So over the inconsistent moderation.

[iObama]

I've been a member here for nearly 20 years. The past couple, it feels like the joy has been sucked out of this forum.

I've been warned for "trolling" for responding "Cool" to people who were going off on me. I've been warned for making "political comments" on articles that are about the EU's regulations on Apple. I've been warned for making "off-topic" comments for responding to someone else's comment on the moderation of a thread I was in.

Meanwhile, today, I reported four comments that called Jony Ive fat on an article about LoveFrom, and the "moderation team concluded no action was warranted." That's super odd, mods – I didn't realize the article was about Jony being fat at LoveFrom.

Frustrating as ****, man.

 

[BrianBaughn]

I like this forum when it's folks asking about software or hardware issues and other folks are trying to help.

Speculation by members (none of whom I know and most completely anonymous) about laws and how tech companies are run and so on doesn't usually interest me. I realize the staff often posts things on the main page that invite such comment…so it's impossible to avoid completely.

 

[Sheepish-Lord]

I personally think there should be little to no moderation. It's a niche tech forum, as long as you're not posting stuff that could get you banned (e.g. racism, hate speech, etc) then who cares if a bunch of nerds call either other fat or dumb. Hell, getting rid of political or religious talk cut's down on the vast majority of issues in society as whole.

Let the mbrs self moderate/report others and if enough people report the same issue then 2+2=4 ya know.

 

[I7guy]

I've been a member here for nearly 20 years. The past couple, it feels like the joy has been sucked out of this forum.

I've been warned for "trolling" for responding "Cool" to people who were going off on me. I've been warned for making "political comments" on articles that are about the EU's regulations on Apple. I've been warned for making "off-topic" comments for responding to someone else's comment on the moderation of a thread I was in.

All of the above are “in the rule book” about things not to do. And are minor violations at first that escalate as infractions accumulate. But if we understand the rules and keep breaking them that’s on us.

Meanwhile, today, I reported four comments that called Jony Ive fat on an article about LoveFrom, and the "moderation team concluded no action was warranted." That's super odd, mods – I didn't realize the article was about Jony being fat at LoveFrom.

There is no rule against public figure insults, unfortunately. I think it brings the level of the conversation down, but it is what it is.

Frustrating as ****, man.

 

[I7guy]

I personally think there should be little to no moderation. It's a niche tech forum, as long as you're not posting stuff that could get you banned (e.g. racism, hate speech, etc) then who cares if a bunch of nerds call either other fat or dumb. Hell, getting rid of political or religious talk cut's down on the vast majority of issues in society as whole.

Let the mbrs self moderate/report others and if enough people report the same issue then 2+2=4 ya know.

There will never be little or no moderation on Macrumors. And from what I gather much of the moderation happens with user reporting.

It’s not that moderators go canvassing the forums for violations.

 

[S.B.G]

And from what I gather much of the moderation happens with user reporting.

It’s not that moderators go canvassing the forums for violations.

These are accurate statements.

When I was doing the job I absolutely did not go trolling for rules violations. I wanted to enjoy the forums just as much as the users did. I would get annoyed when I came across stuff and had to do some work for a while to clean up a thread.

I don't know any stats, but from experience I can say that the overwhelming majority of moderation reports come from the users and not the staff.

 

[fatTribble]

There will never be little or no moderation on Macrumors. And from what I gather much of the moderation happens with user reporting.

It’s not that moderators go canvassing the forums for violations.

I may be in the minority, but I actually stay engaged on the forums because of the moderation. Friends try to compare my forum participation with something toxic like Twitter, but the moderation is what makes this different.

I enjoy hearing other opinions on products from people who have experience with the products. I’m often surprised though at how a simple exchange of ideas can quickly turn into personal attacks. I’ve seen new people get blasted personally simply for bringing up something that has been discussed. There have been completely innocuous comments about a product met with personal attacks. We’ve all seen it.

That Report button, in my opinion, helps keep the conversation civil and focused on the technology.

 

[Madhatter32]

Should a fatso have rights under the MR moderation policy? Another day, another important issue being discussed in the forum feedback section.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Should a fatso have rights under the MR moderation policy? Another day, another important issue being discussed in the forum feedback section.

