Sub-Forum Banning

[AngerDanger]

Over the years, I've noticed we've lost a few decent—or at the very least interesting—members due to suspension. It's difficult to figure out exactly which post went over the edge of warning and into bannable offense because these posts are moderated, but I suspect that many folks lose their accounts because of a comment made in the PRSI.

So I was wondering if it would be beneficial to suspend folks only from posting in the sub-forum that hosted their problematic comments.

 

[EnderBeta]

I personally set that section of the forum on ignore. It is very much slanted to the left. If you say anything that would be considered conservative you inevitably get targeted for suspension with the goal of pushing you out with the ban stick.

Rather then get upset reading the rhetoric I don't even read it anymore.

 

[AngerDanger]

I personally set that section of the forum on ignore. It is very much slanted to the left. If you say anything that would be considered conservative you inevitably get targeted for suspension with the goal of pushing you out with the ban stick.

I don't think that's true. I will say that it isn't always clear what triggers the mods.

Rather then get upset reading the rhetoric I don't even read it anymore.

That makes sense. I have the forum on ignore too, but it doesn't seem to do much of anything. The worst part of the PRSI rhetoric is that you've seen it all before on other sites and in other forums. Everybody I don't agree with is a villain or literally Hitler, all of their actions are subject to odd scrutiny, and it's funny when they express emotions of any kind.

 

[Weaselboy]

Over the years, I've noticed we've lost a few decent—or at the very least interesting—members due to suspension. It's difficult to figure out exactly which post went over the edge of warning and into bannable offense because these posts are moderated, but I suspect that many folks lose their accounts because of a comment made in the PRSI.

So I was wondering if it would be beneficial to suspend folks only from posting in the sub-forum that hosted their problematic comments.

We already do that. Here is a post that explains a bit.

 

[AngerDanger]

We already do that. Here is a post that explains a bit.

Ah, thanks for the info. I guess the members I with thinking of were repeat offenders or something that warranted indefinite suspension.

 

[iMi]

Some people get carried away at times, sure. And by "some people," I mean all of us. Okay... It's me. I get carried away at times... Ok, a lot of times.

Here's the thing. I say some pretty outrageous, liberal things. Many here can attest to the less than flattering things I've said about the current occupant of the White House. I have also read many outrages, conservative things. The key is to be civil toward one another and not intentionally say something to offend or provoke an angry response from another member - which happens at times.

That's really the only time when I received a love letter from an admin. In retrospect, rightfully so. They have an obligation to make this site an accessible and enjoyable experience for everyone. So, I think that you can express yourself pretty openly here. The key is not to attack other people but to perhaps challenge what they say and be respectful.

 

[redheeler]

I personally set that section of the forum on ignore. It is very much slanted to the left. If you say anything that would be considered conservative you inevitably get targeted for suspension with the goal of pushing you out with the ban stick.

Rather then get upset reading the rhetoric I don't even read it anymore.

I don't think you're correct about this. For example, take a look at the most liked posts in this thread. The one at the top has received 47 likes and has a very clear slant to the right, not left.

I'm sure it depends in large part what the topic of any given thread you're looking at is, and which group of people it upsets more. There's also a tendency to notice and remember more the posts we disagree with rather than agree with.

 

[Sunny1990]

Over the years, I've noticed we've lost a few decent—or at the very least interesting—members due to suspension.

Can you please share their user name?!

 

[maflynn]

I guess the members I with thinking of were repeat offenders or something that warranted indefinite suspension.

Moderation is done on an escalating basis, we send out reminders, sometimes multiple times, then suspensions and finally banning. There are exceptions to be sure, as we have a number of instantly bannable offenses, and depending on the report the moderation team will act accordingly.

With the PRSI, we opted for a forum banning as an alternative to a full site banning.

Can you please share their user name?!

Discussing moderation against specific members is not permitted, and to be honest is not germane to the subject matter of the thread.

