[Scarabin]

I have noted complaints that reporting abuse in play fails to secure adequate action, and I have seen posts, especially in the Water Cooler, that offend every standard of civilised behaviour, not to mention the published standards for BBO.

I can understand that monitors are reluctant to take drastic action such as expelling members, but would it not be possible first to issue private or public warnings and, if this does not work,to censor or even delete offending posts. I hope this might work since the perpetrators appear to think they are being clever rather than plain rude or stupid.

[inquiry]

WELL, I don't know about the other moderators, but I tend not to read the water cooler post. In a large part, because I was against a non-bridge forum in the beginning, since there are many other places people can post their views on such things as global warning, or obama versus the church. I have since realized the non-bridge forum does help in building a sense of community, and offers to play online one of my favorite games from my younger days (diplomacy) is a plus. Yet, I still lack time to read the that forum (more than extremely rarely).

The water cooler also has both a higher standard for getting post moderated. Not sure why, but that is the way it has been. In fact, I think many, many post are not read by any moderator. We rely on you guys to report offensive material. Some of you report two or more things a day -- those reporting that many are too sensitive. Others report only rarely, but when they do, what they report almost always gets moderated. Try the report button, explain why it is offensive. It works, and several different moderators get a chance to see it and respond to it.

We do more than edit post. We can raise someone's warning level, we do tell people to tone it down. Some people already have all their post moderated (checked) before they appear and there are more than a dozen banned users (spammers mostly, but a few obnoxious people as well).

[Scarabin]

inquiry, on 2012-March-04, 23:14, said:

WELL, I don't know about the other moderators, but I tend not to read the water cooler post. In a large part, because I was against a non-bridge forum in the beginning, since there are many other places people can post their views on such things as global warning, or obama versus the church. I have since realized the non-bridge forum does help in building a sense of community, and offers to play online one of my favorite games from my younger days (diplomacy) is a plus. Yet, I still lack time to read the that forum (more than extremely rarely).

The water cooler also has both a higher standard for getting post moderated. Not sure why, but that is the way it has been. In fact, I think many, many post are not read by any moderator. We rely on you guys to report offensive material. Some of you report two or more things a day -- those reporting that many are too sensitive. Others report only rarely, but when they do, what they report almost always gets moderated. Try the report button, explain why it is offensive. It works, and several different moderators get a chance to see it and respond to it.

We do more than edit post. We can raise someone's warning level, we do tell people to tone it down. Some people already have all their post moderated (checked) before they appear and there are more than a dozen banned users (spammers mostly, but a few obnoxious people as well).

Thanks that was quick. The trouble is no one wants to snitch and it sometimes seems easier to just retaliate in kind. I would be happy if I thought moderators would intervene automatically when they see cases of outright abuse and name calling. Keeping things private is tactful and understandable but perhaps tact should be kept for the victims rather than the perpetrators. Anyhow I am happy to rely on the current system.

Sorry about Obama versus etc. I intended it as a query on the modern, rather cavalier attitude to laws of property and contract. I could have titled it "Eminent domain" but I thought "Obama versus ..." would be more topical and provocative. I guess I tried to be too brief and the title took over.

For what it's worth I promise never again to post anything remotely religious or concerning cheating in bridge. These threads seem to bring out the very worst in posters.

[Elianna]

Scarabin, on 2012-March-05, 17:24, said:

Thanks that was quick. The trouble is no one wants to snitch and it sometimes seems easier to just retaliate in kind. I would be happy if I thought moderators would intervene automatically when they see cases of outright abuse and name calling.

Don't think of it as "snitching", think of it as bringing a post to a moderator's attention, who might not have otherwise read it.

Just because you "report" something, doesn't mean it will be deleted post-haste. It just means that the post in question will be reviewed. It's a good idea to write a reason, because the moderators are really busy people, and may not have the time to pour over some of the TLDR posts in the Water Cooler looking for the objectionable part.

And just because they don't get back to you, does not mean that they didn't read your report, nor that they didn't do anything. There are disciplinary measures that are only clear to the person who made the post, and to the moderators (that way those of is in trouble do not have it publicized to others and be publically embarrassed).

[JLOGIC]

Even if it is snitching, its anonymous snitching, which eliminates the social downside of doing it.

[Scarabin]

Thanks for your help