• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Moderation

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
See my next post.

Yeah, I'm with Netserk. Doesn't seem to be anything in that long post by SHaines about why simply stating the duration of the ban would be disallowed. Even just differentiating between a non-permanent and a permanent ban.
Though, if I'm not mistaken a username having a line through means the account has been locked. However, that counts both for accounts that have been permabanned, and accounts that has been locked by the user.

BTW, how come none of the actual non-retired mods aren't active in this thread?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cookster15
Yeah, I'm with Netserk. Doesn't seem to be anything in that long post by SHaines about why simply stating the duration of the ban would be disallowed. Even just differentiating between a non-permanent and a permanent ban.
Though, if I'm not mistaken a username having a line through means the account has been locked. However, that counts both for accounts that have been permabanned, and accounts that has been locked by the user.

BTW, how come none of the actual non-retired mods aren't active in this thread?
Addendum: I've also removed the thread where Moderators posted when someone was given a time out or ban. This information shouldn't be shared publicly, so it's now gone. When we take action against a user, we should be contacting that user directly with the reason for the action taken, so sharing it in the open is not a benefit.
 
Addendum: I've also removed the thread where Moderators posted when someone was given a time out or ban. This information shouldn't be shared publicly, so it's now gone. When we take action against a user, we should be contacting that user directly with the reason for the action taken, so sharing it in the open is not a benefit.

Yes... and that thread specifically explained why bans were given. Fine if that's disallowed, it could cause some unwanted speculation. What we're asking for is simple information about whether a ban is temporary or permanent.
Or, as Netserk pointed out, if the mods don't want people wondering how long a person is banned for, then maybe they shouldn't have a big yellow BANNED marker under the "offending" user's avatar...

But maybe a Mod - not you KB - could explain how exactly "This user is banned" is information, but "This user is banned for [time]" is discussion.
 
The right to privacy is pretty well established in European law and personally I think the old way in which people piled in to discuss bans - and where bans were effectively recorded forever - was wong.

The current system works, it tells you if someone is currently banned or not. It may not serve those who want to bang on and on and on about moderation decisions but that's no loss for the rest of us.
 
The current system works, it tells you if someone is currently banned or not. It may not serve those who want to bang on and on and on about moderation decisions but that's no loss for the rest of us.

It's kinda nice to know if we can expect well-respected members of the community - and I think the bans that cause the most outrage are those of well-respected members - is ever going to return...

Showing the current status of a user is not a permanent record of the fact that someone was once banned. It's quite simple, really.

But having that yellow marker include the duration of the ban is... somehow? I'm confused.

Let me remind you what started this whole discussion:

I think it would be good if there was different word under those who have been banned permanently compared to those who have got temporary ban.
 
  • Like
Reactions: search
Yes... and that thread specifically explained why bans were given. Fine if that's disallowed, it could cause some unwanted speculation. What we're asking for is simple information about whether a ban is temporary or permanent.
Or, as Netserk pointed out, if the mods don't want people wondering how long a person is banned for, then maybe they shouldn't have a big yellow BANNED marker under the "offending" user's avatar...

But maybe a Mod - not you KB - could explain how exactly "This user is banned" is information, but "This user is banned for [time]" is discussion.
The mods can’t, or shouldn’t, because as that post from the new admin says, that information shouldn’t be shared publicly. Discussing that would be discussing modera…

I’m not sure why this is so difficult. We had that thread, we got new admin, they told us we weren’t allowed to discuss moderation, I asked them about that thread specifically, they said we can’t do that either.
 
The right to privacy is pretty well established in European law and personally I think the old way in which people piled in to discuss bans - and where bans were effectively recorded forever - was wong.

The current system works, it tells you if someone is currently banned or not. It may not serve those who want to bang on and on and on about moderation decisions but that's no loss for the rest of us.
I’m not even sure it was that deep. On most forums whatever a mod says goes, I think that’s the idea here. Sure, you can email the admi, but honestly think it was just about bringing it in line with other Future forums.
 
The mods can’t, or shouldn’t, because as that post from the new admin says, that information shouldn’t be shared publicly. Discussing that would be discussing modera…

Why. Can't. The. Information. Under. A. User's. Avatar. Stating. That. Said. User. Is. Banned. Also. Give. The. Information. About. How. Long. The. Ban. Is. For?

That's not discussion, that's information! Quick English lesson:

Discussion:
Noun: "the action or process of talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas."

Information:
Noun: "facts provided or learned about something or someone."

See the difference?

