What Hifi sort your website out honestly

[steve_1979]

So, which regulars would you suggest should be moderators?

Maxflinn. *diablo*

Nah. Ashley. *help*

*ROFL*

Or even better... altrusiclemon (or whatever his name was).

 

[Deleted member 2457]

So, which regulars would you suggest should be moderators?

Maxflinn. *diablo*

Nah. Ashley. *help*

*ROFL*

Or even better... altrusiclemon (or whatever his name was).

Lol.

 

[moosey]

The pages take an age to settle on my nexu7; OK on laptop but makes it impossible to accurately hit links on tablet. Forum reading was my late night bed treat but now nightmare.

I would also like to be able to clic on Gels hot deals as copy and pasting impossible on tablet.

 

[Vladimir]

Nice theory but spammers - unlike a lot of actual forum members - have absolutely no problems with the filter. (Including posting live URL links etc.)

Only live human spammer can post through these handicaps activated by the WHF admins. Live spammers are very rare. You want the bots gone because they are the restless spam carpet bombers.

I believe at this point the immune system of the forum is causing the body to die (autoimmune disease). We need steroids.

Which people I would pick? Hmmm. Definitely not good content makers like Cno, PP, chebby etc. I'd recommend people who are present but not too involved in active dialogs. Profile would include moral, stoic and fair in principle but people who don't hold back to give a good spank to a misbehaving adult brat. Definitely people who don't tire from repetitiveness too easily.

I'd like people who follow the forumula of benevolent modding: presence > reasoning > warning > penalization, and in riot threads they just lock them up instead of involving themselves in public demonstration of power over selected individuals as a method of fear control. They allow rant and arguing threads (example cable threads) to go on just long enough as everyone had their say (chance to vent) and entertainment and closing them just in time when canibalism begins.

A good mod should also be able to recognize that a good forum member can turn bad just from spending too much time on the forum and make him take a small break instead of just cutting his head off on a public display. It's not banning but forced paid vacation. I've also seen great mods becoming pr**ks and antimods, instigating conflict instead of extinguishing. This happens simply out of exaustion and spending too much time on the forum. More mods = better modding IMO.

I'm not here long enough to know all the members but from my personal impression I would appreciate matthewpiano, lindsayt, professorhat. But the trick is we don't choose our militia, WHF generals do, which I doubt they will.

 

[chebby]

If they remove the spam filter they need more hands on moderation (more mods, 24/7 coverage). Why not 2-3 volunteer mods from the regulars? WHF staff will be admins and the forum militia will be mods. When WHF gets their regular things in order they can decide to keep or disassemble the militia. This is how every forum does it.

So, which regulars would you suggest should be moderators?

Chebby, Plastic Penguin, Cno and BB.

Someone who can use quotes properly and not make it look like lindsayt suggested me as a moderator!

Gel, you're suspended pending a re-education session in how not to mess up nested quotes

(And PP and I would ban each other the very instant we get our mod status so that wouldn't work.)

 

[bigboss]

Aren't there anonymous mods already who are regular forum members?

 

[Deleted member 2457]

If they remove the spam filter they need more hands on moderation (more mods, 24/7 coverage). Why not 2-3 volunteer mods from the regulars? WHF staff will be admins and the forum militia will be mods. When WHF gets their regular things in order they can decide to keep or disassemble the militia. This is how every forum does it.

So, which regulars would you suggest should be moderators?

Chebby, Plastic Penguin, Cno and BB.

Someone who can use quotes properly and not make it look like lindsayt suggested me as a moderator!

Gel, you're suspended pending a re-education session in how not to mess up nested quotes

(And PP and I would ban each other the very instant we get our mod status so that wouldn't work.)

Lol. *biggrin*

 

[plastic penguin]

Aren't there anonymous mods already who are regular forum members?

(Vincent Price voice) "Behind you".

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Aren't there anonymous mods already who are regular forum members?

(Vincent Price voice) "Behind you".

Boo!

 

[Joe Cox]

There's something amiss with WHFI or Haymarket, noticeable by a lack of involvement from Andy, Ketan, Simon and Joe. That's telling in itself.

