Re: An important idea for me! — General Discussion on True Nudists

JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster

Aug 5, 2011

Hi folks,
I have a good idea to avoid any kind of trouble in forums. If it was up to me, I would control any thread before it is posted. If it is approved, then it will be posted. But it is not up to me, I am not the administrator of the site.
However, I suggest that TT1 and/or TT2 consider my idea. Too many sites use this kind of pre-control.
If this pre-control existed here, I am sure that some threads would have never been posted.
Isn't a good idea? Think about it.
Kind regards,
Jeff

ReactReplySubscribe

Replies

A
A
Aug 7, 2011
Still, where is any use of power, there always is abuse of it. People given authority tend to abuse it, no matter how well-intended it is.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 7, 2011
NudeInMAUltra Super Nudist Level #2 [url=../profiles/30196][/url] Joined: 10/19/2009 Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts 6330 posts [quote]Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: • A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted — the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; • When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; • The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; • Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; • If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; • Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; • "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.[/quote]
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 7, 2011
[quote]NudeInMAUltra Super Nudist Level #2 [url=../profiles/30196][/url] Joined: 10/19/2009 Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts 6330 posts [quote]Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: • A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted — the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; • When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; • The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; • Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; • If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; • Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; • "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.[/quote] [/quote] What's the point if sending this post???????
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 7, 2011
[quote]Still, where is any use of power, there always is abuse of it. People given authority tend to abuse it, no matter how well-intended it is.[/quote] Absolutely! But we should try, as much as we can, to avoid the abuse of power. As I said before, police and prosecutors abuse their powers, how so an internet moderator ... Some people are sentenced while they are innocent, even though that the jury and the judge had good intentions. If it happens in such cases, it is not a disaster if it would happen in internet.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 7, 2011
[quote][quote]If there was active moderation, it wouldn't have happened at all, or been thwarted early on.[/quote] [/quote] If the pre-approval system existed, it would have never been posted. [quote]Proper moderation would kill the trolls, insults, lock irrelevant and useless threads, limit the most agregious offenders, and such.[/quote] I 100% agree with you. But it should happen before it is posted, not after. You indeed all know the proverb: ''Better safe than sorry''. [quote]If *I* were a forum moderator, it's easily probable certain folks would have wisdom and relevant comments posted, with insults and flames removed. Censorship ? Perhaps, but 14 pages of flame war which buries what starts out as a relevant and informative thread is just not acceptable.[/quote] It is better to have them removed before they are posted, believe me. Get this proverb too: ''An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure''.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 7, 2011
[quote][quote]What's the point if sending this post???????[/quote] If you have to ask the question, you won't understand the answer.[/quote] The question was not for you. I asked it to the one who has quoted you and copied/pasted infos about without any comment.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 9, 2011
[quote]NudeInMAUltra Super Nudist Level #2 [url=../profiles/30196][/url] Joined: 10/19/2009 Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts 6330 posts [quote]Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: • A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted — the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; • When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; • The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; • Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; • If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; • Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; • "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.[/quote] [/quote] It is THE answer. Why post more when he has answered your questions How's that for a comment?
ReactReply
CO
Curt, or Cowboy
Aug 9, 2011
[quote]If the pre-approval system existed, it would have never been posted.[/quote] I understand your perspective, but with a pre-approval system, nothing gets posted until.... EVERYTHING is unnecessarily delayed, and the workload on whoever is moderating is increased by many, many orders of magnitude. Only a portion of postings need any attention at all. With pre-approval, ALL postings must get attention whether needed or not, and most don't. On a properly moderated site, very, very few postings will require any attention. SO, preapproval amounts to killing a mosquito with a neuclear bomb. Overkill, and will do too much damage to any and everything that really needs no attention at all.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote]If the pre-approval system existed, it would have never been posted.[/quote] I understand your perspective, but with a pre-approval system, nothing gets posted until.... EVERYTHING is unnecessarily delayed, and the workload on whoever is moderating is increased by many, many orders of magnitude. Only a portion of postings need any attention at all. With pre-approval, ALL postings must get attention whether needed or not, and most don't. On a properly moderated site, very, very few postings will require any attention. SO, preapproval amounts to killing a mosquito with a neuclear bomb. Overkill, and will do too much damage to any and everything that really needs no attention at all.[/quote] I agree with you, but I suggested solutions to some issues we might have if the site will set the pre-control system. What do you think about them?
