Views on the Moderation on this Forum (started by STMOD)

[percy]

This post is from STMOD and does not represent the views of Vince or the Site owners.

Thank you all for your posts and private messages received so far expressing your views.

Not all the bans that happen on this site are by STMOD and at there is no intention of discussing individual bans.

Much as posters have different views of individual companies, forum members have different views of what are acceptable posts and behaviours and this does lead, at times, to moderators being in a no-win situation. Someone is unhappy whatever decision is made.

Moderators do not read every single post on this forum, though certain threads do at times get some attention, but in the main it is up to forum members to report posts that are considered inappropriate.
Moderators are also not necessarily in a position to respond quickly to such reports and patient is required before the report is either acted on or not. Also whilst it is considered a courtesy to reply to reports that are not acted on, this is not always practicable.

However there is obviously a degree of dissatisfaction with recent events and this feedback will be taken into consideration in the future.

STMOD

I think you must try harder.
Banning members without reading the thread is a hopeless situation.
You do yourself no credit,and let down Sharetrader site.
In this latest case you banned both Roger and Paper Tiger,while there was no cause to ban Paper Tiger,had you read the thread.
You did the same to me one time Roger baited me,and I questioned your judgementand.It would appear it has only been "good" members pointing out the errors of your ways, that both Paper Tiger and myself were quickly reinstated.
Had you read the threads, and followed conversations over the years, you would have realised the best moderator the site has had has been a poster.! That poster has been Paper Tiger, who has questioned a number of posters, when they have had their facts wrong,or have just lost the plot.
Banning Paper Tiger by mistake, just means your credibility is further lowered.
I would also point out I have not seen Paper Tiger post since his ban was lifted.
I would think you owe him an apology.

[percy]

This is disappointing, but illustrated how things can get out of hand quickly.

"Moderators do not read every single post on this forum" was meant to mean that the Moderators do not read every single post on this forum and not also mean that Moderators only read reported posts. I think we deserve a little more credit than that.

Otherwise as stated earlier there is no intention of discussing individual bans.

The intention is to move the debate forwards.

STMOD

I think we all would agree with your "intention to move the debate forward"and it is what a lot of us keep trying to achieve....??!!!

[Baa_Baa]

This is disappointing, but illustrated how things can get out of hand quickly.

"Moderators do not read every single post on this forum" was meant to mean that the Moderators do not read every single post on this forum and not also mean that Moderators only read reported posts. I think we deserve a little more credit than that.

Otherwise as stated earlier there is no intention of discussing individual bans.

The intention is to move the debate forwards.

STMOD

I agree, it is disappointing but healthy nevertheless, that at this juncture that a debate is sought.

Many might not realise that STMOD is multiple identities, some privileged members, another with ultimate influence. The small differences in 'current user title' is perhaps lost on some, perhaps many? Explaining that would be a good start, along with what the role and powers of a moderator really is.

My suggestion fwiw is an amnesty. That STMOD, the really angry guy, who decides ST online life and death, gives everyone in say the past year who has been banned or decided to leave an opportunity to return.

(I should add that STMOD, I can't tell which one(s), has been equally as hard on me four times [and I deserved most of them in hindsight] as he has been concerned for my well being!)

STMOD, you have their emails, invite them back, all of them, offering contrition and a definition of consequence. Restate the rules if it helps. Maybe those who are banned won't come back, maybe they will, I hope they will, all of them. We miss them, we miss the healthy debate, albeit sometimes heated. That's life, people have differing opinions, better to hear the opinion and debate it, sometimes battle it, than censor it forever.

ST now lacks a certain colour and vibrancy without those folk who have been around a long time, are very astute and in the past twelve months or so suffered the ignominy of being permanently banned, or banned frequently enough, or for sufficient time as to decide with the delete button.

Jmho, trying to progress the debate. Think amnesty, bring back the quality, and the colour.

BAA