moderated Re: Posting Limits #suggestion


Jim F.
 

Andy, Donald, and Peter-

Different groups operate differently  Our group IS close to a democracy: the website moderators cannot act unilaterally, and achieving an adequate consensus on anything is a long and painful process.  There would be objections to delaying posts at the moderators' discretion--or according to rules that, being manually implemented, would be inconsistently applied.  And we certainly wouldn't do anything under false pretenses.  But most members, I think, would support a transparent limit on excessive posting that was implemented automatically and without cutting anyone off entirely.  

The two-part suggestion I made would do exactly that.  First, an account would become subject to automatic delay after a set number of weekly posts (and both this delay status and the post count would automatically reset every week).  Second, while on automatic delay, posts from that account would be held and distributed at a set time each day.  (Or, as JohnF suggests, such accounts might instead be placed on moderation or simply have further posts rejected.  Our group probably wouldn't accept that, but it might be useful for others.)  

It's hard for me to believe that many other groups don't also have issues with people effectively monopolizing the discussion board with excessive posts.  (I've certainly heard people complain about that regarding online groups generally, as well as in our group; their solution is generally to drop out.)  To say that the moderators should be more forceful, or initiate (yet another) difficult and damaging conversation, really isn't an answer.  The goal should be to facilitate the moderators' job, not to demand more of them. 

Regarding arguments that this capability is already available through monitoring, issuing warnings, and placing accounts on moderation: sure, if you have the authority and the time.  But our group is not actively moderated and our moderators have day jobs.  Even if they tried that approach, a flat daily limit wouldn't work because there are often lively exchanges that go on for a several days.  (The problem is the people who continue posting at that rate all the time.)  So you would need a weekly limit, and then to place each account that exceeds it on moderation, and then to deal individually with each post, and then to turn the moderation off at just the right time to start the new week.  Even if the group accepted it, that process wouldn't be practical for us. 

Best regards. 

-Jim F. 



On Jan 12, 2022, at 5:44 PM, Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 08:43 PM, Jim F. wrote:
I moderate a site for a philosophy discussion group.  Unfortunately we have a couple chatterboxes who treat it as their personal blog and post multiple times daily.
If you have group rules/guidelines that state you will accept a maximum number of posts per person per day then just reject those that exceed the limit and refer the posters to the guidelines when doing so.  It may take a bit of moderation and a few rejections to start with but I'm sure they'll get the message.  It seems like you are asking for a system change to deal with something that already have the tools for but are not prepared to use.

Regards
Andy

Join main@beta.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.