Simply Put, Too Much

[LizKat]

It was moderated for being off topic. That's ridiculous. Show me one thread that doesn't have a bunch of off topic posts.

I think "off-topic" (as simple as it may sound) might be one of the trickiest calls in moderation, mostly when it's about topic drift, less so for an instance of abrupt and intentional topic shift.

But "off topic" from a forum member's POV, in making a complaint about a post, might also be one of the more easily abused forms of reporting posts as well. I realize I'm making assumptions here. Look, a joke or meme in a post that doesn't offend me is not one I'm going to report for any reason, right? But it does offend me, or I'm really partisan and there's no way I can tag out the post for being "not supportive of my own views" and I want to report it, what's my reason?

"I took this as a personal insult" in my report to mods might not fly if someone has merely put up a joke or meme as a somewhat tangential but obviously negative reference to something in my post. The thing about a meme instead of words is the ambiguity potential is higher sometimes. Was that aimed at the opinion, or the author of it, or at people in general who share that opinion?

However, if the joke or meme is also off topic then that might serve as complaint, masking the true but unvoiced complaint about feeling personally (or just politicallly) insulted, a situation that may have had a weaker case in that particular post.

I could find that exasperating as a person who made such a post. On the other hand, what was my intent anyway if my post could be seen as nearly insulting the other guy? What's the other guy's recourse? A charge of "off topic"? Maybe. So I guess if I want to nearly insult the author of a post (as opposed to attacking just his opinion) and I'm using a joke or a meme, I have to find one that's pretty true to thread topic.

Better locks, better locksmiths.. etc. Pity the mods. And I don't really blame them for coming off as inconsistent sometimes, because as I and others have said before, they don't spend all day reading threads for violations, they are like EMS squads summoned to specific car crashes.

I don't like getting posts deleted for being off topic either, especially if they were posts to something already off topic and I wasn't really even aware of the drift when I replied. The annoyance wears off after awhile... its all just pixels. The moderations I've received have all taught me something, even if only to consider my options before I respond to any post.

 

[Mac'nCheese]

I think "off-topic" (as simple as it may sound) might be one of the trickiest calls in moderation, mostly when it's about topic drift, less so for an instance of abrupt and intentional topic shift.

But "off topic" from a forum member's POV, in making a complaint about a post, might also be one of the more easily abused forms of reporting posts as well. I realize I'm making assumptions here. Look, a joke or meme in a post that doesn't offend me is not one I'm going to report for any reason, right? But it does offend me, or I'm really partisan and there's no way I can tag out the post for being "not supportive of my own views" and I want to report it, what's my reason?

"I took this as a personal insult" in my report to mods might not fly if someone has merely put up a joke or meme as a somewhat tangential but obviously negative reference to something in my post. The thing about a meme instead of words is the ambiguity potential is higher sometimes. Was that aimed at the opinion, or the author of it, or at people in general who share that opinion?

However, if the joke or meme is also off topic then that might serve as complaint, masking the true but unvoiced complaint about feeling personally (or just politicallly) insulted, a situation that may have had a weaker case in that particular post.

I could find that exasperating as a person who made such a post. On the other hand, what was my intent anyway if my post could be seen as nearly insulting the other guy? What's the other guy's recourse? A charge of "off topic"? Maybe. So I guess if I want to nearly insult the author of a post (as opposed to attacking just his opinion) and I'm using a joke or a meme, I have to find one that's pretty true to thread topic.

Better locks, better locksmiths.. etc. Pity the mods. And I don't really blame them for coming off as inconsistent sometimes, because as I and others have said before, they don't spend all day reading threads for violations, they are like EMS squads summoned to specific car crashes.

I don't like getting posts deleted for being off topic either, especially if they were posts to something already off topic and I wasn't really even aware of the drift when I replied. The annoyance wears off after awhile... its all just pixels. The moderations I've received have all taught me something, even if only to consider my options before I respond to any post.