But calling someone - anyone, whether in the public space or not - a "fatso" is so horribly reminiscent of the bullying (and discourteous and disrespectful) behaviour of dreadful five and six year olds in the schoolyard.

And no, as I was a small, skinny, kid who wore (and I still wear) glasses, probably predictably, the names hurled in my direction were somewhat different.

Such conduct had little to commend it at the time, and, with age and hindsight, it does not improve.

In any case, my stance is that one should find fault with Tim Cook over his policies, and not his appearance.

 

[Madhatter32]

But calling someone - anyone, whether in the public space or not - a "fatso" is so horribly reminiscent of the bullying (and discourteous and disrespectful) behaviour of dreadful five and six year olds in the schoolyard.

And no, as I was a small, skinny, kid who wore (still wears) glasses, probably predictably, the names hurled in my direction were somewhat different.

Such conduct had little to commend it at the time, and, with age and hindsight, it does not improve.

In any case, my stance is that one should find fault with Tim Cook over his policies, and not his appearance.

As a fellow spectacle wearer, I can relate. Calling someone a fatso is bullying and crass but is it (or should it be) a violation of the moderation policy when directed at a public figure -- not so sure. Name calling is not good but ubiquitous. Where do you propose to draw the line? Should all insults be dispensed with -- which would basically eviscerate the political news section?

 

[ayephoner]

I recently left another forum with way too little moderation (almost none). It's shocking how that turns into an unbearable cesspool very quickly. I think you should be happy to be on a forum where the mods care enough to do something, even if you perceive it to be inconsistent.

 

[surferfb]

I've reported various "insults" of public figures/companies and been told pretty much "public figures are fair game". I agree with @I7guy that it lowers the level of discourse and wish MacRumors would reconsider that policy, but it is applied consistently.

 

[Digital Dude]

I tend to agree with most of what you posted, because I too occasionally get my hand slapped for seemingly innocuous comments. When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, people weren’t as thin skin whereas today, people will claim PTSD for an ingrown toenail. 🫩

 

[maconservative]

Same. I have not been a part of this forum for nearly as long, but the moderation has become questionable at best.

 

[iObama]

Same. I have not been a part of this forum for nearly as long, but the moderation has become questionable at best.

When maconservative and iObama are united...

 

[maflynn]

@iObama, love your 'Tar

Anyways, here's my take, been a member for long time, been a moderator for a number of years, and now an ex-moderator seeing life on the other side.

These threads pop up with alarming regularity, and here's how things will play out:

• Members who have been wronged will post about the issues.
• Other members who have an axe to grind will slam the moderation team.
• Other members who tend to defend the moderation team, sometimes even blindly will come in and try to downplay the issue.
• The mods will eventually come in and state nothing is wrong - all is good.
• Much later Ann or Dr. Q will post, and will say there's not any inconsistency, and if you want a deeper discussion with the admins, please use the contact us, due to member privacy (which is generally a good thing)
• Both the mods and admins will continue to affirm That they all work as a team. Which as an ex-mod is true, while the level of interaction is dependent on the complexity of the issue, there's almost always a high degree of conversations between the staff.

Overall here's my $.02. At the end of the day, its their playground, there rules. The mods and admins try to apply the rules to the best of their ability and I think for a site of this size generally do a good job.

I would hope that both the mods and admins step back from time to time and do some self reflection; see what they did well, and try to identify areas of improvement - that's more of a personal journey.

Speaking personally as an ex-mod, I did that and how I moderated evolved over the years. I know for a fact that no matter how much growth I may have shown, there will be members who will think I was a horrible moderator - just saying no matter what happens, you cannot please everyone.

 

[eyoungren]

Overall here's my $.02. At the end of the day, its their playground, there rules. The mods and admins try to apply the rules to the best of their ability and I think for a site of this size generally do a good job.

To add to this, my two cents as well.

If you have been here any length of time you start to get a feel for which moderators tend to frequent the subforums you're in. Further, you tend to get a feel for how sensitive each moderator is to applying the rules. While, as has been stated, most moderation occurs because of user reports, if you are aware that a particular moderator is active in your subforum then you have to realize that it's likely you might be moderated by them if they see something themselves.

