Unecessary censorship by moderators?

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:34 am

Yes, it reappeared last night, I couldn't get it in my list of contents of the Reference Material section all evening.

Sid, my personal belief IS that EVERYTHING should be preserved. Feldgrau censors just the worst of personal insult, while on Feldpost a moderator was castigated by management for even THREATENING to delete content.

AHF seems to be different, there's a tendancy to delete posts relating to an original insulting or off-topic post, no matter what material is in them. In effect lopping off a branch. Some moderators are better than others at opening new threads instead of just plain deletion, however, which is good; but straight deletion has resulted in good material being lost to posterity as well as bad. A uniform policy would be better, either one way OR the other.

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:02 am

phylo_roadking wrote:Yes, it reappeared last night, I couldn't get it in my list of contents of the Reference Material section all evening.

Sid, my personal belief IS that EVERYTHING should be preserved. Feldgrau censors just the worst of personal insult, while on Feldpost a moderator was castigated by management for even THREATENING to delete content.

AHF seems to be different, there's a tendancy to delete posts relating to an original insulting or off-topic post, no matter what material is in them. In effect lopping off a branch. Some moderators are better than others at opening new threads instead of just plain deletion, however, which is good; but straight deletion has resulted in good material being lost to posterity as well as bad. A uniform policy would be better, either one way OR the other.

All three sites do the Moderation as they see fit and it will suit some and not suit others. Moderators are either to lax, to strict, to slow to act, to fast to lock. Its a unwinnable position, you just try your best.

I've had no real contact with Feldpost, but you will find some knowledgeable people will post mainly on say Feldgrau and not the AHF, or vice-versa, or that they post on both in equal amounts.

Its easy to blame the Moderators but those who cast the stones should look closer to home for those to blame. Rather than informing the Moderator of a flamming post or personnel attack, they respond in kind and a valuable thread becomes mired in crap. The Moderator comes along cleans it up, only for a petulant poster to complain about how the insults have been edited-Simple don't post the F#####g things in the first place.

Moderators time is as precious as everyonelses and you dont want the whole time being spent on editing the thoughtless and selfish posts of others.

I have removed whole threads in the past. Then after a week or so, gone into it and removed the crap and replaced back on the board without a pipsqueak from those who posted the crap.

Each Moderator has he own individual style and though this may cause annomolies within any Forum, I'm personally thankful that we are not all robots.

Regards

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:13 am

Hi Andy,

I think we all recognise that being a conscientious moderator is a time consuming task made less rewarding by ingrates.

However, I am trying to make their lives a bit easier by establishing "rules of engagement" for them.

If they delete misdemeanours they are likely to have to do the same again to later posts by the same culprits. By all means close deteriorating or offensive threads, but give an explanation, name names and leave the thread intact so that positive contributions aren't deleted along with negative ones and other posters can see clearly what the boundaries are.

Cheers,

Sid.

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:37 am

sid guttridge wrote:Hi Andy,

I think we all recognise that being a conscientious moderator is a time consuming task made less rewarding by ingrates.

However, I am trying to make their lives a bit easier by establishing "rules of engagement" for them.

If they delete misdemeanours they are likely to have to do the same again to later posts by the same culprits. By all means close deteriorating or offensive threads, but give an explanation, name names and leave the thread intact so that positive contributions aren't deleted along with negative ones and other posters can see clearly what the boundaries are.

Cheers,

Sid.

Hi Sid

I can't speak and won't attempt to speak for the Mods here, as I'm sure they will add there views. The 'Rules of Engagement' are already in place, as set out within the General rules on all Forums.

You will never get a uniform interpretation of those rules because all Mods are different. Yes we can all spot the obvious violations but some posters are very adept at skating along the thin ice of acceptability. I have seen Moderators here and over at AHF treat similar rules trangressions in different ways. You will never change that to suit everyones viewpoint.

I understand where your coming from in regards to naming and shaming but the problem then arises of 'baiting'. There are many skilled baiters out there, who just love to bait other members. I'm sure we've all met them in cyperspace. This only increases the work of Moderators in my experience.

