Opinions on moderating?

rick_chasey

You might find this interesting.

http://gu.com/p/4hxke?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

finchy

I've heard of fishing for compliments, looks like you've just invented fishing for insults, Rick.

ballysmate

So Guardian readers are misogynist racists?

Ha! I knew it!!

ballysmate

Boys in green please don't take this as criticism, it is not meant as such.
To my mind, this place is more lightly moderated than previously when sometimes people moderating were a bit over sensitive. I appreciate that you responded to complaints made by members and you weren't paid and you undertook the task on a voluntary basis.
But I feel that the lighter touch has benefited the forum.
I may be wrong and the moderation hasn't changed at all. It could be that everyone on here has learned to play nicely.

pinno

The local 'Leisure centre' is a case in point. There are so many 'do's' and 'don't's', it's hard not to break them. They stopped my 3 year old from using the big water flume despite the fact that she had been on it multiple times on multiple occasions. She has an alternative, which is smaller but it has a drop at the bottom into the water and if a child cannot hold their breath or their isn't an adult at the bottom, it's far more dangerous than the massive green flume.
I argued this when the little one was prevented from using the big green flume but to deaf ears.
Now, on the other end of the spectrum is Mabie Farm Park with it's multiple rides, slides, adventure playgrounds, trampolines etc and there's not a supervisor in sight. Despite frequenting the place a few times, I have never witnessed a serious accident. Without the presence of constant (and often coercive) supervisors, parents seem to be more aware of their children. It's almost as if that in a situation where there is over-supervision and rules for everything, safety is subordinated to the individuals in charge rather than just as in the real world, we as parents are aware of the dangers from cars and whatever else.
I'm sorry Rick, ever since the moderation has become 'lax', the forum is much better and a much better place.

Oh BTW, that Bally bloke is a complete and utter w@nker.

ballysmate

Too late Pinno.
Some w@nker in Po Face beat you to it.

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12982668&hilit=gents&start=80

Mind you, he said wankers, plural. I think he may have meant you as well.

pblakeney

"Interesting" is obviously a relative term.

drlodge

I find the Guardian to be part of the regressive left, I don't waste my time reading it. I do notice however, more and more views these days being extreme and based more on emotion/reaction, than thoughtful reason. It seems to be very difficult to have a mature reasoned debate where views can be put forward and discussed openly without fear of people, at worst, shouting obscenities, and at best failing to listen to what you're actually saying.

Any moderation should be principle based rather than rules based, otherwise you end up like the local leisure centre with loads of rules, most of which make no sense.

rick_chasey

2 things.

1) it's easier to be less heavy handed when the worst offenders have left/been banned

2) since moderation has slackened we've seen a significant drop in female members.

slowbike

Rick Chasey wrote:

2) since moderation has slackened we've seen a significant drop in female members.

and a subsiquent significant drop in male members?



Sorry ... I'd get my coat, but it's too nice out there for a coat ... will shirt sleeves do?

ballysmate

Rick Chasey wrote:

2 things.

1) it's easier to be less heavy handed when the worst offenders have left/been banned

2) since moderation has slackened we've seen a significant drop in female members.

1. Yes

2. Do you mean 'new' female members or the number of female members posting? In either case I didn't realise gender was monitored as I can't remember having to specify my gender when I joined. Not saying I didn't have to give my gender but don't remember doing so.
Got any figures?

rick_chasey

Yeah was discussed a lot with previous owners

homers_double

I wouldn't have thought any discussion in the BB or CC would have any impact because as far as I know, neither are searced on google as they are member only areas?

homers_double

OK it is searched, logged out and cleared my history etc but on clicking the reuslt you get:-

The board requires you to be registered and logged in to view this forum.

slowmart

The new owners moderation has been refreshingly light touch with a more relaxed tone from contributors, mods and staff.

The causal link between the new regime moderation and drop of female users is dubious at best as the content from contributors is not as polarising or adversarial as it was previously. Arguably you could say it's more boring but I suppose there are so many times you can swim around a fish bowl before you realise you've been here before with reoccurring content and just the names of the posters changing.

ugo.santalucia

The gender imbalance is pretty dramatic and does not reflect what I see on the roads. I am aware of one or two semi-regular female members who post occasionally. In that we are doing a disservice to the cycling community. My feeling is that it's a lads place... it's always been a lads place and the issue has not been addressed.

The heavy hand was occasionally needed, while we had to deal with scammers in the classified section and folks with multiple IDs that kept reappearing after a ban... the Paxington saga went on for months last year and might well not be over... pretty sure he will reappear when his master gets in trouble.
There was a confused spell when our judgement was put under question (mainly due to that saga) and that's when I gave up moderating, possibly to the relief of the community, there was the general impression that one cannot be heavily opinionated and be a moderator at the same time, which is probably fair enough. Beside the unpopular banning and shaming, we used to do other jobs behind the scenes, which were necessary.

