I'm Gone

[Dibs-h]

Yeah - I vote for Jacob to be a mod! :shock:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[monkeybiter]

Yeah - I vote for Jacob to be a mod! :shock:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm gone!

 

[studders]

This thread would have been removed ages ago under the old Mod team. Good to see things have changed to a more sensible approach.
For my tuppence worth.. for a Forum of this size I don't feel three Mods is enough, as witnessed by the fact that they don't appear to have much time to enjoy the forum and participate as much they may perhaps like to? Don't think that's fair on them really.
Another pennies worth... what's so hard about PM'ing a mod asking for an explanation on posts that get deleted? Posts that are edited are a different matter, in that situation I think it's important that it is made obvious in the message that's been altered.

 

[misterfish]

Oh dear. So as a result of what may be considered by some as an impulsive and stringent moderating decision the forum now loses the expertise of one of the long serving and most helpful members. It is so unfortunate that we will lose access to the huge knowledge and practical skill that Bob has freely given.

'Own goal', 'baby/batwater', 'shooting yourself in the foot' comes to mind. The forum will be a much poorer place because of this and I can fully understand Bob's annoyance.

Misterfish

 

[devonwoody]

Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?

Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?

 

[Noel]

Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?

Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?

John, don't understand your point.
Are you suggesting we have no moderation? Like Facebook? We'd be in court on a daily basis if that was the case. There would be no UKWW.

 

[bugbear]

Do places like facebook,etc.etc. have mods?

Why not progress to something on those lines or does an owner of ukworkshop want to control because of an income involved?

You do know that some parts of Facebook are an open sewer, right?

BugBear

 

[Alf]

Solutions.

More mods

That would seem to be the obvious one.

Personally I can't see the time saving in not sending a quick PM to a long-standing member to let them know why their thread's been pulled when you then have to spend an hour or two reading and responding to the subsequent fallout thread. But then it's been many years since I was a mod.

Hope Bob reconsiders (and that Rob tries putting his bête noir on "ignore" first, before he finally makes good on his threat to leave.)

 

[bugbear]

bête noir

There's fancy!

BugBear

 

[Hudson Carpentry]

Facebook has mods but its only when someone reports something and most of the time its left on as its down to the poster to take responsibility on anything written. Facebook isn't a forum and you're allowed to post just about what ever which is why many regard it as what I call it "The nations playground" There is more falling out and b****hing on there then in an old womans hair dressers.

I can't stand facebook and use it only as a business tool. If this place was to become like facebook, ill be off following a long line of members.

We need mods regardless otherwise spam would fill up the boards and arguments would get out of hand.

The way we tackle it on our forum (although no where near the size of this forum) There are 2 Admins which have total control, 2 Super mods which can ban, delete etc etc then around 10 mods which cannot ban but can edit posts, move threads and do then general housekeeping. It works well currently but we only have around 20 regular members. We also have mods assigned to boards so there not having to trail through all the posts only posts on the boards there assigned to.

I know this place is 100x bigger but maybe a structured mod team like this would work. The current top mods would have time to enjoy the forum and not have to trail through 100's of posts a day between the 3. There would be time to stop this type of outbreak by sending out them personal PM's to members etc.

 

[YorkshireDave]

Oh dear.

I've seen this stuff happen many times and, I have to say, its always been about HOW something is done/said rather than the fact it's done/said. Having modded previously we did have a tiered and narrow ranging setup which meant one wasn't simply trawling through all day and getting bored witless and it was a golden rule to talk to people when modding their post. To reiterate what has already been said, in this day and age mods are a necessity due to porn etc so we have to accept them and the rules. That said, what makes theses types of forums popular and worth visiting is the simply fact that it is interactive and occasionally challenging so if things become too prescriptive the whole place loses it appeal and declines.

Perhaps one way of keeping people who have a deep knowledge and recognising the positive contribution they make is to allow them some limited advertising as a thank you. Perhaps in their signature. That way only those who 'deserve' such things get it and everyone can remain happy.

For me the answer is simple (but then I'm dumb)... Reward contributions. Increase mods. TALK TO PEOPLE. Simples... (if only I could do the sound!)

 

[CHJ]

Mod decisions are not only based on what is declared or entered on UKW but on statements of involvement and associations declared elsewhere, that is part of the normal background checks that are done wherever possible before taking any particular action.
Speculation in threads such as this do not have the benefit of the information being communicated off public forum with member/s involved, the fact that a valued member has, possibly inadvertently, fallen foul of a moderating policy and been aggrieved enough to post on open forum before communicating with the mod team is unfortunate.
As I have said before uninformed speculation can lead to 2+2 equalling 5
If all the facts were public then 2+2+2 would equal 6.
I intend to re-instate the post in question, as requested by 9fingers but in the edited form that was prepared for re-instatement prior to this thread, without the content that the UKW team were not happy with, and which the mod team have endeavoured to explain off forum.

 

[barkwindjammer]

What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?

 

[Mike.C]

What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?

Why oh why oh why

Cheers

Mike

 

[YorkshireDave]

What would the non-gobble-de-gook-version of that be ?

Why oh why oh why

Cheers

Mike

It's nice to know contributions are valued...

 

[CHJ]

.....
Perhaps one way of keeping people who have a deep knowledge and recognising the positive contribution they make is to allow them some limited advertising as a thank you. Perhaps in their signature. That way only those who 'deserve' such things get it and everyone can remain happy.

Those members that observe the signatures will notice that there is already a considerable amount of advertising within established members signatures relating to their personal webb sites and associated business.

What is not allowed in a signature is reference to a commercial enterprise that is not owned or the declared employer of a member.

 

[Anonymous]

but what i don't get is the fact that lots of members refer to certain web links asking for opinions on certain products, therefore indirectly advertising the likes of screwfix, axminster, rutlands etc etc etc, but when an extremely valued member who has most probably helped everyone single contributer on here directly and to the point in one way or another, decides to show a simple display stand (ALBEIT referring to a supplier) it gets removed for breach of rules?!!! now that bob has decided to leave here i think the mods should remove his extremely helpful sticky about power and really pineapple it up for everyone else...........................................Bob if you do read this you were a wonderful help to me when i was first starting out and for that i am very grateful. see you on the other side.

 

[CHJ]

Mark I have done my best to point out to members that there is more to the mod decisions than is declared on open forum. I do not intend to wash all dirty linen in public just to forestall posts such as yours.

Indeed Bob is a valued contributor to the forum*, or was if he decides to stay away, and has been informed as to the reasoning behind actions taken.

There is a big difference between asking for supplier advice or commenting on good service etc. than directly promoting a business enterprise. The choice of wording or presentation can easily swing a posting from one to the other.

*and to me in person.

 

[wobblycogs]

While I completely agree that Bobs post was a breach of the forum rules as they current stand this has got to be the most ridiculous enforcement I've ever seen. A simple mod edit of the post (leaving in just the pictures for example) and a few words as to why would have been more than enough. Bob could then have come back and put in more appropriate wordage. Instead we are losing one of the best contributors the site has. Fair enough the rule is there so that the site can make money through advertising but without contributors like Bob there won't be much of a site left, it will just end up populated by newbies giving each other bad advice hanging around for a dozen posts.

Bob, I hope you decide to stay but if you do go I understand why.

 

[CHJ]

...... A simple mod edit of the post (leaving in just the pictures for example) and a few words as to why would have been more than enough. .....

Please Note:

...I intend to re-instate the post in question, as requested by 9fingers but in the edited form that was prepared for re-instatement prior to this thread, without the content that the UKW team were not happy with, .......