up on a few things:

1. The original question didn't come from Sift/UKBF, though we're obviously interested in seeing the responses.

2. Forums in general aren't as popular as they used to be since the arrival of Twitter, LinkedIn, &c. But, believe it or not, this is one of the most active still around and there's no sense at our end of it being in bad shape.

3. I tend to agree that snarky, sarky responses to new members aren't helpful. Everybody has to start somewhere and the way we learn is by asking daft questions. I'd rather people who find them annoying ignore basic questions and leave others with more patience to give helpful answers.

4. I'm not inclined to relax the self promo rules at the moment. When I ask for a recommendation, I want a third party to endorse a product or service, not the product or service provider recommending themselves. But if someone says something like "If you're a plumber in Dorchester, let me know" then of course it's fine to pipe up.

5. The rules are fairly clear but they're hard to enforce. It's not automated and we don't have a vast team of moderators. As with most forums, up to and including Facebook, we rely on user reports. If you see something you think breaches the rules, click the report button and we'll make a measured judgement. (We can't promise you'll like the judgement but...)

6. We bend over backwards to avoid banning people or censoring conversations. I've hardly banned anyone since taking over this role from Kat back in January. But, as it's come up, this is a business forum, not a political soapbox, and there are certain topics I'd personally rather people discussed elsewhere. If I'm a first time visitor with a query about running my new business, I wouldn't be particularly interested in 'challenging' opinions on politics etc.

 

[estwig]

But, as it's come up, this is a business forum, not a political soapbox, and there are certain topics I'd personally rather people discussed elsewhere. If I'm a first time visitor with a query about running my new business, I wouldn't be particularly interested in 'challenging' opinions on politics etc.

I think you miss the point, like the thread about gambling which you locked. This isn't just a business forum, it's a community of business people. The gambling thread should have been moved to time out, not locked, if people want to discuss gambling or politics and do so in time out, that should be fine.

 

[Ray Newman]

I think you miss the point, like the thread about gambling which you locked. This isn't just a business forum, it's a community of business people. The gambling thread should have been moved to time out, not locked, if people want to discuss gambling or politics and do so in time out, that should be fine.

We had a lot of chat about what to do with that thread. My view was that it needed to stay in GB as it started out on topic, but drifted off. If we had a way to move *half* a thread to a new forum, I'd have done that.

 

[gpietersz]

Ray Newman, you really do need a way to move halves of threads. That is what the other forum I use heavily does in situations like this.

 

[Gordon - Commercial Finance]

We had a lot of chat about what to do with that thread. My view was that it needed to stay in GB as it started out on topic, but drifted off. If we had a way to move *half* a thread to a new forum, I'd have done that.

That thread was never business related. Should have been in TO from the start.

 

[estwig]

We had a lot of chat about what to do with that thread. My view was that it needed to stay in GB as it started out on topic, but drifted off. If we had a way to move *half* a thread to a new forum, I'd have done that.

The whole thread should have been moved to time out. Don't kill the community, or it'll just be newbies taking to newbies and getting nowhere, then with a lack of business advice, the newbies will stop coming too.

 

[Ray Newman]

The whole thread should have been moved to time out. Don't kill the community, or it'll just be newbies taking to newbies and getting nowhere, then with a lack of business advice, the newbies will stop coming too.

OK, OK, I surrender -- it's been moved to Time Out and unlocked.

 

[Gordon - Commercial Finance]

OK, OK, I surrender -- it's been moved to Time Out and unlocked.

Well that was easy. Come on Ray have a bit of backbone!


That was a joke, for the record.

 

[estwig]

OK, OK, I surrender -- it's been moved to Time Out and unlocked.

Thank you, the odd thing is I don't care, I don't gamble or talk politics, but plenty do seem to enjoy it.

 

[The Byre]

1. I have learned a great deal from this forum, simply because in the past, I just worried about my business and did not bother with the trials and tribulations of others.

