Moderation

I see that a thread I started about Black Lives Matter has been moved to a category for “politicos” only with access approved/instigated by the moderator. I think that this important topic should be available to everyone who ventures on this site, not just those approved by the moderator. SE23 is a rich cultural mix and all should be welcomed to contribute to the forum. Creating a silo where Black Lives Matter discussions take place behind closed doors, with participants determined by an anti BLM moderator, is not representative of the SE23 community.

Hi Lin. It’s certainly a very important topic. However, it has always been the policy of this site to focus on directly local and community issues. While we are all affected by many and various political issues, a decision was taken early on to keep all political discussion away from the main forum. This is done whatever the topic and personal opinions of the moderating team.

Any forum member can request to be opted in to the Politicos section of the forum and there is no moderation of who can or cannot join.

I, for one, welcome the separation of politics away from local issues. I have no interest at all in debating politics with strangers on the internet - I am here for local communitymatters and to support our local businesses.

I mod on another forum (an allotment one) and we do get the odd member who wants to steer discussion to the evils of the EU or how bad Labour are, while most of us wan’t to talk about potato blight. It can get annoying and is often a distraction. If people want to join in the politics bit then there are no barriers to do so.

Why is the exams discussion still in the lounge? Who thought that this wasn’t a political discussion, surely not the same person who started the thread about grammar schools?

I would be interested to know if people automatically gain access to the politicos category if a thread they have contributed to is moved there. If not you might be excluding people from a discussion they are involved in.

Personally I don’t think the schools issue is a party-political issue, but rather an issue of policy across the board. But I take your point. And now it has become firmly political, I’m out. I remember a similar thread on TOSS that went the same way.

I’m happy for all posts going forwards to be split off to the Politicos section which gives people the option to carry on there if they wish. They can always opt back out of the politicos section if they want.

Because it didn’t need to be overtly political. But unfortunately people tend to blame Michael Gove for everything that’s wrong / stressful with exams, so it became very political very quickly. I wanted it to remain in the Lounge, however, as I wanted Rachael to be involved and she is (by choice) not in Politicos

As for people getting access to politicos, I did recently grant this to @Lin when we moved the BLM topic into politicos as she’d been involved in that discussion.

Please feel free to move the Exams thread to Politicos.

I am anti-Gove’s policies. If another party had brought in the same policies, I’d still be against them. I was very clear on that. It’s why I mentioned Kenneth Baker, education secretary under Thatcher and someone who is also anti-Gove and whose policies were ones I broadly agreed with, despite my being naturally left-leaning. Policy, not politics. It can be discussed in the same way that we discussed the new 20mph speed limit without ever mentioning the political make up of Lewisham Council.

But it’s been made political and expanded beyond the limited ‘general chitchat’ purpose of the Lounge. So let’s move it.

Sure thing. It’s now in Politicos.

Oh no I just wrote a long reply on the exams thread only to discover I no longer had access to it so couldn’t post!!!
One of my points was that it’s a good discussion and one I would like to contribute to but like RachaelDunlop that I wasn’t interested if it became a Tory v Labour debate. I am anti-Gove because I didn’t like his policies, I am not making a political statement by saying that.

I 100% agree with the decision to move it and all other political / religious and or other similar threads.

Personally I find they poison sites, create angst and generally involve people with entrenched views who never change their minds anyway. The main forum is for local issues and should stay that way.

They have made this change on another forum I am on and it has made the world of difference. If you want to get involved in these discussions do so, but if you don’t they are hidden from view.

Just because it wasn’t party political doesn’t stop it being political. I don’t do Politicos any more as there is a strong tendency to make everything party political there anyway. By moving the entire thread this is a bit like moving to Wider Topics in TOSS.

Agreed with @oakr on this - this shouldn’t be a focus on a local forum IMO, my bad for biting. Can we discuss local issues without moderators (!) making provocative political posts?

Ah, that’s annoying, sorry. You’re welcome to opt-in to politicos and you may find the auto-saved draft of your message still exists on that topic?

