Moderation and a re-look at our Community Guidelines

[Matt]

Hi Hubbers,

 

I'm sure most of you are aware of the recent spats on The Hub and a general increase in the level of aggression and incidents of personal attacks.

 

Without going into the gory details of what went down, there was an incident between two members, one of which has had their account suspended and the other come off with a warning.

 

While neither member was free of guilt, the suspended member had already received a number of prior warnings for similar issues, hence the decision was taken by the moderation team (including myself) to suspend the member.

 

I am aware that the neutrality of some moderators has been called into question over this issue in particular and in the past. In this instance, the moderation decision and actions taken against the two members were agreed by a number of the team members. In most cases we will discuss issues before action is taken to ensure a fair and objective action is taken.

 

We do all have our own styles, opinions and beliefs which will play a role in how each of us approach moderation.

The idea of having a team is to reach collectively fair and objective decisions.

 

We have acknowledged among ourselves that we need to be firmer (and more consistent). Over time the lines of acceptability have admittedly become somewhat blurry. If we've allowed Soandso to say "xyz" and it was okay because of the context or humour, do we now allow Another to also say "xyz" in a different context. Its never cut and dry and can become very difficult.

 

Where to now?

In light of the recent issues and general feeling and tone of many a discussion of late we will be taking a firmer stance going forward.

 

In order to support this we have drafted a more comprehensive and hopefully clearer set of community guidelines for all to read and apply in your interactions on The Hub.

 

Along with the updated guidelines, we are instituting at 3 strike policy:

• 1st offence: Warning
  
• 2nd offence: 2 day suspension
  
• 3rd offence (following suspension): Permanent ban
  

We require support from all members of the community in reporting content which you feel goes against the guidelines set out. All reported content will be reviewed by the moderation team, and if appropriate exist we will take action.

 

Moderation of content relies on the moderation team being aware of instances where a Hubber may have contravened the rules. If you think someone has stepped over the line - hit the report button. If nothing was reported, and the statement/post went through without sanction - then that Hubber might have contravened the rules, but for whatever reason - it slipped through and was not picked up on.

 

It does not mean that the Moderator team were biased, or ignored reports - it was either simply not seen, or it was unreported, or it was reported, and consensus was reached that the particular statement/post - in that particular context - was not worthy of action.

 

If you think someone has stepped over the line - hit the report button.

 

 

Community standards and participation guidelines

 

The Hub provides a growing number of opportunities for members to interact, ask questions, discuss content we publish, or debate issues more generally. This document covers all aspects of community interaction and moderation on The Hub, including topics and replies, comments on classified postings, articles, photos and media and any form of correspondence / interaction made supported by our platform.

 

There are a few simple guidelines which we expect all users to abide by.

1. We welcome debate and dissent, but personal attacks (on members or any individual), persistent trolling and mindless abuse will not be tolerated. The key to positioning and maintaining The Hub as an inviting space is to focus on intelligent and mature discussion of topics.
   
2. We will not tolerate posting the contents of any private conversations (Private Message, email or otherwise) or the posting the private information of any individual. Unless the information is already publicly available elsewhere it should not be posted on The Hub. We reserve the right to remove such postings.
   
3. We will not tolerate racism, sexism, homophobia or other forms of hate-speech, or contributions that could be interpreted as such. We recognise the difference between criticising a particular government, organisation, community or belief and attacking people on the basis of their race, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age.
   
4. We will not tolerate foul language and swearing. We've been very lenient with this in the past, but will no longer tolerate any swearing or otherwise foul language. Any attempts to such language in a veiled / obscure manner to avoid bad-word filters or moderation will result in a warning / suspension.
   
5. We will not tolerate pornographic or otherwise objectionable material. Follow this simple guideline: if it's not safe to view in an open office environment then it most likely shouldn't be posted here. We reserve the right to remove any content deemed to be objectionable.
   
6. We will remove any content that may put The Hub in legal jeopardy, such as potentially libellous or defamatory postings, material posted in potential breach of copyright or the encouragement of participation in any illegal activity.
   
7. Respect other people's views and beliefs and consider your impact on others when making your contribution. We understand that people often feel strongly about issues debated on the site, but we will consider removing any content that others might find extremely offensive or threatening.
   