2. I was shocked at the low levels of business knowledge and acumen within the start-up community. Nobody can have an in-depth knowledge of retail and contract law and business economics and company law and bookkeeping and all matters IT and and and - BUT they MUST have a basic knowledge of the basic principles of these fields.

3. I was similarly shocked at the short-termism that we see in most sectors of the larger business community that are dominated by listed companies being reflected in the start-up and SME communities. I have not yet seen a single posting asking how to structure a company so that it will still be there in 100 years' time for grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

4. I continue to be surprised by the numbers of startups that never get to start up, but crash-and-burn within a couple of years, leaving in their wake a trail of unpaid bills. I come from a society where almost every apprentice is already dreaming of the day when he or she will have completed their master's certificate and can start their own company in 15 or 20 years' time. Here it's a case of 'Have-a-go!' followed almost every time by compulsory liquidation and the 'White-Eared Elephant'.

5. Why the hell do so many owners/managers of SMEs find reading so damn difficult? Contracts - reports at Companies House - credit reports - don't you guys learn to read and write at school? How many times do we have to read "I have since discovered that they have had several companies liquidated and they still owe us £X,000s."? Whatever happened to reading up on this stuff BEFORE you give some chancer credit?

So given all of the above, I would very much like to see the continued good health of the forum community. It provides good 'first-aid' style knowledge and advice for many people who hitherto may have assumed that they were battling alone against deadbeat employees, deadbeat employers, deadbeat customers and the usual 'vulturesque' flock of rip-off merchants that prey upon startups that fall foul of points 2, 3, 4 & 5.

(P.S. Wherever you do business - buy the building and try to borrow as little as possible. That way you won't stumble on point 3 and end up here wringing your hands over point 4.)

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

I have an idea It might be a bad one
The owners of the site should try to promote the site to MPs and big business leaders
I have heard this site mentioned on LBC only once
Now theres a challenge
Who is going to phone in on a subject and explain . "The honest business views are for all to see on UK Business Forums ! "

I do know that two MPs read it but FFS please don't ask how I know because you wont get it from me .

 

[Financial-Modeller]

Not sure if this should have its own thread, but the Moderation function on UKBF seems to be doing more damage than good.

It seems that somebody who says something stupid, then gets called out for it, can request that their stupid post is removed, plus anything identifying that it was stupid, even when the post calling it out as stupid received thanks from other members for doing so.

Surely a basic premise of posting anything to the web is that it is permanent, so one stands by what one says, which should encourage one to not say stupid things.

Many other forums operate successfully on this basis.

If one expects that stupidity will be called out, it encourages one to check facts prior to posting, thereby increasing the quality of the content that is posted.

UKBF moderation policy encourages the opposite: freely post something stupid, in the knowledge that if someone responds in a manner that one doesn't like, one can ask for all reference to it to be removed. Is this a good use of moderators' time?

One potential consequence of this is that people posting intelligently will be less likely to contribute, leaving the forum to those who don't.

 

[UKSBD]

It seems that somebody who says something stupid, then gets called out for it, can request that their stupid post is removed, plus anything identifying that it was stupid, even when the post calling it out as stupid received thanks from other members for doing so.

The policy is already that posts don't get removed.

People can request their posts to be deleted, but they rarely are, and if they are it's usually a SIFT decision rather than a moderators.

They may get removed for other reasons, flaming, trolling, abuse, off-topic, but not because the poster requested it

 

[paulears]

The only posts I have noticed getting removed are ones that in this day and age should not be published by responsible people like the ones who host the forum. Some things are plain stupid, but apart from showing the poster up don't cause problems. Some however are just plain nasty, and these go - which seems the sensible thing. Can't say I'm unhappy at all by the way the mods deal with this. Works fine for me.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

So many long time members who have no time for posters who do not ask their questions in a manner they seem it should be, their replies are ignorant and insulting and i guess would never be said face to face , but they feel they can bully the poster

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

So many long time members who have no time for posters who do not ask their questions in a manner they seem it should be, their replies are ignorant and insulting and i guess would never be said face to face , but they feel they can bully the poster

https://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/threads/how-and-where-to-find-a-mentor.402248/

What do you expect Chris I actually think it is insult to approach business owners with this type of dross.
It would be advantageous for all if people like myself just ignored it but I am fuming as soon as I see this stuff

 

[Clinton]

That's a good example, @JEREMY HAWKE

I gave the OP a polite and helpful answer. What happened? Hilariously, s/he got deeply offended, called me rude and called my opinion useless.

