problem members will now be moderated.

[Torsten]

I've given the situation a few weeks to sort itself out, but it isn't. Some members still feel it is more fun to cause discord than to build a community. So, anyone who repeatedly makes aggravating posts, breaks the rules, or simply tries to push to see how far they can piss the mods off, will now be on moderation queue. That means their posts will be marked as only visible to a moderator who will then have to approve them before they become visible [look for the grey squares next to the forum/thread or ask me]. It's a pain in the ass for mods and frustrating for the poster, but if you don't like this concept, then simply make sure you don't get on that list - or if that is against your character then leave the forums.

I have no idea what happens in forums without moderator. If the moderation queue is forwarded to admin then that's fine. if not then you will be restricted from those forums entirely. I am not going to try to reconfigure things or waste time on you

Problem members may also be barred from editing their profiles and may have other privis removed if they abuse them.

Moderators please report any posts that you decide not to approve so that I can decide on either deleting members or unrestricting them. Please use your own personal judgement whether a post contributes to the forums [and the tone] or is of little value. Members who have been placed on mod review are there for a reason and you don't need to have 100% proof that the post was against the rules to delete it. If you feel it is bringing down the tone of the forum and annoying the community then delete it. Don't be fooled by relevant tidbits dressed up in vitriole and sarcasm. Assess each post on it's merit. Don't be shy about deleting as if a post is not approved the poster can always rewrite it.

If anyone feels like this is as bad as high school, then yeah, I agree. But just like in high schoool it is a few rotten apples that spoil it for the rest.

[shruman]

;)

Edited February 7, 2007 by shruman

[nil]

oh dear.

[Torsten]

I should mention that this is a very short term arrangement. No one wants it - least of all the mods.

There was another option and that is to simply delete a handful of members and get on with things. However, I find that at time when members wind each other up, some heightened state of aggravation blankets each and every exchange between these members. So, if one is removed, the rest often simply cease to be a problem. Now, deleting all of them means that the wrong one might be deleted because he is more emotional or has less selfcontrol, while the aggravation was actually originating from someone else. I am hoping that the mod queue system will calm things down so the provocateurs become more obvious.

If there is an overwhelming dislike of this approach I am happy to reconsider and simply delete the discordants now. I am just trying a new approach. It hasn't been needed in 7 years, so bear with us while we get things back on track.

[AndyAmine.]

Good on ya for taking the extra effort to try and sort this through rather than jst deleting some members outright, your in a very tricky position and I think you and the mods are dealing with it admaribly.

Man do I look forward to things getting back to the way they were 6-12 months ago, this place used to glow..

[sobriquet]

I've given the situation a few weeks to sort itself out, but it isn't. Some members still feel it is more fun to cause discord than to build a community. So, anyone who repeatedly makes aggravating posts, breaks the rules, or simply tries to push to see how far they can piss the mods off, will now be on moderation queue. That means their posts will be marked as only visible to a moderator who will then have to approve them before they become visible [look for the grey squares next to the forum/thread or ask me]. It's a pain in the ass for mods and frustrating for the poster, but if you don't like this concept, then simply make sure you don't get on that list - or if that is against your character then leave the forums.

I have no idea what happens in forums without moderator. If the moderation queue is forwarded to admin then that's fine. if not then you will be restricted from those forums entirely. I am not going to try to reconfigure things or waste time on you

Problem members may also be barred from editing their profiles and may have other privis removed if they abuse them.

Moderators please report any posts that you decide not to approve so that I can decide on either deleting members or unrestricting them. Please use your own personal judgement whether a post contributes to the forums [and the tone] or is of little value. Members who have been placed on mod review are there for a reason and you don't need to have 100% proof that the post was against the rules to delete it. If you feel it is bringing down the tone of the forum and annoying the community then delete it. Don't be fooled by relevant tidbits dressed up in vitriole and sarcasm. Assess each post on it's merit. Don't be shy about deleting as if a post is not approved the poster can always rewrite it.

If anyone feels like this is as bad as high school, then yeah, I agree. But just like in high schoool it is a few rotten apples that spoil it for the rest.

This is actually a very reasonable approach to take.

There are many usenet groups which are totally moderated for example, in that every post is monitored just due to the sheer volume of problem posting and spam that would occur without it. In such groups the posts are of a uniformly high standard where people go to the trouble of spellcheckers etc. to insure that their post has the best chance possible of making it through. Obviously it leaves no room for idle banter and is very formal.