Even if it's simply "The forum setup does not support that sort of detailed information", that would still be an answer. Instead, what you are doing is basically:

"They-can't-give-information-because-we-can't-discuss-it-and-we-should-all-agree-with-the-Mods-because-they-are-the-all-powerfull-mods."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bubba and tobydawq
Why. Can't. The. Information. Under. A. User's. Avatar. Stating. That. Said. User. Is. Banned. Also. Give. The. Information. About. How. Long. The. Ban. Is. For?

That's not discussion, that's information! Quick English lesson:

Discussion:
Noun: "the action or process of talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas."

Information:
Noun: "facts provided or learned about something or someone."

See the difference?

Even if it's simply "The forum setup does not support that sort of detailed information", that would still be an answer. Instead, what you are doing is basically:

"They-can't-give-information-because-we-can't-discuss-it-and-we-should-all-agree-with-the-Mods-because-they-are-the-all-powerfull-mods."
That. Question. Can’t. Be. Answered. By. The. Mods. Because. They. Don’t. Write. The. Forum. Code.

That thread came about so people didn’t have to ask the questions, it was in place of discussion. You can argue semantics all you want but giving information because you know a question is going to be asked is a form of discussion. I gave you a link to an admin saying it was being deleted and that this information shouldn’t be shared publicly. You’re now asking why it isn’t shared publicly…

I responded to someone to give context as to why those threads were gone. When asked why I provided the answers. When queried further by Netserk I provided the quote from the admin. I’m not discussing what could be done, I don’t know why you’re trying to drag me into that conversation. Your inserted yourself into this discussion so you need to follow it, if you have a question for someone else maybe don’t quote tweet the wrong person.



and yes, the last part is the point. That’s how the majority of internet forums run and I’m pretty sure that’s what is meant to happen here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Okay, so it's a code thing... why didn't you just say so?

This whole discussion started because of @Finn84 's very reasonable discussion.

But, yeah... this place needs more mods!
I didn’t respond to Finn84, I responded specifically to someone else. That’s how forums work.

I didn’t say that because it’s not really about it, but I was trying to answer everything I thought you were asking and I assumed one would be about logistics.

the reason it isn’t displayed is in that thread, the one you said didn’t have the answer so I cropped the paragraph that did. Here you go:

Addendum:
I've also removed the thread where Moderators posted when someone was given a time out or ban. This information shouldn't be shared publicly, so it's now gone. When we take action against a user, we should be contacting that user directly with the reason for the action taken, so sharing it in the open is not a benefit.

that bit in bold right there where the admin says that information shouldn’t be shared publicly. That’s why it isn’t shared publicly. The explanation follows. If you’d want that to change you need to speak to the admin.
 
This discussion has become so absurd.
First of all, KingBoonen, I suppose you know that RedheadDane is on the spectrum. I have never experienced her getting into a fight for fighting's sake, but it's hard for her to let things go, so if the issue is clear to you just stop replying.

Then, I think it's ridiculous to come up with the laws of privacy regarding a temporary ban from a forum - especially since everybody can see someone was banned in comments about this ban afterwards still, and the permanent bans, which might be more important in someone's CV or whatever, are visible for all time with that yellow sign.

Once in a lifetime I have to totally agree with Netserk. And I think this has been said by many people over time now: Members would appreciate a simple notification if a ban is permanent or not or in general how long it will take. Whether done manually in an information thread or by an adequate banner "banned"/"banned for 2 days"/banned for 2 weeks" or "banned until..."
People are always worried that members they got used to are banned forever and it causes distress in the forum, much more so then when there would be a simple notification.

It's clear that this is not a moderation issue but one from the administrative side, but definitely something the administration of the forum should think about. Whether people then discuss the possible reason for a ban anywhere in the forum is independent from the notification. A thread where such infos are given (in case it's too much work to change the code for the banners) can be locked so as not to incite discussion.

Problem is that this forum is lead by people for whom this forum is just one in a line - they don't know the particular style or people here. They take rules which seem logical from an abstract point of view and are easiest to handle from above.
 
On most forums whatever a mod says goes, I think that’s the idea here.
Rules are always there to be broken - it's the basic difference between rules and norms and it's why people get banned in the first place - but in any society a fundamental rule is that citizens have to recognise the authority of the officials. Most of us accept that. We get banned, we take it on the chin and maybe we make it a learning experience and maybe we don't, but we move on. Someone else gets banned, that's their problem and we've no need to turn into into another 94-page thread. That's most of us. A minority, however, do seem to love banging on and on and on about why this decision was made and why that decision was made and refusing to listen when they actually get an explanation.
 
Honestly, what irks me the most is the way the new administrators just took over a forum that had a specific culture - and the "information is freely given" bit was very much part of the culture - and just expected it to change into the way they wanted it to be.
So what if 99/100 online forums are of the "Mods are dictators" variety? Why can't ours be different?
 
