Moderation Suggestions
- This topic has 293 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I once a long time ago suggested to you, Vin, that you should volunteer as a moderator. I still think that you should. We should applaud Mod1 for not standing down and weathering the criticisms of himself when he could easily have said …fuck this for a lark, i don't need the hassle but i think he thought that if every branch officer could not take and respond to criticism, the Party democracy in the long run would suffer. Once more, i suggest Vin (or anybody else) to take on the task of moderation. Rather than be an antagonist with the present Mod1, time for some to co-operate with him so he can concentrate upon other issues more to his liking. I actually believe that in this particular duty, a non-member can accept the duty as moderator, if willing, since it is an open forum. Is there anything against that in any of our rules (looking at you YMS, our unofficial Party lawyer)?
alanjjohnstone wrote:I once a long time ago suggested to you, Vin, that you should volunteer as a moderator. I still think that you should. We should applaud Mod1 for not standing down and weathering the criticisms of himself when he could easily have said …fuck this for a lark, i don't need the hassle but i think he thought that if every branch officer could not take and respond to criticism, the Party democracy in the long run would suffer. Once more, i suggest Vin (or anybody else) to take on the task of moderation. Rather than be an antagonist with the present Mod1, time for some to co-operate with him so he can concentrate upon other issues more to his liking. I actually believe that in this particular duty, a non-member can accept the duty as moderator, if willing, since it is an open forum. Is there anything against that in any of our rules (looking at you YMS, our unofficial Party lawyer)?My thoughts exactly Alan regarding taking the hit on democracy. When I recall the many times this has occurred I'm constanly drawing the lessons from the experience. OK I might have been in error to take the action I did, but on reflection the party and myself have learnt from it and adjusted accordingly through the democratic process.I – and others – have been thinking for many months on how the role of moderation can be improved and made more transparent and efficient. For instance the PM function is under utilised imo. Again I have little time to welcome new users to the forum. Unfortunately, they can only be put into practice once some other party member joins me. Fortunately party positions are only open to party members who are accountable to the party as a whole. A non-member is at the end of the day are only accountable to themselves.Read your rulebook.
I did as you asked…read the rules…still none the wiser since moderator is not a Party officer as cited in the rule book…So probably an appointee of a committee, i guess by the Internet Committee…so a sub-committee of one (yourself) right now.btw, do you report to conference or ADM or is it the IC on your behalf?I think technically the SOYMB blog is a sub-committee of the IC but we do report direct and very rarely interact with it. If we do get a non-member vulunteer as moderator, perhaps the EC could adjudicate on his or her eligibility and perhaps make a concession (to later be ratified by conference) .
alanjjohnstone wrote:Once more, i suggest Vin (or anybody else) to take on the task of moderation. Rather than be an antagonist with the present Mod1, time for some to co-operate with him so he can concentrate upon other issues more to his liking.I think you represent most people's perception of this situation: I have nothing better to do than be antagonistic with the Mod.This is untrue.If he gave up suspending me and dumping my posts, I would just get on with it and concentrate on more important issuesWhy doe these problems only occur on this forum? And not just with the current Mod. It seems to be in the mindset of members
Vin wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:Once more, i suggest Vin (or anybody else) to take on the task of moderation. Rather than be an antagonist with the present Mod1, time for some to co-operate with him so he can concentrate upon other issues more to his liking.I think you represent most people's perception of this situation: I have nothing better to do than be antagonistic with the Mod.This is untrue.If he gave up suspending me and dumping my posts, I would just get on with it and concentrate on more important issuesWhy doe these problems only occur on this forum? And not just with the current Mod. It seems to be in the mindset of members
Don't suppose for one moment that you've considered that it might, just might, be your mindset that's the problem here?
Vin wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:Once more, i suggest Vin (or anybody else) to take on the task of moderation. Rather than be an antagonist with the present Mod1, time for some to co-operate with him so he can concentrate upon other issues more to his liking.I think you represent most people's perception of this situation: I have nothing better to do than be antagonistic with the Mod.This is untrue.If he gave up suspending me and dumping my posts, I would just get on with it and concentrate on more important issuesWhy doe these problems only occur on this forum? And not just with the current Mod. It seems to be in the mindset of members
Comrade if I was to comply with your request it would mean me facing charges of being detimental. You are actually asking me to be ultra selective with your posts and discriminate against other users. Obviously, your typical knee-jerk reaction fails to consider the implications and consquences of what you are putting to paper.Or on the other hand you are being deliberately antagonistic? Either way, I can assure you I refuse to even consider such a suggestion.