 

[smallcoffee]

So while you guys take the right approach with that subforum (and you and I have had some great discussions in some of the other Mac threads) it's not moderated very well or within context. All you do is respond to complaints. So it's a case of whoever reports posts the most gets other people banned.

Now, I don't really care. It's probably a good thing being banned since it's like one less thing I waste time on, but on the other hand I do like this forum so I have a bit of an interest in ensuring that it keeps being a good forum - which is why I just mentioned this.

 

[maflynn]

So it's a case of whoever reports posts the most gets other people banned.

There's a few points I'd like to raise regarding this comment.

1. We can only act on posts that we're aware of, either by people reporting the post, of if we come across the post during our interactions. With so many threads, posts and discussions its impossible for the moderation team to be aware or monitor each thread. If people don't report a post that is violating the rules, then there may be a chance the moderation team is unaware, so please report it.
2. Volume (number of reports on a specific post) has nothing to do with moderator action, but rather if a post violates our rules. We are only human and if you feel we acted incorrectly, please reach out to the administrators via the contact us link: https://forums.macrumors.com/misc/contact/ and ask for clarification.
3. Regardless of another member's behavior, you are responsible for your own posts and conduct. So someone else's misdeeds are no excuse for you think its ok to violate the rules.

 

[Apple fanboy]

There's a few points I'd like to raise regarding this comment.

1. We can only act on posts that we're aware of, either by people reporting the post, of if we come across the post during our interactions. With so many threads, posts and discussions its impossible for the moderation team to be aware or monitor each thread. If people don't report a post that is violating the rules, then there may be a chance the moderation team is unaware, so please report it.
2. Volume of reports have nothing to do with moderator action, but rather if a post violates our rules. We are only human and if you feel we acted incorrectly, please reach out to the administrators via the contact us link: https://forums.macrumors.com/misc/contact/ and ask for clarification.
3. Regardless of another member's behavior, you are responsible for your own posts and conduct. So someone else's misdeeds are no excuse for you think its ok to violate the rules.

I'd like to add the the following.

Most Mods are volunteering their time so I think that generally they do a great job on this site.
As members it is our responsibility to bring things to their attention using the report button where appropriate to help to keep this site free of bots/trolls and scum and villainy!

 

[smallcoffee]

There's a few points I'd like to raise regarding this comment.

1. We can only act on posts that we're aware of, either by people reporting the post, of if we come across the post during our interactions. With so many threads, posts and discussions its impossible for the moderation team to be aware or monitor each thread. If people don't report a post that is violating the rules, then there may be a chance the moderation team is unaware, so please report it.
2. Volume (number of reports on a specific post) has nothing to do with moderator action, but rather if a post violates our rules. We are only human and if you feel we acted incorrectly, please reach out to the administrators via the contact us link: https://forums.macrumors.com/misc/contact/ and ask for clarification.
3. Regardless of another member's behavior, you are responsible for your own posts and conduct. So someone else's misdeeds are no excuse for you think its ok to violate the rules.

I don't disagree with what you're saying here except point 3. Determining if a post breaks the rules is inherently discretionary and biased. That's fine and acceptable, but there are plenty of cases where a post could be considered a violation of the rules and where it could not be, even when someone is following the general rules.

I largely don't disagree with any moderation actions, including my own, but the fact that you rely on having incidents raised and then you pay attention implicitly means that whoever reports the most means they get action, even though as I demonstrated it's easy to find equally rule breaking posts with little effort, which do not receive action unless somebody reports them.

Wrt to "mods are volunteers". Sorry that's crap. They do a good job but they can just not volunteer and not complain. It's not like they don't get anything out of it and it would be easy to find other mods.

 

[Erdbeertorte]

I personally set that section of the forum on ignore.

Me too. Why would I go to MACrumors if I want to discuss about politics? Shouldn't be anything Apple unrelated in there.

 

[EnderBeta]

There's a few points I'd like to raise regarding this comment.

