Replies to post #155418 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[buyittradeit]

interesting.....

[Serenity]

Excellent decision and a long time coming!

[b4atf]

Terrible decision. It gives bashers free reign to screw up stabile boards.
Jesus wept.
b4

[ChannelTrader]

I'd like to suggest moving the "add me as moderator" button to a different location so as not to give the impression of an abandoned board.

[RG]

Will the present Mods be staying or are these Boards open to anyone wanting a position there when the change takes place?

[Stevenvegas]

Guess you guys should prepare for the Tsunami of "Why was my post deleted" PMs you'll get lol. or the lead mod complaining of Ibox changes from an assit. ahhhh you guys have time anyway lol

[Slojab]

Who determines which posts are "sticky worthy" and will be stickied/removed?

Example. If there are already 4 posts stickied and one is just a lot of bs, who determines if it should stay or be removed?

If one mod removes it and another reinstates it, do we go back and forth removing/restoring it or appeal to admin like I might on a post that the same thing sometimes happens with?

[Jalex]

this will end well..

[RG]

Will be interesting to see the Feedback for this change.

[imgoingfishing1]

will there be guidelines for when one mod puts up a sticky n another mod removes it?
what about changes to the Ibox?

am i understanding it correctly that there is no more asst. mods just mods. no 1 mod in charge of the board?

[Big Brother]

I liken this decision a little bit to that of "new" coke...lol.

Basically my problem with it is that it allows, bashers, pumpers, IRP's, etc to manipulate boards even easier and further then they already do, they will be out of control.

Plus I won't even get started on the pissin' matches that are going to go on between moderators as the pump-tard and bashers put false info in the iBoxes to sucker in newbies and the honest mods won't have any control.

I'm sure you've noticed that there are a LOT of folks with agendas around here and a LOT of people who get their jollies by stirring the pot.

Too many chiefs didn't work for the indians and I do not foresee it working for iHub either....lol. i hope if works out like you plan but I have some serious reservations.

Not to mention Admin who is obviously already over taxed with PM's will see them increase 10 fold, probably be a week or more before getting a response, if you ever do.

Poor decision all around IMO.

[RG]

Will Admin knowingly appoint Mods to a Board that they know will cause conflict and tell the Mods to work it out or your all going?

[BullNBear52]

IMO 6 mods on a stock board is 4 too many. I would suggest limiting it to two and then Admin here choosing them wisely.

I don't even bother posting on stock specific boards any more because of the moderator abuse.

I don't know what happened to the mod squad that existed in the past; but I would suggest finding some retired (not me I'm still a working stiff) Ihub members who would serve as a 3rd admin on stock specific boards to police your mods.

Or at the very least give them a type of admin ability to prevent moderator abuse.

Good luck.

[LOL]

This is a big mistake, you guys are going to double your work, most stock specific boards are controlled by people that are pro that stock, the minute you let the mods become mixed it's going to be utter chaos because one guy will remove a post and the other will put it back, then another guy is going to delete the iboxes that people have spent hours creating, or removing sticky notes because they don't want people to know the facts about a stock. You guys alreay let people bash stocks and post outright lies without any ramifications, but letting them control the board is going to cause even more chaos than these people already cause on the boards. It's time ihub is 100% free if you guys are going to let it go that way, basically makes ihub as worthless as posting on the yahoo stock boards.IMO

[b4atf]

So sad, friend. I work hard to make my boards useful.

I see mischief makers taking over everything. There is no way I can monitor Iboxes and stickies in a timely manner.

What a terrible idea!

b4

[Rich]

I knew this was coming but, it really isn't such a good idea...

All Moderator positions will have the same abilities and no User can add/remove any other User from a Mod postion.

Was there an issue with Asst. Mods being removed by the Mod without cause?

If that's the case and someone bitched, then that's when Admin should step in and take a look at the situation and make a decision as to whether or not the Mod removed the Asst. for constantly violating the TOS or did they do it just for spite.

If Admin finds that the Asst. was violating the TOS on a regular basis and the Mod had enough reason to remove them, then let it go and move on to the next complaint. IF you felt there was some wrongdoing, just add them back for an undisclosed amount of time and then move on to the next complaint.

