Suggestions

[henk4]

I don't know names, I don't read everything, that's why there are moderators in the first place. In the last months there have been zero complaints about moderators, so I'd really appreciate giving me a detailed description of your complaint before attacking the moderators again. They are here doing you and me a favour, so I don't take any accusation lightly.

I think it is not a matter of people/moderators being accused. It is more that posts of a dubious character (not contributing to anything specific at all) tend to slip through the net a little bit more these days. This not only concerns newbie posts, but also posts of long standing members who sometimes get carried away into useless discussions about dubious subjects.

If I can give one example here. The Martare posts has revealed something unique, and yet it has now turned into a discussion about the quality of Dutch glass house building. I do not consider that to be a stimulating attempt to interest serious people into this forum at all.

[Wouter Melissen]

There is a report post function.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

You're missing the point, please re-read that post.

The post has been re-read, and the situation is still not particularly clear.

from what i gather your talking about more accountability for moderator actions. for the most part Moderators are more up to date with forum policy than members, and have to use their discretion in a lot of situations that members are not privy to.

I think you don't understand something about the moderator role - it's voluntary. there are few benefits - in fact more costs - to the role than people understand. it's not just settling forum issues. it's dealing with Inane spam, stupid members and settling petty arguments with people that really should know better. As a moderator i like to think of myself as a member first - so i engage with some of the antics that happen around the forum. no one likes to be the disciplinarian but if things get out of hand i have to step in. thats my role. And, please don't take this the wrong way, but don't tell me how to suck eggs. i've been doing this for 3 years now. i have it fairly down

To answer your question - Yes. UCP has become more resticted. but only to those who cannot stay within the acceptable social guidelines of any forum. No flaming is a common rule - but UCP attracts a higher calibre of member, and as such needs to reflect that in forum policy. People worked long and hard setting these rules, which we govern by and have been adopted by the community as a whole. Is it wrong to be properly ruled?

Freedom of speech only when it does not contradict anothers - it's something which we agonised over trying to instill into our rules, and it's the one rule i'm particularly proud of. much of the situation you mention are personal jokes, known full well not to be contradictory to anothers freedom. but when this gets out of hand and the intention is to harm we step in. if you think thats restricting the agressors freedom of speech well they forfeit it when they take away anothers. simple.

You'll excuse me if I may miss the point again - to be honest i don't really get that theres a point to be made - but understand this. UCP is not a democracy. Wouter runs it, and he has appointed moderators to police these forums. it's up to our discretion what goes on - because we've been properly briefed as to what should and shouldn't go on. don't think we're above the law - in the Moderator forum there is constant conjecture over the correct course of action - but we work as a team. and for the most part we have a bunch of satisfied customers.

So, in Cliff Note Form.
Moderators are Volunteers. Selected by Wouter to enforce forum policy.

UCP has become more restricted. But only to those who can't stay within the rules.

It's all up to Wouter.

I hope this has helped.

[NuclearCrap]

The post has been re-read, and the situation is still not particularly clear.

from what i gather your talking about more accountability for moderator actions. for the most part Moderators are more up to date with forum policy than members, and have to use their discretion in a lot of situations that members are not privy to.

I think you don't understand something about the moderator role - it's voluntary. there are few benefits - in fact more costs - to the role than people understand. it's not just settling forum issues. it's dealing with Inane spam, stupid members and settling petty arguments with people that really should know better. As a moderator i like to think of myself as a member first - so i engage with some of the antics that happen around the forum. no one likes to be the disciplinarian but if things get out of hand i have to step in. thats my role. And, please don't take this the wrong way, but don't tell me how to suck eggs. i've been doing this for 3 years now. i have it fairly down

I understand that point, yet that's completely different than what I was trying to say. "it's dealing with Inane spam, stupid members and settling petty arguments with people that really should know better." But the moderating team isn't really dealing with these situations, is it? I see some moderators even get involved and help those members to get way off topic and thus making it pointless for somebody to just walk in and reply to the original posts of those threads. As I said, I was only directing the issues too a very few specific moderators, that excludes you.

To answer your question - Yes. UCP has become more resticted. but only to those who cannot stay within the acceptable social guidelines of any forum. No flaming is a common rule - but UCP attracts a higher calibre of member, and as such needs to reflect that in forum policy. People worked long and hard setting these rules, which we govern by and have been adopted by the community as a whole. Is it wrong to be properly ruled?