Thank you for your usual thoughtfulness. I just want to say again that this is a small example of what many people are complaining about. I care much more about my BS PRSI banning than this post.

 

[LizKat]

Thank you for your usual thoughtfulness. I just want to say again that this is a small example of what many people are complaining about. I care much more about my BS PRSI banning than this post.

Personally I'd like to see "PRSI privilege suspensions" be matters of weeks, or for severe offenses, maybe six months. Three months of peace from some posters sounds heavenly enough and not so heavy a sentence as to make those who feel wrongly convicted just depart the scene entirely. But, maybe the mods figure that just means delaying another round of more suspensions for the hard core offenders.

I do miss a lot of people on both sides who are gone (voluntarily or otherwise) or at least exiled from PRSI. Some I don't miss, but it bothers me that people can end up suspended from PRSI permanently.. unless they indulge in something off the "instantly bannable" list which then I can understand. On the other hand moderation is private unless that's waived, so we often don't know what the record or a pattern of violations is for some of the disappearances. We might remember this or that spectacular row, or hear about it from other members, but we likely don't notice the day to day repetitions of lesser offenses that mods have had to deal with.

At least there's an appeals process on subforum suspensions and outright bans. I can still hope some of the vanished and banished will avail themselves of it and may eventually reappear.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It was moderated for being off topic. That's ridiculous. Show me one thread that doesn't have a bunch of off topic posts.
[doublepost=1542396879][/doublepost]
Right not all jokes are funny but that line is different for everyone. A poster here made two jokes about beating women, one posted just to rile me up. Both posts were allowed because the moderators said what's funny to some might not be funny to others and we always want to err on the side of caution to not over moderate. But a picture of Monk is worse than that? Come on.



I didn't seek to offend. And me saying its only a joke is not a defense because I have nothing to defend. Other people liked the joke even the OP. And that's all besides the point.....again, this post was deleted for being off topic.

Okay: I cannot see any context where beating women could be considered hilarious; as a consequence, dealing with that via something considered 'wit' or argument becomes a subjective matter, but one to be deplored via wit or other strategies or tactics.

And yes - while I still haven't a clue who or what Monk is - I will find anything that attempts to argue that women should be beaten a lot less than sidesplittingly hilarious.

 

[samiwas]

One of the admins posts the statistics annually.

Here are 2017's statistics. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/2017-post-report-statistics.2103406/

That's it! The top ten reporters make 34% of all reports, with more than 500 each!

 

[Mac'nCheese]

Okay: I cannot see any context where beating women could be considered hilarious; as a consequence, dealing with that via something considered 'wit' or argument becomes a subjective matter, but one to be deplored via wit or other strategies or tactics.

And yes - while I still haven't a clue who or what Monk is - I will find anything that attempts to argue that women should be beaten a lot less than sidesplittingly hilarious.

Oh it’s worse than that. Since I’ve been given permission to discuss my moderation, get a load of this: the first post about a joke about beating women was fine for the mods as was the second one which was made as a reply to me in a completely different thread. The poster, whom I went back in forth with about the original post being disgusting, made a second joke in response to something I posted, obviously just to rile me up. So that post was OFF TOPIC and was also posted just piss me off which is TROLLING. two rules violation for this guy but his posts were left up.
So then, since other posters had also said his joke about beating women was fine, I started a separate thread, without naming him or others or even saying that someone here posted a joke like that, asking if people thought jokes about beating women were funny or if they crossed the line. I, of course, gave my opinion of jokes like that and the men who told them. The thread started a conversation and had a nice amount of responses. My entire thread was then deleted and I was banned from PRSI because the mods said I was the one trolling and I only made that thread to rile up that one poster. That’s how absolutely ****ed up moderation is here.

 

[FeliApple]

I’d like to throw an idea out here, specifically regarding moderation of comments that correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. I find some of these types of moderation to be the least effective, and I would imagine, a real time and energy suck for the mods.

