Members Policing Themselves

[dannysullivan]

Over the past few months, I've had my share of feeling like I'm playing teacher and separating the children on the playground. I don't mean to sound condescending, but that's what some of the personal snipes people have made at each other in the forums since we launched have made me feel like. It's not all the time, nor does it happen in the majority of discussions. However, when it does happen, it consumes a ton of moderator time plus really stands out for a lot of people.

I know that forums are prone to personal attacks, given that we don't see each other face-to-face. Non-verbal communication is hard. However, we're not going to fall back on that as an excuse.

This is our current ground rule in the FAQs

IMPORTANT: the SearchEngineWatch Forums attract a wide variety of experience levels, as such, the discussions here from range from the very basic to high level, intellectual debates - we welcome all. However, we generally expect a higher standard of professionalism from all members, personal attacks and insults WILL NOT be tolerated, and we expect all posts to add value to each discussion.

And our rule on inappropriate posts:

If you feel an individual member is out of line, please PM a moderator or use the "report this post" feature found at the top of each post, rather than publicly flaming the member in the forum. If you really, really dislike what someone's saying, you can also use the Ignore feature.

We're looking to change the ground rule to something like this:

IMPORTANT: the SearchEngineWatch Forums attract a wide variety of experience levels, as such, the discussions here from range from the very basic to high level, intellectual debates - we welcome all. However, we generally expect a higher standard of professionalism from all members, personal attacks and insults WILL NOT be tolerated, and we expect all posts to add value to each discussion.

Anyone posting a personal attack, as deemed by the moderators, may be subject to a formal warning. Further incidents may subject the person to premoderation for a length of time determined by moderators (where they can only post after having posts reviewed). Continued misbehavior -- or serious initial incidents -- can cause the person to be banned from posting at all for a set period of time.

If you feel you are subject to a personal attack, DO NOT RESPOND TO IT WITH YOUR OWN PERSONAL ATTACK WITHIN THE FORUMS. Contact a moderator for assistance. A response to a personal attack will be treated as just as a bad as the original attack.

That's the idea. In short, be polite to each other. Debate, sure. Insult, no. And if you are attacked, don't respond -- don't lower the tone -- get the mod police to take action. And anyone who isn't following this basic rule is subject to a warning and further action, as circumstances dictate.

So, thoughts?

[Dave Hawley]

Happy Xmas and new year Danny and all the forum members :)

[Marcia]

Belittling, attacking, insulting or accusing other members is one of the most valid reasons for using the negative rep I can think of, along with notifying the mods.

That is one of the many reasons I'm diametrically opposed to eliminating negative rep votes.

[dannysullivan]

No, belittling, attacking etc is not something that the reputation system is to be used to control. It's simply not something to be tolerated, period. That's the point of putting out this new policy. I see no advantage in letting people attack each other and just possibly suffer getting a negative reputation score as a result. Heck, people can just shut off reporting of their scores. Instead, the point is that we don't want that type of behavior period and that it won't be allowed.

[torka]

This is certainly a contentious issue to deal with, and in my experience it's part of the "growing pains" that every worthwhile community will face at one point or another. In one sense, it's a good thing, because it means that people are emotionally involved in what's going on here. If one has no complaints, it generally means that people don't care enough about what goes on to go through the effort of complaining. :)

Between the excessively thin-skinned, who perceive a "flame" every time someone disagrees with them, and the insensitive clods who cry "censorship" any time they're prevented from posting in violation of the legal standards of libel and public decency, the mods and admins face a difficult balancing act.

Of course, generally most of the people on any given professionally-oriented board are in the middle of the road. They're decent business people who respect the rights of others and just want to exchange useful information, possibly do a little networking and maybe share a chuckle or two. Of course, these people aren't usually squeaky wheels, either, so it's easy to forget that they actually comprise the majority.

IMHO, the danger lies in trying too hard to accomodate the fringes.

My usual rule of thumb is that if you've got the extremists at both ends of the spectrum upset with you, for opposite reasons, then you're probably doing well with the balance for the majority. The trick is to avoid letting discussions of how you should conduct your discussions overwhelm the actual discussions. :)

My US$.02

--Torka

[Old Welsh Guy]

I am with Danny on this one, As I posted previously, I make sure I post within the guidelines on all forums I visit, that includes my own. Personal attacking and general belittling are simply not acceptable in life, online or offline. If someone upsets me, then I use the PM to tell them what they have done is not nice. I certainly don't flame them, or make personal matters public, it screws the whole forum tone with people feeling they 'have' to take sides, which in turn compounds the problem.

It can work, but it depends on the mods etc also being seen to post within the guidelines. making a post like ' I have removed the offending post by xxx as he is a slimy toad' really don't help ;) lol It is not easy being a Mod, and being an admin is harder again.

[Anthony Parsons]

I try hard to shut my mouth at times, but it just has a mind of its own. Sometimes my fingers do the walking, and walk across the keys as I think. Doh!

New Years resolution.... try and control fingers from walking on keys as brain thinks...

[Marcia]

Personal attacking and general belittling are simply not acceptable in life, online or offline.
It's actually abusive and nobody has to put up with it. But in the case of members who do it constantly, while it can be "moderated" to eliminate offending posts, giving negative rep is a way for other members to be able to express their displeasure when they see it. That certainly lets the person know what their peers think of the behavior and may cause them to change their ways. It's peer pressure and I can't think of a better use for it.

Peer pressure works for children better than anything else. Same thing with some adult settings. And it's different from the "parent' in the case of children having to be the bad guy all the time which does NOT always work. Sometimes it just gets the kid more rebellious.