I think most Moderators give some explanation as to there actions, but in the main, the more detailed explanation is done by PM to the guilty party. Eventually if a poster doesn't heed the warnings, you end up seeing the words to the effect off-Banned for consistent rule infractions etc.

Regards

Paddy Keating · Post by **Paddy Keating** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:30 pm

What you will never see are reasons like "Banned for questioning the unassailable probity of our sponsors/management" or "Banned for embarrassing moderator/webmaster/sponsor/one of our gang by arguing in a superior manner". Nor will you see "Banned for being blunt", "Banned for calling a spade a spade instead of a bloody shovel" or "Banned for refusing to kowtow to control freakery, Sawdust Caesars, and bullying". And you will never see "Banned for objecting to Bolchevik apologia" or "Banned for objecting to the baiting of German veterans of WW2".

PK

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:38 pm

Hi Paddy

I have yet to hear of a instance where a Sponsors 'feelings' have been taken into account before deciding whether to ban somebody or not.

Though know doubt you will enlighten me

Neither will you see members on the whole apologising for infractions.

One Forums 'Control Freakery' is another persons discipline and likewise one Forums Liberal controls is another persons idea of anarchy.

The simple idea is to stay away from the Forums you dislike because of the Moderation and concentrate on those that you do.

The two word phrases you dont see alot from either member or moderator is "I'm sorry" and "Yes your right and I was wrong" or words to that effect. Oh and a third, "Thank You".

Moderation isn't a exact science, no Forum is perfect in how or when it applies or enforces its rules etc. Moderation to an extent is opinion based and those opinions can be coloured/tainted by several factors, some of which you have eluded too.

Regards

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:40 am

Hi Paddy,

Perhaps because most moderators aren't so petty?

Cheers,

Sid.

Paddy Keating · Post by **Paddy Keating** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:42 pm

Absolutely, Andy. By the way, I think you'll find that many people have been canned over the years from major websites like the Wehrmacht Awards Forum and German Daggers Dot Com for upsetting dealer-sponsors by catching them out selling fakes time and again.

I was canned as a moderator on one of those forums for refusing to censor such posts from members and for posting a couple of examples of my own. As for the rest, we know it goes on.

Sid, you're completely missing the point...

Toodle Pip,

PK

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:06 pm

Ahem, wasn't there someone on HERE about a year ago caused Jason some embarassment with a sponsor?

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:21 am

Paddy Keating wrote:Absolutely, Andy. By the way, I think you'll find that many people have been canned over the years from major websites like the Wehrmacht Awards Forum and German Daggers Dot Com for upsetting dealer-sponsors by catching them out selling fakes time and again. I was canned as a moderator on one of those forums for refusing to censor such posts from members and for posting a couple of examples of my own. As for the rest, we know it goes on.

PK

Hi Paddy

I keep forgeting about Militaria, since its not my thing. Anyone selling fakes/copies as originals should be outed.

Regards

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:08 am

Hi Phylo,

Fascinating. I must have missed that. Tell us more.....

Cheers,

Sid.

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:55 am

I don't remember the details now, but someone said something in a thread that "raised questions in the House" outside of the Forum and the issue had to be dealt with.

Paddy Keating · Post by **Paddy Keating** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:21 am

I have to admit, despite my previous championing of freedom of speech on forums, that I am changing my views. Perhaps draconian control is the only way to prevent troublesome elements from introducing chaos and confusion. Never thought I'd feel this way but there you are.

PK

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:27 am

Hi Paddy,

You may be surprised at your totalitarian tendencies, but I don't think many others will be!

Cheers,

A strangely unsurprised Sid.

Paddy Keating · Post by **Paddy Keating** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:02 am

Oh...no...I'm not in the least surprised by the tendencies, my dear fellow. I have always had them. I am mildly amused that my efforts to evolve into a democrat keeping being thwarted by encounters with people who, regrettably, conform to all my petty bigotries and prejudices and do not conform to my undoubtedly strange notions of manliness, honour and righteousness, to borrow a term from old school biker terminology.