Surely a non party member of the forum could be enlisted to perform moderation duties. If for instance a sympathiser were to volunteer their time and energy, what would be the fears in allowing such a scenario?Surely if a major problem arose a non SPGB member moderator would expect to be removed from that post and even if warranted, removed from the forum. No different to a party member.Such supporter inclusivity could be a positive move for the SPGB as a whole.
Yes, or we could just disband the party and use this forum to talk about flowers. We could do lots of things, but personally, handing the keys to the platform to someone who is unable or unwilling to gain actual membership of the party is not one of them.
moderator1 wrote:Comrade if I was to comply with your request it would mean me facing charges of being detimental. You are actually asking me to be ultra selective with your posts and discriminate against other users. Obviously, your typical knee-jerk reaction fails to consider the implications and consquences of what you are putting to paper.I don't think you get the message, you are too focused om my posts. I will repeat: other members are off topic more than me but receive no warnings. This has been pointed out to you by another member. I don't ask that you ignore the rules. but stop applying them selectively, simples. Alb, gnome, Alan etc etc have all been off topic . Is it action detrimental to ignore this? Why would it be action detrimental to treat me as you treat other cdes? Either suspend the lot or stop suspending me otherwise that could be deemed action detrimental
YMS, Running a Forums is a specialist area making it even more important that one or two members should not have the 'keys'At least a non-member has no axe to grind or desire to influence party policy from a position of control. Not saying it is happening but it is conceivable in the future.After all the party has used non-member printers, glaziers, electricians, lawers etc. Indeed we allowed specialists who were non-members to produce a party video.
Young Master Smeet wrote:Yes, or we could just disband the party and use this forum to talk about flowers. We could do lots of things, but personally, handing the keys to the platform to someone who is unable or unwilling to gain actual membership of the party is not one of them.How is it "handing the keys to the platform"? The same controls would exist for a non party member as a party member. Moderators surely have limited access to the system? Any moderator would be subject to being removed from those duties and even completely removed from the forum, should they abuse the position?The way I see it regular users of any forum, inevitably become a community. The main objection can only be that some party members may object to having their wrist slapped by a non party member.
Technical administration is not the same thing as moderation, and even then, for a third paty to be used we'd need a commercial contract. As a party resource, we need a chair familiar with the party case, and with a demonstrable commitment to the party. This forum does not belong to its regular users, it belongs to the socialist party, and it's democratic institutions.
Vin wrote:moderator1 wrote:Comrade if I was to comply with your request it would mean me facing charges of being detimental. You are actually asking me to be ultra selective with your posts and discriminate against other users. Obviously, your typical knee-jerk reaction fails to consider the implications and consquences of what you are putting to paper.I don't think you get the message, you are too focused om my posts. I will repeat: other members are off topic more than me but receive no warnings. This has been pointed out to you by another member. I don't ask that you ignore the rules. but stop applying them selectively, simples. Alb, gnome, Alan etc etc have all been off topic . Is it action detrimental to ignore this? Why would it be action detrimental to treat me as you treat other cdes? Either suspend the lot or stop suspending me otherwise that could be deemed action detrimental
Evidence please that "other members are off-topic more than me and receive no warnings".
moderator1 wrote:Evidence please that "other members are off-topic more than me and receive no warnings".I have given you evidence. It is all over the forum see for eg Are physical meetings the best form of democratic control in 2015? A thread started by myself and recieved no on topic posts, well almosrst none no members warned.
Vin wrote:moderator1 wrote:Evidence please that "other members are off-topic more than me and receive no warnings".I have given you evidence. It is all over the forum see for eg Are physical meetings the best form of democratic control in 2015? A thread started by myself and recieved no on topic posts, well almosrst none no members warned.
No comrade you have not given me the evidence. In fact all you have provided is one assertion after another that there are more users off-topic than yourself. And then you have the audacity to imply that I should gather this evidence based on your hearsay? Surely you don't take me for a fool? And for what pupose I ask myself? Sorry but I'm not into playing games of this nature. And its not the first time I've requested you to prove your point. Once you find the evidence which will stand up to scrutiny you will most certainly have a case. Until then any further assertions made by you will not be taken seriously.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.