The concept of not nitpicking other people's writing was born in the era of usenet and BBS, when people were on 28K dial up, and kilobytes came down the pipe slowly and expensively. You literally didn't want to waste bandwidth discussing they're vs their vs there. Back then, that made more sense.

But here we are in 2018 with broadband on a variety of devices, and the argument for not discussing spelling/grammar, etc. doesn't really hold much water anymore. At least in my book.

A forum is rooted in the written word. We generally do not post YouTube video comments and replies. We post typed words.

Sometimes a few of those words are typed incorrectly. But many times, it’s an entire post of unspaceduncapitalizedmizzspeltramblings or lazy texting-style speak. And those kinds of posts are trending up in my estimation.

Should we be nitpicking every uncrossed t un-dotted I in every post? No. But if a post is incoherent, (typically) full of grammatical and factual errors, should we not let the poster know?

What if no one ever pointed out to a loved one or friend or newbie that typing in all caps is considered shouting?

What if EVERY post had no paragraphs or periods?

What if some non-native English speakers are actually grateful to have some feedback on their writing?

I think the entire "English isn't their first language so be nice" argument is a PC copout. "Excusing me. Can you help me get the Apple Computer repairing man?" is clearly written by someone for whom English is a second language. People RARELY pile on to those kinds of obviously non-English speaking user posts.

However, "can ppl tell me where there fav mac repair iz bcuz imago crayz if my screen dosent stop blinking and u guyz know i dont no so halp thx." is just an abomination of the language, written by someone who probably knows perfectly well that their spelling and grammar is crap.

These people clearly see others communicating in thoughtful, acceptable ways, and they choose to ignore the norm. When you barge into a forum and slam down a wall of incoherent text, it's like walking into a restaurant barefoot and jumping on the tables. Would a restaurant prevent people from complaining about that scenario because "the customer may not be from a place that has restaurants"?

What if no one corrected spelling and grammar any time, anywhere, ever? If no one ever pointed out poor spelling or grammar ever, anywhere, this forum, and every forum, and everywhere the written word exists, would be illegible and incomprehensible.

No one wants that. And yet, places with rules like MR’s enable the proliferation of bad writing.

THEIR IN LYES TEH PROMBLEM WITH MODERATING POSTS TAHT CORRECT GRAMER AND PUNTUATION.

If a forum isn’t the right place to do it, then where? I submit there’s no better place to help our fellow man communicate more successfully than a discussion forum. Clearly the schools are failing some people. A forum is quite possibly one of the only places many people ever read and critically, write.

Every time I come here I see more and more misuse of basic words. I regularly see a complete lack of concern for sentence structure and comprehensibility. And it’s usually obvious when it’s a language issue and when it’s a laziness or education issue.

So, what’s so wrong, exactly, with correcting someone’s writing? If someone makes a factual mistake, it’s ok to correct it, but if they post a wall of poorly spelled malformed text, it’s preferable to leave it be? Why? Because we don’t want to offend people who don’t speak English? We seem perfectly happy to offend people who don’t use iOS. Is it to ensure that the site isn’t overwhelmed by posts that correct grammar, so that there’s plenty of room left for threads discussing fedex tracking numbers?

The progress of mankind is rooted squarely in communication. Our ability to communicate successfully across borders and languages is a constant challenge and a continual goal.

The Mac saw its first wide acceptance and popularity in its ability to be used as a word processor. It seems a little ironic that a website dedicated to discussing hardware and software that has changed, and continues to change the way we communicate, would go out of its way to stop people from discussing, and improving, each other’s communication.

This was an amazing post and I wholeheartedly agree. Something strikes me as odd, though. I'm a non-native speaker, and I am trying to improve my English every day. If a non-native writes in English here, I would assume they're interested in further improving their language capabilities. Would they really be offended if corrected? I'm not sure about the answer; yet, I certainly wouldn't. Furthermore, I'd be fond of those corrections.