That was not the restriction I was inferring to. There's is no problem with the rules that are on the forums guidelines. The restriction I was talking about was mental restriction, and eventually the forums had produced so much sarcasm that it's coming to a point where you can't tell if one is saying yes or no. These restrictions were registered in the people's mind because nobody wants to get completely crushed for a slight mistake, and recently I've noticed that people would quote specific words, such as misspelled ones, in others' posts and practically label them losers.

Freedom of speech only when it does not contradict anothers - it's something which we agonised over trying to instill into our rules, and it's the one rule i'm particularly proud of. much of the situation you mention are personal jokes, known full well not to be contradictory to anothers freedom. but when this gets out of hand and the intention is to harm we step in. if you think thats restricting the agressors freedom of speech well they forfeit it when they take away anothers. simple.

The mental restrictions I was inferring to leads to the crippling of this freedom when one is afraid to use this freedom when he/she thinks that a slight mistake would destroy their reputation, thus narrowing the freedom of speech.

You'll excuse me if I may miss the point again - to be honest i don't really get that theres a point to be made - but understand this. UCP is not a democracy. Wouter runs it, and he has appointed moderators to police these forums. it's up to our discretion what goes on - because we've been properly briefed as to what should and shouldn't go on. don't think we're above the law - in the Moderator forum there is constant conjecture over the correct course of action - but we work as a team. and for the most part we have a bunch of satisfied customers.

So, in Cliff Note Form.
Moderators are Volunteers. Selected by Wouter to enforce forum policy.

UCP has become more restricted. But only to those who can't stay within the rules.

It's all up to Wouter.

I hope this has helped.

The thing is, a few number of people in the moderating team do appear to regular members as a superior race because of the way they speak and act, and that is exactly the problem. You can defend that they didn't mean to, but they appear as if, and I'm saying this on behave of not only me, but a few other members I have talked to privately, and probably many more members that I didn't talk to. The acts of these "superior" moderators have lead to mental restrictions on members thus crippling the freedom of speech for them.

And again, I'm not referring this to the entire moderating team so you do not need to defend it as a whole, as I expected.

[Matt]

What it seems to me you're doing is expecting the moderating team to make social change. We simply can't do that. We can't tell people to stop making jokes that others don't get. We can't make people think differently.

Personally, I don't see a problem at all with a conversation going off topic. Have you ever sat and had a conversation with a group of people? It naturally and regularly meanders from subject to subject. If you want to solve that by demanding that each meander turn into a new thread, then we'd have people complaining about the number of new threads being made each day. If I'm interested in the topic of a thread, I have no problem weeding out the important posts from the less important ones. You might have less frustrations if you would start paying more attention to the quality posts instead of the posts of less quality.

In many ways, these forums are just like the real world. You have to weed out and ignore what you don't find interesting or helpful. Conversations in these forums are like conversations had in large groups in a bustling hallway. I'm sure you have no problems navigating in that type of situation.

[henk4]

Personally, I don't see a problem at all with a conversation going off topic. Have you ever sat and had a conversation with a group of people? It naturally and regularly meanders from subject to subject.

That is correct as far as it concerns a sort of fixed group of people. However, forums by nature are fluid and people come and go during the discussion. It is quite annoying that when you get back to a topic you'll find that the subject has changed completely and bears no resemblence with what was originally discussed. This is where I feel mods should step in and keep the discussion on topic. (and as you may have noticed, this just did happen in this thread)

[Matt]

That is correct as far as it concerns a sort of fixed group of people. However, forums by nature are fluid and people come and go during the discussion. It is quite annoying that when you get back to a topic you'll find that the subject has changed completely and bears no resemblence with what was originally discussed. This is where I feel mods should step in and keep the discussion on topic. (and as you may have noticed, this just did happen in this thread)

If the original topic is no longer being discussed, then there probably isn't anything more to be added to the discussion. So, no loss, IMO.

[henk4]

If the original topic is no longer being discussed, then there probably isn't anything more to be added to the discussion. So, no loss, IMO.

well, again I disagree, this is a flowing community, and I always welcome new people on the forum that may have new opinions on an old topic. Furthermore the pavlovian reaction of some reaction to reviving old threads is also not one of my favourites. I am not suggesting that each topic on the forum deals with eternal questions, but making a mockery of the original subject does not contribute very much.

[NuclearCrap]

What it seems to me you're doing is expecting the moderating team to make social change. We simply can't do that. We can't tell people to stop making jokes that others don't get. We can't make people think differently.