1. We can only act on posts that we're aware of, either by people reporting the post, of if we come across the post during our interactions. With so many threads, posts and discussions its impossible for the moderation team to be aware or monitor each thread. If people don't report a post that is violating the rules, then there may be a chance the moderation team is unaware, so please report it.
2. Volume (number of reports on a specific post) has nothing to do with moderator action, but rather if a post violates our rules. We are only human and if you feel we acted incorrectly, please reach out to the administrators via the contact us link: https://forums.macrumors.com/misc/contact/ and ask for clarification.
3. Regardless of another member's behavior, you are responsible for your own posts and conduct. So someone else's misdeeds are no excuse for you think its ok to violate the rules.

It depends on the interpretation of the rules by the moderator handling the ticket. This is where the bias creeps in because like a bad police officer bad mods spend a lot of time looking how to twist a turn of a phrase into a rule violation so they can use the stick. Sometimes it's plain as day that the moderator is doing it because of personal views when it's in response to something that in many other instances all throughout the forum the phrase is used and gets thumbs up, but in this instance bam suspended for a day or more.

The difference, in one a liberal used the phrase. In the one who got the stick, surprise surprise a conservative....

My opinion of the mods here leans more towards the power trip then keeping the forum running smoothly. That's my personal opinion.

 

[maflynn]

It depends on the interpretation of the rules by the moderator handling the ticket.

We work as a team, asking advise and opinions on reports, on some reports we have requested an admin's input as well. The moderation team has a series of checks and balances and all of our work is done with transparency with the entire team. Failing that a member can request the administrators to review the moderation.

 

[smallcoffee]

We work as a team, asking advise and opinions on reports, on some reports we have requested an admin's input as well. The moderation team has a series of checks and balances and all of our work is done with transparency with the entire team. Failing that a member can request the administrators to review the moderation.

Meh, could just say the team is biased. I don't find this to be reassuring.

Now I don't think you are, per-se, but I do think that the PRSI forum needs more proactive moderation than reactive. I mean, I gave you guys a clear example before you removed the post (w/e, not a big deal I guess). Those posts are easily justifiably rule violations, but if they aren't reported then those people get off free, whereas if somebody doesn't like you they can just follow you around and report your posts, and then mod bias can amplify that - particularly for those who don't conform to the status-quo.

Again don't take this in a negative way or anything. I'm just pointing out what I see as a possible problem with how things are done now. Nothing negative or angry here friend. I just want to reiterate that because I'm just looking to help out with my personal views on the sub.

 

[EnderBeta]

We work as a team, asking advise and opinions on reports, on some reports we have requested an admin's input as well. The moderation team has a series of checks and balances and all of our work is done with transparency with the entire team. Failing that a member can request the administrators to review the moderation.

If this was true and people are being habitually suspended in topics by a single person or group of people why are you not enforcing no flame bait?

If it wasn't so apparently one sided it would be better but right now the pattern is someone says something inflammatory and then anyone who responds is met with antagonistic comments from the op and their group. Then when the mark makes one mistake, moderated.

Where the bias comes in is when the mark gets suspended for going off topic (even if it wasn't them who went off topic) or "bickering" even if they where not bickering but trying to debate a point but the other side refused to stick to the rules of debate.

I've seen it too many times to count. That's why I don't even read the sub forum. This leaves the system open to abuse.

It happens out in the regular forum too. It's why I rarely visit this forum as of late.

 

[MachCrit]

I personally set that section of the forum on ignore. It is very much slanted to the left. If you say anything that would be considered conservative you inevitably get targeted for suspension with the goal of pushing you out with the ban stick.

Rather then get upset reading the rhetoric I don't even read it anymore.

I fail to see the value of certain sections, which have the look and feel of the Democratic Underground. It's the same handful of people virtue signaling, addicted to conflict, talking but not listening, going to the limit of moderator tolerance on insults, all while making the same arguments over and over and over, taking up moderator's time and perpetuating negativity over the Macrumours site. What is the point?

Plenty of other venues for that stuff, that don't leave a bad taste in the mouths of your customers.