 

[Mac'nCheese]

This was an amazing post and I wholeheartedly agree. Something strikes me as odd, though. I'm a non-native speaker, and I am trying to improve my English every day. If a non-native writes in English here, I would assume they're interested in further improving their language capabilities. Would they really be offended if corrected? I'm not sure about the answer; yet, I certainly wouldn't. Furthermore, I'd be fond of those corrections.

I think it depends on how the correction is given. Is it: just thought you might want to know blah blah is the correct term/spelling in the USA. Or: it’s their not there, hard to take you seriously when you can’t even get that right
[doublepost=1542463828][/doublepost]Off topic: how come the smiles in my iphone keyboard never work here? It is an apple site after all.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

Awe crap. Another good one bites the dust! I enjoyed your posts @willmtaylor. I too have experienced questionable moderation (without any temp bans) and have taken some time away myself shaking my head. It's nuts. But when you have volunteer moderators it's sometimes what you get.

 

[FeliApple]

I think it depends on how the correction is given. Is it: just thought you might want to know blah blah is the correct term/spelling in the USA. Or: it’s their not there, hard to take you seriously when you can’t even get that right
[doublepost=1542463828][/doublepost]Off topic: how come the smiles in my iphone keyboard never work here? It is an apple site after all.

Agree. Tone matters.

 

[I7guy]

If I had to guess, it was because someone who reports every little perceived violation of the rules reported you. There are a small handful of members who are real petty about that stuff. It drove me crazy when I was still on staff. That goes back to my response to your other thread about why we moderate and why I retired.

I've been mulling over this post and there may be more to this than on the face of it. It goes back to some of what has already been said. The staff/mods have repeatedly said to "report every post" even if one isn't sure. If the mandate is to "report away", the mods should have been expecting the flood of reports. I guess to some members, a rules violation is a rules violation, even if a minor rules violation, still a rules violation.
[doublepost=1542470944][/doublepost]

I’d like to throw an idea out here, specifically regarding moderation of comments that correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. I find some of these types of moderation to be the least effective, and I would imagine, a real time and energy suck for the mods.

The concept of not nitpicking other people's writing was born in the era of usenet and BBS, when people were on 28K dial up, and kilobytes came down the pipe slowly and expensively. You literally didn't want to waste bandwidth discussing they're vs their vs there. Back then, that made more sense.

But here we are in 2018 with broadband on a variety of devices, and the argument for not discussing spelling/grammar, etc. doesn't really hold much water anymore. At least in my book.

A forum is rooted in the written word. We generally do not post YouTube video comments and replies. We post typed words.

Sometimes a few of those words are typed incorrectly. But many times, it’s an entire post of unspaceduncapitalizedmizzspeltramblings or lazy texting-style speak. And those kinds of posts are trending up in my estimation.

Should we be nitpicking every uncrossed t un-dotted I in every post? No. But if a post is incoherent, (typically) full of grammatical and factual errors, should we not let the poster know?

What if no one ever pointed out to a loved one or friend or newbie that typing in all caps is considered shouting?

What if EVERY post had no paragraphs or periods?

What if some non-native English speakers are actually grateful to have some feedback on their writing?

I think the entire "English isn't their first language so be nice" argument is a PC copout. "Excusing me. Can you help me get the Apple Computer repairing man?" is clearly written by someone for whom English is a second language. People RARELY pile on to those kinds of obviously non-English speaking user posts.

However, "can ppl tell me where there fav mac repair iz bcuz imago crayz if my screen dosent stop blinking and u guyz know i dont no so halp thx." is just an abomination of the language, written by someone who probably knows perfectly well that their spelling and grammar is crap.

These people clearly see others communicating in thoughtful, acceptable ways, and they choose to ignore the norm. When you barge into a forum and slam down a wall of incoherent text, it's like walking into a restaurant barefoot and jumping on the tables. Would a restaurant prevent people from complaining about that scenario because "the customer may not be from a place that has restaurants"?

What if no one corrected spelling and grammar any time, anywhere, ever? If no one ever pointed out poor spelling or grammar ever, anywhere, this forum, and every forum, and everywhere the written word exists, would be illegible and incomprehensible.