I hope you got a raise with this move Shelly, cuz your headache is about to get much bigger.

Cheers!!

[PLUTUS]

If you guys think you were running a babysitting service before, just wait.

This will go down as worst than "new coke".

Good Luck.

[levelnever]

Unless, Ihub is planning to hire a bunch of new people to police all these boards, making it so there is no head admin will I fear inevitably lead to increased disagreement and dissenssion both among assistant mods and among the mods and Ihub admin. It also makes it easier for people to better manipulate the system. While I have always gotten along with Ihub admins, and respect the work they do to maintain this online community, the limited number of them, now having to monitor and decide who all the moderators are for thousands of boards I fear is going to be unsustainable, and I believe it will make it easier for questionable mods to make it through screening. Certainly, there have been some lead mod's that have been reckless, they should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Instead, by making this decision the belief is that Ihub admin's have a better sense of what is going with each of the thousands of tickers, than the individual mods on the board do. I don't believe this is true.

The better approach IMO would be to better police lead moderators to make sure they are honoring their commitment to effective moderation and the TOS rules. My gut is this will lead to an upsurge of dissension and animosity directed towards Ihub itself. Certainly, there must have been a reason within the company that this change has been made and it needs to be addressed. But, in ways I feel like there could have been a forum for discussions with Ihub users on how to address any of the concerns that would satisfy the concerns of all involved.. Taking unilateral action in an online community is bound to lead to some problems. As some have mentioned, the last thing we want is an unstructured free for all as exists on the Yahoo stock boards.

best,
level

[NervesOfSteel]

I would like to be a mod on CATA please.

Thanks
Scott

[Gooddolphin]

For what it's worth... I appreciate your Policy pertaining to Moderators on various boards...

Thanks

[Porgie Tirebiter]

This is an excellent idea.

Admin will approve Moderator positions based on the person's history of abiding by the rules themselves and/or their activity level in enforcing the rules in previous Moderator positions.

The posters who occupy the mod position should be held to a high bar in regards to observation of the T.O.S.

It should be relatively easy for the geeks to set up a routine which checks for moderators who have a high rate of having their own messages deleted, and high restore rates for deletions they've made, similar to the one which currently checks for inactivity.

Qualification to be added as moderator should be based on the applicant's demonstrated ability to post within the T.O.S. consistently.

Like any change, I'm sure this one will be subject to the law of unintended consequences, but it's probably going to be an improvement over the old system.

[Cassandra]

The "Resign as Moderator" link has been removed, which may confuse mods wishing to resign. It appears that one would have to click on "Manage Moderators" and then see that their ID is the only one they can remove in order to resign. This is not intuitive or obvious.

I suggest changing that link to the former "Resign as Moderator" link, which would automatically remove that person as a mod.

[Cassandra]

Does the current ttechnology/system allow IH Admins/Geeks to determine which mod restored a post deleted by another mod?

For example, I promptly deleted this unquestionably vulgar personal attack on me as a newly added moderator which was posted by another moderator on that forum and someone restored it -- certainly not IH Admin, so it was another mod: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69587520

Is IH able to see which mods have restored such obvious violations? It seems restoring vulgar personal attacks or other obvious TOS violations would be an abuse of moderator privileges and reason to remove such mods.

[interloper]

So if someone has had a board as lead mod for several years and designed an ibox to their liking, a new mod could come in and change what ever he wanted?

[Stock]

Is iHub a "halfway house" like Google+? Or an "echo-chamber" like Twister?

What about the iBox 140 character limit? That would end all disagreements about iBoxes.

========================================================

Facebook Increases Status Update Character Limit To 63,206
By Oliver Haslam | December 2nd, 2011

The battle between the three big social networks is really hitting new heights these days, with Facebook, Twitter and Google+ all vying for our time. With so much choice in a world which was previously dominated by the one real option, Facebook, all three contenders are now fighting to find ways to differentiate themselves from the competition to give users a reason to use not just one network, but two or maybe all three for different reasons.

Take Facebook and Twitter as an example. Facebook has always been centered around family and friends and this is borne out in the way the site handles images, video and information.

