Proposed policy: Inform members when deleting their posts

[Inspector]

The current policy is that the moderators sometimes inform a member when deleting a post of theirs. I propose that it should be board policy that the moderators should always inform a member if a post of theirs is deleted. Obviously, if they are a spammer to be banned from the board, then an exception could be made.

Here is an example of a cut-and-paste message that could be used:

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

A post of yours was determined to be in violation of forum rules and has been deleted. Your post can be located in the trash can here[link]. The forum rules can be located here[link].

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

The problem with not informing people is that they may not know or ever find out if a post of theirs is deleted. This is a concern whether or not the poster is generally a good person. Not only should someone know when they have stepped over the line, but their post may contain acceptable content they would want to re-post.

[Groovenstein]

I support this idea, and I wonder if the software could be made to automatically generate a response whenever a post is deleted. Computer people?

[mrocktor]

I support this idea as well.

[Alon Tsin]

I don't post much here, but I think that if I take time and thought to write something, I deserve at least the common courtesy to be notified in a few words that my post was deleted and why.

P.S- I obviously don't mean posts that are ads or spam, but posts by members who perhaps went a bit too far.

[JMeganSnow]

I vote we simply stop moderation and let the boards fill up with crap, since I've had about enough of this whining. If you care about what happens to your posts after you post them, you'll track this sort of thing yourself and we won't have to notify you. And if you really can't figure out why your post was deleted on your own, just PM the mods and we'll tell you so you won't do it again.

It makes no sense to make a "special exception" for spam and utter trash because this is the majority of what we delete . . . call me crazy but the majority can't be an exception. Posts that might actually warrant notification (because the delete reason is particularly obscure) are the exception and are dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

If you want to avoid having your posts deleted follow the forum rules. If, as a moderator, you think it's important to notify people (especially in the case of iffy posts), then do so. The "staff" on this website are all volunteers capable of using their discretion.

Edited May 10, 2007 by JMeganSnow

[Inspector]

"Whining," eh? Well, so much for manners...

[Ifat Glassman]

Jennifer: This policy may save some work for moderators, but will undoubtedly result in loss of good posters, in present and future (and it already happened in the past). The reason is that people who value their time, and at the same time invest a lot of time and effort into posts, will not want to post on a board that does not respect their effort enough to send a note about deleting a post. Only people who do not invest a lot of time in their posts, and do not care if the content is lost will be fine with this policy (or moderators/admins themselves, who have control over deleting their own posts).

You set the rules, but keep in mind what you have to gain/lose by them.

In the case of my post which you deleted without notification, I think it was error in judgement on your part. That post was not rude, though I can understand why it would seem that way. But in any case, that post was very very important to me, for reasons you do not know and I don't intend to tell. I have no problem if you decide it's not appropriate for the forum, but I do mind having it lost forever, when this content is important for me to communicate to someone else.

Just giving this as an example of my previous point, I don't intend nor want to start a discussion about it.

To clarify: I am not paying for moderating services or for using the board. Nobody owes me any notification or anything else. But if the purpose of the board is to allow quality discussions, I think that the best way to achieve it is by respecting posters' effort enough to notify them if heir post was changed (in a significant way) or deleted.

[JMeganSnow]

P.S- I obviously don't mean posts that are ads or spam, but posts by members who perhaps went a bit too far.

For most iffy stuff I usually already notify because if I don't, nine times out of ten I get a PM from the member. In Ifat's case she posted some rude comments in a sensitive thread where another member already had a post deleted for precisely the same type of rudeness and then decided to raise a public stink about it. It's all very well to expect common courtesy but if you're going to start blanket declaring that other people's ideas are "bullshit" you deserve what you get. Oh, and btw if you don't want to have your post deleted, Starblade, it's usually not wise to put in a P.S. that says "don't delete this post". I can tell you that it will pretty much guarantee that your post is deleted.

----

Before people fly off half-cocked and start complaining that they would feel bad for having one of their posts deleted without notification, they might want to consider whether a.) this has actually happened to them and b.) if it hasn't, is one complaint really representative of the board members to the point where it would mandate that a policy be put in place? One complaint out of three thousand members is hardly a representative sample and I am opposed to instituting extra policies when the problem is better handled by individuals. (Granted, these are not the words of GreedyCapitalist.)

If you are really concerned, just check the new posts in the Trash Can when you log in. If something of yours got deleted without warning and you really can't understand why (and I can appreciate that it may not always be completely obvious), let us know and we'll explain as best we can. It's usually not more than a few posts a day unless we're under assault by trolls or something. Frequently even if the mod forgot to notify you, there will be a thread in the (invisible to members) moderator's forum explaining matters to the rest of the "staff".