No one wants that. And yet, places with rules like MR’s enable the proliferation of bad writing.

THEIR IN LYES TEH PROMBLEM WITH MODERATING POSTS TAHT CORRECT GRAMER AND PUNTUATION.

If a forum isn’t the right place to do it, then where? I submit there’s no better place to help our fellow man communicate more successfully than a discussion forum. Clearly the schools are failing some people. A forum is quite possibly one of the only places many people ever read and critically, write.

Every time I come here I see more and more misuse of basic words. I regularly see a complete lack of concern for sentence structure and comprehensibility. And it’s usually obvious when it’s a language issue and when it’s a laziness or education issue.

So, what’s so wrong, exactly, with correcting someone’s writing? If someone makes a factual mistake, it’s ok to correct it, but if they post a wall of poorly spelled malformed text, it’s preferable to leave it be? Why? Because we don’t want to offend people who don’t speak English? We seem perfectly happy to offend people who don’t use iOS. Is it to ensure that the site isn’t overwhelmed by posts that correct grammar, so that there’s plenty of room left for threads discussing fedex tracking numbers?

The progress of mankind is rooted squarely in communication. Our ability to communicate successfully across borders and languages is a constant challenge and a continual goal.

The Mac saw its first wide acceptance and popularity in its ability to be used as a word processor. It seems a little ironic that a website dedicated to discussing hardware and software that has changed, and continues to change the way we communicate, would go out of its way to stop people from discussing, and improving, each other’s communication.

In my own opinion, allowing commentary on a poster's grammar and writing style, just opens the floodgates on much off-topic posting, debating and more arguing. Hence I can understand this rule.

 

[S.B.G]

I've been mulling over this post and there may be more to this than on the face of it. It goes back to some of what has already been said. The staff/mods have repeatedly said to "report every post" even if one isn't sure. If the mandate is to "report away", the mods should have been expecting the flood of reports. I guess to some members, a rules violation is a rules violation, even if a minor rules violation, still a rules violation.

That is the company line, if you will. When in doubt report it.

My opinion is that we have rules, and there are always exceptions to rules. Just because a post may violate a rule on a technicality, the weight of that violation may or may not be all that egregious and if not, it doesn't mean that it needs to be moderated really. Some things can be let go.

Just like when a police officer stops a person for speeding, they don't have to give them a ticket even though they broke the traffic law. They have the authority and the discretion to give a warning to the driver and not punish them for the violation. I think Internet moderation should work the same way. However, when various moderators do exercise their discretion, then the complaints of inconsistency show up. What is a moderator to do? Should they moderate with an iron fist and punish every violation, no matter how trivial for the sake of consistency? Complaints will abound that way too.

There really is no right answer for the moderators because regardless of what they do or don't do, people will complain. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I can say though that the moderators here strive to be as fair as possible. That much is the truth.

Circling back to my earlier post you referenced, there are a lot of petty reports that in my opinion shouldn't be reported at all. Petty, trivial posts that are made are akin to driving 4 miles per hour over the limit. The police officer probably isn't going to waste their time to even stop the driver. The moderator shouldn't even have to look at a report like that because it's stupid. The member who reports the stupid stuff should just stop because it's just not worth it. Reporting every single post as the company line goes, in my opinion, means report every post that you're not sure of that may be a serious violation of a rule, not every little trivial thing that "seems like... whatever", or especially those members who use the moderators to fight their battles for them or to stifle other people because they aren't capable of or are too afraid of debating someone and sticking up for their own opinions. There are a few people with skin so thin here that you can see their bones and they report other members who just simply disagree with them on a topic and not actually violate any rules at all. That happens a lot. These are the kinds of things I was speaking about.

Moral of the story, fight your own battles. Don't use the moderators to do it for you. Use good judgment when deciding to report something or not.

That old saying of "there are no stupid questions", well I do not subscribe to that one because there are indeed stupid questions and they shouldn't be asked.

