The ATS Issues Thread

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Foe-ing someone will not change what you see or how you see it on the boards..

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Foe-ing someone will not change what you see or how you see it on the boards..
Semper

G'day Semper!

Errr.....big face palm!!!

I meant to say "ignore"!

How does that change things?

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


If you "Ignore" someone, you will not see their posts..

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

If you "Ignore" someone, you will not see their posts..

Semper

Thanks Semper!

So.....

If they'd already made or did make a thread, would I see their threads?

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

You would see responses to their threads...and of course the thread title...

reply to post by MemoryShock


MemoryShock.....

Okeydokey!

Thanks mate
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
I suspect you'd see their thread, but not any posts they made in it, but I'm not sure. About a year ago I put someone on ignore just to see what it did, you can try that too. Then I took them back off ignore I've really never needed ignore thanks to the mods, who thwarted the ad homs coming from some guy (I won't post his real username) with an ID something like "Satan's minion" who ALMOST tempted me to use the function.

It's a little trickier to take someone off the ignore list than to add them though.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Arby me ol' mate!

Yup.....

That sounds about right, according to Memory Shock.....

It would be interesting to be able to see which members had ME on ignore.

I don't think that can be done.....

Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 21-8-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

i've never put anyone on the ignore list, that i can recall.
and, only two members were ever on my respected foes list for any amount of time (as a joke).

Maybe...Maybe not's question made me think of a related questions i have had for awhile.

if we are put on someone's ignore list, how do we know that member is ignoring us?

are we notified that we have been put on their ignore list?

is there a place where we can check to see who is ignoring us?

if i recieve no answer to these inquiries, is it safe to assume that i am on the ignore list?

thanks,
john paul

[edit on 21-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
if we are put on someone's ignore list, how do we know that member is ignoring us?

You may find the member can't resist announcing the fact.
"I'm putting you on my "ignore" list, buddy!"
As a kind of punishment for your bad behaviour to them (not sure how that works).

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

are we notified that we have been put on their ignore list?

is there a place where we can check to see who is ignoring us?

No and no.

Thanks 12m8keall2c for pointing me in this direction I shall repost here then.

Please understand that I am not disputing my own deleted 'off-topic' discussions in this posting but trying to bring the point of understanding what actions are taken to label something as such and what is the right to appeal such decisions in an open and public fashion.

It is not singular at all but rather generic I am looking for.

Here is my previous post:

Hello there,

This may have been done before in some shape or form and if so please excuse my ignorance with the search options because I couldn't find it.

According to the 6th amendment of the American constitution a person has the right to face their accusers when confronted with something unjust being cast upon their character.

Now I appreciate that we're not all in the United States of America here and that the boards have their own set of rules for what is and is not acceptable and so accept the fact that this isn't a given for everyone or a right that people should expect - this is the interwebz after all.

That said I have also seen huge changes to these boards regarding receiving constructive feedback and believe this site to be beyond repute when it comes to proper and honest transparency.

Now I won't link to a recent thread where I found a couple of my posts deleted (and another edited without consent) due to politeness and reserved appreciation of the hard work of moderators here however I will discuss the thoughts I had from such deletions and edits to my expressions.

I understand that one can contact the person who uses their moderation abilities individually to get a more complete understanding of why they moderated something in such a way. I also understand that this action can be revoked through discussion with said moderator and that if that action isn't considered appropriate then a complaint can be posted which will bring it to the attention of all moderators and administrators on these boards.

I think this is not only a superb way of working but also the benchmark which other web forums should strive to achieve - a really brilliant way of making sure that moderation is open and transparent.

However my reason for this thread is that in using said system I have found myself wanting to know why a post can be deemed inappropriate by one moderator and any public call about said actions afterwards (such as mentioning it idly in a later post) also pulls in the actions of deletion.

Where this to happen in a public setting an account would be kept and given for each action and accountability would be given to each individual who provided said actions. This does not happen here.

I realise having every post that is deleted or amended have it's own courtroom is infeasible but is there a way that a person can confront, in public, those who delete, amend or change their content and thus let everyone understand why it happened as well as allow for the decision to appeal said action to be given to an audience?

As is actions taken are either dealt with on a personal level (when questioned) and further actions taken appropriate to that communication or posted to a closed forum where moderators decide amongst themselves what can or cannot become of it (Which I was chided for doing by a moderator in a U2U incidentally).