Yet another reason for not instituting a "policy" is: what are you going to do if someone forgets? Suspend their moderation priviledges? We don't have enough mods as it is and if we did that then GC would be the only one left. Probably what would happen is that . . . the user would complain in a PM, we'd hunt around to find out what happened, they'd get an explanatory PM, and that'd be the end of it. Hmm, that's what happens now. So what is this policy supposed to accomplish, exactly? Making Inspector feel better?

[JMeganSnow]

This policy may save some work for moderators, but will undoubtedly result in loss of good posters, in present and future (and it already happened in the past). The reason is that people who value their time, and at the same time invest a lot of time and effort into posts, will not want to post on a board that does not respect their effort enough to send a note about deleting a post. Only people who do not invest a lot of time in their posts, and do not care if the content is lost will be fine with this policy (or moderators/admins themselves, who have control over deleting their own posts).

Firstly, the content is NOT lost. It goes in the TRASH. Given if it sits there unattended for a long time (like more than a week) I think it does eventually get purged. However this is more than enough time for you to copy/paste it if you're desperate to save it. This is not an archive for your personal journal and thoughts. Forum posts are not tablets to be passed onto posterity, as evidenced especially by the many spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors that are rife even with edited posts by some of the most prolific posters on the site.

In the case of my post which you deleted without notification, I think it was error in judgement on your part.

Duh. However, your judgment of what is/is not rude doesn't matter. Only mine and the other moderators, which should be fairly obvious. Let me be clear here, we are talking about a post (notice it's still there) in which you wrote maybe 5 lines, the rest was all quotations of someone else, yet you're claiming to be emotionally attached to this post and that it took you a great deal of time and mental concentration to write? Well I suppose I can't really say one way or the other on that, but I admit I am skeptical.

It's all very well to make grand claims (not to mention veiled threats about how "all the good posters will leave") but until some substantiated information comes along I see no reason to move from a functioning informal, friendly setup to a formal one with serious implementation problems that will only make people more hostile than they apparently feel themselves entitled to be, while at the same time not actually solving any problem.

[softwareNerd]

Background:

Type 1: A large number of posts we delete are by obvious spammers/advertisers,etc. Everyone here agrees that no notification is required for this category.

Type 2: The second large category of posts deleted are by members who come across as being here mainly to complain about Objectivism/OO.net/etc. Moderators take various actions against this category of member: PM them, raise their warning level, put them on "preview mode" where their posts have to be previewed before showing up, delete their posts, or respond in the topic itself. Often, such members exchange quite a few PMs with moderators "in the background". In the vast majority of cases, the deletion is part of some type of ongoing quarrelsome situation, and the poster would have received a recent PM or Forum-warning; so, the moderator might think there is no point repeating themselves.

Type 3: The last category of deletions are ones where the poster is a "normal user", perhaps even a long-standing member, who has no on-going quarrel with the mods or other members, nor with OO.net, with Objectivism, and so on. These deletions are extremely rare. Nevertheless, I can see why one might wish to be notified, whether to post a different version or to question the deletion, etc. I think that, while moderators should retain the discretion, the fact that a member is "long standing" and of value to the forum, should be one of the factors taken into consideration while making the judgement.

Draft Proposed policy: Moderators who delete posts may inform the poster, depending on the egregiousness of the violation (less obvious violations may warrant a notification), the member's history (members in good standing may deserve a courtesy-notification), and any other factors that the moderator considers appropriate (e.g. a 17-year old newbie may need a specific explanation about a deletion). This judgement is left to the discretion of the moderator.

Automated notification: As Groovenstein suggested, it would be nice if the software could do this automatically, and the issue would be moot. There are some third-party hacks that do it, but third-party hacks tend to be a pain when maintaining/upgrading versions. I'll look into this, to see if something simple can be put in place.

[Ifat Glassman]

In Ifat's case she ... decided to raise a public stink about it.

Please don't present your judgement of my reason to act as if it was actually my action and motivation, when you cannot back it up with my own words.

However, your judgment of what is/is not rude doesn't matter. Only mine and the other moderators, which should be fairly obvious. Let me be clear here, we are talking about a post (notice it's still there) in which you wrote maybe 5 lines, the rest was all quotations of someone else, yet you're claiming to be emotionally attached to this post and that it took you a great deal of time and mental concentration to write?

Yes, few words that mean a lot. When someone thinks that they are unable to achieve happiness, this is the first and most important thing to pay attention to. If this is not dealt with, there is no point in further discussion, as long as someone refuses to recognize that they have control over their mind.