Twitter by contrast is more of an echo-chamber. Designed as a way to bark content out to whoever will listen, Twitter’s creators took the decision to limit updates to just 140 characters, the same as SMS was back in the day.

Then there is Google+.

Google is clearly trying to find a halfway house between the two extremes of Twitter and Facebook, and as such they have a much higher character limit to Twitter, giving users to option of using Google+ as a surrogate blog. Why go through the hassle of keeping a separate blog updated when you can just update Google Plus?

Now Facebook has joined the ranks of the social networks offering huge character limits by upping theirs to a mahoosive 63,206 characters. Yep, that’s a lot of space to tell the world what you’re having for your dinner!

more

http://www.redmondpie.com/facebook-increases-status-update-character-limit-to-63206/

[frankie_fillet]

so they are trying now to emulate RUNNING WITH BULLS? that place went to hell in a hand basket fast.

real

[Kmacneill116]

what is this message about? I said Prob meaning Probily??? Are you asking me to be a moderater???

[DewDiligence]

Very possibly the worst idea in the history of the world.

[IH Admin [Shelly]]

Update on this new system:

Since Saturday, Admin has reviewed 731 Mod requests and approved 533 of these.

The overwhelming thing we've seen is that people we've never heard of, who have been here for years, with very few deletions and no Admin notes are requesting to help out on boards that they've posted on for years. This is what we had hoped would happen. People who have never had the opportunity but are good citizens can now play a bigger part in their community.

Yes, of course, there were also some people who requested to Mod every board they have ever posted on and other people who rushed to post on boards they never had to get a Mod spot. And, of course, after reviewing 700 requests, mistakes were made by Admin. Some of those have already been brought to light and corrected but we fully expect that others will come to our attention as well.

I know some people are very unhappy with this change. Much of the feedback that we've gotten has been from people upset that someone from the "other side of the fence" is now in a Mod role. But, we've also heard frustrations with the system by a few really good Mods and some have chosen to resign as Mod. That's a shame and we (the entire community) will miss your contributions.

We are encouraged by the overwhelming addition of hundreds of new people participating in a vital way to their community. AND despite this hugely impactful change, we are only seeing disruptions on a handful boards.

Yes, there will still be things to iron out and, yes, conflicts will arise. But, the result of what we've seen happening thus far make us believe this was indeed the right path for iHub.

Thank you to all who are embracing, or at the very least reserving judgment, at this point. And, thank you to all who have stepped up the last few days to assist in moderating boards.

[bluebird50]

About time.... smart move

[pagello]

Awesome. eom

[mastaflash]

Not good. Now mods with totally different views on things will have wiki-wars on the info page at the very least. 6 personalities running things their own way, with no way to regulate it. Is this some kind of make work project for you guys?

[elevenzeez]

What's the suggestion for keeping Stickies unbiased with the new mod system?

Seems the new system lends itself to "sticky wars" between mods.

It seems any credible DD should be allowed both pro and con, correct?

[imgoingfishing1]

now that the new mod system has been runnin for abit what are the main issues that you have ran into? will there be any changes coming?

[timhyma]

Can you make me an assistant for this board:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=1592

The Mod hasn't posted since 2004.

tia

[WillForeall]

NVAE needs a new Moderator, the individual deletes posts for their own benefit.

[Belgie24]

I applied to be the moderator on the Golden Phoenix Minerals board, maybe 2 weeks ago, and nobody has replied to my request. Can you give me a status on the request?

Thanks, Dave

[Gulfbreeze]

Communism comes to mind... Someone who knows the board needs to have final say...
Bad Move IMO...

[IH Admin [Shelly]]

Since this program has been implemented - Admin has reviewed 3251 Mod requests with 2472 new Mods being added. 1719 Mods have been removed during this time frame with a portion of those being removed in the auto removal process on Saturdays for inactivity.

While we know that this transition has been a little challenging for some boards and some Users overall this change has seen many positive results across the site.

We appreciate all of you who are working with each other during this change.

Happy day off of trading. :)

[kiwisteve]

I hub seems to be missing the link to start a new board? or is it just me?

Kiwi

[Stock]

Another competitor -- truncated.

