Feature request: Self-moderated Threads

[Matteo]

It looks like blogs (accessible on top menu) have these features. I might try that out.

 

[wk057]

While there are many adults on this forum who would be perfectly capable of consistent and fair moderation, there are also a very large number of posters who have demonstrated they would not be capable. You haven't seen the large number of reports from some forum members who take any disagreement as snippy or 'unnecessary escalation' or decide something is off-topic (when it really isn't).

So then what? Then moderators have to decide who can and cannot moderate threads? They have to go clean up a thread after a zealous OP started deleting anyone who disagreed? And if mods started taking away privileges, then there would be posts from hurt forum members about how they weren't good enough. Just a mess.

Totally against this idea, sorry. It's not personal.

The feature that allows some the ability to edit the first post after the recently added normal 24 hour grace period (love this) is tied to the supporting member list if I recall correctly. Seems like this could be something that would work there also.

 

[bonnie]

The feature that allows some the ability to edit the first post after the recently added normal 24 hour grace period (love this) is tied to the supporting member list if I recall correctly. Seems like this could be something that would work there also.

Again, you haven't seen the perfectly-acceptable posts that some people report. Some of these continuous reports are from people with quite a few posts. (And no, I don't believe the ablility to edit the first post is tied to if you are a supporting member or not, but rather if there is a rational need to be able to edit the first post. I can't edit most of mine - but in one case, yes, where I asked for the ability to do so.)

 

[wk057]

Again, you haven't seen the perfectly-acceptable posts that some people report. Some of these continuous reports are from people with quite a few posts. (And no, I don't believe the ablility to edit the first post is tied to if you are a supporting member or not, but rather if there is a rational need to be able to edit the first post. I can't edit most of mine - but in one case, yes, where I asked for the ability to do so.)

That's when the self-correcting nature of this would kick in and people who's threads are overly moderated just won't get people posting in those threads.

As for editing of the first post, I just checked a half-dozen of my recent threads where the first post is > 24 hours old and I can edit all of the first posts. So, not sure what that's tied to then if you can't and you're in the supporting member list.

Edit: Yeah, looks like I'm not crazy:

Last night I implemented a solution that should give contributing members like the ones mentioned the ability to continue to edit the first post in their threads. Normally I like to verify software changes on a test server for a few days. That didn't happen here, so fingers crossed.

I used the Supporting Member usergroup, of which those mentioned are already part.

 

[bonnie]

Edit: Yeah, looks like I'm not crazy:

I stand corrected .

 

[Johan]

I think this feature would be for a separate forum. Perhaps for mostly technical discussion, where keeping a focused thread for reference can be important.

But for TMC I think it takes too much away from the community and discussion aspect, which is what makes this forum so popular and good.

 

[dsm363]

If all the moderators got the pony we were promised years ago this might be ok

 

[MsElectric]

I think self moderated threads are a step in the wrong direction as I think there is enough moderation already

What I would like on the other hand is an unmoderated section of the forum where posts and topics are not moderated at all, unless they are obviously spam or verbally abusive.

 

[dsm363]

I think self moderated threads are a step in the wrong direction as I think there is enough moderation already

What I would like on the other hand is an unmoderated section of the forum where posts and topics are not moderated at all, unless they are obviously spam or verbally abusive.

Deciding what is spam or verbally abusive is a judgement call and therefore moderation.

 

[MsElectric]

Deciding what is spam or verbally abusive is a judgement call and therefore moderation.

Great point but I still wish we had a section on here to discuss the Model S where apart from abusive language (i.e. swearing at people) and obvious spam (wire money to the account of a Nigerian price) the rest of the discussion is left alone. That's about the only moderation I see on other car forums in which I take part and they seem to work quite fine, but I know TMC is not like other car forums etc.,

 

[dsm363]

So you'd be ok if people started talking about how cool their Ford Mustag was in any thread? That wouldn't be spam or abusive language but off topic. Without moderation someone could post whatever they wanted to in any thread.

The official Tesla forums basically have zero moderation and are a mess.

 

[thegruf]

So WK057 what you are really saying is that

you dont think the mods do a good enough job on this forum
you think you should have the right to censor posts on a thread you start on a public forum

I dont think you have really thought through the ensuing mayhem that would result from this when posters of varying ability, experience, temperament etc get hold of this proposed feature.
I do think you have made many excellent contributions to this forum, however this idea is not one of them.

 

[marcon]

I start a topic, I don't own the thread. Everyone who participates in the discussion has a right to say what they'd like to say (within the TOS) - and I don't think the conversation should be dictated by one person.

[...] what you are really saying is that
you dont think the mods do a good enough job on this forum
you think you should have the right to censor posts on a thread you start on a public forum

^This.

TMC is a large community, quoted by news networks and often first point of contact with the Tesla community for many new enthusiasts and prospective buyers. Any self-correcting mechanisms, where long-term posters will shun certain self-moderated threads will probably be overwhelmed by new or infrequent posters, such as myself. So I really don't think TMC is an appropriate forum for this idea. I have also personally never consciously seen articles about other car manufacturers based on forum posts.
This is also a strong argument against a completely unmoderated section on this forum, as posts will be quoted out of context, as has happened in the past.

It looks like blogs (accessible on top menu) have these features. I might try that out.

