Author
|
Topic: Getting things right on RootsChat (Read 6525 times)
|
Arranroots
Global Moderator
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 11258
|
I suppose it depends what sort of "consumer" you are - if I can use a shopping analogy.
If you receive what seems to you to be poor service in a shop - do you shout from the rooftops and refuse ever to go there again - or do you return to the shop and ask the customer service team to consider your complaint?
The Moderators could be seen as a Virtual Customer Service Team - we mop up the spills, keep things in order and remedy mistakes.
We don;t have the ability to meet and discuss in real life, so we act as cohesively as we can, given the limitations of e-working.
There cannot be a Fixed Set of Rules (please, please read Pams very valuable posts above) BUT this is an advantage - it means that we consider each case individually and do not generalise.
We also respond as quickly as we can.
Please remember - just becuase you feel slighted, does not mean that the Mods will agree with you all the time - occasionally they might stick to their original decision. That does not necessarily make them wrong!
Have a peaceful and constuctive afternoon
kind regards, Arranroots 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SOM: BIRD, BURT aka BROWN HEF: BAUGH, LATHAM, CARTER, PRITCHARD GLS: WEBB, WORKMAN, LATHAM, MALPUS WIL: WEBB, SALTER RAD: PRITCHARD, WILLIAMS GLA: RYAN, KEARNEY, JONES, HARRY MON: WEBB, MORGAN, WILLIAMS, JONES, BIRD SCOTLAND: HASTINGS, CAMERON, KELSO, BUCHANAN, BETHUNE/ BEATON IRELAND: RYAN (WATERFORD), KEARNEY (DUBLIN), BOYLE(DUNDALK) |
|
|
JAP
RootsChat Leaver
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 5079
|
And many posters are addressing points which are not remotely at issue.
JAP It would appear they are or they wouldn't be raised. Barbara
It ain't necessarily so! (As we all sing along  )
Just because a point is mentioned, does not mean that it is at issue. That was precisely what I was trying to say i.e. that people are debating points which are most definitely not at issue - points on which there is no disagreement. And which were certainly not what started this thread.
Let's try to concentrate on the real point - which I see as being that very recent decisions/actions by moderators have upset very reasonable people who have never been upset at all before.
And how that problem can be resolved.
Which, I think, is a matter for the moderators to discuss and resolve among themselves.
JAP
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dennford
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2140
just resting for a while
|
Two threads have dominated rootschat for the past couple of days. First the very public thank you to Paul, and secondly this one.
Now let’s get down to the very basics of this discussion/argument (I purposely used both words because it doesn’t matter one iota what we call it) and keep everything simple (I like things simple – it suits me)
No one on here wants rootschat to degenerate into an aggressive forum (let’s pretend it hasn’t done so yet).
I am sure that we as adults all agree that we don’t always agree. That is proven by the previously posted comments on this thread.
Mod’s have a job to do and without finite rules it is sometimes difficult to know what is the right way of doing things.
With the above in mind we should also take into consideration that no matter how impartial a mod’ tries to be, it is rarely practical to expect this to be so.
Contributors do (in my opinion) have a right to an explanation when a post is (tampered with)
No one (ABSOLUTELY NO ONE) wants wants rootschat to suffer when we can do something about it.
NOW! The question is, what can be done to improve the situation – NOT who is right and who is wrong, or who has done or said whatsoever.
The priority now is to see where we are going – not where we have been.
Denn
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ford, Baines, Dixon, Platts, Peat, Proctor, Rotherforth, Dakin/Daykin, Sales, Beech, Hall, Parkin, Nightingale. ----- Harthill, Waleswood, Woodhouse-mill, Whitwell
South Yorkshire/Derbyshire/Nottinghamshire
Torremocha, Candog, Ramos, Reyes, Rodrigueus
-------Philippines --- Bohol
|
|
|
behindthefrogs
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 4721
EDLIN
|
May I just defend the moderators by saying that in the very few cases where I have been offended by something on rootschat but not bothered to complain, the moderators have removed the offending item either independently or as a result of someone else complaining.
