Is It Time For Moderators?

[rando]

@pkane2001 I was being utterly facetious. Previous suggestions have included word filters (For example MQA in any spacing or attempt at phonetic spelling automatically changes to ) and a passworded romper room for the overexuberant to battle test their commanding grasp on the vile lower rung of personal expression with gentlemen of like mind. 

 

Carry on with the group therapy session and pay me no mind. 

 

Ok, I do have one almost on topic idea. Volunteers to retrieve the detritus of numerous software updates from their unusable state. At one point these articles and assorted other resources were referenced broadly by unaccounted for audiences.  Everyone who has mentioned @austinpopshould be imitating his community spirit instead of post-dating complaints. 

[RickyV]

28 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

Computer keyboards don't kill after all.

Sure, but it suppose fun for all people doing there HOBBY. 

[crenca]

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

CA has survived, and thrived if you like, so far without moderation. That's what enduring about the place. There are posters I can't stand, even on ignore, much like family, you don't get to chose and have to put up with behaviour that's incompatible with your own. Put up with it, or speak out are choices.

 

The reason moderation is considered, if there's a parallel opinion and the paths don't meet. This is not Jihad.. There are those of equally divided polar opinions that won't give an inch either way, 'because it's what I hear, it did make a change and am happy with it' or at 180 degrees 'that's how it works, science says so, it's all in your head'. To find moderation in between two completely opposing views is a challenge in itself and why, honestly, would anyone take on that extra level of stress? And for free? The battle rages on and on, and the only way is to lock the thread, although it's still possible to create a reaction after the thread is locked..(!!).

 

Head-Fi have a Forum section that's DBT free. Anyone can talk about their experiences with cables, DACs impressions on any gear related to audio playback. Any mention of challenging the opinion with a DBT post is removed. If you don't like what's posted in the DBT Free thread, don't go there. Is this section worth looking at for CA? Subjective opinions are important, because no one among hobbyists has the resources of $$$,$$$ worth of gear to test, and are those measurements a yardstick of good performance anyway? Does it mean 0.001% is worse than 0.00099%? By the sheer numbers of equipment that's manufactured, that doesn't appear to be the case. 

 

Well stated.  There is no "moderation" between these two different understandings of reality, not in any significant and worthwhile sense.  Some say objectivists and subjectivists should "learn" from each other but that is idyllic.  I have learned very little form subjectivists (mostly just negative examples - how not to do, or think about something), and quite a bit from objectivists.  

 

[feelingears]

I don't think about this a lot because, I presume, I'm a heavy user of the ignore feature. That said, I still heartily vote "yes" for moderation or perhaps a means to vote people off a thread?

 

While I generally filter out the users who post antagonistic and irrelevant content (to me) and accept that I miss some things because the content "provider" is a troll 90+% of the time, CA does not have to be a democracy and freedom of speech isn't an inalienable right. While this probably sounds and feels dictatorial, I'm more aligned with Chris than it might seem; and I'd prefer selective heavy-handedness with certain individuals and threads than an attempt to be "fair" that will be attacked on the grounds of principle rather than on the fact that certain individuals primarily "contribute" negativity and animosity rather than productive ideas.

 

Again, since there's clearly no majority here (50/50 as of this writing), maybe instead of moderation we give a group of moderators the ability to give warnings, and if enough approved moderators ding someone, they're removed from the thread on the third ding. No discussion, no appeal, no dice. Maybe that will encourage people to be civil? Maybe we should at least try this a while and see how it goes...

 

And to those who are respectful (almost to a "feeding the trolls" fault), my respect. Our founder, especially. You people truly have the patience of a saint. 

 

[pkane2001]

8 minutes ago, rando said:

@pkane2001 I was being utterly facetious.

 

So was I.

 

[RickyV]

8 minutes ago, rando said:

@pkane2001 I was being utterly facetious. Previous suggestions have included word filters (For example MQA in any spacing or attempt at phonetic spelling automatically changes to ) and a passworded romper room for the overexuberant to battle test their commanding grasp on the vile lower rung of personal expression with gentlemen of like mind. 

 

Carry on with the group therapy session and pay me no mind. 

 

Ok, I do have one almost on topic idea. Volunteers to retrieve the detritus of numerous software updates from their unusable state. At one point these articles and assorted other resources were referenced broadly by unaccounted for audiences.  Everyone who has mentioned @austinpopshould be imitating his community spirit instead of post-dating complaints. 

 

WTF.

 

[crenca]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

There are other sites where differing viewpoints aren't tolerated. A strength of this site is that it is diverse. Diversity breeds conflict but that is the cost of maintaining diversity.

 

There is simply no getting around this.  However, there is a minority (majority?  I don't think so but I could be wrong) that simply don't want this reality...