Maybe a section for technical reference guides like a wiki or more prominent blog placements would be an idea. I only wish, I could afford a Tesla, but there is so much technical information gold (specific failure modes, easter eggs, who to contact at Tesla, layouts for signs, etc.) on TMC that often gets buried by the format of the forum. So, I totally agree with the fundamental desire to have a more concise information source, but that should maybe be seperate from "open" discussion, where having human interaction interspersed is part of the enjoyment of reading.

Edit: Yeah, looks like I'm not crazy:

I stand corrected :smile:.

 

[BoerumHill]

 

[wk057]

So WK057 what you are really saying is that

you dont think the mods do a good enough job on this forum
you think you should have the right to censor posts on a thread you start on a public forum

I dont think you have really thought through the ensuing mayhem that would result from this when posters of varying ability, experience, temperament etc get hold of this proposed feature.
I do think you have made many excellent contributions to this forum, however this idea is not one of them.

On the contrary, I think the moderators do an excellent job for the most part.

This isn't about doing something the mods wouldn't do if asked, it's about not having to bug the mods for simple things when possible.

"Censor" is not the correct word here anyway. No one is trying to censor anyone with this. This is just for off-topic/spam/rude/uselessness that is just best quickly removed from a thread as appropriate by the OP.

As an added bonus for the mods, though, people can't really cry "censorship" to the forum mods/admins when something is removed by an OP of a self-moderated thread that is clearly designated as being moderated by the OP. They fully have the option of starting their own thread if they feel "censored."

As for thinking it through, there really isn't much to think through. This has been tried and tested for years on other forums I frequent with massive success. One in particular is such a large forum that it's usage can be usefully measured in posts-per-second. (Not including spam bots and such either, real posts.) I actually have a long term self-moderated thread on that forum that now has something like 4000+ posts. Out of those posts I've had to self-moderate/delete maybe a dozen off-topic/spam/rude/etc posts. When I have done so I've posted that I did so, and why. Never once has my judgement on that usage been questioned.

There are many other self-moderated threads there. For the most part the feature is left unused but available when needed.

I've only ever seen one thread there where a forum moderator disabled self-moderation due to the OP using the feature to skew a perception. The thread was soliciting opinions as an informal poll of sorts to drive home the OP's viewpoint, and the OP was simply removing posts that didn't fit his view in an effort to skew the perception so he could come back and say, "See, no one really supports this" when in fact most did but were squashed. Turns out people are sent a PM from the forum when their posts are deleted on a self-moderated thread (I never knew this until recently when someone forwarded the PM to me when later apologizing for their post that I removed). So the forum moderators just undeleted (basically self-moderated deletes are just hidden from the public as if they didn't exist) everything that was removed and disabled self-moderation for that thread (and I think for his account entirely in the future).

In general though, the feature is widely appreciated there. Most people see the "This is a self-moderated thread" note at the top of the page and don't even bother posting nonsense because they know that not only can the forum mods going eventually get around to deleting their post the OP, who likely is more actively monitoring the thread, will probably more quickly just remove their nonsense.

Definitely seems like something that would probably work well here, especially if limited to something like the Supporting Members group or otherwise.

In practice, a lot of the concerns brought up in this thread opposing the feature are a non issue.

 

[bonnie]

I got the feeling from your posts (you didn't say that, only my interpretation) that there must be a great deal of self-moderation going on out on the vast wide internetz, so I went looking.

I found very few. But I did find a great deal of discussion about how it's great if you have a poster who can handle themselves, "but mostly it just all goes to #$%@". A lot of negative comments in general, a few positive. But the big picture was not good.

It did seem to work at times when there was a very focused topic & didn't attract a lot of dissent - meaning, more technical discussions in nature. But otherwise, no.

My guess is you're seeing this through the filter of how you'd behave, wk, and not through the filter of how a lot of the general population behaves.

This is just for off-topic/spam/rude/uselessness that is just best quickly removed from a thread as appropriate by the OP.

The mods aren't complaining about handling this stuff. Just report it.

 

[wk057]

Guess I'll just stick to bugging the mods a hair more often than I have in the past, for now.

 

[dsm363]

Guess I'll just stick to bugging the mods a hair more often than I have in the past, for now.

I think the idea has some merit and maybe something the site admins are looking into but don't know for sure. Was good to bring it up as I hadn't heard about that feature before.

I agree with Bonnie mostly though. For certain technical topics I think it could work well. For others where people are upset about something or it's an issue with polar opposite viewpoints that can clash with the OPs views it might be more trouble than it's worth.

 

[cpa]

(A) Listing of site moderators: Show Groups - Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum

(B) How to report a post (not that this one should be reported ):

View attachment 89103

Thank you, Bonnie. That location (for me anyway) was not self-evident. And I told you that I do not understand all these signs and symbols, so thank you for bringing it to my attention. I highly doubt that in any of your 11,800+ posts that anyone would consider what you type to be reportable. Disagreeable, occasionally,:biggrin: (!), but always decent.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is a thought to try to compromise: Give the original creator of the thread the ability to remove the left hand part of the thread that reveals the name and other information for the person who posted something felt objectionable, but retain the comment. That way, the post is kept but the writer is anonymous to everyone but the thread maker and the person who posted it.

Of course, timing is everything in this matter, so a lengthy delay between posting and removal of the poster's identity might not accomplish much, since the kitty will already have been out of the burlap for several hours.

 

[bxr140]

Bad Idea.

From the forums I've been a part of on the internets (which are almost exclusively vehicle related, if that matters), the less moderation, the better the forum. TMC is already thoroughly moderated...sometimes comically so...but that will change as more people join.