Work for us to do

[SteveColes]

please read this last post but don't take anything I said as directed at anyone of you. All of you are the people that really make this site happen, not the people who are *****ing and complaining.

But, my comments about perception have real foundation. So we need to do a few things.

1. We need to clarify and expand our posting policies. I would like a volunteer to take over the coordination making this happen.The current site policy is in vBaCmps form. We should first change it to WebLogisitics format than we can easily edit in line.

2. We need to start to write a formal moderation policy. Again this should be done using webtemplates and we need a vounteer to coordinate. There used to be somethng I wrote about this a long time ago, but if we can find it, it might provide a start.

 

[MikeH]

I don't have the time to volunteer to do this, but it really aggravates me that a handful of people that want to buck the system are causing us so much frustration and work. It's just childish! :BangHead:

Ok Im done. :gar-Bi

 

[TracyP]

I'll take the moderation procedures on. I will work on that this evening and weekend. Any words of wisdom?

 

[WoodWrangler]

I'll take the moderation procedures on. I will work on that this evening and weekend. Any words of wisdom?

Wisdom? No. But suggestions for moderation procedures ...

1. Moderate the post, not the thread. Sometimes threads are going along good, then someone with a bad post makes the mess. I too have been a part of what appeared to be a good thread only to see the whole thing get removed. That is, IMHO, moderation over-kill. If the originating post in the thread is violating, then the thread goes away ... otherwise, go for the post.

2. Always -- meaning always -- tell the person WHY a post is being removed with a direct quote of the operating policy included as a reminder when possible. People usually respond better to logic, as compared to when it feels like a personal attack (even when it is not).

3. Encourage "warnings" with logical explanation for ones teetering the edge. Sometimes we don't really know how things are being interpreted and a little heads up warning would be nice.

4. Kind words. Real words. No "automated" text crap about a post being removed. Those are the worst and extremely cold. Moderators should take a moment to tell the user (as noted above), but also be sure to use kind words that convey the message but don't sound like a parent. No one wants to be "told" what to do and taking a military approach isn't probably going to cut it.

5. And we should assume that people don't know, nor have read, the posting policies. How many times do you read the license agreement? It's about the same thing. We're a bunch of friends out here ... we don't need to force the policy down their throats, just good-hearted reminders of proper forum conduct and maybe a few smilies to ease the message.:wink_smil

 

[ScottM]

Welcome from the other side of the earth.... One thing to add as part of the formal process and I believe we do this in practice 90% of the time already, is a moderator discussion prior to deleting a entire thread.

 

[WoodWrangler]

Welcome from the other side of the earth.... One thing to add as part of the formal process and I believe we do this in practice 90% of the time already, is a moderator discussion prior to deleting a entire thread.

That is good to hear, as I am new to this side of NCWW. :icon_thum I have helped with other forums in the past and hopefully some of that insight will help us here. I am not one to sit back and sit quiet, but also don't try to be the thorn in someone's rear side trying to stick it to ya.

I do know I've been moderated a few (just a few, come on guys!) times and a couple years ago it always came with some feedback as to why. But as of late, moderation has been rather cold and frustrating ... and it's for this reason I offer some "this side of the fence" feedback for consideration.:thumbs_up

 

[Douglas Robinson]

I don't have the time to volunteer to do this, but it really aggravates me that a handful of people that want to buck the system are causing us so much frustration and work. It's just childish! :BangHead:

Ok Im done. :gar-Bi

Mike you are reading my mind!

 

[sapwood]

Well, I read the post in the Mods/Admin forum and felt sad
Then I moved to the regular forums . . . and low and behold!
Folks were still posting, sharing, and enjoying :mrgreen:
Apparently the world isn't going to end today :eusa_snoo

Good points, Jeremy!
Does that mean you volunteer ccasion1

Roger

 

[Bas]

I have been completely buried in work this week with all-day (and all-night) meetings, I've barely had time to follow all the conversations. I know this is shocking, but I don't really have anything to add :rolf: Everything that could be said has already been said on this topic.

1. We need to clarify and expand our posting policies. I would like a volunteer to take over the coordination making this happen.The current site policy is in vBaCmps form. We should first change it to WebLogisitics format than we can easily edit in line.

I will take care of that.

2. We need to start to write a formal moderation policy. Again this should be done using webtemplates and we need a vounteer to coordinate

Tracy, I'm glad you volunteered, or I would have volunteered you Seriously though, I think as we're expanding the staff there is a greater need for coordination. It doesn't need to be overly formal or stuffy, but it's easy for a team to feel "paralyzed" or degenerate into chaos without organization. That means the senior mods need to spend more time setting policy and directing the other moderators, and less time moderating.