I just have one question about this if you feel that it deserves an answer: once a person is muted through moderation, then what will be the criteria to remove the moderation queue on that person's posts?

I know that all such things pose tricky issues, but ultimately it does come down to the fact that it's a privately owned forum and an admin should and does have the right to administer it in absolutely whichever way they see fit. It's my personal view however that some allowances must be made for differences of opinion, lest we be branded closed minded.

[Auntyjack]

I've sat and pondered this one for a little while...and had written a long post regarding censorship, freedom of interaction etc etc....but it was not the point.

So I'll summarise instead!

I believe that a lot of ppl come here for a certain liberty in sharing in what they believe to be their right.

So as long as the 'discordants' have a process of appeal to state their case, and as long as they are only put on the list due to personal attacks (keep it loose you know what I mean),then I would have to say you have made the best choice out of a set of limited ones.

Also by including the feedback (a vote??) of the community even with the ultimatium of sorts ;

'If there is an overwhelming dislike of this approach I am happy to reconsider and simply delete the discordants now.'

Then I think the only question I would ask is about transparency, although administering this could be difficult.

I haven't been here a long time, and I haven't a great deal of exposure to these problems (I'd prefer to just ignore them) so I don't want my words to hold a great deal of weight...but more a just a perspective of a member with a newer history.

AJ

[Torsten]

Obviously it leaves no room for idle banter and is very formal.

actually, this is not how far we want to take it. This forum used to be friendly informative and still full of banter. But people used to enjoy it and wouldn't worry too much about screwing up every now and then. Now everyone is on their guard and many threads just deteriorate so badly that they become tedious to read.

I just have one question about this if you feel that it deserves an answer: once a person is muted through moderation, then what will be the criteria to remove the moderation queue on that person's posts?

As you cans ee, I have asked the mods to forward all emails they delete. I can also keep track of all emails that are posted. So, if I, or the relevant mod(s) feel that things have improved then moderation can be turned off.

I know that all such things pose tricky issues, but ultimately it does come down to the fact that it's a privately owned forum and an admin should and does have the right to administer it in absolutely whichever way they see fit. It's my personal view however that some allowances must be made for differences of opinion, lest we be branded closed minded.

I fully agree, but this is not about differences in opinion. This MAY be about differences in style [not sure about that yet], and is definitely about differences in character. All the members over the years have built this place as a peaceful, safe and enjoyable place to be. A place where differences in opinion are cherished and encouraged. However, over the years we have very rarely been in a situation where the style and character of this forum were being dramatically transformed by just a few individuals. One can assume this to be a phase and maybe it would fix itself, but in the meantime this place isn't what it was designed to be and this is detrimental to the people who come here for the original purpose.

This isn't a troll haven where aggression and division is protected under the same values that apply to constructive members. Just like even the most vigorous democracy will not give democratic rights to organisations that are actively working to destroy democracy, this forum will not pander to individuals who do not value it's core principles.

The moderation queue makes it possible to let people know just where the limits are without deleting them. If they chose that these limits are not acceptable then they should not be here.

As for allowing for differences in opinion, I make a point of not deleting members just because they piss me off personally [although i will delete them if needed]. It's not easy, but i try to keep my personal feelings out of these decisions and look at the benefit of the forum as a whole. Seriously, if my personal wishes were paramount the top 5 boot list would look very different.

[nil]

i don't like it and may well not participate as much. i don't believe this will be done fairly across the board and i agree that transparency is an huge issue. i have personally watched 'moderation' get out of hand (in my opinion) and feel if the opinions of the community as a whole are valued, rules simply must be applied across the board. i don't see that happening at present and don't have an extraordinary amount of time to invest in 'communities' that are heavily moderated in this fashion (without equity).

i do understand the idea is to promote a 'vibe' in this 'community' that is jovial and friendly. i'm not sure if this means what i'd hope it to mean. we're all different and we all have different 'vibes'. i've personally found one of the people that has been 'moderated' to be a delightful addition to this community and a reason i continue to come and contribute. i enjoy a bit of dark humour, sarcasm and intellectual ability in my reality.

my concern at this point as it is less about 'following the rules' and more about personality clashes. there isn't a community in the world that doesn't deal with this issue. if this is going to be a community of personality rather than a community that's representative of all of us, that's innately disturbing to me.

with all due respect, if this is an issue of 'torsten doesn't like me this week so i'm now moderated and ganged up on and that's ok because torsten says so', i am not feeling it. you have every 'right' to do that, torsten, it's your forum. i came here because there was always a feeling that it was a forum from your business that belonged greatly to 'us' as the community, no matter what our personality differences. in the end, though, it is your business and your forum and i'll respect your choices in that vein even if i do not agree with them. whether or not i'll personally continue to feel comfortable here will remain to be seen.

i do hope the rules can apply across the board from now on. and i might suggest perhaps it is the people who are drawing your attention to the forums that are more of an 'issue' than those they are complaining about. just a thought from the peanut gallery as i have no idea what goes on 'behind closed doors' here.

