setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion
|
Brilliant! Many thanks, Mark.
Cheers Helen
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:15 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
I've made this change. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
On second thought maybe I like Gerald's suggested change. It serves to contrast the two statuses very clearly. On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:05 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 04:37 PM, Gerald Boutin wrote: --
J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 04:37 PM, Gerald Boutin wrote:
moderate all messages of every topic this person startsSince a "moderated topic" is used elsewhere, I would keep it as is and not make this change. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 06:35 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Assuming my interpretation is correct, might I suggest rewording the second override as follows.
-- Gerald
|
|
|
|
Yay! Thanks, Mark.
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
Hi All, I've just added the following two post status overrides:
Please let me know if you see anything strange. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
I just encountered another use case this morning. Our group is a science-based group on a cat disease, and while neutral discussion of unproven supplements is allowed to some extent, people are not allowed to make unproven statements about their effectiveness or recommend them if unproven, etc.
There are certain group members who have to restrain themselves in order to adhere to this rule (they're into supplements) and who tend to start threads about all kinds of unproven cures. These threads can then take off down the rabbit hole, into extreme speculation and misinformation about the supplements, including by members other than the member who started the thread. This can cause future readers to read the inaccurate statements and take them as fact. (I actually have sen instances of this. A group member will post, "I saw that xyz supplement is good for the liver" or whatever and start using it.) This morning, one such group member - and she was fairly predictable from the start - started such a thread, and I had to (belatedly) put it on moderation. I have put the group member herself on mod, but what I'd really prefer to do is put all threads she starts on mod, because they tend to take off down the rabbit hole. I don't want to have to moderate every post of hers in other people's threads. Just hers. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 02:21 PM, ro-esp wrote:
and whether that value outweighs the amount of programmingIt would be easy to implement. It's not quite so clear how to make the setting interact with Helen's suggestion about just moderating the first message in threads started by the member. I think the two could be nested options, with moderate whole thread beneath moderate first message. that's what often happens when an idea is "outside the box"...I don't see it as that far out of the box. But yeah. ;) -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
ro-esp
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 07:35 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
The only question is whether moderating threads by certain individuals wouldModerating threads *started by* certain individuals, right? Something like "override. threads started by this member are moderated" and whether that value outweighs the amount of programming these arguments against it are really perplexing.that's what often happens when an idea is "outside the box"... groetjes, Ronaldo
|
|
|
|
BTW I did start a separate thread with my suggestion of applying hashtags to group members, so this discussion could be taken over there:
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/ability_to_apply_hashtags_to/25166716 -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
Jim Higgins
Received from Dave Wade at 9/4/2018 05:29 PM UTC:
As others have said, in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics. In most groups there are one or two vocal individuals who need careful management. Yes... and they do so at their own peril in my groups. If they need "careful management" then everything they post is moderated because I don't have the time or patience to "carefully moderate" problem subscribers. If they behave as badly as you mention above... going as far as trying to open new accounts to bypass moderation, they get tossed and banned. Responsible management can (and sometimes must) be supplemented, but never replaced. Every solution I've ever needed began with management of the root cause of the underlying problem... after which additional solutions were often unnecessary. Jim H
|
|
|
|
Jim Higgins
I second that! This isn't the first time in this thread and it's getting a bit old.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Jim H Received from Tony Moody at 9/4/2018 02:20 PM UTC:
Ouch !!!
|
|
|
|
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 05:09 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
why not simply tell that member that the specific hashtag must be appliedIf the required hashtag is known ... Some of them would be known at joining. Some would not be known. Some members would comply. Some would not. Etc. etc. etc. -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
Jim Higgins
Received from J_Catlady at 9/3/2018 06:35 PM UTC:
The idea is that either the member or the mod applies the hashtag at some point, thus *eliminating* the need to moderate on a per-message basis and/or add it later. In our group, we deal with one main disease that has subdiagnoses. We know a priori when a member joins which their cat has (or the cat may be diagnosed with it later). We would apply the hashtag to the member immediately upon joining, or when their cat's diagnosis becomes known. If the required hashtag is known when the member joins the group, why not simply tell that member that the specific hashtag must be applied to every new thread that member starts? Jim H
|
|
|
|
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Tony Moody wrote:
What about some sort of filter? ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.What about just considering my original feature request. :) Why are people suggesting things as far afield as AI and Bayesian filters? This has gone really far afield. ;p -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
Tony Moody
Peace.
What about some sort of filter? ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.
Not sure how to handle the results but maybe the filter could add appropriate hashtags or push
the post to moderation if in doubt.
Each group could have their own filter to play with and that could be a handy feature.
OK,
Tony
On 4 Sep 2018 at 10:03, J_Catlady wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] setting to moderate ever
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.
Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away
with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that
what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection. Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…I have no idea how many groups veer one way or the other in terms of individuals vs. topics needing moderation. But moderating a topic is ALREADY a feature i in groups.io. By saying that "in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics" you are again essentially arguing that the feature is useless. And it is not. The only question is whether moderating threads by certain individuals would have value. My group is in existence proof that it would. It can't be known a prior how many other groups would take advantage of or benefit from it, but these arguments against it are really perplexing. It would be a minute change to the UI and trivial to implement, and nobody would have to use it who didn't want to. -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
Dave Wade
As others have said, in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics. In most groups there are one or two vocal individuals who need careful management. They divert threads off-topic and hijack sensible discussion. Even then they are, if membership is not moderated, prone to opening new accounts…. .. so what I am saying is that whilst I can see some benefit in it, I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…
Dave
From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 18:04 To: main@beta.groups.io Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|
|
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection. -- J
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
|
|
|