Disclaimer: The views represented in this post are that of SandboxGeneral and may not necessarily represent the official views of MacRumors.

 

[I7guy]

...Circling back to my earlier post you referenced, there are a lot of petty reports that in my opinion shouldn't be reported at all. Petty, trivial posts that are made are akin to driving 4 miles per hour over the limit. The police officer probably isn't going to waste their time to even stop the driver. The moderator shouldn't even have to look at a report like that because it's stupid. The member who reports the stupid stuff should just stop because it's just not worth it. Reporting every single post as the company line goes, in my opinion, means report every post that you're not sure of that may be a serious violation of a rule, not every little trivial thing that "seems like... whatever", or especially those members who use the moderators to fight their battles for them or to stifle other people because they're aren't capable of or are too afraid of debating someone and sticking up for their own opinions. There are a few people with skin so thin here that you can see their bones and they report other members who just simply disagree with them on a topic and not actually violate any rules at all. That happens a lot. These are the kinds of things I was speaking about...

This paragraph addresses the essence of much that has been posted in this thread and the others that address inconsistent moderation, "mod weaponizing", etc. There is no easy solution as the internet is bigger than all of us. However, your candor is appreciated.

 

[Doctor Q]

OK.... in a thread that was about 6 pages long, I posted a picture and said OP, is this you? It wasn't offensive, it was a picture of Monk from the tv show Monk. Some people liked it, the OP included and even responded with something like, LOL yeah, I love that show. The thread continued on for at least another page. My post and the OP's response was deleted due to being off topic. Here are my thoughts (And I say again, this is a silly, not important example but an example none the less)

1. Its not over topic, its about the OP.
2. Its a joke, jokes are allowed.
3. Its not offensive. The OP even liked it.
4. It didn't derail the thread at all. Some people liked it, Op commented on it, thread went on.

So why was it deleted when other jokes and memes aren't deleted.

1. They ALL weren't reported but mine was? Don't buy it.
2. I was kicked out of PRSI and someone doesn't want me back in so they need to built a history of breaking the rules. Possible but damn, that would be crazy.
3. Some moderators follow the letter of the rules but not the spirit of it. Good Chance.
4. I reported too many posts lately (thought I was being helpful, please move this to the proper folder type reports) and someone is saying, ok, you're gonna report others, let's report you. Probably not but just spit balling here.

This has happened to me before when a joke was deleted and I was told since it was the second post it could derail the thread but the thread had many response after mine so that was just flat out wrong.
[doublepost=1542300649][/doublepost]
Ha-Ha, Well, I do now. That's fine...

We removed your post because we decided to remove ALL posts teasing the original poster. Some, like yours, were meant to be friendly and were taken that way, but others were mean-spirited, reported, and removed. Leaving the remaining teasing would, in our opinion, likely encourage more negative comments about the OP as a person, rather than encouraging comments about the multi-iPhone-return saga in the original post. We decided to leave posts, even if they expressed incredulity about the story, if they also offered advice.

We moderate with an eye toward fostering useful thread conversations. We don't judge posts as acceptable or unacceptable based on how many likes they get. Helpful posts may get many likes, but insulting posts often get many likes too, before we can remove them.

As we often remind people, when you post a joke or use sarcasm, the person targeted may or may not recognize it as humor or appreciate the comment. Humor is often in the eye of the beholder. It's not against the rules to make jokes, but if they cause problems they will be removed. We know from experience which types of posts are likely to derail a thread, so we don't have to wait to see if things go badly. In this case, your joke wasn't a problem on its own, but the weight of jokes and negative comments directed at the poster steered the thread in the wrong direction.

Having a harmless joke removed does not affect your record of moderation or indicate a conspiracy to pick on you. Removing the post in question was not related to past moderation and won't affect future moderation.

As far as we know, nobody submitted false reports for this thread to cause trouble for anyone else. It's true that once in a while we've seen a user pick on another user by falsely reporting many of their posts. That causes more work for the moderators to review and dismiss the false reports, but it doesn't actually affect the targeted user.