8. We reserve the right to redirect or curtail conversations which descend into flame-wars based on ingrained partisanship or generalisations. We don't want to stop people discussing topics they are enthusiastic about, but we do ask users to find ways of sharing their views that do not feel divisive, threatening or toxic to others.
   
9. We will remove any posts that are obviously commercial or otherwise spam-like. Our aim is that this site should provide a space for people to interact with our content and each other, and we actively discourage commercial entities passing themselves off as individuals, in order to post advertising material or links.
   
10. Keep it relevant. We know that some conversations can be wide-ranging, but if you post something which is unrelated to the original topic ("off-topic") then it may be removed, in order to keep the thread on track. This also applies to queries or comments about moderation, which should not be posted as comments.
    
11. Be aware that you may be misunderstood, so try to be clear about what you are saying, and expect that people may understand your contribution differently than you intended. Remember that text isn't always a great medium for conversation: tone of voice (sarcasm, humour and so on) doesn't always come across when using words on a screen.
    
12. The platform is ours, but the conversation belongs to everybody. We want this to be a welcoming space for intelligent discussion, and we expect participants to help us achieve this by notifying us of potential problems and helping each other to keep conversations inviting and appropriate. If you spot something problematic in community interaction areas, please report it. When we all take responsibility for maintaining an appropriate and constructive environment, the debate itself is improved and everyone benefits.
    

 

In short:

• If you act with maturity and consideration for other users, you should have no problems.
  
• Don't be unpleasant. Demonstrate and share the intelligence, wisdom and humour we know you possess.
  
• Take some responsibility for the quality of the conversations in which you're participating. Help make this an intelligent place for discussion and it will be.
  

[johannrissik]

+1

['Dale]

 

Good.

[King_Crispy]

"Along with the updated guidelines, we are instituting at 3 strike policy:

• 1st offence: Warning
  
• 2nd offence: 2 day suspension
  
• 3rd offence (following suspension): Permanent ban"
  

I think this is too open ended.

I believe this should have a timeline attached. You will find that someone like Oom says something stoooopid which riles some hubbers and they react (or he reports them) and they are warned, suspended and banned in a space of 3 days over 1 topic which they might be very passionate about. A method employed by other cycling forums in the UK & US (who actually censor content) as well as our very own Metro Police, will allow misdemeanors to fall away after a pre-defined period.

On the subject of keeping the posts from straying "off topic", who cares? If the direction suddenly veers off-course then it has been the decision of the posters in the interests of "maintaining an appropriate and constructive environment", then it has been allowed to proceed by consenting people who contribute to the current direction of the thread. For a moderator to delete posts because he thinks it is off topic is wrong. Ask the OP if the new direction is ok or just kill the thread. For another individual to have a controlling influence over a topic which is not his own is an abuse of power and technically speaking an infringement of one's constitutional rights.

[Capricorn]

"Along with the updated guidelines, we are instituting at 3 strike policy:

• 1st offence: Warning
  
• 2nd offence: 2 day suspension
  
• 3rd offence (following suspension): Permanent ban"
  

I think this is too open ended.

I believe this should have a timeline attached.

 

there are two timelines: One is the period between teh first warning and the second warning, and the other is the one between the 2nd warning and you getting the boot? How is that open ended? Surely you meant too strict?

 

As for going off topic: you are over generalising. the derailing of threads being mentioned here are those instances that end up in personal confrontations or inappropiate content relative to the rules of this forum. The derailments you mention happen all the time. So honestly, in those instances, how many times have mods intervened then? By my count, near zilch, aka, not worth complaining about cos it's a non-issue. Secondly wrt derailments, more often than not, some forum members request a topic split, or the mods pose the question, but wait for a response from the thread. Some have gone ahead using their judgement, and split the content. But again, a non-issue.

 

As for who cares, some OPs do care. It comes down to simple showing of respect.

 

As for constitutional rights, man, why did u have to bring in that when in reality, there is zero basis for it? Is thehub enshrined in the constitution? Dnt like the forum, find another. Your freedom of choice is enshrined in the constitution. Go exercise it.