ReactReply
CO
Curt, or Cowboy
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote][[/quote]I agree with you, but I suggested solutions to some issues we might have if the site will set the pre-control system. What do you think about them? [/quote] Pre-approval creates a tremendous amount of overhead work, and is by default not a great idea in the vast majority of cases. I'll conceed that there are a few individuals that, like another site that I do run, as well as a mailing list, do need pre-moderation, as they just will not learn. Experience suggests that the software quarantine whatever postings by these very few, yet allow everything else, much like the artificially intelligent spam filter I wrote. The work load to check quarantined posts is still a tremendous burden, but is sometimes preferable to outright banning of those individuals that do sometimes contribute something of value. Still, experience suggests that treating the flamers as they appear "in post" as we say in "the biz" is a tremendously more efficient way to go.
ReactReply
DE
DesertRat
Aug 10, 2011
As the saying goes: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. We have a free and open Forum. Yes we get some stupid entries, but that is far out weighed by the thoughtful ones. When you propose to limit peoples' right to free speech you are getting on that slippery slope that leads to tyranny. I'm willing to put up with a few dumb posts in the cause of free and open expression, but I reserve the right to be critical of the ones with which I do not agree.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote][/quote]Well, no actually, we don't have a free and open forum. This site is a privately owned property, and as such, the owner makes the rules of what is and isn't allowed. Freedom of speech and the 1st Amendment do not apply to privately owned media, only to a government.[/quote] Yes, indeed. It is a private website. You follow its rules, you are welcome. You don't follow them, go somewhere else.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote][quote][/quote] Well, no actually, we don't have a free and open forum. This site is a privately owned property, and as such, the owner makes the rules of what is and isn't allowed. Freedom of speech and the 1st Amendment do not apply to privately owned media, only to a government.[/quote] Yes, indeed. It is a private website. You follow its rules, you are welcome. You don't follow them, go somewhere else.[/quote] My children learned those rules years ago. They decided to stay. They were very careful when the door closed behind them.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
Hi again folks,
I think a site called truenudists needs to be pre-moderated. This site's forums need to be pre-controlled.
There is another main reason of my suggestion: A website like this one may attract many perverts who might post an abusive thread.
My goal is to make the forums more into the topic of the website, without any kind of troll, a website where trolls and pervert people are not welcome.
Kind regards,
Jeff
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote]NudeInMAUltra Super Nudist Level #2 [url=../profiles/30196][/url] Joined: 10/19/2009 Location: Berkshires, Massachusetts 6330 posts [quote]Congratulations to all who have posted to this thread using quote nesting and have not fallen prey to the quote anomaly. That's unusual. RE: the topic, writing as an admin and a mod on other sites, this old hand is against it. One of the primary attractions of Web forums is the immediacy. It's not on-the-fly like chat, but it IS a fairly fast response time. Universal post moderation poses issues, e.g.: • A person having a problem with the site asks a question, but must wait for a mod to approve it before it is posted — the question is unasked and the problem is unresolved until then; • When it is posted, any response is delayed, and people who are responding do not know if others already posted a solution; • The OP's reply and the success or failure of the solutions offered is delayed; • Conversations between members via the forum are pretty much stymied, and they might as well use email as the forum; • If there are no mods logged in, posts go into limbo until one shows up; • Personal conflicts between mods and members could result in letting posts sit for a few days, or deletion of posts without a comment; • "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" -- King Mongkut of Siam I've been on dozens of sites over the years, and never have I found one where posts require approval. A few limited posting privileges for newbies until they achieved a certain number of posts, but none required every post to be approved. With nearly 100,000 members, TN is a handful at the best of times. It is counterproductive to introduce bottlenecks where they aren't required.[/quote] [/quote] It is THE answer. Why post more when he has answered your questions How's that for a comment?[/quote]
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote]It is THE answer. Why post more when he has answered your questions How's that for a comment?[/quote] And I answered to the answer, if you bothered yourself to read well.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 10, 2011
Beating a Dead HorseMeaning To bring up an issue that has already been resolved. Any attempt to discuss said issue is pointless, as it has already been done repeatedly.OriginBeating a dead horse can alternatively be said as "flogging a dead horse". The earliest recorded use of this term was by British politician and orator, John Bright, when he was referring to the Reform Bill of 1867. Parliament was indifferent about the bill, and Bright said in a speech that would try and gather interest in the Reform Bill "would be like trying to flog a dead horse to make it pull a load." The Oxford English Dictionary says in The Globe had the earliest use for "flogging a dead horse", used in 1872.Examples of The Phrase Being Used"Why keep beating a dead horse and bringing up these old subjects that have already been debated over and over." "I wanted to discuss why the Dreamcast was superior the Nintendo 64 with my friends, but they said talking about it again would be akin to beating a dead horse."