 

[Mac'nCheese]

We removed your post because we decided to remove ALL posts teasing the original poster. Some, like yours, were meant to be friendly and were taken that way, but others were mean-spirited, reported, and removed. Leaving the remaining teasing would, in our opinion, likely encourage more negative comments about the OP as a person, rather than encouraging comments about the multi-iPhone-return saga in the original post. We decided to leave posts, even if they expressed incredulity about the story, if they also offered advice.

We moderate with an eye toward fostering useful thread conversations. We don't judge posts as acceptable or unacceptable based on how many likes they get. Helpful posts may get many likes, but insulting posts often get many likes too, before we can remove them.

As we often remind people, when you post a joke or use sarcasm, the person targeted may or may not recognize it as humor or appreciate the comment. Humor is often in the eye of the beholder. It's not against the rules to make jokes, but if they cause problems they will be removed. We know from experience which types of posts are likely to derail a thread, so we don't have to wait to see if things go badly. In this case, your joke wasn't a problem on its own, but the weight of jokes and negative comments directed at the poster steered the thread in the wrong direction.

Having a harmless joke removed does not affect your record of moderation or indicate a conspiracy to pick on you. Removing the post in question was not related to past moderation and won't affect future moderation.

As far as we know, nobody submitted false reports for this thread to cause trouble for anyone else. It's true that once in a while we've seen a user pick on another user by falsely reporting many of their posts. That causes more work for the moderators to review and dismiss the false reports, but it doesn't actually affect the targeted user.

That would be ok if there weren’t still posts made before mine making fun of the OP and/or accusing him/her of being of a troll. Thank you taking the time to respond, I appreciate it.

 

[I7guy]

We removed your post because we decided to remove ALL posts teasing the original poster. Some, like yours, were meant to be friendly and were taken that way, but others were mean-spirited, reported, and removed. Leaving the remaining teasing would, in our opinion, likely encourage more negative comments about the OP as a person, rather than encouraging comments about the multi-iPhone-return saga in the original post. We decided to leave posts, even if they expressed incredulity about the story, if they also offered advice.

We moderate with an eye toward fostering useful thread conversations. We don't judge posts as acceptable or unacceptable based on how many likes they get. Helpful posts may get many likes, but insulting posts often get many likes too, before we can remove them.

As we often remind people, when you post a joke or use sarcasm, the person targeted may or may not recognize it as humor or appreciate the comment. Humor is often in the eye of the beholder. It's not against the rules to make jokes, but if they cause problems they will be removed. We know from experience which types of posts are likely to derail a thread, so we don't have to wait to see if things go badly. In this case, your joke wasn't a problem on its own, but the weight of jokes and negative comments directed at the poster steered the thread in the wrong direction.

Having a harmless joke removed does not affect your record of moderation or indicate a conspiracy to pick on you. Removing the post in question was not related to past moderation and won't affect future moderation.

As far as we know, nobody submitted false reports for this thread to cause trouble for anyone else. It's true that once in a while we've seen a user pick on another user by falsely reporting many of their posts. That causes more work for the moderators to review and dismiss the false reports, but it doesn't actually affect the targeted user.

Interesting behind the scenes insight. Thanks for the well expressed recap.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

We removed your post because we decided to remove ALL posts teasing the original poster. Some, like yours, were meant to be friendly and were taken that way, but others were mean-spirited, reported, and removed. Leaving the remaining teasing would, in our opinion, likely encourage more negative comments about the OP as a person, rather than encouraging comments about the multi-iPhone-return saga in the original post. We decided to leave posts, even if they expressed incredulity about the story, if they also offered advice.

We moderate with an eye toward fostering useful thread conversations. We don't judge posts as acceptable or unacceptable based on how many likes they get. Helpful posts may get many likes, but insulting posts often get many likes too, before we can remove them.