If you re-read my opening post on the Exams topic I hope you’ll agree it wasn’t an overtly political post.

When the discussion became political, and with the agreement of others, I moved it into Politicos.

On a broader note, the more I’ve learnt about politics, the more I’ve realised how much of our lives is affected by politics, and politicians. I know that political conversations can get fraught, which is why Politicos is opt-in.

This site is very flexible, and if there’s a topic you don’t like, or a category that you don’t like, you’re able to mute it, or simply not participate in it.

I’d agree that political conversation is not what I want from this particular forum and I usually steer well clear. I joined that conversation yesterday because it is a particularly raw topic for me. Not something I normally do and I was soon kicking myself.

I do think, Chris, it helps to distinguish politics and policy. Your assumption that my position was anti-Tory and bringing out your anti-Labour rhetoric to refute points I was making about policy (NOT politics) effectively closed down the debate, for me at least.

And that’s my last word on the subject. Back to drooling over the picture of the pizza at Chandos.

Well I can’t see it any more and don’t really want to. The post I refer to included a lot of provocative statements like head teachers liking Gove’s policies. A bit of a silly statement as anyone with a modicum of recent experience of the education sector would know. You didn’t stop there. As for @RachaelDunlop this touched a nerve for me - am sorry for escalating it.

Sorry also if this is uncomfortable for you but I am calling it as I see it. This is precisely the behaviour that occurred on TOSS that I know for a fact put a lot of people off. It would be a shame to reproduce this here.

The fact that only leftwing, pro-Labour arguments were allowed to be vocalised on TOSS put me off TOSS.

I’m surprised you found it provacative for me to post an open letter penned by 76 headteachers of outstanding schools in deprived areas. Why should their opinions be “haram” because they’re in the minority?

This whole atmosphere smacks to me of a politician being turned into a boogieman figure, with their positive achievements deliberately suppressed in order to keep the argument purely ideological and partisan.

Anyway, at the risk of this thread itself becoming an escalating political argument, I’m going to make this my last post here.

Here here. Politics in politicos. Though like many I’m becoming less inclined to participate. My life is political enough to allow it to dominate my down time.

As usual you cannot resist making party political comments. As this conversation is about moderation it is a shame that you are missing the point here, it is in the word.

I suppose if a few white kids with nose rings chain themselves to the FH WH Smith and complain about the environmental impact on black people under the guise of BLM then we could leave it in general.

Personally I would like to think that All Lives Matter but I appear to be a minority or just dont have a suitable bandwagon to jump on

Continuing the discussion from Black Lives Matter:

I think you miss the point about continuing to involve yourself in a discussion and in the same posts threatening to remove people and claiming that their behaviour has been against forum rules. It is not just about taking action, it is about making threats when you are the owner of the forum.

Michael, the problem is that Chris is the owner and has an opinion. I dont always agree with him but am happy to see what he has to say. Does he just sit out contentious issues to avoid finger pointing or does he get stuck in? He was called a racist, how should he respond?

@Michael I think discussion of moderation of Politicos threads should stay in the opt-in area. I don’t think it’s appropriate to quote someone out of context in a public area of the forum, when the rest of the thread is inaccessible to non-forum members reading, or members who haven’t opted in.

I think sometimes we have to be more objective when moderating posts. Proactively spotting when a topic is steering off its point, and be quick to split the topic, post a reminder / warning notice to advice why it was split, a link to the split part, and a request to please keep the political stand point out of things.

A simple thread focusing how the younger generation suffer due to the pressures put upon them by the education system in itself is NOT political. Just as a topic on depression does NOT have to focus on any failings in the NHS, but more how we can support those struggling.

I would implore people to think long and hard about turning things political. Like most I have no interest in the subject, and am VERY keen to avoid the whole area of the forum. But this does not mean we can’t have discussions and healthy conversations about the bits of the topics that matter. Whining about who did what and when is not helping anyone in their struggles to cope.
Discussion on how to change that, go for it in politicos.

