Advanced search

Overnight Moderation

(46 Posts)
WorraLiberty Mon 18-Feb-13 09:40:26

There still isn't any, is there?

Really confused

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 15:24:49

We could have volunteers - I'd do it free grin

Sparklingbrook Mon 18-Feb-13 15:33:56

I doubt they are queuing up at MNHQ to do the nightshift 'forum watch'. sad

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 15:37:24

But all the best most bunfighty serious threads happen at night....

Tee2072 Mon 18-Feb-13 15:45:25

Okay, I've got to be pedantic here.

MN isn't moderated at all. Moderation means every post is read by a member of HQ and acted upon, positive or negative.

MNHQ relies on us to self moderate and report threads that we think need attention. Venus did you report the poster(s) you found offensive? Or did you assume someone else did?

Because the only way a board like MN survives the trolls, and trolls are a fact of life, is if every time you think a post needs attention, you send a report to HQ.

MN gets something like a million hits a week. And I have no idea how many of those are actual posts, but hundreds of thousands, I would think. There's no way to moderate it. It's too huge.

I agree there has been a break down in communication overnight. But more mods is not going to solve the problem. Because we have no mods anyway.

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 15:49:24

I know, Tee2072, but for the purpose of this thread 'moderation' is the monitoring of reports received and acting on those reports.

Tee2072 Mon 18-Feb-13 16:00:21

Well, I said I was being pedantic!!

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 16:10:38

I know, I was just unloading my cognitive dissonance over the subject grin

WorraLiberty Mon 18-Feb-13 16:10:48

Yes what lougle said.

There's little point in pressing the report button (although plenty of us did last night) if the thread is going to stand until the next day.

If the threads could disappear quicker, it would take the whole 'point' in trolling away and make it a waste of time.

BIWI Mon 18-Feb-13 16:14:11

Could there not be a point at which, when x number of reports has been received, that the thread is automatically locked until someone from MNHQ can deal with it?

<hears the sound of Tech's head exploding in the shed>

Tee2072 Mon 18-Feb-13 16:14:38

I didn't see the thread last night so I can't comment on how quickly it needed to be deleted.

However, I do think we sometimes have an expectation that just because something is reported, MNHQ will do what we think they should do. And that we need to give them time to read a thread before they can decide the correct way forward with it.

Some, yes, should be obviously deleted. But I think people get het up about grey area ones and feel ignored very rapidly.

My suggestion would be a message, on thread, saying 'we are aware of this thread and are investigating. Please bare with us.' so that we know it's at least been reported, even before a deletion message or deletions appear.

Worra's 'call out thread' was left up by accident, as HQ said they had a technical glitch. The internet isn't fault proof, after all. If it was, it would be a much more boring place. smile

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 16:21:07

It would be helpful for MNHQ to be able to suspend a particular post or posts while they considered action.

Rather than having to make a snap decision to delete, they could just 'hide' the post with a message saying 'awaiting decision' or an alternative.

The trouble is that the overtly awful threads (with exception of direct attack as Worra experienced) are not the ones that do the most damage. The ones that do the most damage are the ones that are 'grey' in themselves, but together with others build up a picture that is very unsavoury.

Thinking specifically of SN here, there is a pervasive message that comes across which does need challenging, but it can still be quite hard to pin individual posts down as deletable, despite the overall message being clear.

greenhill Mon 18-Feb-13 16:21:22

please bare with us <flashes body part at screen>

greenhill Mon 18-Feb-13 16:23:07

biwi a klaxon needs to go off at MNHQ when a thread is repeatedly reported....

Tee2072 Mon 18-Feb-13 16:24:37

That's an interesting idea, lougle.

Oops, greenhill. Hoisted with my own pedantism!!! grin

BIWI that's been suggested before but it's been pointed out that then someone only has to report it X number of times, no matter if it needs reporting or not, and it's gone or locked or whatever. Trolls would have a field day!

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 16:24:53

They have a flashing red light though...what more can they need? wink

BIWI Mon 18-Feb-13 16:27:11


So sometimes a thread might get locked without it being necessary - does that really matter? MNHQ would unlock it soon enough.

But it would stop the horrible nonsense that happened with the thread about Worra.

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 16:27:14

I think we should have volunteers who get an algorithm from MNHQ - a fancy flowchart with action to take in each situation....with a Bat-Phone, perhaps. Breach of the chart results in withdrawl of privilege.

The late night trolling also often comes in the form of a single poster who goes from thread to thread (on whatever subject) posting really unsavoury stuff that will without a doubt be deleted by HQ.

Those type of trolls are really awful as they seem to pick sensitive subjects and just leave one inflammatory response.

To the OP returning to that thread, such a post can be upsetting, and worrying.

It would help if a ban or posting suspension could be implemented if a single poster is repeatedly reported in the space of the same evening.

I've often found myself searching the name and reportig each post, whilst trying to 'help' any poor unsuspecting OPs that have returned to their threads to find a vile response. And I'm not the only one.

The long threads (like the Worra one) are irritating, but the super vile multi-thread trolls are especially beyond the pale IMO.

greenhill Mon 18-Feb-13 16:52:21

I search the name and report each post too, but tend to stay off the thread in the hope that it will drop out of active conversations. The trolls are after attention after all.

Unanswered threads that are obviously inflammatory, become active conversations, if MN'ers answer, rather than report.

Obviously, as sue says, supporting an OP who has been rounded on is entirely different. It is a shame there isn't a quicker response to reports, in those cases.

fraktion Mon 18-Feb-13 19:19:39

I don't know how the reporting system works but wouldn't people need to report an individual post a certain number of times rather than the thread in general for a lockdown idea to work?

lougle Mon 18-Feb-13 19:43:21

It depends, I think. Generally, when the thread is reasonable, but a few posters get carried away (euphemism) then individual posts are deleted. If the thread is so littered that it becomes a bit silly, then the whole thread goes.

It's often the same post/poster that gets people's attention enough to report.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now