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote]To bring up an issue that has already been resolved. Any attempt to discuss said issue is pointless, as it has already been done repeatedly.[/quote] [/quote] Not when you bring a new idea. I see you are brillant in copy/paste, I would give you an A+.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote][quote]To bring up an issue that has already been resolved. Any attempt to discuss said issue is pointless, as it has already been done repeatedly.[/quote] [/quote] Not when you bring a new idea. I see you are brillant in copy/paste, I would give you an A+.[/quote] Thank you.
ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Aug 10, 2011
I will now ignore this man and any of his posts. I invite the rest of True Nudists to join me.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote][quote][quote][quote]To bring up an issue that has already been resolved. Any attempt to discuss said issue is pointless, as it has already been done repeatedly.[/quote] [/quote] Not when you bring a new idea. I see you are brillant in copy/paste, I would give you an A+.[/quote] Thank you.[/quote] You are welcome.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 10, 2011
[quote]I will now ignore this man and any of his posts. I invite the rest of True Nudists to join me.[/quote] Do what you want. I didn't ask you to read my posts, neither to reply, nor to put any comment on this thread.
ReactReply
JE
JeffTheGentlemanOriginal Poster
Aug 11, 2011
It is very logicall what you said. I totally agree with you. Perhaps my suggestion is good in theory, but not in practise, especially here. Even though, I think it should be established with some conditions. That's to avoid the disavantages you've mentionned. [quote][quote]A question: were you to submit a post, had to wait a day or two to see it, and then discovered that it had been altered, what would be your opinion of the website?[/quote] [/quote] To be honest, yes I'd be upset. But I'd learn to avoid breaking the rules when I submit a comment. According to your experience, don't you think that the website can hire many forums moderators who are very much active and then it won't be long time? I can moderate some forums myself. I did it in the past. [quote] [quote]I have found a board where the premise that you are suggesting is apparently in use. It is not a social networking site. The board appears to consist of stand-alone posts on assorted topics with little or no interaction between the members. It's informational rather than social.[/quote] [/quote] As I said, I've controlled posts in a forum before. It was at a media. Once an article is published, you see below ''send a comment''. And my duty was to control and approve these comments. I only alterated the ones which were offensive, trolling, etc. Everything was objective and it didn't take more than few hours to be posted. [quote] [quote]TN is an oasis for nudists in a textile desert. One of its values is its immediacy. I post, you respond, I respond to you, others respond to us, we respond to them, and commiunication occurs. It's not instantaneous ala chat, but it is quick enough that a live conversation or debate can occur.[/quote] [/quote] This oasis should be protected, no? [quote] [quote]A parallel concept: you call Joe on the phone; your call is recorded at the central office; there it waits for approval; after it is approved (and edited to meet telco standards), it is sent to Joe. Joe dials your number and his message runs through the gauntlet. You reply to him. This could take a day or more between calls, depending on how many screeners are working and how many calls must be approved. Is that progress? Is that acceptable? Would you ever use the phone?[/quote] [/quote] It is different. [quote] [quote]Were the backlog of unapproved posts long, your OP might still be waiting in the queue, or it might just be deleted because the mod or admin doesn't like it.[/quote] [/quote] I agree with you about this statement. [quote] [quote]In short, we like TN the way it is. Is it perfect? Of course not. Nothing made by humans IS perfect.[/quote] [/quote] [quote] [/quote] Only God is perfect. [quote] [quote]We get more than our fair share of rulebreakers, trolls, juvenile brats and gibbering idiots here. It comes with the turf. They are dealt with, not necessarily in as timely a manner as we might desire, but eventually.[/quote] [/quote] As you can see, some threads created by trolls took a very long time to be dealt with. Not so long ago, someone has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. It was Cheef_1976. Until now, some threads sent by trolls are still there and not deleted. [quote][quote]The severity of the offenses plays a major role in the priorities that are in place. A moron who is here to agitate is given a far lower status than a perv who posts hard porn or photos of naked children.[/quote] [/quote] In that case, I'd suggest it should be reported to INTERPOL cyber crimes team. I mean it. [quote][quote]Hang around; learn the ropes; realize that we are the users, not the bosses, and we don't get to establish rules and policies; and enjoy the good company of the vast majority of Tee-Enners.[/quote][/quote] Yeah, right. That's why we are just suggesting, we are just giving our personnal opinions. That's all. Take care Kind regards, Jeff
ReactReply
CO
Curt, or Cowboy
Aug 11, 2011
[quote]To be honest, yes I'd be upset. But I'd learn to avoid breaking the rules when I submit a comment.[/quote] Under a pre-approval scheme, it could be months to recognize a rule break correction, just because of the delays. [quote] According to your experience, don't you think that the website can hire many forums moderators who are very much active and then it won't be long time?[/quote] Google, yes. Yahoo, yes. Facebook, yes. Almost anyone else is questionable, and the vast majority I'd suggest do not have the cash flow. [quote]As you can see, some threads created by trolls took a very long time to be dealt with.[/quote] That's a failing of the admin, not the system. ANY and EVERY system must fail, if the administrator refuses to adminstrate.
ReactReply