With regards to the intentions on any member of forum staff. Please feel free to make objective and factual comments which may lead to better moderation of a forum. If you feel a certain member of the forum staff is being unfair or doing things to cause problems, please contact another member of the mod team with your concerns.
@anon64893700
@RachaelDunlop
@Londondrz
@anon5422159

We all have rather different views on matters, and you can be assured that it will be dealt with objectively.
Please however realise that it works both ways, and blatant flaunting of the forum rules will not go ignored. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated by anyone.

The decision on the BLM thread was the right one. It is NOT a local matter, but more a nationwide issue, if not global. Moving it where it will not disrupt the day to day running of the forum is the correct thing to do.

Re @anon5422159 being the owner and a user of the site, it is indeed an awkward situation, and one which was addressed at a very early stage in the forum’s development.
Those who know Chris is the owner have to be objective, and take posts in the context based on which account they are posted from.

Much like a friend who is a cop, hat off, lets have a laugh and be friends, hat on, I will nick you if you break the law.
Only those who know it is the same person will find conflict in what was said, and run the risk of taking it out of context. Anyone who doesn’t, won’t. They will just agree or disagree with the sentiment.

Again, maybe there is something to learn here, and maybe it is better for members of the mod team involved in a discussion to allow other team members less involved to take the required action, or if all are involved, suspend the thread, discuss it, and take agreed action.

This disrupts the smooth flow of the forum, but if seen as the best, maybe it is the most unbiased way to go,

Well I’m not going to start another thread about moderation in another area of the forum, and the thread in politicos had been terminated (at my suggestion).

I think I’m going to have to take a step back from the forum for a little bit and let some of these issues run their natural course without me. I’m not trying to stir up more trouble, but that seems to be the result of my posts at the moment.

In the case in point, the line between @anon5422159 as participant, moderator and owner was a little blurry. If two users are having a robust discussion and a moderator comes along and moderates the conversation that’s one thing. But in this discussion when he switched into moderator mode midflow it was hard not to see that as the owner of the site shutting down a conversation. Being told that there were sites that might be better suited to me is one thing coming from another user like me, but from a moderator / owner it could be interpreted as ‘piss off my site’ and even if I was trying to ignore the fact that he was a moderator, his responses later reinforced that he was. Sure that wasn’t the intent but if we are to be objective, we need some help in doing that and so I’d agree that someone else needs to moderate those discussions that the moderators are vocal in/drivers of/dominating.

I have to agree with Fran on many of the points.

anon64893700, thank you for your comments and level head as always.

@fran I understand your point, and take it all on board. I hope the suggestions I have made above are some way positive to move on from this.
I feel there is still a lot to learn, and one of those things is chemistry of the people on the forum. Discussions like this one certainly highlight some issues. But that is part and parcel of a forum with “free speech”. Using the phrase cautiously for obvious reasons.

We have a forum meeting towards the end of the month, and I can assure you these matters WILL get discussed. From misinterpretation, to misrepresentation, they are all hurdles which need to be overcome.

As too are the defining of the limits of each topic to all forum users.

Fran, personally from me, please don’t piss off, your input is in-depth, interesting, and raises valid stand points.

Ditto for Michael. There is no need to step back every time a contentious issue is discussed. Only though discussion do we get understanding and hopefully a commonality.

Obvs!

I agree with you John and @anon64893700 I don’t think anyone needs to step away from the forum. I think we all have different opinions on different things so we won’t always agree with each other.

At least on here we can discuss things in a decent manner to sort any problems out.

I know everyone that’s posted on this thread so far except @Foresthillnick @oakr & @Lin (but I may know them) and all are genuine, generous, nice and decent people - so just because we might have different views sometimes please don’t let this stop anyone from posting on the forum.

I am quite annoyed with @Londondrz though as he only came and dropped a couple of computers to me today for the library - How dare he do that to benefit the whole community

And you didnt even shoot me with your Nerf gun!!

Hahaha, there’s always a next time

2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Community Library computers

We’ve had a little chat about this amongst the mods.