In any case, I am not protesting the deletion of the post, just the fact that you did not notify me.

It's all very well to make grand claims (not to mention veiled threats about how "all the good posters will leave") ...

Again presenting your own judgement of me as if it was fact. I never made a threat.

[Ifat Glassman]

Type 2: The second large category of posts deleted are by members who come across as being here mainly to complain about Objectivism/OO.net

When I just came to OO, I was in the process of being classified into this group, of people who come here to "complain about Objectivism" and in fact a moderator suggested that maybe this place isn't the right place for me, and I would be better off leaving.

I think that caution and benevolent treatment is needed much more with newbies than with regular users, and it is more important to give a good treatment (like to explain deletion, perhaps with suggestion how to correct it etc) to a new member than to a regular one. Benefit of the doubt and benevolence are actually more important, IMO, in that phase than later on.

Then again, I also think that if someone is a regular with a "good reputation" (usually has a good behavior), then a notification of deletion is also in place.

[KendallJ]

Since the thread seems to be open again, I'll weigh in.

I'm not an admin, but I have to come to Jen's defense a bit.

I think many times, we want a rule or limitation to be our solution, thinking that that will be more effective than trusting people to make reasonable judgements. Many times what you get is somewhat beaurocratic bits of not very useful regulations.

The question I think of before I even get into a discussion of whether rules should be changed is: "Is there a systemic problem that needs to be fixed." If it isn't systemic, then changing a rule is going to do very little except make the person who was offended in this particular case feel a little better, and there are other mechanisms to accomplish that that are more friendly than getting "satisfaction" this way.

While I can't claim they are always absolutely consistent, I think the mods are fairly reasonable people, and have demonstrated to be such. I've been a mod on other boards, and it ain't an easy job. I don't see evidence that this is an ongoing problem, and I think Ifat's argument that members might be lost over it, is only true if it is an ongoing problem. judging by her tenaciousness in debate, I certainly don't think she's going to leave anytime over this incident.

Now I could certainly debate Jenni's judgement in this case, but frankly I just don't think it is that big a deal. If Ifat didn't think that she was "on the edge" when she hit the send button on that post then shame on her. She's been here too long to not know that it might be a questionable post. Certainly she is a well respected forum member, and maybe Jen could have notified her out of that respect, but again, I don't think it's inidicative of an issue, and I'd vote for kissing and making up over a rule change.

A certain amount of the forum decor is the rules, and expectations, but a certain amount is basic trust in the people who run the place. Dave and the other mods have earned my trust, and I think this added rule is unnecessary.

[D'kian]

The reason is that people who value their time, and at the same time invest a lot of time and effort into posts, will not want to post on a board that does not respect their effort enough to send a note about deleting a post.

I've done admin and mod work on boards like this one. I want to remind you the mods put a great deal of effort maintaining the board, particularly keeping it tidy (and this si one of the tidiest baords I've known). They don't get paid for their efforts, but they do have to take time from their lives to maintain the board. I think it's rude, and shows poor gratitude, to demand they take up more of their time for the users' benefit.

Furhter, I agree witht he mods here that it's up to the poster to keep track of his posts. You will also notice no mod has said they won't explain why a particular post was deleted if, and when, asked about it. That's fair enough, if you bother to track your posts.

[JMeganSnow]

I like the automatic notification option IF it won't screw up the board in some bizarre way. Since I'm the least software-savvy admin this is not something I'm qualified to make a call on. It'd be nice if the software automatically did some other things, like linked warnings to the relevant post, etc. But since we have to remember to do all of this by hand and it is tedious and a sometimes difficult, sometimes it doesn't get done. Just think about when you're doing your email or something like that. Do you always remember to attach files? Do you always attach the correct file? Do you always leave your phone number in a loud clear voice on voice mail when you want someone to call you? Do you always turn off every electronic device in your house when you go out?

If you're like me, sometimes you forget to attach things, you leave the wrong phone number, and you lock your keys in the car. It happens. Which is why computers are nice because they are good at always remembering to do things for you . . . if you set them up to do it. This software (from what I've seen) is really good at managing the big forum database etc. But it doesn't have a lot of the fluffy user-friendly features you get in a big program like Office where it does a bunch of stuff (like check your spelling) automatically.

Furhter, I agree witht he mods here that it's up to the poster to keep track of his posts.

Er, that's just me, D'kian, the Grouchy Admin.

[Ifat Glassman]

judging by her tenaciousness in debate, I certainly don't think she's going to leave anytime over this incident.