 

I used to be a mod on another NCR forum. Back then, it was the mods 'going with the flow' while simultaneously violating the board rules that caused the inconsistencies. Same crap, different forum.

Edited March 31, 2012 by Capricorn

[Grebel]

There are rules and regulations for a reason and everybody should abide by them regardless of the outcome of this thread.

 

The issue that needs to be addressed IMO is are all of these "new" rules and regulations going to create an environment that is too sterile? There are other forums that run a very tight ship and a lot of hub members have gone across to "the other forum" only to return here because of the lack of substance (they seem to sit aroung drinking tea and throwing teaspoons occasionally whereas here we drink beer and throw punches) and I am not suggesting for one second that thehubsa members are hooligans. On the contrary, I would like to think of us as mature enough NOT to have to resort to running to the prefects. It is my understanding that thehubsa is what it is because of the passion and exhuberence if you like. It would be a shame to lose that due to a few individuals, and judging by the response they seem to be in the minority, taking offence to a tattooed lady (Not for the first time mind you) being posted in a thread that is known for it's risque and sometimes borderline content.

 

It might be time to take stock and decide if you prefer tea to beer...

['Dale]

I'm cool with beer and spirits and cigar smoke.

 

Just can't stand brawls and drunken dudes spitting in me face when I am out for a lekka chat.

[Clinton1]

I agree on two points raised above.

 

1. A time period for the warnings. I could get riled and say something someone finds offensive. I get warned for this and then am stuck with this warning for the rest of time. I could be a good boy for months and then another person riles me and I slip up again. All of a sudden I am in ban territory and will probably limit my interactions for fear of being banned. And if we were to all be honest, it is interacting with others that makes forums alluring.

 

2. Linked to point 1 is the argument that discussions could become too sterile. We are all adults and unless the interaction becomes a total name calling and insulting match the two individuals should be able to handle it themselves. We need to ensure warnings aren't handed out too quickly.

 

In saying this I am aware of some folk who seem to take pleasure in carrying disagreements in one thread through to any subsequent thread you post in. This is a practice that really irks me. If I have a disagreement with you then so be it but get rid of that chip on the shoulder, move on and stop trying to bait me.

[Capricorn]

1. good perspective there clint. But i have to say, the mods in general are pretty lenient. They let lots 'slide whether we realize it or not. So when the first warning comes, i'll bet it wont be your first offence. But a time limit would be practical for all.

 

2. Again, they let lots slide. Check any of the 'heavy' threads on this forum. There is plenty interaction without the mods sterilising them at every opportunity. Lets be realistic and cut them some slack. It's not as black and white as you are making it out to be. They dont shoot from the hip every single time, even when they are well within their rights to do so. But when it's time to clean house, it's time to do it properly.

 

We should just let the mods and Admin do their thing. Things will calm down for a bit, people will jump to all sorts of outrageously polarised opinions in the interim, but really, we'll be back to our old selves in no time. Hopefully a bit more respectful of each other and circumspect of the rules.

 

I vote the rules remain as admin laid out (with maybe some consideration of a time limit on first warnings). (not like this is up for voting, just saying )

[Big H*]

Just a suggestion while new and maybe old rules...... are implemented.

 

 

Moderators should have a limited tenure, something like six months, after which new moderators should be appointed by democratic vote. This will stop the establishment of "little kingdoms" and the brainless, liberal, bigoted, fat and lazy will be replaced with new, eager and willing people.

 

Moderators should continuously be rated and replaced. Some will will argue that they were voted in by Hubbers. That is true, but many Hubbers has never the chance to vote. Not many Hubbers has ever the chance to vote. Not democratic at all.

 

Moderators posts should also be moderated. They should also not be allowed to rally other members for support. This cannot be proven but it does happen.

 

The Hub belongs to Admin, not the moderators, they were democratically voted in by Hubbers to serve a purpose. They do their job, sometimes, but they should not become comfortable in their ivory towers and think they have the protection of the boss, and their clan, even if the err. I say again, they were voted in by Hubbers.

 

This voice of reason should be heard as it can damage the environment we call the Hub in the long run.