Sometimes I wonder why I'm all sweetness and light around here.

Perhaps we should be expecting more of the quality of newbies UKBF allows on this site.

No, seriously.

How SIFT do it is not our problem, but it's up to management to maintain quality. Allow lower and lower quality newbies - in terms of not of their knowledge but their expectations and attitude - and you end up with problems.

Anyway, I've got a busy few weeks coming up and I've had my fill of numpties, so you guys have them all to yourselves for a bit.

Enjoy!

 

[Clinton]

PS: Tip for management, if they're interested:

I've owned big forums. The rules for newbies were more stringent. So, yes, your "no links" is a good rule. But then you give them links at 30 posts and you've built an incentive for them to make 30 brain dead posts just so they can acquire link dropping privileges. And we, the people who work tirelessly to generate content for you, have to trawl through that sh*t and read it.

Giveusabreak!

I experimented with a higher bar for newbies and it worked well - a higher bar in terms of quality of posts.

For example, "no fluff posts". How you define fluff is up to you but, for example, if someone posted a one liner demonstrating their stupidity, they got banned. No mercy. So a one liner asking just "how do I market my business?" would attract an immediate ban because it suggests a lazy clutz who couldn't be ars*d.

You don't need to give them any explanation, just ban them. You'll find the quality improving substantially.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

Guys you can simply shut up and not reply, you are not forced to reply if you dont like the question

 

[estwig]

Guys you can simply shut up and not reply, you are not forced to reply if you dont like the question

Radical!

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

Guys you can simply shut up and not reply, you are not forced to reply if you dont like the question

Never that easy !

 

[Clinton]

Guys you can simply shut up and not reply, you are not forced to reply if you dont like the question

It's not that simple.

It's an imposition to expect us to read lots of dumbass newbie posts - from the entitled, the arrogant, the lazy - to find one worth a reply.

Sorry, I still think it's a quality control issue.

 

[Financial-Modeller]

The policy is already that posts don't get removed.

People can request their posts to be deleted, but they rarely are, and if they are it's usually a SIFT decision rather than a moderators.

They may get removed for other reasons, flaming, trolling, abuse, off-topic, but not because the poster requested it

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Ray Newman]

Thanks for clarifying.

FWIW, we hardly ever delete posts or threads at user request, just anonymise them as we're required to do under our GDPR policy.

I've spent a fair bit of time this year explaining to people who want threads or posts deleted why I can't just click my fingers and do it -- that is, because it would make threads impossible to follow, and be a kick in the teeth to people who've taken the time to give helpful replies.

 

[Ray Newman]

Thanks for all the input here. Clearly some conflicting views so we won't be able to please everyone but the editorial team will be getting our heads together and working on a plan for some changes for next year and will put some ideas out for consultation.

So far, we particularly like the idea of a subforum *just* for newbies to ask what might seem like obvious questions.

In general, I'd like to see subforums getting more use, rather than almost everything ending up in 'General', which might mean us and mods being more active in moving threads where they belong.

 

[Newchodge]

I don't know if I reflect the norm, but I read posts. I rarely notice which forum or sub forum they are in.

 

[Clinton]

So far, we particularly like the idea of a subforum *just* for newbies to ask what might seem like obvious questions.

And maybe some additional rules for that subforum and for newbies!

1. Search for your answer before posting. Some questions have been asked a million times already ...and have been answered a million times.

