Moderation (or lack of it)

Lisser wrote:

What if Barb deletes a thread considered to be offensive to you but is something I've been looking for information on?

I think what most people who want some form of moderation are looking for are topics that contain racist comments and sexually explicit links to be removed. They don't belong on Queenzone.

Word to yer momma... WORD UP!!

PieterMC wrote:

There have always been idiots that post crap here, always will be. However it's getting worse and worse and happening more often.

The idea of just ignoring them is great, but it's just not going to happen. People will always reply no matter how often people say just ignore it. I have been here since 1997 and people said ignore it then, and 8 years later people are still saying the same thing.

The fact is some things just need to be deleted, that does not mean the person needs to be instantly banned, but some posts should not be allowed.

I do agree with you Pieter but somehow I think that if threads start being deleted, it becomes a game to poster that starts them. They just keep posting over and over again so they occupy all of your time. they know you'll have to watch the board all day to delete them. I believe that is what Amadeus did right? I definitely agree with banning spammers. They cover up all the good information. I've been here long enough now that I know what a crap topic is and I know when to skip it. I also remember which posters have a reputation for posting nonsense. I skip their threads entirely.

Got one of them there catch 22's on our hands, don't we? ;-)

Lisser wrote:

I do agree with you Pieter but somehow I think that if threads start being deleted, it becomes a game to poster that starts them. They just keep posting over and over again so they occupy all of your time.

That is true. That's why I think a 3 strikes and you're out rule should apply. If it becomes a game, then bye bye..

PieterMC wrote:

Lisser wrote:

What if Barb deletes a thread considered to be offensive to you but is something I've been looking for information on?

I think what most people who want some form of moderation are looking for are topics that contain racist comments and sexually explicit links to be removed. They don't belong on Queenzone.

Word to yer momma... WORD UP!!

Wuuuuuuuuuuuuuurd!!

I recall Haole being banned. The people that wanted his head were the prissy Queen Forever types that had no sense of humor. Haole was unfairly banned, but was eventually reinstated by Richard (with a warning to Queenzone to never put him in this situation again).

I do not know Richard, but based on his post history over the last five years, I believe that he would prefer to shut this site down rather than become a babysitter. YV has also indicated that she does not want to be a babysitter. Her anti-moderator views, and her battles against moderator censorship at QOL are legendary.

Concerning censorship, after Haole was banned, a several page reactionary topic to Haole's banning was suddenly closed (no viewing or additional posts allowed) just before Richard's return (fom vacation?). A moderator on Queenzone censored reasonable free debate ... not once but twice (banning Haole and closing a topic). I do not want to see that happen on Queenzone again. Any strict moderator, even Barb or Richard if they became babysitters, would eventually succomb to being censors to some extent ... because power corrupts.

The whole discussion is somewhat academic because Richard never wanted his board moderated, he has made that clear on many occasions. I think it would hurt the core of the board if it was moderated.

Actually, there is some sort of moderation - topics are moved from one forum to another to provide for a more serious forum for people who cannot stand the ever repeating "fave" topics. Spammers are deleted. But there is no moderation based on the actual opinion expressed by people in their messages.

I know that people who ask for moderation mean well, they care for the board. But there are very good reasons to vote against moderation:

You can set up rules what is allowed and what is not allowed on the board but in the end a mod would decide if the rules are violated or not. There would be random decisons because one "offense" would be addressed and another one overlooked. Moderators would start deleting topics they find annoying but that should not be a reason. A mod is only human and favouritism would soon be an issue - bitter fights would break out because a mod deleted a topic by user A but not by user B. You would need people who are willing to send out "warnings" to users before they are banned - what a horrible idea! Who wants to spend his/her free time policing messages on a Queen message board - and who would trust these people?

On QOL they "quarantine" messages and the admins look into it before deleting - what a ridiculous system. But then it's the official EMI website and they need more control.

YourValentine wrote:

On QOL they "quarantine" messages and the admins look into it before deleting - what a ridiculous system. But then it's the official EMI website and they need more control.

True.. I mean we critcize the moderation over there, but they can't exactly leave messages critical of Queen, for example, on the official board. Hence the high Stepford population..;-)

Rip Van Winkle wrote:

Any strict moderator, even Barb or Richard if they became babysitters, would eventually succomb to being censors to some extent ... because power corrupts.

Power corrupts?? We are talking about a notice board not ruling a country..*lol*

I think this whole issue is entirely too serious. I'm off to watch the chimp video posted by whirled peas..;-)

Rip Van Winkle wrote:

I recall Haole being banned. The people that wanted his head were the prissy Queen Forever types that had no sense of humor.I

Concerning censorship, after Haole was banned, a several page reactionary topic to Haole's banning was suddenly closed (no viewing or additional posts allowed) just before Richard's return (fom vacation?). A moderator on Queenzone censored reasonable free debate ... not once but twice (banning Haole and closing a topic).

Hmmmm, no there were many more people that just "prissy Queen Forever" people that called for him to be banned.

Also whoever closed a topic after Haole was banned was not me. Just thought I should point that out as you said the two things were done by the same person.

I did not know that. I wonder who closed the thread. Oh well it was 5 years ago.

Erin wrote:

Rip Van Winkle wrote:

Any strict moderator, even Barb or Richard if they became babysitters, would eventually succomb to being censors to some extent ... because power corrupts.

Power corrupts?? We are talking about a notice board not ruling a country..*lol*

Didn't you see 'Spiderman' Erin? Remember, with great power comes great responsibility.

But, I guess you're right. It's just a message board. We're not talking about thousands or millions of people being opressed by a regime.

Some people are saying that by saying that the moderators need to crack down on their job is an insult to them. WTF? It's hard to keep track of all these boards (and they have their own lives). Why can't we find a moderator per forum? That'd just be easier for everyone. Honestly, I don't care what people say about having sex, etc. on the boards but with the porn, it's getting out of hand. I'm so tired of clicking on a topic I think will be interesting and all and it turns out that it's just more crap about porn, having porn websites, etc. Honestly, I'm close to leaving this because of the lack of moderation. I once clicked on a link where it said something like "oh this is a really fun game." Well, it was porn. My parents would have gotten so upset if they would have found out. Some of these topics are not appropriate not only for kids/teenagers, but for anyone. This is really out of hand. If you guys want to talk about having sex, how often you masturbate, fine, put that in the topic, but I don't want to be led on. We need to start checking the links that people put on here and we need to stop having these random comments that are very inappropriate on topics that are perfectly fine. Honestly, I think the moderators need more help because of how many people are now putting more inappropriate things on these forums.

I do not see the need of moderation and am glad that Richard (and Barb) are following that policy still.

As long as people react on those incredible idiot things that are posted by some fools, that long the fools have the right to post as well.

It is the best to ignore them, if you see a topic of one of them, just don't read it. and if you accidentically walk into a reply from them, then quit it, and look to the few bright things that sure are here at the zone.

The complainers about those idiots are in fact the people who legislate their exsistence at this board.

Big cheers and high respect for Queenzone, and the very nice posters I know from here, and yes, a lot of them are in this thread!