quote:

Originally posted by Paula C4:
...I suspect the 24/7 opening suggested by Poslpe is a budget constraint, so may not be as easy to address

Paula

--------------------------------------------------
█ resealable for freshness █

quote:

I was not able to find out how many posts are deleted, and how many people ask why their posts are deleted, but I was told that posts, once deleted, are hard to retrieve if someone does subsequently query the reason for the removal.

quote:

Mods have some very specific training that enables them to tell the difference between humour and libel or defamation.

quote:

Originally posted by wolfram:
What does C4 care what anybody thinks about anything?

Once there were forums where debate was possible - about news, politics and the like. They now resemble ruins with tumbleweeds rolling around in a foul smelling breeze.

It remains unclear, due to a complete inability on the administration's part to communicate on the issue, whether this is an unfortunate but inevitable occurrence or, and I suspect this is the more likely, that it is the result of frankly poor management and individuals combining their employment with some sort of perverse "sport".

Either way it's a damned shame.

quote:

Mods have some very specific training that enables them to tell the difference between humour and libel or defamation. If you think they are erring on the safe side and can give some examples, I can look into this in more detail.

quote:

Originally posted by Paula C4:
Apologies for such a long post, but I wanted to reply to as many comments as possible:

Stop deletion of entire threads when only one post is causing a problem.
This should never happen. Our policy is only to remove a thread if the whole thread is unsuitable, or it contains so many unsuitable comments that editing them out would not leave behind a readable thread. Talking to the moderators toiling away to help you all stay within the rules, they point out that by the time they reach a contentious thread it may have already deteriorated too far to consider pruning all inappropriate posts and keeping the thread. They observe that in the News forum in particular, threads can deteriorate very fast and, in their humble opinion, some seem to be posted purely to intentionally annoy or antagonise other users rather than start a constructive discussion, hence many end up being deleted. Their advice is that, if you see anything offensive, you should alert the mods rather than reacting with a follow up post, which would give threads a better chance of surviving.

Cease the practice of moderators editing people's posts. If there's a problem - delete the post and state a reason (this has never happened), nothing gets my back up more than being edited and having no comeback.
The Communities Manager at Channel 4 is going to look into this. She starts from a position that posts should not be edited, as this runs the risk of changing what the poster is trying to say. If editing is taking place, it will only be if the mod believes that the editing does not change the meaning of the comment, but your comment has prompted her to think again about whether we should allow any editing at all.

It should be possible for admin to state why a post has been deleted without getting into pages of argument.
Another one we are going to look into. I was not able to find out how many posts are deleted, and how many people ask why their posts are deleted, but I was told that posts, once deleted, are hard to retrieve if someone does subsequently query the reason for the removal. Hence the standard response would be to refer posters to the forum rules, which I think are rather well written, albeit lacking in specific examples. So, I have asked if we can try and give posters some examples of what would be merely humorous and what would be defamatory if included in a post. It might be a tricky thing to do, but we are going to try! I am also going to get some figures on the number of e-mails we get asking why posts have been removed, to see how practical it would be to respond to these individually.

Accept that people are going to try to be humorous and that public figures are going to be lampooned. I have seen many a thread disappear over the years for less offence than might be found on Bremner, Bird and Fortune. Mods should consider that this site is not the Washington Post - or even the Huffington Post. They get to write closer to the bone on blogs in the US, where people are far more litigious as a rule.
Mods have some very specific training that enables them to tell the difference between humour and libel or defamation. If you think they are erring on the safe side and can give some examples, I can look into this in more detail.

As was mentioned on a burned thread last week, the definition of what constitutes a safe URL in the T&Cs is quite ambiguous. I've had links to stories from AP, AFP and Reuters journalists taken down because presumably (we never actually know you see - because they won't talk to us) they made their internet presence known at Raw Story or some other site of that nature.
Mods and Community Editor both think you make a good point here. The forum rules refer to “Official news sources and established company URLs” but it is probably a good time to review the list of sites that fall into these categories. If you are in any doubt, send a quick e-mail to chat@channel4.com and they will check the url for you.

We need to talk about this. It causes a lot of ill feeling and irritated people then start to snipe back at the admin, who then appear to wind them up further and further until they do or say something which gets them banned - hence my "perverse sport" statement upthread. Let's have an admin thread and talk about it eh?
Community Manager likes your idea for an admin thread and is going to go and think about how best to resource it from our end. Coming soon to a forum near you…..