I'm in the same boat. I really need to focus on planning and coordinating the site updates rather than just doing, which isn't always easy: Coding is much more fun and brings immediate results. My only excuse is that the technical staff is just Chad and me right now

Words of wisdom - probably not. But here are my thoughts:
- Stop discussing whether a thread should be moderated. Just do it. I'm not sure who posted about this, but the "lag" between when a post is made and when we moderate it is causing confusion. We can't be on all the time of course, so there will always be a delay, but let's not compound the problem.
- If you moderated something but you weren't sure, post about it in the moderator's forum AFTERWARD, and ask feedback from your peers. That will help drive consistency. Will we make 'mistakes'? Definitely. That comes with the job. We'll get better as we go along.
- If this is helpful, we could decide that mods should report on every post they moderate. It's a little more work, but it should help with consistency.
- Don't take it personally. This is the toughest part I think. It gets easier over time. If someone contacts you about a moderation, just quote the relevant part of the site policy or give a short (!!!) explanation. Leave it at that. Don't argue.
- Remember - the policy is NOT open for debate during a moderation action. If someone has a problem with the policy, he or she can post it in one of the forums for discussion. We do not do "legislation from the bench" (this one is for you Doug :wink_smil). So, if someone says "I think this should be acceptable for the Off Topic forum", politely inform the person that the current policy does not allow that. Done. Don't argue the merits, or whether you agree or disagree.

Tracy, when drafting the guidelines, please include the followings:
- Concrete examples of what's allowed and what's not. We have the formal policy (e.g. no politics or religion), but examples help. Let's use a Webtemplate page for this, so that we can easily update it. If there was doubt or confusion, we'll discuss it as normal in the moderators forum, and then update this examples page for future reference
- Sample text to send when moderating a post, or answering follow-up questions, e.g. "Dear XXX. I edited your post in the thread YYYY. The NCWW policy prohibits discussion of ZZZZ. Thank you for your cooperation". I think we already have some of this, I'm thinking mainly in the area of responding to follow-up questions. I can help with this.

As Roger said, people keep on posting. Hopefully this will all blow over, and we come out of this stronger and better organized.

 

[TracyP]

Bas, I will try to have this done by this weekend. As I feel we need to get this done real soon. Will you be around the puter to answer technical questions on the off chance I would need help:help::help::rotflm:.

 

[Bas]

Bas, I will try to have this done by this weekend. As I feel we need to get this done real soon. Will you be around the puter to answer technical questions on the off chance I would need help:help::help::rotflm:.

I will be here, just let me know what you need.

I have copied the site policy into a web template: http://www.ncwoodworker.net/forums/view.php?pg=sitepolicy

Anyone on the staff can edit this page. Please provide your comments either in this thread or make your edits directly in the template (you may want to highlight your edits via italics or a different color). For example, I updated the section on politics as follows:

At the time of the writing of this document, the United States is involved in several military conflicts and experiencing a downturn of the economy. This is not the place for debating these complicated topics. Forum-style discussions can easily escalate into heated arguments that detract from this site's primary purpose: Woodworking. Again, there are common sense exceptions, such as expressing sympathy over someone's loss of employment. Any statements in support of the troops themselves are not only allowed but encouraged [...]

​

Once we're happy with it, I'll update the link in the menu bar to point to this page. I want to get that done by Sunday evening, so please, look it over this weekend.

 

[b4man]

Just a suggestion regarding rewriting policies;

Keep wording to a minimum. The longer the sentence or paragraph the shorter the attention span of the reader.

Remember that not every member or future members are as educated or culturally experienced as others. Keep it simple enough for a 5th grader.

Consider the ramifications of " we encourage support of our troupes" when we don't support political topics. Same goes for religion. Although we welcome prayer request we do not allow religious topics in our forum.

m2cw....

me

 

[DaveO]

Very good suggestions and points Barbara.
Thanks,
Dave

 

[SteveColes]

I want to get that done by Sunday evening, so please, look it over this weekend.

Bas, while we want to do this fast, I don't want us to rush to judgement. Before we make any new changes official, the board will have vote on it and I as President/Chairman of the BOD and DaveO as Webmaster and Vice-President of Internet Operations.

So let's push the process but let's be careful and make sure we have something we can live with. We won't get this chance again, so let's make sure we get it pretty close to perfect.

 

[SteveColes]

Just a suggestion regarding rewriting policies;

Keep wording to a minimum. The longer the sentence or paragraph the shorter the attention span of the reader.

:embaresse:embaresseI think I am the one most guilty of writing long winded boring policy statements and explanations

Consider the ramifications of " we encourage support of our troupes" when we don't support political topics. Same goes for religion. Although we welcome prayer request we do not allow religious topics in our forum.

I think becuase we make explicit exceptions in these 2 cases, there really isn't a problem. As far as I remember only one person brought that up and it was one of the people who were it as an example why we allow everything,

 

[cskipper]

I added the stuff in red -- forgot to tell you. Sorry about that.

 

[TracyP]

I have edited (with help) the moderation policies in the site policies. Has not been updated in web templates yet but I want final approval from the webmasters first. I am now working on a set of moderation guidelines for the moderators. So we are all on the same page when moderating. I would like to add a little more to the auto PM so it doesn't sound cold and indifferent as some have suggested.

 

[TracyP]

The first draft of moderation guidelines have been sent to the webmasters for critiquing. :swoon::elvis:

 

[McRabbet]

I made a few small additions in the upper part of the policy to recommend that members remember to post a thread that would not offend their ten year old daughter and a second addition prohibiting personal attacks. In general, I think the staff is moving this in the right direction.

 

[Bas]

The first draft of moderation guidelines have been sent to the webmasters for critiquing. :swoon::elvis:

I'll take a look ASAP. I think this is a key item. The site policy can definitely use some improvements (good comments from everyone so far :icon_thum) but we also need consistency in moderation. The new guidelines will go a long way to make that consistency happen.