~abrasive girl

[Torsten]

I've sat and pondered this one for a little while...and had written a long post regarding censorship, freedom of interaction etc etc....but it was not the point.

I struggle with the concepts of freedom of speech etc all the time. I am a firm believer in it, but I am also a firm believer that when the freedom of one person is impinged by the freedom of another person then that is no longer freedom. eg, if a white supremacist group is allowed to insult and denegrate black people and incite violence, then that is no longer freedom for all. So, the concept of freedom of speech can't be absolute in my opinion - it has to be relative.

Then again, if this forum had absolute freedom of speech then we would not have any rules. However, we do have rules and I think most members are comfortable with those rules. So the real argument is about how far to enforce these rules and what to do about members who do not accept these rules.

I feel that keeping within the spirit of the rules is more important that to stay within the letter. ie, if chemical shaman calls me a fag then no one takes it seriously and no one would assume that to be a disrespectful insult. However, if another member calls all inhabitants of a city in the middle east faggots then that is not acceptable as the intention is not clear. Herein lies the much lamented [by one member at least] arbitrary enforcement of the rules, and I am not going to lose any sleep over that.

So as long as the 'discordants' have a process of appeal to state their case, and as long as they are only put on the list due to personal attacks (keep it loose you know what I mean),then I would have to say you have made the best choice out of a set of limited ones.

we all find ourselves attacking someone once in a while. It's when it becomes the norm that we have to look at ourselves as a community and especially at the relevant members and ask what is going wrong. People don't get banned easily, so it's not just a matter of one issue that causes deletion. If someone gets to a position where they are deleted they've already gone through various processes of appeal both with the mods/admin and the membership. But you see, even that is a flawed process. The appeal you seek may just be rejected by the memebrs because of a possible group mentality or because of vocal members. In that case it is up to admin and mods to protect the individual and maybe make an unpopular decision of retaining that member.

Also by including the feedback (a vote??) of the community even with the ultimatium of sorts ;

as you said, the choices are limited. At this point I personally can't see more than these two.

Then I think the only question I would ask is about transparency, although administering this could be difficult.

well, I've already indicated who is in the top 5 and there is no need to repeat that as that list has already shrunk and changed somewhat. A couple of the minor trouble makers I presume will no longer be a problem as they now understand what I am trying to achieve here, and priorities appear to be shifting with some of the rest too.

I haven't been here a long time, and I haven't a great deal of exposure to these problems

In all those years we've only had these sorts of problems once before, but that time it was very different. There was actually a strong polarisation at the time, whereas this time it is just the odd trouble maker and a few noobs who did not understand the limits [due to the general degenerated state when they joined]. The new mod queue will prevent new members getting off on the wrong foot.

[Auntyjack]

Man do I look forward to things getting back to the way they were 6-12 months ago, this place used to glow..

AndyAmine...I would have liked to have seen these other times.

All in all i'd guess most ppl would skip past the trashy crap anyway..

AJ

[stonewolf]

I've only spotted one thread with a bit of angry banter...so im unsure as to what this is about, perhaps the more offending topics have been deleted? Personally i see this place as extremely tranquil as compared to other net forums *shrugs* I must be the only one in the dark about this.

[naja naja]

Well and truely needed at this point I think.

Personally, I think u r being very generous T. Certainly more generous than I'd prob be. Some of these members are really starting to shit me with all the nit picking and pedantic crap, when they are really just being guided in a general direction.

Also comments like "Fucking Newb" are not nessisary and are just provokative.

AA is correct when he says we need it like it was 12 months ago. Shit was flowin smooth back then.

[Amulte]

AA is correct when he says we need it like it was 12 months ago. Shit was flowin smooth back then.

it will return the energy shift back has already begun, just gotta start pumping out some love

[foolsbreath]

I agree naja

I have noticed a few of our older members have taken a back seat and stopped contributing, and I believe it to be a result of all the shit slinging going on, it rubs off on everyone and creates a tense environment not conducive of free speech and the willful sharing of information

Man do I look forward to things getting back to the way they were 6-12 months ago, this place used to glow..

