News Focus
News Focus
icon url

SoxFan

09/10/03 12:49 PM

#29222 RE: Mattu #29221

good idea - however if the moderator tosses a person they go immediately to jail and we can have a trial. We need to keep Fryday's.
icon url

sarals

09/10/03 12:50 PM

#29223 RE: Mattu #29221

Just enforce regular iHub TOS rules period. Simple, end of story.

Don't let those boards make up special rules ... makes your job harder.
icon url

Lownumba

09/10/03 12:57 PM

#29225 RE: Mattu #29221

You need someone who is universally admired, venerated and beloved to oversee the political boards. Reluctantly, I accept.
icon url

Lownumba

09/10/03 1:02 PM

#29228 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt, how about this:

Get rid of the moderators on political boards. They do nothing but screw things up.
icon url

fung_derf

09/10/03 1:49 PM

#29234 RE: Mattu #29221

Cool! If the Grotto becomes a political board, I can tos whoever I want?!!!
icon url

Tatari Gami

09/10/03 2:41 PM

#29238 RE: Mattu #29221

As long as you're editing the TOU,
you may as well include the following changes:

you agree that you will not . . . post . . . any content . . . that:
. . .
2. victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability, except feel free to use the slurs "raghead" and "towelhead" all you like.


Just to be clear, that is your policy, right?





icon url

BullNBear52

09/10/03 3:30 PM

#29243 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt, Apply the IHUB TOU and cut the crap in the Iboxs. If the moderators don't apply the IHUB TOU fairly then TOS the moderator.

For instance how many problems have you had with the Freedom board and it's moderators who are basically using IHUB's TOU, compared to some other boards that have specific rules in their IBOXs.

icon url

Phil(Hot Rod Chevy)

09/10/03 6:14 PM

#29286 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt,

I agree.

Have fun,
Phil
icon url

WTMHouston

09/10/03 9:14 PM

#29298 RE: Mattu #29221

If you are going to allow that then you might as well allow private boards, which although I think they are a bad idea, will piss off a lot fewer people on an ongoing basis. If any moderator can delete anything they feel like for any reason, you are likely to get some serious bashing and flaming across other threads. This place should not become a series of small fiefdoms controlled by the moderators. It is easy to say that you will let the moderator and poster "settle differences," but that is simply not realistic when one has the power to eliminate the other from the discussion.

Here is a practical problem: someone pays or has paid (lifetime) for premium features, which includes posting on premium boards. Of course, under the "moderator has full control theory," they may not be able to do so because the moderator will be allowed to delete every post of theirs on a given thread just because they do not like the person posting.

The terms of use should apply to all threads equally. If a post violates it, it gets toasted. If it does not, it stays. A very simple concept that seems to have gotten twisted somewhere along the way. If a moderator cannot follow the TOU, then they should not be a moderator. Folks who file frivolous TOU complaints ought to pay the consequences for those just as those who violate the TOU do so as well.

You head down the proverbial slippery slope when you empower people to make content decisions for the site on any basis different from objective, content neutral terms of use.
icon url

The Original dpb5!

09/10/03 10:46 PM

#29311 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt! That's a GODSEND in diplomacy. For quite a long time now I have wondered why you have worried so, (and Bob, too!) about what is happening on the NON STOCK Threads of SI and IHUB.

You started the site as a way to allow moderator's to control the content of particular threads. I can see how you wish to mainain control of the STOCK related threads, but I also applaud both you and Bob for recognizing that policing of NON STOCK related boards CAN and SHOULD be allowed by the moderator's who created those threads.

Without that, how can you possibly spend the necessary time for you to police the Stock Threads as IHUB grows?

To clarify, is this a complete change in IHUB philosophy of allowing moderator's of NON STOCK threads to monitor and control their boards in the future without being overridden?

If so, this would be a tough call for you to make, and it would be expected that as admin that you would defend the decisions to delete solely upon the moderator and assistants of any NON STOCK Message Board! If you agree with this, then the Political Threads of IHUB CAN WORK...

Further, this would clearly allow you and Bob to spend more time on moderating the STOCK RELATED Boards and not these "superflous" ones! If a member complains to you or Bob about a post on a NON STOCK Thread, simply refer them to PM the MODERATOR of the Board about their dispute.

All in all, this is a nice change in position on the part of yourself and Bob regarding NON STOCK Threads.

THOUGHTS??????
icon url

ergo sum

09/10/03 10:52 PM

#29313 RE: Mattu #29221

Moderators should be allowed to moderate without your involvement. Moderators who cause problems should be evaluated. Is it the moderator or is it the whiners? Uninvolve yourself, the threads will live or die by their own merit. The TOU should dictate what your involvement is and the moderator's IBOX should be respected as a addition or a subtraction to those rules. The general public will either accept the moderator or they will reject it, that is their vote.
icon url

GGraessle

09/10/03 11:07 PM

#29315 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt - Bad move in my opinion.

