Replies to post #469 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Was (Bob)]

A 4th (or is it 5th?) thing jumps out at me: My inability to tell the difference between "3" and "4". :)

[Bernard Ng]

I guess the immediate deletion features can be implemented in privacy cases. The Chairman has to delete those posts immediately, and post an explanation on it right after the deletion. For OT immediate deletion on a non-stock thread, you can care less... eh? Then the filter concept might work... any thought?

I think the current CoB model is cool, but still evolving, and trying to test and see if it works might ruin iHub, since there is no turning back in terms of posters and readers' confidence. Keep evolving and be dynamic should be the key to success... IMHO.

signed,
Bernard

[Lisa aka Viperchick]

"1. What if a post not only *should* be deleted, but *must* be deleted immediately? For example, because it
contains someone's personal contact information. "


And what should happen when the COB ABUSES their power by posting personal information as Jenna has done and deletes any post that even questions anything about her activities while she continues to spout her attacks against Lola, DrMensaWannabe, Tim Luke, Teresa Lo, etc.

Even one of her bosses at Pristine said her posts (that she deleted) were "silly".

[Uncle_Frank]

>> I like the empowerment of the CoB concept, with me in place to prevent abuses of it...

Me, too, Bob. As you know I threadmaster two high volume forums on SI. Neither of them is moderated, so the only barriers to disruption are our community standards, but those standards are very dissimiliar since one thread is a serious investing site and the other a place for curmudgeonly rants. The same message posted to both threads could be totally out of line on one and very amusing on the other, and it would be very difficult for an admin to to make that call using objective criteria.

I don't see IHub as a community, but rather as a collection of communities, each of which should have the right to set its own standards. Imo some who have objected most vocally to the CoB concept are concerned that their ability to disrupt will be diminished. I see that as a good thing.

if

[bonnuss]

Hey, there, Bob ... here's a 'what if' I know you've seen in your prior life -g-

What if the Chairman him/herself posts sensitive, real-life contact information and then has the power to delete the selected 'victim's' replies?

Further complicated with the "five deleted posts and yer out" theory ...

For example, for those here who may not have encountered this in the past.

Let's say a 'thread head' ... or "Chairman," in your IHUB PC terms <g> decides to make an aggressive attempt to 'drive a poster away' from not only his thread, but the site itself.

This Chairman has knowledge of the poster who he doesn't care for in personal info terms -- real name, address, phone numbers, etc.

So, sets up a thread and possibly using other account names (yep -- that happened even on SI -- it's not just a Yahoo! phenom) ... reveals such information to all of Cyberspace. Inviting harassment not in simple investing board 'flaming' capacity, but in real life stalking/intimidation terms.

I'm sure you can imagine potential consequences for the site itself .. and its 'administrators.'

I think that's lawsuit material, myself ...

Your and Matt's comments?

bia

[smchan]

Bob, a common theme runs thru all the 3 or 4 (who's counting? :-) ) reasons you list for immediate deletions with the CoB model: all benefit of doubt is taken from the posters' hands and placed squarely in the CoB's which insinuates an element of distrust on the part of your community of posters. It also empowers the CoB to use their thread as a personal soapbox as Jenna as so aptly demonstrated - as recently as a couple hours ago by canning innocent posts (albeit probably off topic) by bob_john while NOT deleting her own off-topic pokes at him.

The timeliness issue cuts both ways. What if there is important news regarding a stock pick that cuts against the CoB's position (ie bullish news on a bearish position)? I can imagine many other scenarios as I'm sure you could w/ respect to deleting posts right away or not, so in my mind it boils down to trusting your community or not and (right now) my perception is that you do not.

Sam

[zeuspaul]

How does filtering increase your work load? It seems to me if properly implemented it would decrease your work load. If a COB marks a post OFF TOPIC you shouldn't even get involved. I don't know of any good threads that don't let their guard down..especially on the week ends. Off topic posts are a given on a good thread. However good thread etiquate sp? generally reserves OT posts for the regular posters. It is a good way for readers to get some insite into the person behind the post.

Let the threads evolve and become what they will be. It takes hundreds of startup threads before a winner is born. Let the natural selection process work. Don't restrict the number or type of thread for a particular stock or subject. One of the reasons for the success of the original SI was that anyone could start a thread on any subject...it empowers the user...everyone is on equal terms...no elite status unless it is earned.

More on censoring and Filtering.

Investors like to do their OWN DD. You might be the greatest and fairest person on the planet...but there would still be a difference of opinion as to what should and should not get deleted based on TOU. I don't even trust my mother to decide what I should and should not read.

I believe MATT under states the problem when he refers to only a handful of users that object to the power invested in the COB. Even the hint of censorship is enough to keep quality posters away. Simply put if we can't read the posts you are deleting we will have doubt.

Any attempt at censorship should err on the side of too little. As currently contemplated the COB concept errs on the side of too much.

Why did the SI boards have quality posting vs Yahoo! for example? (not exactly true as there are a lot of quality posts on Yahoo! The problem with Yahoo! is there are too many non quality posts mixed in) The posters on SI were held to higher standard because they had something to lose.

IMO it should be the same here. If someone abuses their posting priveleges (hurry up with the spell checker) restrict them.

Did some threads get out of hand?..you bet. But don't forget all of the ones that didn't.

When did SI start down hill?...When GO2NET came on the scenen and the site move away from a user oriented messaged board site.

IMO the COB concept is an over reaction to a minority of threads that get out of hand. Don't give up the opportunity of being a first class site. Let us see what you don't want us to see. Let us make up our own minds. If you take the responsibility of deciding what we can't see then you have also assumed the responsibility of what we do see. That responsibility should remain with the poster.

Giving us some tools to manage our threads is a good idea. Giving the COB or other the ability to mark posts off topic or other could make for an enjoyable reading experience. Sometimes I just don't have the time to read a zillion posts with OT and other mixed in. Given a good COB with a marking option I would most likely read the thread filtered. But don't take away the ability for us to see what is being censored...(some exceptions...abusive language and the like)

Zeuspaul