Seen A Post You Don’t Like? ....

[JohnK]

Walk on by

 

In my opinion a lot of posters here make the same mistake I used to make (all the time). Responding to posts they don’t agree with. I’m not saying don’t respond to incorrect facts (in my opinion they should always be challenged). But the “you’re an idiot” or “I don’t like what you’ve done” or “I don’t like what you posted” kind of posts are (in my opinion) best ignored. Let the mods remove them if they breach the rules.

 

Just an opinion from a relative newbie with a lot of forum experience but little on here.

This seems to be a forum that tries very hard to be friendly but often fails because one post that may be a misunderstanding or trying to provoke a reaction then escalates because lots of people jump in.

 

Mods, I have no problem at all with you removing this thread if you think I’m wrong or don’t like the message.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[riyadhcrew]

JohnK.

If you are a little more particular and report the posts - then the Mods will action it.

[JohnK]

JohnK.
If you are a little more particular and report the posts - then the Mods will action it.

The ones I’m thinking of (in my opinion) don’t need action, they need ignoring.
The problem here (again only in my opinion) is often not the initial post, it’s the thirty replies (from non mods) saying “you shouldn’t post that”
I know how difficult being a mod is and I think you’re all doing a great job. It’s a very difficult balancing act.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smellyloo]

Just now, JohnK said:

it’s the thirty replies (from non mods) saying “you shouldn’t post that”

 

But surely a certain amount of forum self moderation is OK ..... at least the person being criticed can see who, and how many, found the post offensive?

The originator then has the opportunity to either apologise, correct the misunderstanding, change their written style or continue the debate.

What I find irritating is a blind refusal to accept that  their post has been found offensive, and then follow up with a barrage of "autopsy style" questions asking for proof of who said what, when or where!

[JennyMorgan]

I didn't like this post!

[JohnK]

But surely a certain amount of forum self moderation is OK ..... at least the person being criticed can see who, and how many, found the post offensive?
The originator then has the opportunity to either apologise, correct the misunderstanding, change their written style or continue the debate.
What I find irritating is a blind refusal to accept that  their post has been found offensive, and then follow up with a barrage of "autopsy style" questions asking for proof of who said what, when or where!

I do agree with you, however, have you ever seen it go that way? I don’t think I have.
I think often pointing out where the original poster has gone wrong seems to end up with them entrenching their opinion. I think as well we do have a few minor trolls here that actually want the reaction.
There was a thread recently that I took personal offence to (I’m not going to say what it was). I think maybe 50% of people would have agreed with me taking offence if I’d posted a reply but it would have been divisive so I just said “idiot” to myself (I paraphrase slightly ) and let it lie.
Perhaps we just need a dislike button


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnK]

I didn't like this post!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

12 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I didn't like this post!

Has he been down the Chet recently?

[grendel]

the other problem I see is when the moderators do step in and remove an offending word phrase or post, is everyone coming back and repeating the phrase asking where and why its gone, to my mind that just negates all their hard work, and draws even more attention to the original faux pas.

[JennyMorgan]

41 minutes ago, grendel said:

the other problem I see is when the moderators do step in and remove an offending word phrase or post, is everyone coming back and repeating the phrase asking where and why its gone, to my mind that just negates all their hard work, and draws even more attention to the original faux pas.

I wasn't going to comment further but after many years on various Broads related forums, and having seen and even suffered some appalling moderation, I do feel that I have something constructive to add. A moderator's job is not easy, sometimes a balancing act that is nigh on impossible to achieve, a job that I would be loath to take on or even comment on. However, maybe wrongly, it's exception time, I will say that we recently had a mod comment that inflamed rather than placated a rather negative post on what had previously been a perfectly affable thread. What I'm really saying is that even mods can and do get it wrong so PLEASE don't lay all the blame at the feet of the members. One member recently, and wisely in my opinion, used the term 'self moderation', it can and does work, when allowed, after all we are adults! The future of this forum lays with us all,  Team NBN so to speak. Put it another way, please take chill pills, before it's too late.

