Forum moderation

[Andy Clough]

Hi folks

Just a quick post to let you know that from today we're switching to a policy of external moderation on the Forums. I've appointed five external mods, independent of Haymarket, who will report into me, and two 'super mods', Clare Newsome and John Duncan.

We're going to trial the new system for a month and see how it goes. I've also amended the House Rules, which you can read here. The main changes are that we will allow linking to other sites, including competitors, from now on. However, as before, trade members – retailers, manufacturers and their staff – must not use the site to solicit business of any kind, so can't link to their own websites, sales offers, promotions and so on.

I've also added a new clause, No.14:

"We will not tolerate abusive criticism of What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision, whathifi.com, its publisher and staff. We will also remove any links to other sites abusing What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision, whathifi.com, its publisher and staff."

While we accept that general criticism of us is part of a Forum such as this, and will tolerate it within reason, the key word here is abusive. We provide the Forum free of charge to all our users, and this involves us putting in many, many hours of our own time to make this a fun, lively and informative place to be. We want that to continue. But we will not put up with users being unnecessarily rude or aggressive to us.

If you feel a post or profile has been unfairly altered or removed, please use the Contact Us page to register your views and we will respond to that privately.

We've built up a loyal following over the past few years, and the Forums provide a great place to chat about all things hi-fi and AV (plus a few other topics!), so let's try and keep it that way. And please remember, while we try to help out as much as we can, the pressures of producing the rest of the site mean those of us who work on it can't always be online 100% of the time.

Andy

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Who are the external moderators?

 

[Andy Clough]

They'll remain anonymous.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Anonymous as in they are members on the site, or they'll remain 'invisible'?

 

[Lee H]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Do you need a fish tail coat to be a mod?

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Hmm - secret police, huh? Not comfortable with that concept at all.

 

[Anonymous]

Left trouser leg rolled up, funny hand shake standing on one leg. Nudge, nudge.

 

[John Duncan]

Hmm - secret police, huh? Not comfortable with that concept at all.

I don't see the problem with it; it's to protect them rather than because of any secret squirrel agenda, that's all. And since the attacks on mods here have, in some cases, been...extreme...I think it's a reasonable thing to do for their sakes.

It's a trial though after all, if it turns out that it would might be better for them to be public, could take a look at it I guess.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Sorry, that's why you have secret police and informers.

 

[plastic penguin]

I don't see this as a problem. After all, all MODS have been anonymous. I (we) only ever know the names and an avatar. Business as usual IMO.

BTW, where's Andrew these days? Seen (or read is more accurate) very little from him recently.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

But now we don't know the names nor see the avatar do we PP? Do you not understand the implications of that?

 

[John Duncan]

But now we don't know the names nor see the avatar do we PP? Do you not understand the implications of that?

That cable threads might be locked by somebody and you won't know who it was?!?!?!?

 

[Anonymous]

:beer:

Sounds (more) reasonable...

 

[Clare Newsome]

Absolutely.

And anyway, moderation is already predominantly anonymous - hence use of comments like [edited by mods]

There is nothing sinister in this; in fact it's in the interest of making the site more open - hence Andy's comments re other changes such as greater ability to link outside the site.

 

[chebby]

Sorry, that's why you have secret police and informers.

They are hardly going to drag you from your bed in the early hours and send you to the Gulags without trial!

A lot of moderator comments have been anonymous for some time as far as I can tell.

Like this one from May last year for instance...

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/accessories/topic-removed

...if it wasn't an issue then, why is moderator anonymity an issue now?

 

[Anonymous]

Absolutely.

And anyway, moderation is already predominantly anonymous - hence use of comments like [edited by mods]

There is nothing sinister in this; in fact it's in the interest of making the site more open - hence Andy's comments re other changes such as greater ability to link outside the site.

Is this a murdoch publication ?

 

[John Duncan]

Sorry, that's why you have secret police and informers.

(holds head in hands)

It's an internet forum. The mods jobs are to try (to the best of their ability) to apply the House Rules, not to subvert the fabric of your constitutional rights. You can even - gasp - discuss moderation now; if you think something has been handled badly, tell us. We're only human, after all*.

 

[John Duncan]

Absolutely.

And anyway, moderation is already predominantly anonymous - hence use of comments like [edited by mods]

There is nothing sinister in this; in fact it's in the interest of making the site more open - hence Andy's comments re other changes such as greater ability to link outside the site.

Is this a murdoch publication ?

No, it's *always* been open on Sundays.

 

[scene]

No, it's *always* been open on Sundays.

:rofl:

And I'm sure that no hac[Deleted by My Lawyers - for my own protection...]

 

[nads]

some people need to get off their high horses.

the Only good thing about having visable Mods is you know who to contact. But i suppose there will be a common contact mail addy. and common means of them seeing the reported issues. and if they have any sense there will be their area of the forum where they can gosip about us.

sounds right for any forum.

But as we are not allowed to disscus Moderation I had better shut up.

 

[Andy Clough]

A couple of comments: this is a trial, as I said earlier, so we'll assess how it goes over the next month. The moderators will only be implementing the House Rules, which are available for all to see here.The purpose of anonymity is to protect the moderators. Some of them have suffered unacceptable abuse in the past, which I will not tolerate.

Myself, Clare Newsome and John Duncan will continue to be visible on the site as 'super mods', so you can always talk to us.

And if you have an issue with the way something has been moderated, you can use the Contact Us page to tell us and we'll come back to you. And yes Nads, you can now discuss moderation.

 

[Xanderzdad]

I think the trial sounds ideal.

It will keep this forum open and fair - more than can be said of many other forums!

It appears to give more freedom whilst still protecting everybody.

 

[Anonymous]

Absolutely.

And anyway, moderation is already predominantly anonymous - hence use of comments like [edited by mods]

There is nothing sinister in this; in fact it's in the interest of making the site more open - hence Andy's comments re other changes such as greater ability to link outside the site.

Is this a murdoch publication ?

No, it's *always* been open on Sundays.

Now there will be seven SUN DAYS .

 

[Andy Clough]

That's certainly our intention Xanderzdad

 

[AlmaataKZ]

So, what is the change?

1) links to external (even competing) sites now allowed - I think this is very good and is a sign of good health and strength

2) mods are anonymous - I am OK with that, although generally it is nice to have a face behind a name, but I understand the protection need

3) mods are external - that bit is unclear. what does it mean?