No I just want a few people of the moderating team to start acting like moderators and not gods. I know that in response to this you'll probably say moderators are not gods, and yes I understand that, and yet some moderators do tend to act like gods, plus I'm talking about only a specific few, and you aren't in it, so saying "we" inferring to the entire team isn't gonna allow you to accept anything I've been saying.

Personally, I don't see a problem at all with a conversation going off topic.

Not when the original poster, or even some other people, speaks that he, or they, wants his thread back on topic with the moderator ignoring that request and join the off-topic members.

well, again I disagree, this is a flowing community, and I always welcome new people on the forum that may have new opinions on an old topic. Furthermore the pavlovian reaction of some reaction to reviving old threads is also not one of my favourites. I am not suggesting that each topic on the forum deals with eternal questions, but making a mockery of the original subject does not contribute very much.

That I agree, some people just wanted to add to the original discussion and then there comes the people who mocks. I do share the feeling that it gets very annoying.

[Rockefella]

No I just want a few people of the moderating team to start acting like moderators and not gods. I know that in response to this you'll probably say moderators are not gods, and yes I understand that, and yet some moderators do tend to act like gods, plus I'm talking about only a specific few, and you aren't in it, so saying "we" inferring to the entire team isn't gonna allow you to accept anything I've been saying.



Not when the original poster, or even some other people, speaks that he, or they, wants his thread back on topic with the moderator ignoring that request and join the off-topic members.



That I agree, some people just wanted to add to the original discussion and then there comes the people who mocks. I do share the feeling that it gets very annoying.

I have the suspicion that a lot of this is directed towards me.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I understand that point, yet that's completely different than what I was trying to say. "it's dealing with Inane spam, stupid members and settling petty arguments with people that really should know better." But the moderating team isn't really dealing with these situations, is it? I see some moderators even get involved and help those members to get way off topic and thus making it pointless for somebody to just walk in and reply to the original posts of those threads. As I said, I was only directing the issues too a very few specific moderators, that excludes you.

You can't just pick and choose who you're picking at - the Moderating team is a whole.

As Matt Said, conversations meander - if it doesn't add to your viewing experience there is nothing to stop you going to a different part of the site.

That was not the restriction I was inferring to. There's is no problem with the rules that are on the forums guidelines. The restriction I was talking about was mental restriction, and eventually the forums had produced so much sarcasm that it's coming to a point where you can't tell if one is saying yes or no. These restrictions were registered in the people's mind because nobody wants to get completely crushed for a slight mistake, and recently I've noticed that people would quote specific words, such as misspelled ones, in others' posts and practically label them losers.

Honestly, some people bring this upon themselves. I am more than happy to accept a change in a members behaviour if it has been less than satisfactory in the past but respect is earnt, not given.

I agree some people are turned off asking what they perceive as 'stupid questions', but you'll find most people who are lambasted have either missed the point, or have asked a question which, if they had properly read the thread, has already been answered.

The mental restrictions I was inferring to leads to the crippling of this freedom when one is afraid to use this freedom when he/she thinks that a slight mistake would destroy their reputation, thus narrowing the freedom of speech.

Everyone has the right to make mistakes - if people don't want to then it's not up to us to change their behaviour. thats a personal thing. They have the freedom to ask just about anything. but byasking the questiong they put themselves up for the answer. if it's not what they were expecting....well, really.

The thing is, a few number of people in the moderating team do appear to regular members as a superior race because of the way they speak and act, and that is exactly the problem.

They are figures of authority. they have the respect of their fellow forum users and they demand to be headed. and rightly so. if you have a problem with authority then why complain about the rules which were set up so the forum would, essentially, self govern?

You can defend that they didn't mean to, but they appear as if, and I'm saying this on behave of not only me, but a few other members I have talked to privately, and probably many more members that I didn't talk to. The acts of these "superior" moderators have lead to mental restrictions on members thus crippling the freedom of speech for them.

Again just because the answer given is not the answer expected doesn't make it any less valid.

And again, I'm not referring this to the entire moderating team so you do not need to defend it as a whole, as I expected.

Well i do feel as though i need to defend as a whole. just the same as you speak, supposedly, on behalf of a lot of suppressed members, the moderating team speaks as a whole.

There is nothing, NOTHING, stopping people asking questions. what the current system requires of members is to make sure these questions aren't inane and useless. if people properly read the threads they'll find we've answered the query previously, and if not then the question can be asked - so long as it is considered and intelligent. we do have high standards here at UCP (How i survive i'll never know ) and we don't tolerate fools lightly - that shows a pride in what we do. There are diversions from the original train of thought in many threads but what conversation doesn't have that?