Yeah, cant y'all just get along?

[Auxin]

Glad to see this, really...

...I'm running out of kittens

[watertrade]

Thank you for doing this.

I was starting to get the shits with the negative interuptions...

[dqd]

AA is correct when he says we need it like it was 12 months ago. Shit was flowin smooth back then.

... ah yesss... those laxette days, those senna nights... ...

[sobriquet]

I just want to comment on some members waxing lyrical about the good ol' days. It's a common syndrome in almost every sphere of life, and dwelling on past ("better") times is a waste of time.

The past never returns. Everything moves on. When forums are small and have fewer members then yes it can be a very chummy and peaceful place. But look at the number of registered members ---- close to 2000 now. 12 months ago I'd bet it was half that number; if you check the 'validating members' in the memberlist you'll see about 20 members having put in applications to join in the last week.

More people equals more chaos, more ideas, and in general a better overall store of information and experience to draw from.

In the end the purpose of these forums is to promote ethnobotany within an environment that puts many of the discussed plants within easy reach of people because the admin happens to also administer the finest ethnobotanical materials online shop in Australia. It brings people closer to the action and that can only be a good thing.

Craving the past is pointless. If anything things will become more chaotic as time goes on and the deluge of members grows and grows. I don't know how many of the 2000 members are active at any one time, but the overall figure is going to point to a higher number of active members in general.

Finally I want to say that even though the moderation queue is a reasonable idea, that people should be given a warning before being put on it.

Coming from the point of view of an advocate of free-speech and libertarianism, I think it would be unfair to suddenly be silenced without the right to reply to any criticisms. I don't know if Green_Osiris was warned prior to being placed on the list but it would seem unfair if it was just a snap decision without warning. At least with a warning there is the chance for dialogue. Gagging is a serious course of action and I think needs to be treated with care.

Just my thoughts for what they are worth.

[Machine Elf]

I see forums not as some open market square for everyone to shout at each other in, but as someone's house that I've been fortunate enough to walk into/ be invited to. I don't go into that person's house and piss in the corner and abuse their partner...I'd pretty much expect to be booted out or silenced in some other manner if I did. Anybody who has ever run an Internet forum of any kind should know that moderation is sometimes needed. No problems with the decision here T.

Belf.

[sobriquet]

I see forums not as some open market square for everyone to shout at each other in, but as someone's house that I've been fortunate enough to walk into/ be invited to. I don't go into that person's house and piss in the corner and abuse their partner...I'd pretty much expect to be booted out or silenced in some other manner if I did. Anybody who has ever run an Internet forum of any kind should know that moderation is sometimes needed. No problems with the decision here T.

Belf.

The house analogy is close but incorrect in my opinion.

I think the open nature of these publicly visible forums is more akin to a club. More people with very different backgrounds and directions enter a club with a general understanding of why they are there for some common purpose. But these people will occasionally get drunk, fight, vomit on the floor, flick their ash on the carpets, and they might even be careless when they are using the toilet and not bother to use the brush to get rid of the skid marks.

BUT in general everything goes well, and just like in a club setting there are bouncers and cleaners to sort out the mishaps.

[Torsten]

I just want to comment on some members waxing lyrical about the good ol' days. It's a common syndrome in almost every sphere of life, and dwelling on past ("better") times is a waste of time. The past never returns.

Not really true as it applies to forums. I have been on several forums and mailing lists that lost their way for a while and then found their way back to their roots. As I mentioned, even this forum has doen it once before. Not that you would ever go back to exactly how it was. That's not feasible nor desirable, but you can try and regain the positive aspects and put the rest down to experience.

When forums are small and have fewer members then yes it can be a very chummy and peaceful place. But look at the number of registered members ---- close to 2000 now. 12 months ago I'd bet it was half that number; if you check the 'validating members' in the memberlist you'll see about 20 members having put in applications to join in the last week.

Most validating members are spam. At least 80% don't make it in, and of the 20% that do, many are spam too [but they have usually forgotten where we are by the time I let them in].

We have a slightly higher noob rate at the moment than ever before and this is causing a shift. However, we have gone through similar phases before [where noob energy outweighed oldie energy] and we usually bounce back with little trouble.