As we often remind people, when you post a joke or use sarcasm, the person targeted may or may not recognize it as humor or appreciate the comment. Humor is often in the eye of the beholder. It's not against the rules to make jokes, but if they cause problems they will be removed. We know from experience which types of posts are likely to derail a thread, so we don't have to wait to see if things go badly. In this case, your joke wasn't a problem on its own, but the weight of jokes and negative comments directed at the poster steered the thread in the wrong direction.

Having a harmless joke removed does not affect your record of moderation or indicate a conspiracy to pick on you. Removing the post in question was not related to past moderation and won't affect future moderation.

As far as we know, nobody submitted false reports for this thread to cause trouble for anyone else. It's true that once in a while we've seen a user pick on another user by falsely reporting many of their posts. That causes more work for the moderators to review and dismiss the false reports, but it doesn't actually affect the targeted user.

Thank you for this insightful and thoughtful explanation.

 

[niploteksi]

Oh it’s worse than that. Since I’ve been given permission to discuss my moderation, get a load of this: the first post about a joke about beating women was fine for the mods as was the second one which was made as a reply to me in a completely different thread. The poster, whom I went back in forth with about the original post being disgusting, made a second joke in response to something I posted, obviously just to rile me up. So that post was OFF TOPIC and was also posted just piss me off which is TROLLING. two rules violation for this guy but his posts were left up.
So then, since other posters had also said his joke about beating women was fine, I started a separate thread, without naming him or others or even saying that someone here posted a joke like that, asking if people thought jokes about beating women were funny or if they crossed the line. I, of course, gave my opinion of jokes like that and the men who told them. The thread started a conversation and had a nice amount of responses. My entire thread was then deleted and I was banned from PRSI because the mods said I was the one trolling and I only made that thread to rile up that one poster. That’s how absolutely ****ed up moderation is here.

I for one guess that the trolls that get banned already have multiple accounts and create new ones as needed. It's a bit entertaining browsing through the PRSI but so many posts aren't really worth reading because it's just obviously trolling.

The moderation in the PRSI is a joke. Why would you even want to get back in? Just accept the fact that you're never going to be let back in, you probably have lots of better ways to spend your time

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I for one guess that the trolls that get banned already have multiple accounts and create new ones as needed. It's a bit entertaining browsing through the PRSI but so many posts aren't really worth reading because it's just obviously trolling.

The moderation in the PRSI is a joke. Why would you even want to get back in? Just accept the fact that you're never going to be let back in, you probably have lots of better ways to spend your time

Unfortunately, far too many of the posts in PRSI are a joke, too.

Insults masquerading as debate, and opinions as argument.

 

[ericgtr12]

Actually, today they're allowing some level of back and forth between people, in exchanges they've clearly slapped us down for before. Personally, I welcome this change. If given the chance, people can often work these things out themselves.

Keep it up guys!

 

[I7guy]

Actually, today they're allowing some level of back and forth between people, in exchanges they've clearly slapped us down for before. Personally, I welcome this change. If given the chance, people can often work these things out themselves.

Keep it up guys!

I'm assuming the back and forth is civil and debate worthy?

 

[ericgtr12]

I'm assuming the back and forth is civil and debate worthy?

Well, ish. If the mods were so inclined they could go in there and remove the OT back and forth. It's my hope they continue hold us all to the same standard in that respect, otherwise it comes off as biased.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I'm assuming the back and forth is civil and debate worthy?

Yes, agreed, this would be a concern of mine, too.

 

[Mac'nCheese]

Well once again I am confused. Posts that are very similar to ones here and in a non PRSI thread were removed for being PRSI like. There’s just no consistency.

 

[ericgtr12]

Yes, agreed, this would be a concern of mine, too.

Sometimes they go off topic but as long as it's civil and gets back on then what's the big deal? Stop treating people with kid gloves in there all the time or simply get rid of the forum. In some cases the mods have inconsistent leanings, for example they'll penalize one person for the exact same thing they let slide for another.

That being said, I don't know if they've loosened the rules up but they appear to be letting things play out a little bit and I hope they keep that up.