It's great hearing your opinion on this - don't think i don't see where your coming from. I just happen to think we don't see eye to eye on some issues

[Matt]

No I just want a few people of the moderating team to start acting like moderators and not gods. I know that in response to this you'll probably say moderators are not gods, and yes I understand that, and yet some moderators do tend to act like gods, plus I'm talking about only a specific few, and you aren't in it, so saying "we" inferring to the entire team isn't gonna allow you to accept anything I've been saying.

It would be helpful for all of us if you could give us specific instances.

Not when the original poster, or even some other people, speaks that he, or they, wants his thread back on topic with the moderator ignoring that request and join the off-topic members.

I said conversations NATURALLY meander. I, for one, am not going to interfere with that unless it somehow breaks another forum guideline, such as it becoming a flame war or the conversation being vulgar or profane.

That I agree, some people just wanted to add to the original discussion and then there comes the people who mocks. I do share the feeling that it gets very annoying.

Here's what you do in those instances: 1)Deduce whether the post you're reading is or is not adding to your vast library of automotive knowledge. 2)Scroll past that post to the next one, repeat step 1. 3)Repeat steps 1 and 2 until you find a post you deem helpful. Ignore others.

It really isn't difficult. But, you seem to be spending more time finding and getting stuck on the posts you don't like rather that doing a simple 1/2 second scroll.

[NuclearCrap]

It would be helpful for all of us if you could give us specific instances.

Will PM you examples when I have time to dig some out.

I said conversations NATURALLY meander. I, for one, am not going to interfere with that unless it somehow breaks another forum guideline, such as it becoming a flame war or the conversation being vulgar or profane.

As henk4 said, when somebody tries to stick to the topic there's usually somebody there to mock, and I don't think these mockings are okay by any means.

Here's what you do in those instances: 1)Deduce whether the post you're reading is or is not adding to your vast library of automotive knowledge. 2)Scroll past that post to the next one, repeat step 1. 3)Repeat steps 1 and 2 until you find a post you deem helpful. Ignore others.

It really isn't difficult. But, you seem to be spending more time finding and getting stuck on the posts you don't like rather that doing a simple 1/2 second scroll.

Only if skipping a couple posts is really an option if one wanted to post in the same thread. It's just the way it is, if you skip a few words while reading, people would practically label you a jackass for it.

And I'm not spending more time finding and getting stuck on posts I don't like, I tried to ignore. It's more like trying to ignore nearby people saying annoying things to each other until you can't ignore any longer, and it's a natural human reaction, I don't think I need to be taught on how to ignore as there is a limited capacity in how much one can ignore. Please don't assume about me.

[drakkie]

Honestly, some people bring this upon themselves. I am more than happy to accept a change in a members behaviour if it has been less than satisfactory in the past but respect is earnt, not given.

But a chance should be given. Which currently isnt to most.

Example:
The house stuff. It kinda gets annoying now.

I posted a question ages ago.In a stressed-out,grumpy mood i made some mistakes. It was understood quite wrongly IMO and when trying to defend myself i was basically slaughtered. Ok, i can get over that, sure, i am now a dult and thats just life.
I later offered my apologies to those that misunderstood it and/or were offended.
What i still see now are each time i post something that contains one of the words "house","quality","building","landscape" or similar i get stupid sarcastic comments. Once or twice, sure, but 10+ times a week, ow come on folks !!! It really starts annoying and offending me now. I have yet to see any mod action to that !

Example 2:
Mr.Detroitmetal.

As we all know,his photoshop achievements suck. We pointed that out to him dozens of tims so far. But I have neve seen or heard about anyone giving nhim tips,advice and help on improving. I did get it long ago. Thx for that. But maybe someone else needs it harder now ?
Where did the helpfullness go on UCP ? Compared to the "past" it has been becoming less and less...

What the mod team culd improve and do about this ? I honestly have no real clue. Perhaps they can try and help,thereby getting the discussion back on topic. I dont know really...

Now everyone is accusing the mod team. It aint your fault entirely ! The mentality of the members is changing. Nothing we can really do to that though. In some cases it is even a positive thing (hopefully you noticed my changes in the last few weeks and enjoyed my different attitude).

Anyway, I'll stop my chatter here and get back to work.

[McReis]

As we all know,his photoshop achievements suck. We pointed that out to him dozens of tims so far. But I have neve seen or heard about anyone giving nhim tips,advice and help on improving. .

Honestly, I don't think he wants our tips or help. He says he's highly paid for the chops he's doing, and you know what they say: "If it works, don't fix it."