Be honest, the site is growing and is becoming more time consuming to manage. Couple that with Bob spending most of his time at SI. In my opinion the acquisition of SI stretched both of you too thin and from what I read in that post - Bob is just trying to come up with an idea that will take less of his time to manage all because Bob wants to play programmer and not Cop. (may sound harsh, but those are the facts as I see them)

IHub is a community of people and although your primary vision and goal is discussion of stocks, the fact of the matter is that many post here for reasons other than stocks. If you create different standards for non-stock boards you will in my opinion open up a can of worms, or may be a Pandora's box. Or you'll turn every non-stock thread into a Jailhouse type environment, where virtually anything goes. Once that happens you'll see a plethora of new boards just made those for select few that agree eye to eye and damn the rest. Hey how about a NAMBLA board - sounds sickening doesn't it?

Did you know that Saudia Arabia for 10 years now has banned the Barbie Doll? (my attempt at trying to be like gotmilk - and toss in a brain fart. lol)

I think you need to take a good long hard look at this site and where you envision it down the road in say 3 years. Factor in the growth rate you have been experiencing, how are you going to deal with it? IHub will continue to grow, IMO, and why - because it is more desirable than that cess pool of a site called Raging Bull and Yahoo and a host of others. But as you grow you will have growing pains. Letting people duke it out on Non-stock boards doesn't solve the problems.

Hey my 2 cents, now time to watch Arnold chat with O'Reilly on Fox news. And a special thanks to AK, who cared enough to PM me about this issue, other wise I would have missed it, been busy of late. Good night Matt.

GG

icon url

Rick Faurot

09/11/03 12:10 AM

#29325 RE: Mattu #29221

There are decency issues that have showed up on many threads that must be dealt with and having an Admin available for that is vital IMO.

Apart from that, your idea seems okay. Zeev's politics thread has been managed effectively by Zeev and we have had a wide open discussion from all sides of the political spectrum without anyone going so far as to cause a major problem.

It's in the nature of political discussion to have debates and the debates can be heated without being uncivil.

And there's always the ignore function which has served me very well.

icon url

Sam_0

09/11/03 12:47 AM

#29339 RE: Mattu #29221

America is for Freedom in my eyes...That's why I'm an American..
I have the power of choice... I have Freedom of expression,speech,bill of 'right' etc.etc.etc.etc. if someone wants tp print political,religion or off color dookies..I have the power to choose: to 'read' or not to read! and so does everyone else... so let the children play as children and the civil adults versed in knowledgable financial fact...please post your best...and enjoy..

Bob..for the most part..this has been a wonderful board..and I for one really enjoy it...!

Thank YOU! for what you've done for me and a whole bunch of others..

Sam O

icon url

Bruce A Thompson

09/11/03 7:58 AM

#29360 RE: Mattu #29221

Hi Matt,

My opinion is that both IH and SI are in a class above Yhoo. The reason is the pride you two guys take in your work. Your steadfast attention to the TOS rules and your maintainence to the standards of decorum have made these threads a pleasure to participate in.

As the work load increases over time, you should take pride in your success. If you consider it, you could be like everybody else with popups and not a care in the world about TOS rules. If you were no better than Yhoo, why would anybody pay you to be here.

Also, if this new policy of "Letting go of the reins" is just a start, where will it end? Will there be broken links that go for years unfixed? Will Kazaa and Al Quieda have their own boards?

If it is taking too much of your time to monitor the boards, I suggest that you feel complimented on your success and hire a board monitor. My thoughts are that you should hire an educated woman, preferably an english major. She should be refined, aggressive, with rapier like wit and no tolerance for Bozos. You know. Kind'a like a mom with a gun.

Remember, your standards are what has gotten IHUB & SI to this point. Don't comprimise them now.

BT

icon url

GGraessle

09/11/03 8:40 AM

#29365 RE: Mattu #29221

..<font size=5><font color=red>Matt

Please take Bruce's last line, from #msg-1424693 enlarge it to the biggest font you can print and tape it across the bottom of your monitor.

Remember, your standards are what has gotten IHUB & SI to this point. Don't compromise them now.

Thank you.

icon url

WinLoseOrDraw

09/11/03 4:40 PM

#29405 RE: Mattu #29221

kind of a "it's a toxic cesspool, swim at your own risk, don't waste my time asking for a towel" policy? i think that's fine, as long as the border between "here" and "there" is well-defined.

icon url

ONEBGG

09/11/03 4:56 PM

#29406 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt...Too Simple... It would never work... HARR!!!!
icon url

ONEBGG

09/11/03 5:15 PM

#29409 RE: Mattu #29221

Matt...Great Idea!!! EOM
icon url

MrBankRoll

09/14/03 11:07 PM

#29761 RE: Mattu #29221

Violations of privacy? The moderators have access to private messaging?