Honestly, what irks me the most is the way the new administrators just took over a forum that had a specific culture - and the "information is freely given" bit was very much part of the culture - and just expected it to change into the way they wanted it to be.
It wasn't really new moderators, it was new forum software under new(ish - it's always hard to distinguish with Future and Immediate, they play musical chairs with the site) owners.

Here's an idea: those most concerned with this should club together and buy the site themselves. That way they get to make the decisions and not just bang on and on and on about them.
 
This discussion has become so absurd.
First of all, KingBoonen, I suppose you know that RedheadDane is on the spectrum. I have never experienced her getting into a fight for fighting's sake, but it's hard for her to let things go, so if the issue is clear to you just stop replying.

I don't know why you would expect me to know this, I know very little even about the posters I interact with on a regular basis and RedheadDane isn't one of them. If you're reading tone into posts that's on you, I'm trying to provide information to questions specifically asked of me so I'll reply as I see fit.

Then, I think it's ridiculous to come up with the laws of privacy regarding a temporary ban from a forum - especially since everybody can see someone was banned in comments about this ban afterwards still, and the permanent bans, which might be more important in someone's CV or whatever, are visible for all time with that yellow sign.

Once in a lifetime I have to totally agree with Netserk. And I think this has been said by many people over time now: Members would appreciate a simple notification if a ban is permanent or not or in general how long it will take. Whether done manually in an information thread or by an adequate banner "banned"/"banned for 2 days"/banned for 2 weeks" or "banned until..."
People are always worried that members they got used to are banned forever and it causes distress in the forum, much more so then when there would be a simple notification.

It's clear that this is not a moderation issue but one from the administrative side, but definitely something the administration of the forum should think about. Whether people then discuss the possible reason for a ban anywhere in the forum is independent from the notification. A thread where such infos are given (in case it's too much work to change the code for the banners) can be locked so as not to incite discussion.
You're going to make me quote it again..?

Addendum:
I've also removed the thread where Moderators posted when someone was given a time out or ban. This information shouldn't be shared publicly, so it's now gone. When we take action against a user, we should be contacting that user directly with the reason for the action taken, so sharing it in the open is not a benefit.

What you are asking for is, literally, what the admins said can't happen and they deleted. Literally. I don't see the harm in asking, I'll even tag @SHaines here so they hopefully see it, but all I was doing was pointing out why this happened.


Problem is that this forum is lead by people for whom this forum is just one in a line - they don't know the particular style or people here. They take rules which seem logical from an abstract point of view and are easiest to handle from above.

Well, yes, obviously. As anyone who has ever managed multiple sites will tell you, you need to have consistent HR policies or you're going to have a bad time, and when you have multiple managers looking after the same sites it's even more important.
 
Honestly, what irks me the most is the way the new administrators just took over a forum that had a specific culture - and the "information is freely given" bit was very much part of the culture - and just expected it to change into the way they wanted it to be.
So what if 99/100 online forums are of the "Mods are dictators" variety? Why can't ours be different?
You can see my reply to BR2, but I would say it's because if you have multiple people managing multiple sites they are not familiar with you need to have consistent policies so they know what should be happening and they can be more easily enforced by the person who has to deal with the issues.
 
Rules are always there to be broken - it's the basic difference between rules and norms and it's why people get banned in the first place - but in any society a fundamental rule is that citizens have to recognise the authority of the officials. Most of us accept that. We get banned, we take it on the chin and maybe we make it a learning experience and maybe we don't, but we move on. Someone else gets banned, that's their problem and we've no need to turn into into another 94-page thread. That's most of us. A minority, however, do seem to love banging on and on and on about why this decision was made and why that decision was made and refusing to listen when they actually get an explanation.
Pretty much. I would also note that permanent bans were extremely rare when I was a mod. I can think of 1 and I can't even remember who it was or what was said but it was so offensive it was obvious they were gone for good.
 
It wasn't really new moderators, it was new forum software under new(ish - it's always hard to distinguish with Future and Immediate, they play musical chairs with the site) owners.

I'm not talking about the moderators, who are in fact old-time members from before The Great Migration. I'm talking about the new administrators.

You can see my reply to BR2, but I would say it's because if you have multiple people managing multiple sites they are not familiar with you need to have consistent policies so they know what should be happening and they can be more easily enforced by the person who has to deal with the issues.

And here I was, thinking the purpose of forum-specific mods was to make sure forum-specific rules were being followed.

But anyway, thanks to @Red Rick for actually providing some information.
 

TRENDING THREADS