R0bert is someone calling me gutless and disaffected and telling me to move to another site allowed?

I am finding it ironic that while defending moderation Corny you have probably broken all the rules the moderators wish to enforce. Is this part of some personal agenda you have?

OLO appears to be middle of the road at any rate – not overly moderated. Actually I had never seen a thread disappear before which alerted me to the fact that something was different and I better find out what; this being the whole reason for the thread being created which was at Graham’s suggestion. Got a pipe to put that in Corny?

Hey Squeers, you made a good point, and often someone acting “badly” will have their words at some later date shoved right back down there throat which can be awesome to behold. Police Your Own Actions comes to mind but I think that is an anarchist slogan? I wonder if conforming can be in itself an act of rebellion.

Belly babe, I thought I wrote the character assassination ones? I know that was what I was trying to do at the time but it also didn’t bother me that they were deleted. What was sad was that the baby got thrown out with the bathwater which made me very sorry if I had something to do with that.

Who is MTR?

Pat I look forward to reading a timely bit of sarcasm from you. Not directed at me though ay, OUG is a better target, he’ll pull it apart bit by bit until it begs for mercy and rightly so. :)

Moderating isn’t thankless… I saw much praise for the (deleted name of thread) decision that hung around for a little while, and the moderators on another site you talked about Pat seemed to be enjoying their roles. I’d be crap at it obviously. Understanding rules is enough of a challenge for me without also working out when appropriate to enforce them.

To cut to the chase, I cannot recall a public criticism of a moderator decision that wasn't a points-scoring continuation of a fight on the board and one that had likely raged across threads, often involving members of what appears to be a long-standing clique, or cliques.

The board has been great for weeks. There are reasons for that and while I do not agree with pelican's simplistic and diplomatic, "Maybe we all need a holiday from OLO from time to time so old sparring partners and perceived injustices in recurring themes that stir the passions don't get out of hand", there is evidence that applying the rules improves the forum. What other conclusion could be drawn?

It isn't the recurring themes and old sparring partners that seem to be the problem, rather it is the spite that some just cannot seem to avoid. That and the hounding of certain posters by a veteran push, apparently with the aim of driving disliked posters off the forum. That sort of bullying behaviour should be made unwelcome, but recently there has been little cause for concern about it.

I suggest that the recent vigilance by the moderator and more likely by forum members themselves acted in concert to improve the forum for vast majority.

I have just been reminded of the recent absence of baiting, another very positive change that should not be lost.

I haven't participated in this thread yet. I wanted to hear what you thought before putting my point of view.

From my point of view moderation is a movable feast. It depends on the context often as to whether a word is objectionable or not. "Idiot" was applied to an author. I've come to the conclusion after numerous complaints from authors that if we want a high quality of article, then we need to ensure that they receive respect.

That doesn't mean you can't agree with them, just that they have put the effort in to write an article and they have a right not to have people abuse them. They are also in some ways a guest, and so what might be harmless joking amongst the regulars might actually offend them. They are not necessarily familiar with the culture.

Some of the authors are regulars on the forum, which complicates things a little as well.

I have been trying to make the forum more civil. And I have been cracking down on certain behaviours.

The "cracking down" can be a bit uneven because I am dependent on people telling me when something is getting out of hand. I came across a thread this morning that I wasn't happy with, but no-one had alerted me so I made a call and left it alone. It will probably die out soon.

It can also be uneven because I have to make judgement calls and I wouldn't claim they are all entirely consistent. Particularly as some events may occur concurrently with other pressures which mean decisions have to be made quickly, and sometimes on partial information.

Now something more serious. You may want to check out http://morganalysis.blogspot.com/. This is a blog called "Cyberia" where CJ Morgan hosts a coven of current and ex-OLO forum participants who spend most of their time complaining about me, OLO and moderation decisions.

CJ is free to do whatever he wants, but if he wants to participate in this site then one of the rules that he should observe is that you abide by the rules of this site. He has posted copyrighted material on his site in an effort to debate moderation decisions. I don't have the time or resources to spend arguing with him on his blog. I object to material which I decided was not appropriate for this site being put on another. I don't think his participation here can be viewed as anything but an effort to be in the longterm disruptive.

So I'm proposing to ban him from the site. It's a pity. When he posts on topic rather than provoking others he makes some reasonable points.

With respect to this you might check out the post http://morganalysis.blogspot.com/2010/11/rules-of-engagement.html. Apparently because of the way OLO is programmed when a thread is deleted the individual comments live on, although they are inaccessible unless you have the exact address. According to CJ this reflects on my moderation.

Severin also puts private correspondence up on Morgan's blog site about another moderation decision. You can read about it on http://morganalysis.blogspot.com/2010/10/democracy-or-demockery.html. I'm intending to ban Severin as well.

I'm intending to ban Severin as well.

Unfortunately the word limit won't let me finish this post in one, so it will be serialised. This is not something I generally condone. :(

You'll also get an idea of how mature Cyberia is if you want to check out the photo of me fitted with a Hitler moustache. http://morganalysis.blogspot.com/2010/10/grima-fuhrer.html. If you're into Godwin's Law this is one for the scrap book.

If anyone thinks you can run a site without moderation, you might like to check out the "No d-heads" rule that Cyberia runs as part of its moderation policy. I think it would be much harder for a number here to get a post up there, than it is for their antagonists to get one up here.

The reason for that is because this site is about open discussion, and the rules are policed to ensure that the discussion is open. Some of the commenters on this site who are also on Cyberia are not interested in open debate - they want to close it down unless it agrees with their point of view.

This might give some of you some insight into moderation decisions. When you have people who are this intent on causing trouble you have to deal with them, otherwise they will end up running the forum, in which case it would become as rancid as Cyberia.

Corny you’re still doing it even though you’ve been told there is no criticism intended only me (just me) wanting clarification of the rules and a catch up of how things are being done now. Nothing has been continued here or carried over. No one questioned if the forum had improved or not and no suggestion made that enforcement of rules would not improve content.

You seem to be reading this thread with your chin over your left shoulder.

So anyhoo… after reading Grahams post an overall theme is forming that OLO is running a majority rules type deal with a notification/s that a post is probably in want of deleting which then alerts the moderator and the final decision is theirs but in general getting a notification from anyone would be half the death warrant signed for post or thread.

Graham wants more civility and is inclined to tolerate certain behaviors’ less. I know he said that it just helps me get it clear in my mind to repeat stuff.

It is appreciated that the difficulties in moderating a site about Opinions is going to be rife with objections. So now I understand the not discussing moderation decisions because yep that could just drag on forever.

Now I prefer details but I can see that it can’t be that easy, we can’t have a precise list of do’s and don’ts. There is a sort of ebb and flow to conversations and the way communities form and what becomes generally acceptable over time? Like the mention of Authors maybe not understanding was has become normal practice to others here?

I launched back in and ran straight into someone I clashed with immediately given I always react when anything is to do with the protection of children. This is probably what is called a personal agenda but I’m still not 100% on that one.

There is a blog out there dedicated to complaints about you Graham? I actually find that a little creepy and stalker like.