Right now it seems to me moderators in green have no tools in their box to moderate so I really don't understand what is all about.... you can call it a softer approach, but to me it seems there is no approach.

ballysmate

In the old days some man in green would have been along to moan that this topic should have been posted in "Discuss the website..." area of the forum. :roll:

ballysmate

Man in green? Just realised there were no female mods.

Stevo_666

Well so far the former mods seem to think there is some sort of problem and the place is going to the dogs - and everyone else thinks the place is better...can't think why that might be :roll:

ugo.santalucia

Ballysmate wrote:

Man in green? Just realised there were no female mods.

Interestingly, when I left I advised that having a female moderator would be a good thing, to be chosen among the 1-2 members who post occasionally, but that didn't happen

... and yes, we used to shift threads around a bit more, which was a good thing, I think

... and we also made sure that threads were not opened for purely commercial purposes, which seems to happen more and more frequently these days

... basically we used to stick to the rules a bit more

on the plus side, it seems the classifieds section works a lot better now

ugo.santalucia

Stevo 666 wrote:

Well so far the former mods seem to think there is some sort of problem and the place is going to the dogs - and everyone else thinks the place is better...can't think why that might be :roll:

I don't think it's going to the dogs, but I believe there is (and there was) a gender imbalance and there is (and was) also (if I am allowed to say this) a socio-economic imbalance. The number of folks on here who spend in the region of what I earn every month in cycling gear is staggering and I think that creates a two tier system, where the less wealthy seeks company elsewhere. It might be the way cycling is going, but I do not believe the majority of folks out there spend thousands on gear every year, let alone month!

Bobbinogs

I am not sure what the actual figures are but we have to be honest and say there is a big gender imbalance in cycling so it can't be a surprise to see BR reflect that. I help run our local club which goes out of its way to be all inclusive (we even have a Ladies' captain with a budget to specifically increase the appeal to ladies through social events and special rides) and yet women only make up about 10% of the number (which is ~300).

ugo.santalucia

Bobbinogs wrote:

I am not sure what the actual figures are but we have to be honest and say there is a big gender imbalance in cycling so it can't be a surprise to see BR reflect that. I help run our local club which goes out of its way to be all inclusive (we even have a Ladies' captain with a budget to specifically increase the appeal to ladies through social events and special rides) and yet women only make up about 10% of the number (which is ~300).

10% is realistic, but I suspect on BR forum less than 1% of the active users are female... certainly fewer than 1% of the comments are from female users

slowmart

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Well so far the former mods seem to think there is some sort of problem and the place is going to the dogs - and everyone else thinks the place is better...can't think why that might be :roll:

I don't think it's going to the dogs, but I believe there is (and there was) a gender imbalance and there is (and was) also (if I am allowed to say this) a socio-economic imbalance. The number of folks on here who spend in the region of what I earn every month in cycling gear is staggering and I think that creates a two tier system, where the less wealthy seeks company elsewhere. It might be the way cycling is going, but I do not believe the majority of folks out there spend thousands on gear every year, let alone month!

Re socia-economic imbalance - Or it's just the gobbler ones who like to spout crap?

There was a interesting article in today's Guardian written by a cyclist whose narrative was about how the demographic of cycling has changed and it's more about material chattels and performance rather than the life experiences bought by cycling.

ugo.santalucia

Slowmart wrote:

There was a interesting article in today's Guardian written by a cyclist whose narrative was about how the demographic of cycling has changed and it's more about material chattels and performance rather than the life experiences bought by cycling.

It is beyond question that by far the most popular section of the road forum is "buying advice" followed by "general" which also contains buying advice. The racing section has a lot of comments, but made by 20 users at best.

The classifieds are inundated on a daily basis by top end bikes and components that folks keep flogging.

Yet, when I go out on the roads, I don't see all these 5 grand bikes around... I have NEVER seen an EPS component on the road, they seem to be all on here.

I do genuinely belive that BR is a magnet for a certain typology of bike (as opposed to cycling) fanatic

pinno

I guess that because I don't frequent parts of the forum, I don't get the impression of the bling brigade. I spend very little on bike bits which may please Ugo.
Probably sounds silly coming from me but an open minded female moderator would be a good thing.

ballysmate

Pinno wrote:

I guess that because I don't frequent parts of the forum, I don't get the impression of the bling brigade. I spend very little on bike bits which may please Ugo.
Probably sounds silly coming from me but an open minded female moderator would be a good thing.

Like Pinno, I don't come across the bling brigade either.
Open minded moderation regardless of gender is optimum.

ballysmate

Interesting that the consensus so far seems to be that the place has improved with less intervention,

rick_chasey

Says the ringleader of the peanut gallery.

ballysmate

Interestingly Rick, I seem to be the one on the receiving end of abuse and am saying things are better than they were when things were more sanitised.

pinno

Rick Chasey wrote:

Says the ringleader of the peanut gallery.

Uh? I am the ring leader of the peanut gallery.