Re: Feedback on moderation
There's been a lot of commentary about moderation lately. Here's my view, not that it matters - there's a certain social hierarchy that happens in any meeting place, real or virtual. One of the obvious end results is conflict, in various forms. One of the things that I've seen happen on topical forums like this are posters who are deemed "know-it-alls," or other ones who are aggressive and seem intent on challenging others, and other typical "types" of people. In everyday life, such as an office or school, these types of people, through social interaction, modify their behavior to better fit the group, or are ostracized or otherwise "reprimanded" in a social way if the group does not appreciate their behavior. This is part of how we "learn" and while it's been quite a few years since my Sociology 101 class I can remember some interesting observations about groups/society that are mirrored on forums. This brings me to my point. It seems like with the uptick in moderation, the negative reinforcement of the "group" towards certain posters who weren't really "fitting the mold" so to speak, and the insistence on everyone playing nice, has allowed some people such as the "know-it-all" types to run rampant within the group. Hence certain people have gotten fed up with seeing these people here and their posts, and sometimes run afoul of moderation if applying some of that negative reinforcement - and then leave when pushed to be "nice." I do know of at least a few people whose primary reason for not posting much anymore is due to these..."personalities" on the forum.
I do think it is important to have open sharing of ideas and knowledge. However not all opinions can or should be given equal footing.
I have tried to be relatively neutral here, and just state my observations. That said, I can say that I have avoided commenting on certain threads which were overrun with comments from certain individuals, and if those individuals were the majority of the forum, I would definitely not be visiting here anymore. Though honestly if my new work goes well you all may not see me much anyway, perhaps to certain peoples' delight.
Just my thoughts. I am not a sociologist and don't claim to be, fyi.
Regarding the F/S forum, I'll not comment on that discussion as I've already been very vocal about the changes.
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IanG
It's swings and roundabouts Rick, it's good to see the constant bumping going, but then I got told off for bumping after a year :D
I've always thought it's important tomresearch prices as a buyern or a seller and it was very rare I'd bump a sale, in fact it always surprised me that items I posted here and and/or on APUG would suddenly sell months or over a year fater posting. I think people forget it's a smallish market, more desirable items fairly priced sell quicker than less common or more brand/model specific or the more exotic. It's the same with wanted adverts, sometimes it's take a year before I've found parts I've needed, less for lenses etc.
The reality is it's more important to have adverts whether sales or wanted that are accurate and contain enough detail. I've bought a lot from this Forum and also APUg and only one needed intervention the rest were great amicable transactions everyone getting what they wanted/needed.
Ian
Gee, Ian, it's easy enough to close an old thread and start it again, and you only have to wait a month, not a year.
Rick "we hope those old items that take a long time to sell will now be easier to find" Denney
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
StoneNYC
I would be curious to know if the amount of for sale post has gone down in conjunction with the reported complaints about them. With the the new limitations I do know some people have stopped posting in the FS threads here so I wonder if that is the real reason? BUT that's why I asked, that's all supposition and bias on my part to think that of course.
I don't know the answer to that. But we aren't trying to increase the number of for-sale posts by increasing the number of people who come here only to sell things. If people come here just to sell things, doing so on ebay or elsewhere won't undermine this forum. I know when I'm looking to buy something, I search all avenues, including here, ebay, and the major retailers of used stuff. Not everything needs to be listed here, and frankly it's easy enough for people who really want to sell here to do so. The For-Sale forum is for regular participants, not just for people who only sell things.
Rick "mindful of goals and objectives" Denney
Re: Feedback on moderation
I make sure I read the 'ads' faithfully, so I don't miss out.
Which actually increases my presence, as I check in more often.
Found something today. :)
I will post more carefully, as 'here' is my major interest.
Duffers keep the greens up, too bad I dislike golf.
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rdenney
I don't know the answer to that. But we aren't trying to increase the number of for-sale posts by increasing the number of people who come here only to sell things. If people come here just to sell things, doing so on ebay or elsewhere won't undermine this forum. I know when I'm looking to buy something, I search all avenues, including here, ebay, and the major retailers of used stuff. Not everything needs to be listed here, and frankly it's easy enough for people who really want to sell here to do so. The For-Sale forum is for regular participants, not just for people who only sell things.
Rick "mindful of goals and objectives" Denney
I'll put it a different way as I think my point was missed.
There are regular posters who post incessantly (I used to be one of them much more than I am now) and there are new and returning less often posters. Of the less frequent posters, have those numbers gone down as of late?
Those who are on the forum all day every day will always say things are fine, because they will never leave the forum, they are in effect addicted to it, and often are not valuable contributors because they are again, not real shooters, they are hobbiests and yes even fakers who don't actually shoot at all, or rarely. A few have some knowledge but a lot of them are ... There's not a nice term, so let's just say not that helpful.
So the question is, are those who are truly of value (new blood who want to learn, professional shooters, sellers (yes, for the new blood who are in acquisition mode especially), professional engineer-types (like lens makers), teachers (of photography), etc) abandoning ship?
The "regulars" don't actually matter as much as the "others", you can't keep a site going on the 20-30 posters who have too much free time to sit in front of a computer but not enough to go out and shoot. You need to not put off the "others".
These are general statements, there are always exceptions.
It's also not said to be mean, it's said to be helpful and point out the obvious flaw in the thinking of who to cater to if you want the site to survive and thrive.
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rdenney
Gee, Ian, it's easy enough to close an old thread and start it again, and you only have to wait a month, not a year.
Rick "we hope those old items that take a long time to sell will now be easier to find" Denney
Many won't make the effort of closing the old thread, it's far easier to just post anew one. I didn't find closing a For Sale thread was quite as simple as it should be as first you have to make a new post on the thread to close it.
Ian
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IanG
Many won't make the effort of closing the old thread, it's far easier to just post anew one. I didn't find closing a For Sale thread was quite as simple as it should be as first you have to make a new post on the thread to close it.
Ian
If posting "please see my new thread offering this item" and then checking the "close this thread" box is too much trouble, then I question what we should be expected to do to accommodate the lazy. That is little more work than bumping. Sellers can, of course, just leave the listing as it is and wait for deep searchers to find it.
Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney
Re: Feedback on moderation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rdenney
...
The first thing new folks have to learn in a forum is discernment. But I really don't know what role the moderators can or should have in aiding that.
...
First thing for new folks; and should be a continuing thing for all the rest.
Re: Feedback on moderation
Wow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
StoneNYC
I'll put it a different way as I think my point was missed.
There are regular posters who post incessantly (I used to be one of them much more than I am now) and there are new and returning less often posters. Of the less frequent posters, have those numbers gone down as of late?
Those who are on the forum all day every day will always say things are fine, because they will never leave the forum, they are in effect addicted to it, and often are not valuable contributors because they are again, not real shooters, they are hobbiests and yes even fakers who don't actually shoot at all, or rarely. A few have some knowledge but a lot of them are ... There's not a nice term, so let's just say not that helpful.
So the question is, are those who are truly of value (new blood who want to learn, professional shooters, sellers (yes, for the new blood who are in acquisition mode especially), professional engineer-types (like lens makers), teachers (of photography), etc) abandoning ship?
The "regulars" don't actually matter as much as the "others", you can't keep a site going on the 20-30 posters who have too much free time to sit in front of a computer but not enough to go out and shoot. You need to not put off the "others".
These are general statements, there are always exceptions.
It's also not said to be mean, it's said to be helpful and point out the obvious flaw in the thinking of who to cater to if you want the site to survive and thrive.