Great British Insults Dying Out!
News0 min ago
Secret Moderators
467 Answers
I would like to acknowledge that there are some accounts that have been created by our moderators, to help them control the community, without breaking their normal identity.
Having multiple AnswerBank accounts is against site rules. However, these accounts have been approved by the Editors.
These moderators will be added to this thread, and you should give them as much respect as you would give to an Editor.
If you are a moderator, and would like to have one of these accounts, please send us an email.
Having multiple AnswerBank accounts is against site rules. However, these accounts have been approved by the Editors.
These moderators will be added to this thread, and you should give them as much respect as you would give to an Editor.
If you are a moderator, and would like to have one of these accounts, please send us an email.
Answers
Zacsmaster - It looks like I started all of this last night. In the past I removed posts and had to watch as a row breaks out about who was responsible and why. I can now use my usual name to remove the posts and explain why in my secretmod name. I will also be able to warn posters to kerb their tempers and it might result in less suspensions happening.
16:23 Mon 26th Sep 2022
16:16- I honestly don't think so, jno. Anyone without the courage of their conviction, shouldn't be removing a post anyway. Imv, as little should be removed as reasonably possible.
Anyone willing to be a mod now, would be blamed for every decision made- like Andy is. I think, now, it might probably be better to allow mods to put their name to a removal along with the reason.
That should reduce erroneous removed answers.
Anyone willing to be a mod now, would be blamed for every decision made- like Andy is. I think, now, it might probably be better to allow mods to put their name to a removal along with the reason.
That should reduce erroneous removed answers.
// [My suggestion] should reduce erroneous removed answers. //
What "erroneous removed answers", though? Multiple times, the Editors have confirmed that they (a) review all decisions taken, and (b) are happy with them all -- or at the very least the overwhelming majority. Now, granted, you could argue that the Editors themselves are "wrong", in the sense that the rules themselves might need some changes, but in that case the moderation itself still isn't an issue.
An alternative explanation might be that those users who feel that answers were removed erroneously themselves have missed something. This rarely seems to figure in the complaints. Perhaps some increased transparency would help, for sure, but not because the moderation itself is flawed.
What "erroneous removed answers", though? Multiple times, the Editors have confirmed that they (a) review all decisions taken, and (b) are happy with them all -- or at the very least the overwhelming majority. Now, granted, you could argue that the Editors themselves are "wrong", in the sense that the rules themselves might need some changes, but in that case the moderation itself still isn't an issue.
An alternative explanation might be that those users who feel that answers were removed erroneously themselves have missed something. This rarely seems to figure in the complaints. Perhaps some increased transparency would help, for sure, but not because the moderation itself is flawed.
Jim, the editors might give reports accompanying deletions a cursory glance but I don’t for a moment believe they ‘review all deletions’. I have never seen a removed post restored unless specifically requested but I’ve seen countless posts that broke no rules removed. Ive even seen people who broke no rules removed. It’s nonsense to suggest the moderation isn’t flawed. It is.
"I’ve seen countless posts that broke no rules removed. Ive even seen people who broke no rules removed. It’s nonsense to suggest the moderation isn’t flawed. It is."
You have seen posts re-instated because someone has asked for that.
If, as you claim, posts abiding by the rules have been deleted, would their authors not have challenged them and seen them re-instated? Perhaps it could have gone either way but if the author isn't fussed, why re-instate it?
When you notice a post has been deleted, can you mind on the contents of that post, word-for-word?
I have seen posts that blatantly broke the rules but then the author swears blind it was fine and dandy.
Why would someone who has broken no rules be banned? It is possible that there is something you're not aware of which would justify that action.
You have seen posts re-instated because someone has asked for that.
If, as you claim, posts abiding by the rules have been deleted, would their authors not have challenged them and seen them re-instated? Perhaps it could have gone either way but if the author isn't fussed, why re-instate it?
When you notice a post has been deleted, can you mind on the contents of that post, word-for-word?
I have seen posts that blatantly broke the rules but then the author swears blind it was fine and dandy.
Why would someone who has broken no rules be banned? It is possible that there is something you're not aware of which would justify that action.
This thread could go on for years and the problem would still remain unresolved.
ABeds need to work out what they want from the site.
Deletions need to be categorised - to distinguish spam and totally inappropriate answers from the rest.
The mods should have to explain why they have removed any posts that are due to infighting and the usual human bad behaviour.
I think that mods should be visible but I understand why some folk might not wish to reveal that they are a mod.
On the brights side - I have bought some popping corn for the microwave, anybody want to buy some?
ABeds need to work out what they want from the site.
Deletions need to be categorised - to distinguish spam and totally inappropriate answers from the rest.
The mods should have to explain why they have removed any posts that are due to infighting and the usual human bad behaviour.
I think that mods should be visible but I understand why some folk might not wish to reveal that they are a mod.
On the brights side - I have bought some popping corn for the microwave, anybody want to buy some?
Since the overwhelming majority of moderation is pretty trivial stuff, really -- deleting spam accounts, closing dead threads that the spammers reactivate for whatever reason -- then I don't see any reason not to take seriously the idea that the Editors are able to keep track of any of the more possibly controversial decisions. So for them to repeatedly stress, publicly and privately, that they're satisfied with the moderation, suggests that in this too they ought to be listened to.
Wolf, I would suggest Eds decide what they want they want from the site?
Professional expertise, chat and friendliness, longterm users, younger people, and so on. It can't be everything to everyone.
I would suggest their USP is slightly more mature members, and it shouldn't resemble FB, Twitter etc. Part of its charm is that it isn't just the same as all the others. However, adults do like to be treated as such. Anyone about to say "act like one then".... is getting it the wrong way round.
Professional expertise, chat and friendliness, longterm users, younger people, and so on. It can't be everything to everyone.
I would suggest their USP is slightly more mature members, and it shouldn't resemble FB, Twitter etc. Part of its charm is that it isn't just the same as all the others. However, adults do like to be treated as such. Anyone about to say "act like one then".... is getting it the wrong way round.
THECORBYLOON
//"I’ve seen countless posts that broke no rules removed. Ive even seen people who broke no rules removed. It’s nonsense to suggest the moderation isn’t flawed. It is."//
/You have seen posts re-instated because someone has asked for that./
Never seen that. I’m still yet to fathom why being chased by a herd of cows whilst serving in Northern Ireland was removed, no satisfactory explanation to its deletion, zero reinstatement.
It certainly made up my mind for me in regards to making a donation to the site.
But as has been mentioned when I glanced in on the thread, some are obviously and blatantly favoured over others.
//"I’ve seen countless posts that broke no rules removed. Ive even seen people who broke no rules removed. It’s nonsense to suggest the moderation isn’t flawed. It is."//
/You have seen posts re-instated because someone has asked for that./
Never seen that. I’m still yet to fathom why being chased by a herd of cows whilst serving in Northern Ireland was removed, no satisfactory explanation to its deletion, zero reinstatement.
It certainly made up my mind for me in regards to making a donation to the site.
But as has been mentioned when I glanced in on the thread, some are obviously and blatantly favoured over others.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles36 mins ago
And Another One Bites The Dust.
News37 mins ago