Some of us think that a couple of people are being allowed to dictate forum content by excessive use of the complaint triangle. It has been suggested that posts - but mainly threads disappear because of their sometimes self-confessed overuse of it. I would hope that a brief investigation takes place prior to the removal of somebody's thoughts. If anything should result in a member's banning, it should be the abuse of this facility.
Everyone I spoke to was adamant that the use of the complaint triangle triggers an impartial assessment of the post in question prior to any decision to remove it. There is no question of people being either penalised or rewarded for their use of the button, but the mods were keen to stress that they would prefer more use of complaints and less retaliation on the forums as this would mean less thread and post removal

Oh, and having just spoken to him, do you think you could fix it for my old mate fatdave to be unsuspended. His account has been suspended for 2 years!!!. As he pointed out, "That's not a suspension - it's a sentence!" I know he misses many of his chums.
Fat Dave (and anyone else who has been suspended) can e-mail chat@channel4.com and request a review of their status. No doubt promises of good behaviour and word perfect recital of the forum rules will help their case……

I'm really pleased that somebody has taken an interest and I hope we can all learn something from going through this exercise.
It has been a really useful process for us at Channel 4, so many thanks to Wolfram and others for getting us thinking about how we moderate these forums. You may also be interested to hear that we have just finished a review of opening hours, and will be announcing the results here shortly……

quote:

Originally posted by wolfram:
fatdave did contact the people you mention. They sent him a list of his transgressions - which I have seen. they actually banned him for having a go at a fellow who was making filthy comments about moderator's family members! How daft is that?

quote:

Originally posted by Bizzie Lizzie:
Could we be allowed innuendo and euphemisms?
I was brought up on Carry On films.

quote:

Originally posted by old hippy guy:

quote:

Originally posted by Bizzie Lizzie:
Could we be allowed innuendo and euphemisms?
I was brought up on Carry On films.

yeah

quote:

Originally posted by maximus destinus:
also if u did close the pm option in 4chat then in my opinion THAT is a far safer environment than here considerin the moderation that was in effect there ...far more stringent and warnings were issued very justly n appropriately

a much safer environment than here in my opinion

-----------------------------------

my lil white

quote:

Originally posted by C4 Ed:

quote:

Originally posted by wolfram:
fatdave did contact the people you mention. They sent him a list of his transgressions - which I have seen. they actually banned him for having a go at a fellow who was making filthy comments about moderator's family members! How daft is that?

Hi wolfram,

Just to reiterate what Paula said, if a user feels someone is attacking them, another user or provoking them their only response should be to use the alert button. Replying will continue the issue on the forums and may result in their own suspension. Unfortunately "having a go" at other users is not the best way to react

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by C4 Ed:

quote:

Originally posted by wolfram:
fatdave did contact the people you mention. They sent him a list of his transgressions - which I have seen. they actually banned him for having a go at a fellow who was making filthy comments about moderator's family members! How daft is that?

Hi wolfram,

Just to reiterate what Paula said, if a user feels someone is attacking them, another user or provoking them their only response should be to use the alert button. Replying will continue the issue on the forums and may result in their own suspension. Unfortunately "having a go" at other users is not the best way to react

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by Angelus the Vampire:
>> but I was told that posts, once deleted, are hard to retrieve if someone does subsequently query the reason for the removal<<

I think someone is misinformed.

When I transgressed, and was banned, I was given, in an email, copies of three messages that had led to my being banned. The messages I had posted did not happen in one day, or even one week, but over a period of several months.

So, respectfully, the person who told you that they cannot trace deleted posts either didn`t know what they were talking about, or is misleading you.

Unfortunately, my pc crashed at the start of march, and I lost everything on my hard-drive, which included the eamil from C4 detailing the reason I was banned.

quote:

Originally posted by Mount Olympus:
hmmmmmmmm *thinks*

So only certain people in this thread get their posts addressed..

I never did get an explanation why a whole load of LUT posts were deleted for no reason.. no swear words, no innuendo.. just details of a task the Housemates were doing.. and when I asked for an apology for what must have been a human error, all that happened was I got a ban. The old type mods have apologised in the past for accidentally deleting stuff in the BB LUT threads forum.. why haven't the new lot got any manners to own up to their mistakes if they are 'only human' too?

(and my list of transgression went back to the year I signed up and involved such things as hello you and good luck etc.. pretty weird if you ask me..but then you aren't are you? )

do you have to be a special person in here to get a response?

quote:

if you want to give me a couple of examples of things that have happened in the past that you now miss, we'll consider them as we continue to develop and evolve this community.

Best

C4 Admin