Getting things right on RootsChat

[Boongie Pam]

Cal,

I agree.  As long as the discussion does not resort to specifics regarding threads or people. This will trigger me to edit the thread.  As previously said, specifics should be taken to the people in question.

Julian,

Your phrase "humble rootschatters" is interesting.  It serves to encourage an Us and Them feeling.  I have less experience, less knowledge about FH, narrower FH skill base than most of the members- if anyone is a humble rootschatter - it is me.

Ok so I get to move posts out of offer boards into requests when required.

Again, happy to take PMs on the matter.

Pam
 

[Boongie Pam]

Kerryb,

some are even still on the boards that offend me or amaze me that they have been missed

Please use the report to moderator function or let us know.  We cannot read every post, it is physically impossible.

Thanks,
Pam

[indiapaleale]

Hi Everyone,

I'm from a different time zone...far...far...away!

This is my 2 pennyworth:

Rootschat is a private web site that Trystan and Sarah have been kind enough to build for the pleasure of us dead people fanatics ...errr genealogy researchers. The moderators have been asked to kindly keep their eye on the boards for infractions that may offend...and to take care of general housekeeping. In my opinion, the mods do a bang up job.

As with any open internet board, there are going to be some things that offend some people.....I am not offended by dirty words...or innuendos...in fact...I was a sailor in a previous life! However, there are a few things that have made me cringe because I know that this is the net and can be seen by anyone...even my own grandchildren.

I believe that if a post...or thread disappears......OH WELL! It must have upset someone..or it must have been out of bounds.

Do the mods need to notify every one of the infraction on the thread?...NO......the fact that the thread is gone is enough to let us know that someone was hurt or offended...and that is good enough for me. If I need to know why the post was deleted  I can send a mod a PM and ask for an explanation.....but I don't blame them if the response is:

"Because I'm the Mother."....(or Father)   

Indi....who thinks that TOT should be buried along with Ephraim Bathurst...wherever he is!

[Springbok]

What an interesting discussion!

I have always been so impressed by the high standard of Moderating on  Rootschat.

Of course we have all grown up having certain things which offend us.(sometimes age related) and as Boogie Pam says there is the function to report , and that must create a dilemma for Moderators in itself.

The worst site which I use is a Media one which has numerous subjects,including genealogy.To get ones first posting accepted, one may wait and keep posting for many days before it appears.
After that it seems that (unless one complains) anything goes.

Whilst I normally just look to see what comments have been made regarding a certain programme, often many threads deteriorate into thinly veiled near obscene postings.
The same thing happens even on subjects such as art. genealogy and probably all the rest of a vast number of subjects.none of which are actively moderated unless a complaint is registered.
I did this (for the one and only time last week) when a posting referred to a character and and a Decameron Type sexual action. My objection was noted and the e-mail reply stated that the Moderators found that there was nothing objectionable.
I am not a prude and have lived(an still do) in the company of seamen and am not easily offended but somehow it seems that  some pathetic contributers seem to feel that they have an anonymity and can indulge their baser fantasies.

Spring

[trish251]

I really believe Julian should run for Prime Minister (or President). He has a wonderful method of resolving problems without agro &  the world would be a better place if this happened more often. I fear I do not have these skills & many moons ago I was upset by a thread being (I think) locked rather than deleted, but in hindsight it resolved any further issues that may have arisen.

My personal view is, if a thread is gone - we mere mortals have to accept it - or stop posting. I tried the latter  a couple of times but the interest in genealogy brought me back      

I have seen other forums where the comments/attacks become very bitter and personal - this has not obviously happened on RC -  the comments on this thread tell us why.

Being interested in things past    perhaps the presentation by Lord Moulton on "Law and Manners" - obedience to the unenforceable - explains why it is difficult to have a list of guidelines that cover all the possibilities

http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/13/jun95/silber.htm

Trish

[Tephra]

I'm not going to go into the where's and why-fors of individual threads - or posts - being deleted.   I'm not going to comment on the busy lives moderators have outside RC, we all know about the difficulty they face and appreciate the time and effort they put into looking after the individual boards on RC.

BUT.

It really comes down to percentages.   There are over 40.000 members of RootsChat.  How many of those 40.000 are active.   How many of those who are active use the Lighter Side board and how many use the Totally Of Topic board.  What's the percentage of people who put in complaints regarding a thread ( for whatever reason) to the amount of people contributing to that particular thread.

If there are 20 people contributing and there's one complaint made, for me majority rules .  If there are 3 people contributing and 20 complaints, again the majority rules.   What offends me, will probably not offend another and vice versa.   Remember, we as individuals have the power to read or not read the subject matter.   It's not compulsory to read each and every thread posted.

It's been noted there are youngsters who are members of RC, yes there are, but does that mean we have to bring ourselves down to a 12 year olds level of understanding before we post on a subject?  If we do that, many posts will simply not be presented as it's impossible to know if the 12 year old in question is a worldly wise one or a shy retiring one unfamiliar with the workings of an adults sense of humour.   This is so difficult a question, I honestly don't believe there is an answer to it.

Ultimately, it boils down to the individual and what offends or upsets them.  We're all different and we all have different opinions on what is right or wrong, humorous, obscene or simply objectionable.   And the moderators are NEVER going to please everybody simply because of that difference in us.