These removals seem to have upset other people but in most cases including the one which occurred recently were entirely justified.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Living in Berkshire. From Northampton & Milton Keynes DETAILS OF THE FOLLOWING NAMES ARE IN SURNAME INTERESTS, LINK AT FOOT OF PAGE Wilson, Higgs, Buswell, PARCELL, Matthews, TAMKIN, Seckington, Pates, Coupland, Webb, Arthur, MAYNARD, Caves, Norman, Winch, Culverhouse, Drakeley. Johnson, Routledge, SHIRT, SAICH, Mills, SAUNDERS, EDLIN, Perry, Vickers, Pakeman, Griffiths, Marston, Turner, Child, Sheen, Gray, Woolhouse Census Info is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wrjones
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2514
|
You're far too modest Barbara!
Regards
William Russell Jones
Cefn Mawr
Wrexham.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jones,Griffiths.Stephens,Parry,Gabriel,Conway,Hughes,Evans,Roberts,Lea,Hanmer.Peake,Edwards.Newnes,Davies. All North Wales. Conway,Durber,Cartlidge,Lovatt,Bebington.Brindley,Sankey,Brunt.Dean.Clewes.Rhodes.Mountford All Stoke-on-Trent. Francis-Nantwich Cheshire. Dennell-Cheshire/Staffordshire. Census Information Is Crown Copyright,from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
|
|
mshrmh
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 1158
|
As my experience of the Moderators is only that of seeing "MOVED" in front of some of my own & other's postings may I ask some basics, please?
I'm confused about what is meant by locking/deletion/quarantine in this regard. Can anyone explain the differences, please? Also when a particular reply or original message is deemed inappropriate, does the action against it affect other messages on the same thread?
Reading between the lines of previous messages I can guess some answers, but not having seen direct results, I'd appreciate a definitive answer.
I can only comment on the experience I have had, which is that the regular moving of posts must alone be a time-consuming job, but is a valuable service in trying to give original posters the best chance of a response.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Arranroots
Global Moderator
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 11258
|
Hi mshrmh
Locking is done when a thread reaches 20 pages, when it is an offer (replies should be on a separate thread), or occassionally when a thread has become contentious - i think I have done that once during my time as a Mod.
Deletion is sometimes done at the request of the person who posted (eg if they made a mistake), but we try to avoid doing this as it is time-consuming! We do not delete completed threads, as they might be useful to others later.
Quarantine is a "holding board" where threads or individual posts that need discussion can be moved to. They can then be discussed, edited or returned to the board. This will be done in consultation with the originator where possible, except in the case of spam (when the originator is banned and the post deleted permanently).
It is possible to move part of a thread to Q - yes. See Pam's posts above.
Did I miss anything?
kind regards, Arranroots
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SOM: BIRD, BURT aka BROWN HEF: BAUGH, LATHAM, CARTER, PRITCHARD GLS: WEBB, WORKMAN, LATHAM, MALPUS WIL: WEBB, SALTER RAD: PRITCHARD, WILLIAMS GLA: RYAN, KEARNEY, JONES, HARRY MON: WEBB, MORGAN, WILLIAMS, JONES, BIRD SCOTLAND: HASTINGS, CAMERON, KELSO, BUCHANAN, BETHUNE/ BEATON IRELAND: RYAN (WATERFORD), KEARNEY (DUBLIN), BOYLE(DUNDALK) |
|
|
julianb
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 1445
Portrait of the genealogist as a young man
|
Did I miss anything?
Only thing I'd add to a very helpful reply is that the person who started a thread can lock it themselves. This is usually in anticipation of filling up the twenty pages (and starting a new, continuation thread).
I've known moderators lock a thread when clearly it has got to the point that there is nothing more to say. On one occasion this happened to a thread I was involved in, and we negotiated it's reopening - the mod had misundersood something and graciously accepted that that is what they had done. 
So back to the substantive point (after a useful diversion), among the many excellent and well considered posts here, I thought JAP hit the nail on the head very well (slightly abridged by me):
Could we all agree
a) that RootsChat is absolutely wonderful (please, please, Trystan & Sarah don't let this current discussion upset you at all - it's just a little family tiff among a generally loving family!)
b) that Moderators (and Copyright Editors) are needed
c) that (overall) they do a fine job
d) that we thank them for all the time they voluntarily spend on this
e) that we recognize that, being human, they may make mistakes and won't always get things right
f) that we readily forgive them if they make mistakes or don't get thing right.
So let's not debate, or discuss, further any of those points.
None of the above is, I believe, what has produced this current thread (and other similar threads).