More people equals more chaos, more ideas, and in general a better overall store of information and experience to draw from.

We don't really have more active poeple than we usually have, so this doesn't quite fit.

Craving the past is pointless. If anything things will become more chaotic as time goes on and the deluge of members grows and grows.

I don't mind growing at a steady pace, but this community has always doen best if there was a balance of new and old. I've also seen many forums collapse under noobs. That is in no one's interest. Not sure what I would do if we have a massive continuous noob influx, but I don't think either noobs or anyone else would be served by such a community. we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. I would hope that such a hypothetical deluge would spawn/support more forums rather than overload this one.

Finally I want to say that even though the moderation queue is a reasonable idea, that people should be given a warning before being put on it.

I think plenty of warnings were issued by mods and myself that we are running out of patience. Most have taken the warnings seriously. The mod queue is for the rest. While I hope it will rarely be needed, it is a mechanism that can be left in place if the need arises in future and we can thus avoid leaving thigns so late.

Coming from the point of view of an advocate of free-speech and libertarianism, I think it would be unfair to suddenly be silenced without the right to reply to any criticisms.

Silenced?? Please re think what the mod queue actually does! All it is there for is to make sure that problems members can't make posts that are against the rules. See, often a problem member will post at a time when the mod is absent, so the damage is already doen by the time the mod can intervene. This can then lead to nasty exchanges, editing, deletion of members, or even deletion of threads. So, by making sure all posts are seen by a mod before posting we simply remove the fact that some people make use of this discrepancy for their own ends. The mod queue is also an indicator that a member has already shown him/herself to be a problem poster and repeated rule breaker, so firstly can't be trusted in that regard, and secondly should expected to be redeem him/herself rather than pushing the envelope further.

[Torsten]

BUT in general everything goes well, and just like in a club setting there are bouncers and cleaners to sort out the mishaps.

I like your analogy ~username. Not because I agree with it, but because it quite clearly shows the differences in expectation we are dealing with here. While some people here feel it is OK to flick ciggies and leave skid marks, I prefer a place where you don't need cleaners and bouncers. I fail to see how destructive and careless people are an assett to a community/club. Why not compare it to a cafe, where people don't hide behind the anonymity of darkness, the irresponsibility of alcohol, and generally have a higher level of respect for each other?

The cleaners and bouncers we have at the Corroboree are for extreme situations rather than part of day to day business. I mean, why should they be bouncers and cleaners for free? What makes you so special that you expect volunteers to clean up after you?

If I had a choice between a club or someone's home to build a community in I'd go for the latter.

[coin]

More people equals more chaos, more ideas, and in general a better overall store of information and experience to draw from.

In the end the purpose of these forums is to promote ethnobotany within an environment that puts many of the discussed plants within easy reach of people because the admin happens to also administer the finest ethnobotanical materials online shop in Australia. It brings people closer to the action and that can only be a good thing.

Is this really true?? Personally I don't think so...all I see lately is a hell of a lot more noise.... There seemed to be a point where the member numbers were optimal and the member base was specific enough with their interests that this was a good research group and a relatively common-minded community, however free-form it was...I'm just an old fogy really (I'm 26 ) ... and I've always been too much of a hermit to get involved with the community 'offline' for the most part ... but I definitely don't see a better store of information now, based on a larger member base... at all.... and I've gotten over the craving for the "old days" about one or two years ago (it fluctuated) ... it doesn't phase me now....but there's so much shit I just ignore now, and some of the interesting threads, I pick up on a lot later... I've never been a major contributor though, I have to admit..and at times I've just been a whiny bastard ... i've 'left' before .. but always end up coming back through curiosity after a few months, for a few different reasons

I don't care if I fade into oblivion here (as coin) but at times, I do get a tiny bit dismayed/nostalgic when special contributors announce that they are leaving, or when some of the older members just drift away without notice ... this place has always meant a lot to me, right from the beginning

Edited February 8, 2007 by coin

[ballzac]

Firstly, great idea...hope it works.

I think it's mainly an issue of keeping to the topic. I have seen many exchanges that become heated over sensitive issues, and I think everyone's fine with that. It's when people start making personal attacks for no apparant reason that there's a problem. Even worse, people bring up arguments from other threads, which is really tedius for those not involved. We might see three threads on the same day in different forums that end up with the same people arguing about the same crap. Mostly, I never see where these arguments start as I don't read all threads. That makes it even more tedius Anyway, I think that is the crux. Just stick to the topic at hand.