May I offer two simple solutions the moderators could use which would cut down on personal PM'ing and the need for explanations going out to all and sundry.

1.   If a thread is deemed to be objectionable (for whatever reason) and locked, a PM is sent to the originator of that thread with a full explanation as to why it has been locked.   A short message on the bottom of the thread could say it has been locked and all queries should be sent to the poster - not the moderator.  That would cut down on a mods need to PM each and every poster to that thread with an explanation.  Then it's up to the originator to explain to whoever contacts them the reason behind the locked topic.  In the event a thread is deleted and not simply locked, the title should remain on the boards with a message from the deleting mod giving an explanation and again directing all queries to the original poster.

2.   When a complaint or complaints are received by a mod, I recommend they look at the total number of complaints versus the total number of posters - the percentages.  Then they can act accordingly.    I certainly don't believe it should be simply up to the moderator to lock or delete a topic based on their own personal opinion of that topic however wrong they feel it is.  That is borderline censorship.

I'm fully aware not everybody will agree with what I've said, but that's what living in a democracy is all about.  We can have our own opinions on a subject and we can air those opinions in a civilised manner . . ... . . .  ..  and I'll now get off my soapbox.


Barbara

[Arranroots]

Hi Barbara

Your post makes one important assumption: that everyone who contributes to a thread approves of everything that is written after they have posted.

As Pam has described above, threads might start well (and be funny, informative or otherwise valuable) but later posts can be of dubious merit and it is there that the problem can arise.

We cannot assume that all those who have posted on a thread agree with everything on it.  Far less can we assume that the other 40,000 (less 20) who have not posted agree with the Moderators' decision or with the person whose post is removed - we plain don't know! 

All we can do is to act in good faith to do what we believe is the best/ right thing. 

In general
It is a fact of life that sometimes Mods will sometimes make mistakes.   

There is a suggested approach when this happens and/ or a poster disagrees with an action a Moderator has taken.  Please contact that Mod (or another) to discuss.  Locking your own thread because it has been "unfairly" edited; resigning or posting "It's not fair" objections on the boards are all quite understandable reactions - but they do not help in the long run.  Many other Rootschatters find themselves as puzzled and distressed by this sort of activity as by whatever the Moderator did. 

I am not saying that a protest by PM to the Mods will reverse whatever decision has been taken.  It is difficult to quantify the opinions of the silent majority of Rootschatters and the only way the Moderating team can gauge what they might be thinking is to listen to the Reports to Moderator that have been made and then discuss among themselves.

Please bear in mind that Moderators are not all made out of a single mould - we vary enormously in our sense of humour, political allegiance, bedtime etc!!  The one thing we have in common is that we have been asked by T&S to give up a little of our time to help run Rootschat. 

Thank you all for your comments: it has helped me personally to get a clearer picture of how Rootschatters are thinking - obviously there is a variety of opinion, which is exactly what the Moderating team are trying to reflect.

Remember - we are here for you - use us, don't abuse us! 

Arranroots

[Tephra]

Hi Barbara

Your post makes one important assumption: that everyone who contributes to a thread approves of everything that is written after they have posted.
As Pam has described above, threads might start well (and be funny, informative or otherwise valuable) but later posts can be of dubious merit and it is there that the problem can arise.


Arranroots

Hi Arranroots

And therein lies the problem.   I do understand and appreciate what you are saying.  It makes perfect sense.   But I still believe there should be a way whereby a particular thread can continue on the boards and not have the whole lot deleted.

If a particular post on a thread is objected to, then the poster should be given the opportunity to delete it themselves.   Very often, the poster would not be aware they had made a blunder and would more than likely delete it once it was brought to their notice.   The one thing I have noticed with RC'ers is their sense of fairness and empathy towards other members.   I do believe that once they were made aware of the situation, they would do something about it.   

The upset occurs when a topic or post is arbitrarily removed without explanation.   Perhaps an 'objectionable' post could be temporarily deleted with the mod saying it is only temporary and requesting the poster contacts the mod in question.

It seems a shame to me that whole topics are locked, deleted or quarantined depriving many posters the opportunity to continue posting for the sake of perhaps - and this is an assumption - a couple of 'bad' posts on the thread.   

To sum up . . . If it started out good, why not find a way to keep it.

Getting down off soapbox again     

Barbara

[bigcol]

Hi, everyone!

What type of community is Rootschat?

It is a family oriented site - yes, I agree! Do you never have fallings-out and disagreements in your family?

The problem seems to be, in my opinion, that some people are unable to accept that someone else may have a different opinion to themselves. They are not confident in their own beliefs and values, therefore they believe that they must attack the beliefs and values of others.

There was plenty of good-natured banter, criticism, comment and nationalistic tub-thumping on the Australia v England cricketing threads, some of it quite strong, yet it wasn't pulled by the Mods. I suggest that the spirit of the comments was recognised by the Mods and the comments were not seen as inflammatory. (Isn't nationalism political?).

Unless comments are unpleasantly racist or perhaps slanderous (ie breaking the law) then surely the family of Rootschatters can accept the fact that someone else may think differently without entering into violent argument or villification.

After all, isn't freedom of speech the opportunity to say something that nobody else likes?

Colin