2. Take the time and trouble to write a quality post. Be descriptive, clear and to the point in your descriptions. Some readers (and posters) have English as their second language. Use formal English rather than "I woz gonna lok n c m8" or "whatcha talkin bout bruvva?". It doesn't hurt to use paragraphs and full stops.

3. Don't state the obvious: If the discussion in a thread is about advanced SEO techniques, dropping in to explain what SEO stands for doesn't help - none of the posters in the thread need that information. Repeating, albeit in different words, a fact already expressed is also annoying. Either add something new...or stay out of the thread.

4. Don't ask a question that's already been answered in the thread. Particularly if it's a short thread with just 10 or 20 posts, read them all first.

5. If a thread has had no replies over the last 3 days, don't post in it unless you've got something extremely useful to add to that conversation.

6. Starting a thread asking just "How can I make money online?" will get you in trouble. If you want to persuade people to help you, don't act like the village idiot. Do a bit of research first and ask for specific help. Start by telling us what you've already tried, what ideas appeal to you, what skills you have available, where you are based etc. Then ask whether your idea could work, how to implement it or how to improve sales.

7. If you're making repeated short posts that neither add value nor further the conversation, it will be assumed that you're a spammer trying to build a postcount of 30 and you will be banned.

Good luck, Ray, I'll send you my invoice by email.

 

[The Byre]

It's an imposition to expect us to read lots of dumbass newbie posts - from the entitled, the arrogant, the lazy - to find one worth a reply.

That's today's society! Everyone is 'entitled' to start a business, despite the fact that they know nothing, have prepared nothing, have learned nothing, experienced nothing, read nothing - and are prepared to understand or accept even less!

Criticism? How dare you criticise me! I need instant potted knowledge and not a list of books I need to read or, worse still, courses I should attend!

 

[billybob99]

I got a warning for calling someone a dinosaur.

 

[Clinton]

Ray Newman looks like a dinosaur. Jeremy Hawke is a dinosaur. The Byre is president of the UK chapter of the dinosaur club I attend.

 

[fisicx]

And maybe some additional rules for that subforum and for newbies!

1. Search for your answer before posting. Some questions have been asked a million times already ...and have been answered a million times.

2. Take the time and trouble to write a quality post. Be descriptive, clear and to the point in your descriptions. Some readers (and posters) have English as their second language. Use formal English rather than "I woz gonna lok n c m8" or "whatcha talkin bout bruvva?". It doesn't hurt to use paragraphs and full stops.

3. Don't state the obvious: If the discussion in a thread is about advanced SEO techniques, dropping in to explain what SEO stands for doesn't help - none of the posters in the thread need that information. Repeating, albeit in different words, a fact already expressed is also annoying. Either add something new...or stay out of the thread.

4. Don't ask a question that's already been answered in the thread. Particularly if it's a short thread with just 10 or 20 posts, read them all first.

5. If a thread has had no replies over the last 3 days, don't post in it unless you've got something extremely useful to add to that conversation.

6. Starting a thread asking just "How can I make money online?" will get you in trouble. If you want to persuade people to help you, don't act like the village idiot. Do a bit of research first and ask for specific help. Start by telling us what you've already tried, what ideas appeal to you, what skills you have available, where you are based etc. Then ask whether your idea could work, how to implement it or how to improve sales.

7. If you're making repeated short posts that neither add value nor further the conversation, it will be assumed that you're a spammer trying to build a postcount of 30 and you will be banned.

Good luck, Ray, I'll send you my invoice by email.

All good, but the noobs that post the daft questions won't have read the rules.

New members that ask proper questions do get answered properly. The one line questions where zero research has been carried out often get short shrift. And even when they do get answered fully the op often never returns or doesn't like the answer.

 

[Scalloway]

The one line questions where zero research has been carried out often get short shrift. And even when they do get answered fully the op often never returns or doesn't like the answer.

I'm sure some first time posters never return is because they only get an email for the first reply and don't reaslise they need to login now and again.