Perhaps this is just down to my own personal trauma, whereby to protect myself, I learned to read people as best I could and avoid actions that would irritate them. I apply that same protection to moderators.

One of my first moderation experiences was being told not to advertise my eBay auction. Well, I wasn't. I was showing what I'd just bought. So from that time to present, any time I post a link showing something for purchase on a website I make a disclaimer. That's protecting myself.

There are other things I avoid doing, but this was the most benign example I could think of. I hate being 'told what to do', but if I want to use these forums without being banned I have to assess what the moderators will and will not tolerate and that usually starts with the rules. Whatever anyone else is doing and/or getting away with, if I am following the rules I'm protected (generally).

 

[Weaselboy]

Moderator Note:

A handful of posts discussing specific moderation have been removed.

It is fine to discuss general moderation policy issues in this thread, but if you want to discuss why a specific post was moderated, you will need to waive your right to privacy in the thread. This way a staff member can review the records and explain the moderation.

Obviously you cannot waive another member's right to privacy, so if you wish to discuss moderation involving a forum member other than yourself, the involved member must waive in the thread.

 

[davide_eu]

Moderator Note:

A handful of posts discussing specific moderation have been removed.

It is fine to discuss general moderation policy issues in this thread, but if you want to discuss why a specific post was moderated, you will need to waive your right to privacy in the thread. This way a staff member can review the records and explain the moderation.

Obviously you cannot waive another member's right to privacy, so if you wish to discuss moderation involving a forum member other than yourself, the involved member must waive in the thread.

Respectfully, but this is censorship.

 

[Weaselboy]

Respectfully, but this is censorship.

No it is not. All we are saying is if you want to come here and publicly complain about how you were moderated, you are welcome to do that. But you will also need to waive your right to privacy so an admin can review the records and reply. Otherwise, only one side of the story is presented.

 

[I7guy]

Respectfully, but this is censorship.

What you’re missing is this is not your house. You can’t go into another’s house and behave how you want. And this house has their own set of rules.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Respectfully, but this is censorship.

And?

Personally, I have come around to the view - given the horrors of an unregulated, unmoderated, unaccountable space occupied by (excessively powerful and influential) social platforms in the current online world - that I far prefer censorship, regulation (whether imposed by the site owners, or a government, or a supranational body such as the EU) and fact checking, to the grotesque insanity of the current online world.

In any case, their house, (or, Arn's house, or, MR's house), their rules.

 

[turbineseaplane]

And?

Personally, I have come around to the view - given the horrors of an unregulated, unmoderated, unaccountable space occupied by (excessively powerful and influential) social platforms in the current online world - that I far prefer censorship, regulation (whether imposed by the site owners, or a government, or a supranational body such as the EU) and fact checking, to the grotesque insanity of the current online world.

In any case, their house, (or, Arn's house, or, MR's house), their rules.

You had me intrigued until you said you prefer censorship

😐😵‍💫

I will never prefer censorship, especially from a governing body.

 

[Madhatter32]

You had me intrigued until you said you prefer censorship

😐😵‍💫

I will never prefer censorship, especially from a governing body.

Common misconception. There is nothing wrong with "censorship" on private property. Letting ignoramuses pontificate on matters they know nothing about and allowing the riffraff to spew their pablum (and often hatred) in most vulgar terms doesn't fly in my house. Nor should it here.

Also, your avatar picture is offensive -- but I suspect you know that already.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

You had me intrigued until you said you prefer censorship

😐😵‍💫

I will never prefer censorship, especially from a governing body.

Well, there are worse things than censorship in the online world.

For my part, much though I may think (or, to be more precise, may have thought) that I like (liked) the idea of - the very notion of - anarchic nihilism implicit in an unregulated (and unaccountable) online world, where everyone can express themselves exactly how they may wish to do so, irrespective of custom or courtesy, fact or fiction, truth or lies, somewhat belatedly, - and entirely as a consequence of what has been taking place in the online sphere - I realise that I have come to far prefer excessive moderation (or control, or regulation) to no moderation, or regulation.

And, yes, to my mind, some things ought to be censored, irrespective of commercial imperatives, or popular demand.