CLEARSTATION® IS BEING RETIRED

Dear Clearstation User,

ClearStation® is being retired effective January 27, 2012. However, you can continue to connect with fellow investors when you join the E*TRADE Community today.

Like ClearStation, the E*TRADE Community gives you access to an engaged group of investors willing to share their ideas and knowledge with you. As a member, you'll be able to:

-Be part of the conversation on our Discussion Boards
-See which stocks are currently the hottest at E*TRADE
-Follow Top Performers and see what they are trading
-Submit buy, sell, and hold opinions and see what others think
-Compare your performance with other Community members

[EarnestDD]

I am trying to make some alterations to an Intro Page.
Every time I attempt to do so, I am kicked out of Ihub and have to sign back in.
Is there a solution to this glitch?

[BIG BALLER]

NO MODERATOR system you mean~?..:-D//LOL~>what i'm saying is wHy does it toggle back in forth from me being a MOD or Assistant depending on weither i'm logged in or not?

:-)

TIA!

[Planopenny]

This assistant mod change has got to be the dumbest thing you guys have ever done to the site (well, at least the few years I've been here). It just causes more problems and i'm sure, more work for ya'll. Enjoy your Sunday :)

Plano

[Lojiko]

I like this idea in spirit, but the implementation leaves a lot to be desired. Perhaps the Admins don't understand that moderating a board is a lot like moderating iHub. Would the Admins be so cavalier about this new policy if it meant anyone could become an Admin? When you have the answer to that question, you'll understand why the established mods have such a big problem with this new mod policy. If the goal was to increase the signal/noise ratio, the Admins did a lot to increase the noise while only moderately improving the signal.

Case in point, my board. After implementing this policy, two new mods have been added to my board. One of the new mods has been a pest since day 1 and doesn't seem to have a strong command of the English language. No one likes this guy, I field complaints about him daily, I'd be astonished if the Admins have received no objections about his being added as a mod from posters on my board, and the only reason he hasn't had any violations is not because he contributes to the discussion but because I prefer not to run my board like a fascist state. In that sense, I only use my privileges as mod to address egregious violations and listen to my fellow posters when making such decisions. I encourage dissent and welcome new asst mod applications.

The other mod just wanted to "test" the system, I assume because he didn't believe me that I didn't add that other mod. Now he wants to be removed as a mod, but I can't remove him. In this example, the Admins only created more work for themselves with a frivolous mod addition.

The Admins want to increase the signal/noise ratio on their boards and selecting new mods is one way to do it. There is no doubt that some mods run their boards like fascists, which can drown out dissent - dissent being something I have mentioned on my board numerous times as being crucial to smart investing. However, adding new mods willy-nilly, without adequate examination, only leads to anarchy, confusion, and makes iHub a less enjoyable place for investors to congregate and share their knowledge.

I would propose that iHub strike a balance between the power sharing of the new mod policy and adequate examination by posters on the board. Why not take it to a vote? When someone applies to mod a new board, post a poll in the stickies which will be in place for one week. All the posters on the board could then vote on whether they would like the applicant to be a mod. This amendment to the new policy would allow Admins to make a more informed decision as to whether they should add a new mod to a board. In this manner, mods couldn't complain if a mod applicant had popular support and iHub could still create more diversity on the boards.

Again, while some mods might run their boards like fascists, and the goal of adding new mods to foster diverse opinions is applaudable, the new mod addition policy ignores the experience of the mods/posters on the boards and creates the potential for anarchy. The new policy - as currently implemented - only creates more work for Admins and makes iHub less enjoyable for the posters, on my board at least. I would encourage the Admins to either reinstate the old policy or to strike some balance between the old and the new, a balance which will respect the opinions of the board mods/posters while allowing for the addition of new mods, even if a particular mod might object.

[chrisaetos777]

Your basic criteria of choosing a moderator are all WRONG.

How do you control a moderators having an invested interest in

the boards they moderated?


How do you control them to remain subjective and fair?

How do you avoid the conflict of interest in order to comply with your

so call business model which you claim of being one of "fairness."

Your whole moderators model is wrong!!!!


Above all, moderators should not be investors..!!!!

Nor can they be chosen from the people in here.

You need to rethink the entire moderators model.


The one in place as now, does not work.