[socrates]

Compared to several Broads related FB pages, there are relatively few posts on here likely to offend all but the most sensitive people. Healthy debate and questioning of assumptions should be a feature of any civilised democracy. Autocratic or dictatorial policing by "moderators" , or people who cry "foul" when opinions opposing those of their own is uncalled for and a waste of time. It is not beyond the ability of a reasonably intelligent person to scroll past a post they disagree with. However, I do tend to object to the increasing and unnecessary use of foul language, this is meant to be a family site. If you have a desire to use profane language it is probably best saved for elsewhere. Protest politely please.    

[VetChugger]

11 minutes ago, socrates said:

Healthy debate and questioning of assumptions should be a feature of any civilised democracy.

I suspect this is part of what is being gently "hinted" at! Healthy debate attracted a "lets play nicely" comment from sources on high.

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

2 minutes ago, VetChugger said:

I suspect this is part of what is being gently "hinted" at! Healthy debate attracted a "lets play nicely" comment from sources on high.

At the point the comment appeared, there had been nothing unfriendly, not even heated debate.

[socrates]

I forgot to add, we could always have a "dislike" button. Then again that might create a degree of animosity between members.

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

A members "forum reputation" is based upon the number of likes they receive, perhaps with a dislike button reducing the reputation by a point each time it would be more meaningful, then again I have seen on some newspaper comments section where two posters who don't agree with each other just dislike each others posts regardless of content.

[smellyloo]

38 minutes ago, ExExmemberKingFishersTime said:

A members "forum reputation" is based upon the number of likes they receive, perhaps with a dislike button reducing the reputation by a point each time it would be more meaningful, then again I have seen on some newspaper comments section where two posters who don't agree with each other just dislike each others posts regardless of content.

I thought you had departed? (the forum that is)

Anyway, seems not.

Does anybody actually care how many "likes" they get? I know I don't ....which I guess is just as well!!

[Islander]

So if he decides to leave again will his latest posts be marked 'Exmemberexexmember....'

Colin

[Bedslad]

I'm on a few forums and I have to say this one is the healthiest of the lot.

people often dislike something because they don't agree with someone or it goes against ideology, surely one knows whether they're going to dislike a post by the opening 2 or 3 posts, there is no need for dislike buttons, surely were old enough and in my case ugly enough to ignore the thread completely.

itll run its course and disappear off the bottom of the page in time, life's to short enjoy it

[Labrador]

1 hour ago, ExExExExExMemberKingFisher said:

A members "forum reputation" is based upon the number of likes they receive, perhaps with a dislike button reducing the reputation by a point each time it would be more meaningful, then again I have seen on some newspaper comments section where two posters who don't agree with each other just dislike each others posts regardless of content.

What a load of c**p.

This only applies to the paranoid. 

[Jim]

30 minutes ago, Labrador said:

What a load of c**p.

This only applies to the paranoid. 

Indeed Lab!  I wonder how few of us founding members are still left these days.  Reading through this lot has made me realise what a bright, friendly, cheerful and helpful place this was back then. Nicknamed the "Bright side" for all the right reasons.  

[Labrador]

5 minutes ago, Jim said:

Indeed Lab!  I wonder how few of us founding members are still left these days.  Reading through this lot has made me realise what a bright, friendly, cheerful and helpful place this was back then. Nicknamed the "Bright side" for all the right reasons.  

There is another forum for the cantankerous and disruptive element, please either go back there or join it if not already a member. I joined this forum very near its conception and wish to see its original aims upheld.

[vanessan]

6 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

I didn't like this post!

What if it was a Broads dayboat though? 

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, ExMemberKingFisher said:

At the point the comment appeared, there had been nothing unfriendly, not even heated debate.

EMKF, for short, am glad to see that you are still posting. I hope that we can all put the past behind us.

[rightsaidfred]

32 minutes ago, Labrador said:

 I joined this forum very near its conception and wish to see its original aims upheld.

 I have only been a member for a relatively short time so don't know what that infers but if a forum is to be broad church and of benefit to all its members then while being antagonistic is unhelpful so is a sterile environment, all that is needed is tolerance on all sides and if any one is oversensitive then social media is the wrong place to be.

Fred

[JennyMorgan]

Fred, we don't always agree but I am 100% in agreement with you on this one. 

3 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

 I have only been a member for a relatively short time so don't know what that infers but if a forum is to be broad church and of benefit to all its members then while being antagonistic is unhelpful so is a sterile environment, all that is needed is tolerance on all sides and if any one is oversensitive then social media is the wrong place to be.

Fred