Initially I put this down to the awards, but since then... nothing.

Nothing amiss old boy! As I said in another thread last week, we've made changes and pushed through fixes, especially on the forums, but it's just not possible to do everything. We're logging the bugs and feedback - from the whole site, not just here - and working through things as quickly as we can.

 

[andyjm]

Moderation is censorship, and censorship is never a good idea.

I disagree with a good portion of the posts on this website, but I would defend the right of the poster to post them.

Trolls are easily fixed. If you don't feed the trolls, they go away.

 

[lindsayt]

I totally disagree andyjm.

I think every well run forum should have clear rules that are strictly enforced.

For example: no spam.

So if you get someone advertising building materials in Poland in the hi-fi section of this forum their posts should be deleted. That's censorship. Sensible censorship.

And then what if you get manufacturers, or friends or relatives of manufacturers coming on here and recommending products from said manufacturer? Especially if they don't declare their connection to the manufacturer? Especially if their recommendations go beyond the actual abilities of the products they're recommending? That's spam of a perniciuos nature that I think should be censored. Trouble is, it can be difficult to identify.

And what if you have posters that too often come out with personally insulting / rude / ad hominem remarks? When it's done with excessive frequency I think it becomes verbal internet bullying. The sort of bullying that wouldn't be tolerated in the workplace and shouldn't be tolerated on an internet hi-fi forum.

In the context of a hi-fi forum, if you don't censor the insulting trolls or the product spamming trolls they get stronger because they keep getting away with. That applies, even if you don't feed them.

 

[andyjm]

I totally disagree andyjm.

I think every well run forum should have clear rules that are strictly enforced.

For example: no spam.

So if you get someone advertising building materials in Poland in the hi-fi section of this forum their posts should be deleted. That's censorship. Sensible censorship.

And then what if you get manufacturers, or friends or relatives of manufacturers coming on here and recommending products from said manufacturer? Especially if they don't declare their connection to the manufacturer? Especially if their recommendations go beyond the actual abilities of the products they're recommending? That's spam of a perniciuos nature that I think should be censored. Trouble is, it can be difficult to identify.

And what if you have posters that too often come out with personally insulting / rude / ad hominem remarks? When it's done with excessive frequency I think it becomes verbal internet bullying. The sort of bullying that wouldn't be tolerated in the workplace and shouldn't be tolerated on an internet hi-fi forum.

In the context of a hi-fi forum, if you don't censor the insulting trolls or the product spamming trolls they get stronger because they keep getting away with. That applies, even if you don't feed them.

I dont disagree with your comments about spam. I think you are using 'moderation' in a wider context than I was.

 

[Covenanter]

I now get "Language English" at the top of a lot of posts. The "Links" box doesn't work. It opens but then it freezes and only the "back" button gets me out of it.

Chris

 

[Andy Clough]

There's something amiss with WHFI or Haymarket, noticeable by a lack of involvement from Andy, Ketan, Simon and Joe. That's telling in itself.

Initially I put this down to the awards, but since then... nothing.

My absence is easily explained: I've been on holiday for the last fortnight since the Awards. And we already have a team of external mods who monitor the site and report back to me and Joe.

As for the spam filter, we are constantly tweaking the settings but it's a balancing act between making it too draconian (which blocks legitimate posts) and too lenient. We'll keep adjusting as necessary.

 

[matt49]

Moderation is censorship, and censorship is never a good idea.

I disagree with a good portion of the posts on this website, but I would defend the right of the poster to post them.

Trolls are easily fixed. If you don't feed the trolls, they go away.

Some people have very strange ideas when it comes to censorship.

In reality all sensible people agree that some forms of censorship are essential -- or would you like young children to be exposed to hardcore pornography on daytime TV? and should people be allowed routinely to publish material intended to incite racial hatred? Really? Sometimes censorship is a very good idea indeed.

People also seem to think that moderation of a commercially run forum equates to censorship. It doesn't. A commercially run forum has no obligation to preserve free speech. If I manufactured loudspeakers and ran a forum to promote my speakers, I'd be perfectly within my rights to block posts recommending other brands of speakers. That wouldn't be censorship; it'd be rational commercial practice.