Wherever there’s ambiguity like this, we’ll aim to be clear and say “with my moderator hat on…” before doing any moderation.

Or, if there’s a major conflict of interests, we’ll do a “call to the @moderators” to ask that an uninvolved moderator steps in to take action objectively.

What I have seen on some forums is that you have different moderators for different areas. So without wishing to pick on him, for example Chris would never be a moderator of the politics area (though as the owner he can clearly do as he likes but assuming he was not). Others would moderate these areas which they did not themselves overly contribute (in a potentially controversial manner anyway).

What I have seen moderators who clearly have a view on some things, is either say as diplomatically as they can, or simply reply interesting points even if they disagree. The same as in work, if you are really worked up about something \ annoyed and want to email someone about it, you are always best to wait and do it with a cool head.

I don’t think you want or need to over-complicate things in the relative early days - but the mods should be the least controversial of all members in my opinion.

Fair points there @oakr
Different mods for different areas is in theory a good idea, but in its infancy, at the moment there are a limited number of mods. Some who choose not to participate in certain categories, such as Politicos for myself. However, if called upon, I am happy to review flagged posts, or comments made by others highlighted to me.

There is indeed much to learn when it comes to user vs moderator. It is simple in theory to remain objective when needed, but sometimes areas of interest conflict. For me, I am who I am, and I am quite happy to say what I see at any time.

From threads like this, we are learning, as are the users. Discussing behaviour openly, and hashing out any misunderstandings.
Would be interested on your opinions too @Lin

A post was merged into an existing topic: Keeping topics “on topic”

Classic example of taking a topic and integrating it into another discussion. Not applicable to everyones view point, so possibly not valid. *tssk

With regards of a simplification of things as @oakr suggested. A few “how to” posts on the basic functions, less on the compliance of things.
Lets be honest, who reads the T&C’s anyway? iTunes T&C’s anyone? lol
So having a few simple posts to explain how people could improve their experience is possibly a pro.

lol, my bad (but don’t assume malice). There are two topics here that are very similar and I put my response in the wrong one. I clearly need some re-education! I’ve split it off to the “Keeping topics on topic” topic

sigh
Sometimes I wonder about you Mr Beach lol
No worries, I will delete the mark from your name in my “annoying users” database

Like I say, much to learn, for all

I know @RachaelDunlop and @anon64893700 prefer not to get involved in Politicos at all, although I appreciate @anon64893700’s offer to step in if required. @Londondrz is involved in Politicos and he has a diplomatic and conciliatory voice that fits the bill perfectly.

So I think when we get extreme / belligerent behaviour in Politicos, we ought to make a call to @moderators and see if @anon64893700 or @Londondrz can step in.

I know I’m not neutral, and I know I occasionally need moderating myself. I trust the opinions of the other mods and will go with their decisions.

I’m just confused. So many threads. So many.

Happy to help if needed

How do I remove myself from the politicos category? I muted it a while back but have no will power and can’t resist peeking and then can’t resist getting involved. What this most recent exchange led me to realise was that I don’t enjoy those conversations and they detract from community news. So I’d like to be removed from the group.

Just wanted to add for newish users that right from the start of this forum @anon5422159 wanted everyone to be involved in how we shape this for the whole community. So this thread to me just proves that.

I’ve not witnessed this kind of conversation on any other local community forum so hats off for that Chris!

Chris also involved myself & @Londondrz in choosing the name for this forum & @anon64893700 was joined to the conversation

As the owner & builder of this site he could do as he wants, but is clearly more interested in what we all want as a whole.

Does Chris have strong views on certain topics - Yes
Does that make him a bad person - No

Do I have strong views on certain topics - Yes
Does that make me a bad person - I hope not

My point I’m trying to make is we all can have strong views on different things (guilty as charged) but this shouldn’t turn us against each other it should make us come together to work things out.

Anyway rant over, I just wanted to point out the input all can have on here as opposed to other forums.