[wgscott]

47 minutes ago, RickyV said:

 

WTF.

 

 

Sometimes it helps to drop acid and then read it backwards.

[lucretius]

Moderation to keep a thread on-topic and to remove offensive posts --- YES.  Editing posts --- NO.  Also, I don't like the idea of the OP moderating the thread.  Once a thread is started, it is public, not personal -- moderation should be impartial.

[vmartell22]

It is a hard question  - as we know, freedom of speech in this country (USA) only limits government censorship - so Chris is well within his rights to moderate, delete, suppress, etc, whatever one might think of it.

 

So the question is - what kind of forum do we want it to be. There are many members that want the freedom to discuss $10K plus Ethernet cables and their sound - and they are right to be upset if the troll in me drops in and derails THEIR thread.

 

Do they have the "right" to discuss unmolested ? Well that all depends what rights Chris grants us. Is it the "right" thing to do, not to have detractors drop in and derail? (or troll, if you see  it that way) - sure! "live and let live" is a golden rule.

 

Should they expect to be able to do so ? No. Unless Chris explicitly says so in the agreement to use this forum. As the forum is, right now, you should expect dissent, mockery and downright insults. EVERYONE knows what a discussion thread for $10K Plus Ethernet cables might degenerate into. 

 

So I turn the question to Chris - what kind of forum do you want? Do you want a more civil forum  (as it has been discussed many times) ? If so, I say go ahead - it would probably be at the expense of liveliness in the threads. 

 

I would ask, Chris, that  if you decide to add moderators  please do not anoint current users. There are professional moderators out there, working for companies you can hire for that purpose. Because to tell you the truth, anointing users, no matter how senior as moderators, causes their biases to dominate the forums - or worse you could create inconsistency in criteria, if you try to balance points of view by picking users from each side.

 

If you do it Chris, professional moderation is the way to go.

 

v

 

 

[Teresa]

Chris Connaker I am sorry I didn't vote as there are both pros and cons. However, what you decide to do is fine with me.

 

@Music Enthusiast stated that not everyone is going to scroll back to the 1st post in a thread to read the rules. I always read the first post of a thread before reading any of the other posts as I consider the first post the most important and what the thread is supposed to be about. I do this every time I open a tread, but I don't have much short term memory, so most other posters won't need to read the first post every time. However, I believe if they kept in mind the concerns of the OP'er, threads would go a lot better and perhaps be less off topic.

 

Also, no one is on my ignore list as I value all opinions even those I disagree with. I'm a subjectivist and have learned a lot from objectivists when they are being helpful and not trying to get under the skin of some subjectivist. I think both sides have things to contribute. And as you said, this is supposed to be fun!  ?

[mav52]

Moderators are used when posters act like children.  I feel since we are all adults, why not act like adults and keep enjoying this site

[Abtr]

I think moderation can/should only be used to address ad hominem attacks, gross incivility and off topic trolling. Such posts can be reported and subsequent moderation shouldn't be too hard. IMO this already works quite well.

 

Maybe the way moderation is done can be improved. I would remove the content of an offending post or posts and replace it with a short explanation in red, such as "Ad hominem attack removed" or "Off topic content removed." This way moderation would be more visible which may have an extra preventive effect.

 

The moderator should *not* discuss his or her decision. Any complaints about moderation can be removed without providing a reason. Occasionally a post may be removed unjustified but that's unavoidable; like the occasional wrong decision made by an arbiter in a sports match.   
 

[rwwjr44]

I haven't voted yet. Why? Because I would like to know why (within reason) @The Computer Audiophile posed the question. Is it becoming too much work, is it a distraction, etc.? The site seems to run just fine with only a few blowhards. BUT, I don't participate in many of the threads so...

 

@The Computer Audiophile do what you feel best. If you decide to have moderators, please see that they are of moderate  temperament and not dictatorial.

[marioed]

I've been a member of this forum for over 5 years and I usually check in at least once a day. I rarely post in many cases because I find that someone else has already said what I might add and in a better way than I could.

 

Over time I have noticed that the Objectivist/Subjectivist battles seem to have taken a nastier more insulting tone and conscious attempts to derail a topic under discussion are more frequent and often repeated throughout the thread. This does make following a thread that I'm interested in harder and also makes me less likely to actively participate. I don't really enjoy having to get into a heated debate when I express my opinion, something I've unfortunately seen happen all too frequently in various threads.

 

On the part of some folks there seems to be a relish for combat as I see the same members engaged in the same arguments across multiple threads, often completely derailing the thread. I like mav52's sentiment and would hope that everyone could do that, unfortunately I suspect they can't. While I can wish that moderator's aren't necessary I think at this point having moderators may be a good idea.