As I've said earlier, I think the question is one of inconsistency.
Please moderators, get together and see where things have gone off course.
... and then Denn helpfully said (lower volume this time )
The priority now is to see where we are going – not where we have been
There is one further issue relating to all this (and I know the thread has done a bit of a slalom around the subject, so I don't see any harm in another slight diversion).
In the light of earlier comments (that Moderators have jobs, homes, families and even lives to run and their own FH research to do, as well as managing our environment on here), someone asked me the question "have we enough moderators?". They haven't got round to posting that, so I've stolen their question.
Given the extensive views already expressed here (for which many thanks to you all), I thought it would make sense to drive all this out to some kind of conclusion - hopefully a bit of "time out" for the Moderators as a group to reflect on what has been said.
So, taking into account this new question, I seek further comments from my esteemed colleague Rootschatters (with a view to concluding the thread within the next few days before it gets to twenty pages/runs out of steam).
So take a deep breath, think about it a second time, and please post your considered thoughts on what I've tried to sum up here
Thanks for listening.
JULIAN
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Essex - Carter, Danns, Mason, Middleditch, Pond, Poole, Rose, Sorrell, Surry, Theobald Hunts - Danns Kent - Luetchford Nottinghamshire - Baker Suffolk - Rose Surrey - Baker, Bedel, Bransden, Carter, Coleman, Gibbs, Luetchford, Quinton Sussex - Gibbs Wiltshire - Brice, Rumble Rootschatters fh websites - http://www.rootschat.com/links/04lg/ Any census info in this post is Crown Copyright - http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ |
|
|
pjbuk007
RootsChat Veteran
Posts: 584
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
I think that only a very few people have "been upset" by "inconsistency" in the way the Mods have acted.
This thread has been viewed 1209 times but there are only 42 posts, some of which argue for the status quo. Some of us have posted more than once.
I have re-read the whole lot, and I think the "way forward" is to leave the Mods to operate as they have.
Perhaps all should read the T&Cs. Here is an extract:-
You agree, through your use of this RootsChat forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a living person's privacy, or otherwise contrary to law. Legal actions can be taken against you. ...... Spam, flooding, advertisements except in the "For Sale/Wanted/Events" Forum, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also inappropriate to this RootsChat forum.
Some posts of mine were in threads which ended up deleted. But this is just part of joining a forum. One has to accept the way in which it is run. Some of you seem to want to be even more prescriptive as to what is "allowed" and what is not. I think that the ethos of the forum is pretty clear, and would not like even more rules to be set out.
My own view is that there is no need for the Mods to change their modus operandi and that those of you who do are in a tiny minority of rootschatters.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
BENNET(T); NRY- Brotton, CON BURTON; NRY- Saltburn, Guisborough, Marske, Stokesley Judge Newark Lincoln BURTON , USA DALES; NRY- Brotton, LIN - Orby DAVIES GEORGE: GLA - Oystermouth & Penarth, CON LINCOLN. Middlesbrough, NRY, Durham PERRETT Gloucestershire QUESTED London. Assisting with One-name Study. TRASK; GLA - Cardiff, Barry etc, SOM - South Petherton WESTED Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
Gadget
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 25929
Holy Island - Pilgrims' Path
|
Julian
I'm glad that you've moved the discussion on. I think that most that can be said has been said.
You ask if we need more Mods. Let us first examine their role.
1. To examine threads and move them as appropriately.
2. To guard against spammers and delete/ arrange for those persons to be removed as members.
3. To resize image files
4. Probably other 'routine housekeeping' functions.
These functions could be done by a range of people.
Then there are the more thought provoking/sensitive/decision making functions:
1. Examining messages and threads for appropriateness of content in a more value judgemental way (as Pam has described) and acting on this
2. To communicate with members about the above.
3. To answer a wide variety of members queries and messages via PM
4. To check on their own areas of expertise to see if members questions have been answered or if more information might be useful which means reading the whole thread in context and having good memories or using searches to see if a similar query has been answered
I think these latter tasks are more difficult and need a careful, considered and sensitive approach. This is the real core of Moderation.
These all have to be carried out 24/7.
Not sure if this answers your question or if I've missed anything but whereas the first group would be fairly straight forward but time consuming, the last group are difficult functions.
Gadget
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