I will never be a moderator on here & said it right from the start as I’m a dimwit when it comes to IT & far too opinionated for my own good which can get me in trouble quite often

My last comment on moderation in here, is something that possibly already happens in the politics area, but sometimes people have expressed their views and you are better off just closing it, everyone has had their say, arguments are circular and nothing is really gained from further discussion. People can read it and form their own opinions but sometimes for the sanity of users and as importantly moderators it’s best to close these things off.

@anon5422159 Not sure how to do this still.

Agree with that. The only issue arises when one user feels they are being muted by the closing of the thread. Very much the admin having the last word.

Good to know where I slotted in lol.

I don’t think anyone called Chris a bad person. But the mixed messages from the combo of owner, moderator and user can cause confusion. This is the point being addressed.

Was just mentioning I can have very strong views sometimes so why can’t Chris just because he is a moderator.

And regardless if we agree or disagree

Thank you for the kind words @Pauline.

I’ve removed you from Politicos on your request, @fran.

@anon64893700 - you are an owner of the Politicos group, so you can add and remove people using the group page. Likewise, I gave ownership to @Brett, @Michael, @TimLund and several other regulars so they’re able to add and remove people. Please don’t remove me - I know you want to, and I probably deserve it

I fully appreciate that @Pauline, nothing wrong with airing your views on things, heaven knows I do it enough. But there has to be a clear distinction between who making that statement, the person or the member of staff. Which is the point I have been trying to make in this thread.

All users need to be aware of the differences of when a moderator is just posting as a user, or posting in an official capacity. This helps break down any animosity between people, and also distinguishes when a post should be taken very seriously and comments adhered to.

Brief apology for not having really followed what’s been going on in the section recently.

I’ll try to give the matter of this thread some more thought when I’ve had a look to see what the issues are.

I think that’s fair enough Michael, BTW think I’ve worked out how to do the quote thingy

I’d just like to add for newish members who weren’t involved from the beginning that @anon5422159 spent a lot of his own time, money, and effort on this forum so we could all speak freely as opposed to being blocked, having posts changed etc on #TOSS (abbreviation for the other similar site) so I love the fact that this conversation is going on for everyone to give their input

This is like listening to people in animated discussion about a film one hasn’t seen and finally realising that one is glad one hasn’t.

We were thinking of banning you completely from the forum if you dont shape up Chris. I shall be doing an inspection tonight. Kit not in good order, shoes not shined, that’s it, you are out!

No problem Tim, it is one of those things you are either aware of and want to see clarification on, or unaware of it, and unaffected.

Nice one Pauline lol, its easier to do multi quotes when on a PC, but doable all the same.
Indeed, freedom to express yourself is key indeed. So we have to make sure that people can do that, in a polite and respectable way, and do not single people out to disagree with, and turn a thread into a personal attack.
At the same time, moderators need to be seen as acting fairly and unbiased. So if involved in the discussion, they are not the right person to make decisions on the thread.
PS, the mods have invested a chunk of time into this forum too

Well that’s one way of looking at it. I wish I hadn’t seen this film

I keep getting notices of updates on this topic. But when I go to the page there are none. The last one I can see is @anon64893700’s post in response to TimLunk, Pauline and robin.orton about an hour ago.

Will ask Chris to have a look. John

Taking a look at the issue now guys. Shouldn’t happen anymore in the next few mins.

Sorry about that, took a while for Chris to have a look. Should be ok now. Apart from the notification you just got for this reply lol.

@Starman and @Cazimo - apologies for the glitch in notifications.

It looks like this topic has run its course (perhaps several courses), so it may be wise to close it. Closing a topic leaves it visible, but means it cannot be replied to.

New, specific, topics can be created for any suggestions or concerns on moderation in the future.

We’ll close this topic within 24hrs unless there are any objections.

As above, agreed. Thanks Chris and anon64893700.

anon64893700Mod. John_Mod. Cute.

ahem am I not cute?

Simple but to the point. Hope you agree.

Okay. Go on. But apparently also needy.

Ahem. flashes ankle

What have you started now @starman

Anyway, I read something about post hijacks the other day, so lets call it a day eh