 

[EnderBeta]

I fail to see the value of certain sections, which have the look and feel of the Democratic Underground, with the same handful of people virtue signaling, making the same arguments over and over and over, taking up moderator's time.

Plenty of other venues for that stuff, that don't leave a bad taste in the mouths of your customers.

I agree. Maybe the politics sub forum should simply be removed.

 

[LizKat]

I don't disagree with what you're saying here except point 3. Determining if a post breaks the rules is inherently discretionary and biased. That's fine and acceptable, but there are plenty of cases where a post could be considered a violation of the rules and where it could not be, even when someone is following the general rules.

I largely don't disagree with any moderation actions, including my own, but the fact that you rely on having incidents raised and then you pay attention implicitly means that whoever reports the most means they get action, even though as I demonstrated it's easy to find equally rule breaking posts with little effort, which do not receive action unless somebody reports them.

Wrt to "mods are volunteers". Sorry that's crap. They do a good job but they can just not volunteer and not complain. It's not like they don't get anything out of it and it would be easy to find other mods.

Wow.. easy to find other mods? There are a lot of guidelines and other moderation parameters to consider and grow familiar with. It would seem a pretty thankless task if you ask me. And probably pretty repetitive, a lot like clearing the table or washing the dishes, because the same stuff happens over and over again and must be addressed in the same way. Someone spills milk, someone else says oh someone spilled milk can you clean it up? Consider the mod asked for the 207th time to deal with some troll who just insulted a fan of iOS or Android after a software release in one or the other of those categories. And they're not paid to fish out that boilerplate and make the notification one more time just so the rest of us don't have to encounter that level of rudeness so many times. I don't want to be one but I sure appreciate what they do (as well as people who bother to report the way over top guideline violations.

Anyone who reports something gets "action" although it may not result in someone getting a vacation... I've once or twice reported something I thought busted a guideline and got back a reply that after review, no action seemed warranted. I can accept that. Most of the time I admit I'm more likely to roll eyes and just keep scrolling down. I make exceptions during the heat of campaign seasons and iPhone launches lol when certain forums seem in meltdown mode.

And I've been warned a few times over stuff that surprised me, at least at first, until I thought about it for awhile, so it's not just conservatives who get their chops busted, believe me.
[doublepost=1505175854][/doublepost]

I agree. Maybe the politics sub forum should simply be removed.

NOOOOOOOOOO! How about just ignore it?
[doublepost=1505175902][/doublepost]

It depends on the interpretation of the rules by the moderator handling the ticket. This is where the bias creeps in because like a bad police officer bad mods spend a lot of time looking how to twist a turn of a phrase into a rule violation so they can use the stick. Sometimes it's plain as day that the moderator is doing it because of personal views when it's in response to something that in many other instances all throughout the forum the phrase is used and gets thumbs up, but in this instance bam suspended for a day or more.

The difference, in one a liberal used the phrase. In the one who got the stick, surprise surprise a conservative....

My opinion of the mods here leans more towards the power trip then keeping the forum running smoothly. That's my personal opinion.

Bring back the downvote...

 

[smallcoffee]

Wow.. easy to find other mods? There are a lot of guidelines and other moderation parameters to consider and grow familiar with. It would seem a pretty thankless task if you ask me. And probably pretty repetitive, a lot like clearing the table or washing the dishes, because the same stuff happens over and over again and must be addressed in the same way. Someone spills milk, someone else says oh someone spilled milk can you clean it up? Consider the mod asked for the 207th time to deal with some troll who just insulted a fan of iOS or Android after a software release in one or the other of those categories. And they're not paid to fish out that boilerplate and make the notification one more time just so the rest of us don't have to encounter that level of rudeness so many times. I don't want to be one but I sure appreciate what they do (as well as people who bother to report the way over top guideline violations.

Anyone who reports something gets "action" although it may not result in someone getting a vacation... I've once or twice reported something I thought busted a guideline and got back a reply that after review, no action seemed warranted. I can accept that. Most of the time I admit I'm more likely to roll eyes and just keep scrolling down. I make exceptions during the heat of campaign seasons and iPhone launches lol when certain forums seem in meltdown mode.