Can we have an open and transparent area where these actions can be viewed and a separate area where members can discuss the outcomes of said discussions?

We need someone to watch over the watchers.

Please understand that I in no way dislike, condemn or disapprove of the moderation of these forums - it's a hard days graft done on a voluntary basis and I really appreciate it. I am only asking that decisions made by the moderators be open and transparent and that we can all see how these decisions come together and be able to appeal them in a public setting if need be.

Sorry for the huge amount of reading required to get to where we are now and I thank you for any and all thoughts regarding this request.

Again in no way shape or form am I putting down the excellent work of the moderators of these forums I am only asking that it be done in a more civilised and democratic fashion.

Thanks for reading.

-m0r

I think the original thread should be re-opened because this is worthy of discussing openly in itself and not tucked away in a thread where everything is swept under the carpet.

Having read the posts of those who created this site I'd say that it makes sense to be credible by way of receiving feedback and giving it also.

-m0r

Originally posted by m0r1arty
...trying to bring the point of understanding what actions are taken to label something as such and what is the right to appeal such decisions in an open and public fashion...

There is no opportunity for an open and public appeal of staff actions... especially on something as mundane as the removal of an off-topic post that was rightfully removed, along with the follow-up in-threads complaints of the removal.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


I'm looking for those who accuse people of doing something to be out in the open about it all - not about about some petty post of mine.

C'mon, it's right up ATS' street!

Be open about how it works and allow people to see what their accusers are saying and then supply them with a place where they can bitch about it separate from the actual place where things are done.

It's not rocket science - be as open as the governments which we all have are.

-m0r

reply to post by m0r1arty


It's neither fair nor right to expect that every decision made by volunteer moderators on a free-to-access web site be open to public drama events.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Says you.

If we expect...I dunno, disclosure or the truth behind something or other then surely we present that ourselves as an example?

Unless that in itself is all drama (Which I'm not against the idea of).

We expect truth here and yet here we deny it?

Is that a fair analysis or am I just being problematic?

Again I'm not looking for trouble just answers so please reply in the context that I ask.

And sorry for any inconvenience that I cause.

-m0r

reply to post by m0r1arty


Hi

I think your question is valid and brings up a good point.

However...

I think S.O.L. means to say that if they would start to discus every removal publicly, the already time shortage that causes the staff not being able to read all posts and every thread, will drastically increase.

No mod's will be around to do what they have to to make this site as it is now.

The best site on the interwebz.

Just my 2 cents.

[edit on 8/21/2010 by Sinter Klaas]

Sinter Klaas has it right for the most part... The time sync and drama fest a forum like that would become would be the end of ATS. Nobody would have any time to do what we need to do to keep the place going.

It's pretty simple really, the Terms and Conditions describe what is and what is not appropriate and the staff removes that which falls into the latter.

There is no "accusation" or "smear" of anyone's reputation involved with a simple post removal. It's nothing more than housekeeping or rule enforcement.

Springer...

reply to post by Springer


Cheers Springer!

I never thought it was anything complicated or ill-conceived. I do think though that there is the possibility of corruption within those who moderate (although I'm sure that you guys keep an eye on it) and that possibility would be removed if we all saw the moderation process.

If there was some way of gauging what is or is not appropriate moderation, as a groupthink thing, then we would be better off as a group as to how to act.

As it is though we get told 'No' and our only way of actual response to the membership of moderators at large is through the complaints procedure which highlights to all the mods what is going on.

It works for just now - for the best part. But it also keeps the what, when, who and why away from the membership of general users and that in itself is what most of us are trying to find out about the whole reason for existence!

Again, please take what I say with the utmost respect - all of you guys do a great h=job, but there is always room for improvement.

-m0r

I would like to weigh in here on just one point if I may..

I understand everyone, (Well a couple) of peoples desire to "see" what transpires in the background, and even the motivations for such, to some small extent..

However let me interject this in regards to a negative action taken against a Member..

Perhaps the finest supervisory/management school in the world.. USMC NCO School, says this about discipline/negative interaction with others..

1. It MUST be private
2. It must be immediate
3. It must be clearly understood

I know that as a Member of ATS, I have been "talked to" by the Staff prior to becoming a Moderator and I can freely say this.

I DO NOT and WOULD NOT ever want what transpired made public. It is pretty much none of anyone elses business except the Moderator and me.

Just my 2 Cents

Semper