A change proposial in policies.

[Ott Rovgeisha]

I have a proposal about the forum's rules.

As you probably know, whenever a moderator decides that certain posts or remarks within a post are insulting, uncivil, sarcastic or rude, he or she removes that message and leaves a new message instead The message says something to the effect of the following: "rude, uncivil or sarcastic remark removed".

This is not made clickable, so other forum members or visitors cannot read it, only the label remains, that says that the poster was rude.

Unless a post contains obvious vulgarities or obvious personal insults, it is not always very clear to make a distinction, whether a particular remark was really rude or sarcastic or not.

Therefore it is left to a moderator to "decide" what they think is rude or insulting etc.

After removing a message, only a label "rude remark deleted" remains, with no proof whatsoever.

Therefore a member's reputation is obviously at stake.

So the proposition is this:

Whenever a remark is removed, there should be a clickable link, to show, what the remark actually is. Then everyone, who wants, can decide upon rudeness, and then one can really say, that everyone saying something can take responsibility about it.

This is more fair to moderators and members. Also it shows that a moderator has responsibility.
We should not live in a society (even if it is an online forum; therefore virtual), where one can label someone as they fancy without any proof or responsibility.

Any remarks that this is a "private forum" do not make sense: this forum is out in the open on the world wide web for everyone to read.

I will not hide the fact, that I made a remark, that was considered rude and sarcastic and that made me think about this issue.

One can start to speculate on my "hidden agendas", but my proposition is really simple and clear.

 

[russ_watters]

Thread moved to feedback.

The problem with allowing the post to still be visibile is that it was deleted so that it wouldn't be visible! If it is still there, people can still be insulted/offended by it and it can still be replied to.

[edit] Oh, I see: the post was edited and a note left to say it was edited. I don't think what you ask would be possible without re-writing the forum software for such a case.

[edit2]

Any remarks that this is a "private forum" do not make sense: this forum is out in the open on the world wide web for everyone to read.

I don't think you understand what the word "private" means in this context. Private simply means that it isn't owned/run by the government, it is owned/run by a private individual. So he gets to make the rules. Being visible by all doesn't have any bearing on that.

 

[Ott Rovgeisha]

Thread moved to feedback.

The problem with allowing the post to still be visibile is that it was deleted so that it wouldn't be visible! If it is still there, people can still be insulted/offended by it and it can still be replied to.

[edit] Oh, I see: the post was edited and a note left to say it was edited. I don't think what you ask would be possible without re-writing the forum software for such a case.

Thank you for answering!

I guess it is possible to make that comment unanswerable, so that no commotion would arise..

If there somehow is a possibility that the "remark removed sign" would not appear, that would work too actually..

I had a heated discussion with one of the moderators, and by now, he probably considers me a nutjob or a criminal, who's "pride is heart" :D , but regardless that, there are some things to consider about censorship options...

But thank you kindly for answering.

 

[Ott Rovgeisha]

Thread moved to feedback.I don't think you understand what the word "private" means in this context. Private simply means that it isn't owned/run by the government, it is owned/run by a private individual. So he gets to make the rules. Being visible by all doesn't have any bearing on that.

I am aware that private means this.. It still changes little. One person's private freedom ends with responsibility: the responsibility not to label someone without showing proof.

So in that context, it does not matter, that "private" means "owned by someone". This should not become an excuse.
A moderator's opinion is always subjective, and that is a fact.

So either their should not be any marks left, when a comment is deleted, or there should be a possibility for the forum members to see that deleted comment, by clicking on the deleted comment remark. That way anyone interested can decide. It would stiil be invisible, unless you click on it. And of course there should be no possibility to answer that "rude remark".

Otherwise there is just a label "rude", "vulgar", "sarcastic" and this is equal to slander if no proof is added.

I also want to insist on that I am not bitchy or hurt, nothing to do with my personal pride. I have admitted that I was sarcastic and explained my reasons about it. I even apologized sincerely about it. The thing is, it also sparked a genuine interest in such things and I am really interested about the reasoning of people and reasoning behind various decisions and attitudes.

The moderators can leave the remark about my "rudeness" intact, I don't mind, I am not that desperate to save my face.. however, It is the basic principle that worries me, and future problems with other members.

I find it very important that such decisions would be rational and logical and well explained.

Thank you for understanding.

 

[Nugatory]

If there somehow is a possibility that the "remark removed sign" would not appear, that would work too actually..

That "remark removed" note is something that we manually add when we edit the post because it is bad form to change someone's words without making it clear that they've been changed so longer represent the poster's original words. So are you just asking that we provide fewer or less pejorative details about why the post was edited?

 

[Ott Rovgeisha]

That "remark removed" note is something that we manually add when we edit the post because it is bad form to change someone's words without making it clear that they've been changed so longer represent the poster's original words. So are you just asking that we provide fewer or less pejorative details about why the post was edited?

I do not know how can one be more clear:

1. Either the "rude remark" would be removed with no traces about it whatsoever (but of course notifying the poster)
2. Or make the note "rude remark removed" clickable: so that everyone who wants, can click on it and see what the original remark was, that was considered rude, vulgar, sarcastic etc.

Because, if that is not done, the only thing that remains, is the label about poster's rudeness with no proof whatsoever.
Rudeness or sarcasm are subjective terms, therefore, it is up to a moderator's "gut feeling" what to remove or not.
Sometimes what is considered rude or sarcastic by a moderator may not be considered as such by another poster, to whom that remark was intended, or even by the remarker himself/herself. People grasp things differently. If a poster insists that she or he did not intend to be sarcastic at all, how can she/he prove it?

So unless the post consists obvious vulgar terms or personal insults (e.g you are such and such), the moderators should not have the right to label someone "sarcastic" or "rude" unless they can provide proof of it.

So etiher a remark is removed and no signs left, or it is removed with the possibility to see that remark if one wants to, in order to see exactly what was going on.

 

[russ_watters]

Perhaps just saying "Post edited by mod" and giving the reason in a warning would be better.

 

[Ott Rovgeisha]

Perhaps just saying "Post edited by mod" and giving the reason in a warning would be better.

Yep, that would do too: a post edited by mod would visible to everone and then a personal warning about that to the poster.

It is not perhaps better, but certainly more fair: without any labels etc.

 

[Bandersnatch]

Perhaps just saying "Post edited by mod" and giving the reason in a warning would be better.

If you care for an outsider opinion, that does sound like the best solution to me.

 

[Mark44]

Ott Rovgeisha, your proposal has been discussed by several of the mentors. One of the mentor, Russ Watters, suggested revising the comment about the deleted text in your post to say only that some text was deleted, without giving a reason. I have done that.

In my opinion, we would have been easier to persuade with regard to the policy change you requested if you had taken a more diplomatic tack. Instead, your request came across more like "here is what I want to happen -- make it so."

You complained about the fact that moderators can make arbitrary decisions about what is rude, sarcastic, and so on. One mentor's reaction was, "guess what, that's what 'moderated forum' means. Don't like it, start your own forum." We mentors spend a lot of time discussing matters like this in our own private forum in an effort to ensure that our decisions are fair and reasonable. If you or any other forum member has a problem with one mentor's actions, you can contact other mentors to get a second opinion.

Thread closed.