Right, I don't. Even while having to search the trash-can for possible posts the forum is still worth participating for me.

Now I could certainly debate Jenni's judgement in this case, but frankly I just don't think it is that big a deal. If Ifat didn't think that she was "on the edge" when she hit the send button on that post then shame on her.

I agree that it was on the edge. But I thought that BS was still the right word to use both because of the previous 2 posts I made in that thread, and because of the severity of the idea involved (having no control over one's own mind, or ability to achieve happiness). I did not think I was violating forum rules while posting it. I was not trying to offend the original poster, rather I was trying to help him.

Anyway, the point was about lack of notification, not about the justification for deleting it (after thinking about it from someone else's PoV, and not my own, I actually agree that it should have been deleted, modified (by me), and re-posted. But hey, I deserve the chance to know that it was deleted to be able to change the bad parts and repost.)

I think I said everything I had to about this. (The End).

[softwareNerd]

Sounds like we're all in agreement then!

[D'kian]

Er, that's just me, D'kian, the Grouchy Admin.

I stand corrected.

But still users ought to keep track of their posts.

[Inspector]

But still users ought to keep track of their posts.

Ought they? I have over 3000 posts on this board. At any time, any moderator might decide that any post should be deleted. This is fine, as I agree with the rules and can dispute a deletion if I don't agree it was in concurrence with board policy. What is not fine is that nobody is required to inform me. Copy-and-pasting an automated message into a PM would take literally 15 seconds to do. And given that, if the trash can is accurate, there are only a handful of non-spam deletions per month, I am asking for... what? Less than half a minute of the mods' time? They've all spent more time reading this thread, I am sure, than would be required of them in one year of moderating.

Granted, software that did so would be even better.

Alternatively, every one of us would have to check the trash can manually every time we search for posts. That is much more time for any one of us than it would be for all of the mods combined. So take that for what it's worth.

Edited May 12, 2007 by Inspector

[KendallJ]

Ought they? I have over 3000 posts on this board. At any time, any moderator might decide that any post should be deleted. This is fine, as I agree with the rules and can dispute a deletion if I don't agree it was in concurrence with board policy. What is not fine is that nobody is required to inform me.

You're kidding, right? Do we have a systemic problem with mods going back and deleting three year old posts right from under you, unaware? It's a good thing we've brought that up as a possiblity though, isn't it.

But since you're implying that the possibility of it might warrant a rule, let's see what that rule will actually do for you.

Let's say a mod goes back and deletes post #52 of yours. What is it about a rule, per se, that will force them to notify you? And since you readily admit keeping track of all 3000 is a bit difficult, what is it about having a rule that will prevent them from deleting post #52, not notifying you, and still getting away with it?

Answer: not a blinking thing...

[Inspector]

You're kidding, right?

No, I'm not kidding. Seeing someone have a post deleted without being informed made me sit up and take notice.

Let's say a mod goes back and deletes post #52 of yours. What is it about a rule, per se, that will force them to notify you?

Why have any rules at all, if that is your attitude?

Besides, if someone is not informed of a deletion, how are they to know their behavior is unacceptable? If they don't know it's been deleted, then they will assume it was acceptable, and continue the behavior.

I don't like how I am insulted ("whining" and "making Inspector feel better") by JMeganSnow and now greeted with incredulity ("You're kidding, right?") by you for what is a very simple and easy request that I thought was already policy and should have been from the beginning. This thread was even locked, for some reason. I don't understand why... is this idea so troublesome?

[Groovenstein]

For the record, KendallJ, I deleted a post of yours in this thread that appeared to be a duplicate. Check the trash can.

Don't say you weren't notified.

And the post I just posted also duplicated itself, so I deleted one of them.

Excuse me while I notify myself.

(The comedy is just flowing today.)

[KendallJ]

Inspector,

First off, my last post was a bit emotional (yeah, sarcastic) and for that I apologize. However, I still think that your argument goes far beyond what the actual incident would lead one to even suspect is reasonable.

No, I'm not kidding. Seeing someone have a post deleted without being informed made me sit up and take notice.

I'll ask again. Do you believe that this instance shows a systemic abuse by our mods? You're argument rests on the possible / probable distinction. Yes, the fact that a post was deleted certainly gives you a context where it is probable. But that does not mean that the argument from possibility holds any water. As an Objectivist, you ought to know that distinction pretty well (and is where my incredulity comes from). It certainly is possible that a mod would go back and delete a three year old post, just as it is possible that there are green headed men on Mars, but where is your evidence.

Why have any rules at all, if that is your attitude?