Human behavaior is human behavior, and I'll tell you what - imho the very reason and motivation for hogging and spamming for big rep is rooted in a desire for peer approval, to "look good" in front of peers. So it's childish in its roots to begin with.

[donut]

Sadly, some peers like to see the belittling and abuse- they think it's "deserved" and are more than happy to give positive points to offset the negative ones. It turns into a game and the forum as a whole loses.

Kudos to Danny and staff for making an effort to give SEW a more professional tone, as it deserves.

[dannysullivan]

But in the case of members who do it constantly, while it can be "moderated" to eliminate offending posts, giving negative rep is a way for other members to be able to express their displeasure when they see it.
To clarify things, we're looking at changing the system so that if you give positive rep, people see their rep scores rise. If you give negative rep, they won't drop. The reason, as discussed elsewhere, was to help reassure those people who fear they might be attacked unfairly through negative rep.

That's a debate for elsewhere. The point is you will still be able to negative rep someone -- to say anonymously, I disagree. It won't hurt their score, but you can send your views.

However, I don't want members to rely on that to curb abuse. Instead, we have a report bad post link. That's what members should use if they see it. That will get the moderators to look at whether an edit is in order, if they haven't spotted something already.

The solution is to eliminate these type of comments -- to find when they fall over the line of active and health debate and because abusive and belittling.

I try hard to shut my mouth at times, but it just has a mind of its own. Sometimes my fingers do the walking, and walk across the keys as I think. Doh!
It can happen to everyone, which is why a slip isn't going to instantly consign someone into being banned forever. But when it keeps happening, that's when a stern warning is in order. And if it keeps going, OK -- we'll "time out" a member and give them a few days to cool off. But hopefully this will stay minor if members try to curb themselves and especially if you don't see that type of tone on the board. If the tone is high, I think it will be easier for everyone to stay at that level.

[grnidone]

If someone is going to give a 'negative' reputation click, they should be forced to sign their name and state WHY they chose to report it as a bad post.

That way, it gets taken off the board...y'all can duke it out in pm.

[dannysullivan]

So more clarification:

If you report a bad post, that goes to the moderators, and we know who reported it. Helpful if we need to do follow up. The person posting does not get the message.

If you rate a post and give it a negative mark, we debated internally if people should have their names shown. For the moment, we decided to allow it to remain anonymous. First, negative rep will eventually not hurt your score. Secondly, some people may simply prefer to say something privately but anonymously. And it provides an outlet to help keep it off the board, as you rightly point out.

[robwatts]

So, if you are a 5 block greeny now, you can never go down right?

[Ron Carnell]

Definitely a step in the right direction. One I have to think was a bit overdue, and I suspect will be welcomed by many. Communities never grow because of rules, but they certainly can suffer from the lack of them.

As to the other, while I'm a little ambivalent about the benefits of a Rep system, I see no benefits at all to one that moves only in one direction. There is no light without dark, and positive votes become meaningless without the possibility of their negative counterparts. The Rep Meter is a long-term measurement and, frankly, SEW Forums hasn't been around long enough yet for ANY of the meters to truly reflect reality. Castrate it now, and it never will mean anything.

[projectphp]

Just a suggestion, but how about some positives in there? Rules are so often negative and constricting. What about throwing in a mission statement of three, and a gentle push in the right direction? It was like Reverend lovejoy said "Have you ever read this thing? Practically everything is a sin. Technically we can't even go to the toilet...."

Adding some positive reinforcement would help, and make it easier to point the direction forward, rather than slapping people's wrists for wrong doings.

My $0.02.

Next question: how does one find said rules?? Not a url, I mean where is the link on this page??

[Dave Hawley]

What a user(s) doesn't say can also be used to judge their character. Hint hint ;)

[fathom]

Over the past few months, I've had my share of feeling like I'm playing teacher and separating the children on the playground.

Unfortunate as it is 'you are'... get use to it. :cool:

The more 'openness to discuss topics of extreme debate' breeds this automatically as a side affect... and you set the precedence.

I doubt any of us 'condone' the negative points mentioned - but the 'flame' is often an escalating result of 'prove it' in a professional world that has far more assumptions and far less proof... and that leads to people engaging fingers without their brains clutched in.

Admittedly - I have done this twice, and maybe 20 times where the brain actually stop the clicking of 'submit'... backspace, backspace, backspace... 'Get the point across another way'.

Candidly though - 'your team' doesn't appear to have a sense of what you want out of SEW forums or maybe a sense of your directions - they appear to moding or just posting as completely independents. That is even apparent here in this thread where Marcia made a suggestion, which was immediately followed by the first word of your subsequent post - 'No'.

While I could be totally spiff-balling - that didn't occur because there is clear direction [or clear understanding of that direction], as such others are guided by their life long experiences & skills which obviously differ from yours [or the authority of the board itself].

In the end, (IMHO) the vision for this place hasn't been considered or hasn't been convey [not sure which] - and I doubt just a simple snappy change in board rule copy will change much.

CAVEAT: you did ask so please 'don't ban me'! :D

[MrMackin]

Contact a moderator if you would like to discuss a post or member attitude.

Can the REP System.

[Brad]

I'd say keep the rep system - if members don't like it then they can turn it off or ignore it. The rep system should not be used by the mods for moderating - that should be done the old fashioned way - PM and <snipsnipsnip>.

The rules do need to be clear for both the mods and the members such as you are clarifying them now.

[Elisabeth]

some valuable posts split off into a new thread, Search Engine Watch Forums Mission Statement (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=3475)