And I've been warned a few times over stuff that surprised me, at least at first, until I thought about it for awhile, so it's not just conservatives who get their chops busted, believe me.
[doublepost=1505175854][/doublepost]

NOOOOOOOOOO! How about just ignore it?
[doublepost=1505175902][/doublepost]

Bring back the downvote...

I'm not even complaining about conservatives because I'm a pragmatic Nordic socialist. But, uh, this whole idea that "oh those poor mods they do so much work" is very misguided. They could easily find replacements for that work and not have to pay. I don't mean this in a negative way as I think the current mods do a good job, but a site like MR would have no problem finding competent mods. But my point here isn't to lambast mods, again, they're fine, but to combat the idea that was initiated that somehow they are saints and they just do this put of the kindness of their heart at great suffrage. That's simply incorrect. Great work and keep doing it, but if you feel overworked then there are st least 10 people willing to take your job who are competent and ready to go, Lizcat and myself included.

 

[LizKat]

I'm not even complaining about conservatives because I'm a pragmatic Nordic socialist. But, uh, this whole idea that "oh those poor mods they do so much work" is very misguided. They could easily find replacements for that work and not have to pay. I don't mean this in a negative way as I think the current mods do a good job, but a site like MR would have no problem finding competent mods. But my point here isn't to lambast mods, again, they're fine, but to combat the idea that was initiated that somehow they are saints and they just do this put of the kindness of their heart at great suffrage. That's simply incorrect. Great work and keep doing it, but if you feel overworked then there are st least 10 people willing to take your job who are competent and ready to go, Lizcat and myself included.

Heck I don't want to be a moderator. Ask @jkcerda, he's wanted the job for years now.

Maybe it comes down to this thread being something of a request from some of us to other forum members to be more proactive themselves in engaging moderators' attention. However, I have a feeling most members are not going to change how they deal w/ forum posts or subforums they find annoying. They'll use the ignore feature, stay out of certain subforums or just roll eyes and scroll past the offending stuff figuring "hey that's not for me but I have other fish to fry right now."

On balance I think what happens at MacRumors, with moderation as it is, is that it does tend to keep the place user-friendly, more so than plenty other places. Some of the people who have gone on permanent vacations from here certainly had seemed to have a number of little vacations offered earlier as teachable moments. And it's none of our biz how many warnings they may have got even before that for the same stuff short of instantly bannable offenses.

When I occasionally do feel that the moderation could lean in a little at MacRumors, I just go read a few dozen comments in random You Tube offerings, or in the Washington Post appended to news articles that don't even seem anything but straight up to me. I come back thinking this place is a PG-rated haven.

 

[jkcerda]

Heck I don't want to be a moderator. Ask @jkcerda, he's wanted the job for years now.

Maybe it comes down to this thread being something of a request from some of us to other forum members to be more proactive themselves in engaging moderators' attention. However, I have a feeling most members are not going to change how they deal w/ forum posts or subforums they find annoying. They'll use the ignore feature, stay out of certain subforums or just roll eyes and scroll past the offending stuff figuring "hey that's not for me but I have other fish to fry right now."

On balance I think what happens at MacRumors, with moderation as it is, is that it does tend to keep the place user-friendly, more so than plenty other places. Some of the people who have gone on permanent vacations from here certainly had seemed to have a number of little vacations offered earlier as teachable moments. And it's none of our biz how many warnings they may have got even before that for the same stuff short of instantly bannable offenses.

When I occasionally do feel that the moderation could lean in a little at MacRumors, I just go read a few dozen comments in random You Tube offerings, or in the Washington Post appended to news articles that don't even seem anything but straight up to me. I come back thinking this place is a PG-rated haven.

Every Tuesday would be taco Tuesday if I was moderator

 

[LizKat]

/thread before they wasteland this thing...