[rando]

I've seen very similar problems on other forums. At some point every technical and enjoyable topical subject has been examined to the point of becoming threadbare. Nearly everyone knows nearly everyone else which results in deeper and more personal awareness for better or worse. The only major component in this I see missing is a comprehensive easily searchable local database to direct less proficient users towards. 

 

The band of regulars mentioned above creates enough problems for moderation. However, what really seems to be the driving force here is a division between those looking for a healthy open forum that shakes off familial scuffles and the survivors of early message boards who's ideals are at direct variance with the above.

 

Thanks for the Christmas card v. GFYM you #!*&%'ing tin eared moron. 

[Rt66indierock]

On 12/26/2018 at 8:38 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi Guys - As the title says, is it time for moderators in the forum?

 

Nope my fault for getting a bad infection and not delivering content. Things get a little off track without direction.

[Blake]

I believe in the current status quo that allows each thread starter to impose rules and moderate their own thread.

 

If no such rules are imposed by the thread starter, then I prefer an organic approach and just let the thread evolve or devolve without moderation (except by Chris when things get too out of hand). 

 

I would also like to see Chris putting members on "time out" for a week as an intermediate step to banning if they continually exhibit exceptionally obnoxious or spastic behavior (i.e. opening multiple new threads in a day and responding to their own posts ad nauseam).  

[BigAlMc]

I voted Yes but with a degree of uncertainty. Overall I think Chris does a great job and keeps it balanced. But perhaps it's unfair to expect one person to do it all.

 

I don't have the answers but I don't think letting the Op moderate each thread works for various reasons.

 

Rajiv has done a tremendous job on the Novel Way thread and whilst that's saluted as a model that's also because of his diligence, patience and even handed approach.

 

Op self moderating isn't likely to work nearly as well in many situs, including:

 

Newbie/junior members

Posters with an agenda

Outright trolls

 

If Chris wants to enlist help then that's fair enough. Jud is an excellent nomination. Likewise, I'd add Firedog into the mix. And Austinpop is an obvious candidate. Assuming of course they were interested. But I think a track record for even handed and well reasoned posting in line with the spirit of this forum should be key.

 

I'd love to offer my services but I don't have the time and I'd end up fighting with the posters suspected of residing under a bridge! ?

 

Just my two cents.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[4est]

1 hour ago, BigAlMc said:

If Chris wants to enlist help then that's fair enough. Jud is an excellent nomination. Likewise, I'd add Firedog into the mix. And Austinpop is an obvious candidate. Assuming of course they were interested. But I think a track record for even handed and well reasoned posting in line with the spirit of this forum should be key.

+1

[Ralf11]

You don't always have to scroll back to the 1st post in a thread to read the rules.  On Rajiv's thread, I asked Chris to put the Original Admonition at the top of each page.  It is there, and that, together with Rajiv's moderating and sense of good humor, seems to be working.

[Allan F]

I don't like moderation in general. However, there have been more than a few instances where trolls insist on posting their views in threads despite being told by the OP or CC that their posts are inappropriate and/or off topic. I "moderate" their behaviour by placing them on the Ignore List. Unfortunately, if quoted in replies, those posts are still visible. It would be nice if there was a way to hide posts of those on Ignore Lists even when included as a quote.

[sandyk]

10 hours ago, Abtr said:

I would remove the content of an offending post or posts and replace it with a short explanation in red, such as "Ad hominem attack removed" or "Off topic content removed." This way moderation would be more visible which may have an extra preventive effect.

 

In some cases, perhaps just the offending part of the post ?

 Why do  some of you guys feel the need to use stuffy dead Latin language phrases such as Ad Hominen  ? 

Surely it can be said even more effectively in plain English for the non technical members who would appear to be in the majority in this forum ?

[cjf]

I voted "NO" in the Poll but in reality I'm mostly indifferent to the idea of having more moderators. I come to Audio Forum XYZ strictly as a form of entertainment and amusement in my free/down time.

 

As such, I dont take anything I read/see on audio forums to heart. Actually I may be in the minority here by saying this but, I actually find the Trolls entertaining....to a point. I cant think of anything I read here that bothered me enough which resulted in me in stressing over it for more than a few seconds at most. I would only offer others to try and do the same.

 

Its just Audio/Gear folks, were not taking/saving lives!

 

 

[4est]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Why do  some of you guys feel the need to use stuffy dead Latin language phrases such as Ad Hominen  ? 

Surely it can be said even more effectively in plain English for the non technical members who would appear to be in the majority in this forum ?

This is a specific logical fallacy. This is the short effective way of saying what they want to. You are on an audio debate forum. I'd take the opportunity to learn some of them. It would help your arguments and understanding. I mean no disrespect.