Besides, if someone is not informed of a deletion, how are they to know their behavior is unacceptable? If they don't know it's been deleted, then they will assume it was acceptable, and continue the behavior.

Well, my criteria for considering if a rule is necessary was contained in my question, but I'll phrase it within this distinction. That is, you have rules to set expections against contextual behavior that is a. probable, and b. if occurs, will damage the functioning of the board.

You do NOT set rules because something is possible, that list is amost infinite, and mostly useless. Nor do you set rules even if something that is probable really doesn't hurt the function of the board, given it's contextual level of probability.

And especially, you do NOT make the rule more general than it needs to be if it creates a ton of extra effort on the part of our volunteer moderators.

The real litmus test is that if you propose the rule, given the context of what actually is probable do you end up bounding it so much that it becomes a "special case." Write the rule in context, and see how special it is. If it is exceedly special it probably applies to a small population, and fairly infrequently, so why have the rule? That's my point.

Look, I personally think that Jen may have exercised poor judgement in this case, but if I look at what this particular contextual rule that addresses the probablye that would be required to fix it, it would be something like "in the event that a post, by a regular member, is deleted, for bad behavior, the mod shall take extra care to notify said member."

My experience here just comes from the standpoint of having to negotiate agreements at work. You know you're starting to run afoul of the basic trust required in a contract negotiation when you see things like "In the event of a., b., c., d., e., and f., notwhistanding the occurence of g.,h.,i.,j.,k the seller shall be required to x, y, and z." You don't write terms for every possibility. The lawyers would have you there for eons. You write terms for those things which are probable and essential to the proper function of a relationship. The same goes for charters, expectation lists, etc.

[DavidOdden]

I will add an observation about the irrationality / disfunctionality of always automatically notifying people that their post was deleted. First, a considerable number of posts that get deleted don't even deserve 1 second of extra attention. People who mistakenly duplicate-post should clean up their own mess and should not expect special treatment in the form of a sweety message saying "Oh, I'm so sorry that I had to delete your post, but you see, it was a duplicate and I just didn't think it bore repeating". Same with null and nearly null posts, and spam. Second, too many people get flamingly angry when there precious but lunatic words are deleted, and by sending a PM to the offender, you facilitate their further attacks against you, which is not a good idea in my opinion.

I have no objection to an automated and anonymous message of the type "Your post was deleted; look in the trash". I object to the presumption that I owe a couple minutes of my life to the miscreant who clutters the board with trash that needs deleting. I do, of course, send messages to deletees when I consider it worthwhile to do so.

[Inspector]

First off, my last post was a bit emotional (yeah, sarcastic) and for that I apologize.

Thank you. I'd prefer a little less hostility in a situation like this.

I'll ask again. Do you believe that this instance shows a systemic abuse by our mods?

First of all, there has been no accusation of abuse - let's be perfectly clear about that. I'm in hot enough water as it is. I checked the trash can after I saw the events giving rise to this topic and saw two things:

1) It only goes back about a month or so. At any point in the past few years, any of my posts could have been deleted by a mod and that mod might not have seen fit to inform me. If I didn't notice it happening at the time, the trash can might have expired and now I wouldn't know about it. Since I wasn't aware that that sort of thing was done around here, I had never before checked the trash can for my posts. Since the board policy does not at all forbid this sort of thing, it would not have been abuse.

2) The last month or so only has a handful of messages that have been deleted - and only a smaller fraction of those are not spam. The ones that are not double posts or where the poster requested it be deleted is only a tiny handful. The task I have proposed would not be very hard for the moderators to do. I don't know what the big deal is.

As for probable vs possible - I had previously thought that this sort of thing was not probable and so never raised the issue. But then - and this is the critical part - it happened. I am not talking about some imaginary fear here - one of Ifat's posts was deleted and she wasn't informed.

This is not about setting a rule versus the infinitely possible. This is about setting a rule against something that has demonstrably happened!

And especially, you do NOT make the rule more general than it needs to be if it creates a ton of extra effort on the part of our volunteer moderators.

A ton of extra effort? That is hardly the case.

"in the event that a post, by a regular member, is deleted, for bad behavior, the mod shall take extra care to notify said member."

I don't know if "bad behavior" would cover it, but if it did then that would be what I was asking for. Except that I don't think it should be limited to regular members. So long as it isn't spam or the guy isn't banned anyway, they should be informed.

...okay, I checked and saw the trash can goes farther back if you set the menu right. That's a bit of a relief. Now this is nothing more than an annoyance.

But I still say this is a good idea. As I illustrated above, it wouldn't take more than a few seconds.