Edited March 31, 2012 by eccentric1

[Agteros]

Just a suggestion while new and maybe old rules...... are implemented.

 

Moderators should have a limited tenure, something like six months, after which new moderators should be appointed. This will stop the establishment of "little kingdoms" and the brainless, liberal, bigoted, fat and lazy will be replaced with new, eager and willing people.

 

Moderators should continuously be rated and replaced. Some will will argue that they were voted in by Hubbers. That is true, but many Hubbers has never the chanche to vote. Not many Hubbers has never the chanche to vote. Not democratic at all.

 

Moderators posts should also be moderated. They should also not be allowed to rally other members for support. This cannot be proven but it does happen.

 

The Hub belongs to Admin, not the moderators, they were democratically voted in by Hubbers to serve a purpose. They do their job, sometimes, but they should not become comfortobe in their ivory towers and think they have the protection of the boss and their clan, even if the err. I say again, they were voted in by Hubbers.

 

This voice of reason should be heard as it can damage the environment we call the Hub in the long run.

 

Yes, the reputation system for members can be expanded for moderators to include a negative vote as well... Maybe with the inclusion of mandatory comments ? Mod 'rep' falls below a certain level and he/she is 'swopped' out?

 

Mandatory comments will help (a bit) w.r.t. moderated hubbers that want to get back at the mods. Admin (alone) should have the power to veto those votes

[kosmonooit]

'liberal' in the same bag as 'brainless, bigoted, fat and lazy' LOL

[SwissVan]

 

will allow misdemeanors to fall away after a pre-defined period.

 

 

The problem then is that the average "serial" offender will just carry on doing what got them suspended in the first place, they might learn something but chances are it will not be "how to be a better hubber" but rather how to operate under the radar or on the boundry of the rules instead of within the rules of the forum.

[Big H*]

The problem then is that the average "serial" offender will just carry on doing what got them suspended in the first place, they might learn something but chances are it will not be "how to be a better hubber" but rather how to operate under the radar or on the boundry of the rules instead of within the rules of the forum.

 

Pity PM's cannot be punished

[SwissVan]

 

1. There are rules and regulations for a reason and everybody should abide by them regardless of the outcome of this thread.

 

2. I would like to think of us as mature enough NOT to have to resort to running to the prefects. It is my understanding that thehubsa is what it is because of the passion and exhuberence if you like. It would be a shame to lose that due to a few individuals, and judging by the response they seem to be in the minority,

 

3. taking offence to a tattooed lady (Not for the first time mind you) being posted in a thread that is known for it's risque and sometimes borderline content.

 

 

Sorry for snipping / editing your quoted post, but the bold highlight tool is not working for some reason.

 

1. Exactly, Admin has laid done the rules and someone needs to enforce them properly. I dont think the rules are that strict that people will not be able to carry on as before, but hopefuly when things hot up then the offensive stuff will be stopped.

 

2. That mature sword is multi edged, it also means that one expects mature hubbers to be able to settle issues in a mature manner.

 

3. If this is refering to the awesome thread issue a few days ago and dangles suspension then I think you dont understand the reason for the suspension, IMO the measures taken by the mods and admin were not because of the pictures but because of the behaviour that occured afterwards and which has apprently occured before (read admins post, 3rd para or see the qoute below:

"While neither member was free of guilt, the suspended member had already received a number of prior warnings for similar issues, hence the decision was taken by the moderation team (including myself) to suspend the member".

[TheV]

Admins, Moderators, thehubsa..... this is just another internet forum, run by people... no more important than anyone of us.

 

If anyone doesn't like the rules, then they frankly dont have to come here... and if enough people do actually leave, then this place will fade away...

 

Personally, I think it's a fine balance for the admins/mods to keep the place under control but also stay neutral.... I think mods and admins should be transparent... the problem here is that the mods want to be part of the forums and part of the community... share their views and carry on like they have a noddy badge... but then they also feel they can throw their weight around when it suits them...

 

Mods should not participate in the forums, they should just perform a job without a personality.

 

Oh... let me also say i think the biggest problem facing this place is that there is no real competitor.... and in todays age it might not always remain like that.

Edited March 31, 2012 by TheV