Replies to post #22412 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[sarals]

I"ve gotta run for now... but I'll definitely put some thought into that and get back to you on that.

[sarals]

Still thinking... but greg had a good point about board moderators.

My idea goes back to trying to prevent the problem from developing in the first place. You know how it goes, first the snide little remarks towards someone. That someone takes offense and snipes back. It continues to escalate until anger is in control and reason it out the window. The person to catch it first is the board moderator.

So my suggestion is two fold. 1) train the moderators. As you know it isn't easy to moderator a board. Maybe there could be a help section that gives examples of posts that are focused on the poster vs. posts that are focused on the stock and it's issues. 2) Nip it in the bud. When snide remarks and sniping starts, deal with it right away. Address it right away while it's a minor problem. At this point, your more likely to make a gentle suggestion about posting style and rules and have it accepted. The boards I see that rarely have problems take care of problem posters right away. It's just like kids (not to be condenscending, but to demonstrate human behavior)... if you let them know their behavior is unacceptable right from the get go, at the smallest offense, they learn quickly where the limits are.

It's late and I'm rambling... food for thought...

darn... now all I can think about is a KKD chocolate iced... and they are open all night...

[WTMHouston]

>>The ultimate solution would be to keep the boards the way they are and teach a few select folks self-control and effective use of the filtering function. That's the best solution IMO<<

Any suggestions on how to do so?

Let's see:

Option 1: take those few who lack basic self control and knowledge of the filtering system and give them a time-out to calm down and figure it out.

Option 2: reformat the message board layout to limit discussion because some can't or won't play nice.

Option 2 sure seems like letting the inmates run the asylum.

I admit to being biased: I think "private boards" are a bad idea -- especially if they are visible to everyone else. It will take away from the "discussion" aspect of this site.

I guess it comes down to whether this is a site where discussion of stocks (and other things) are open to all so long as they follow the rules or whether it is a rent-a-room site.

That Yahoo, RB, SI and others allow "private" boards is no reason to permit it here. Wasn't one of the very reasons for the creation of IH to not be like the other sites -- all of whom (I think) have been losing members and posts not gaining them.

IH offers the whiners (regardless of whether they are pumpers or bashers) plenty of options with filtering and private chat. It ought to stop there and not change the basic format and structure of the entire site.

[Koikaze]

The administrator has the tool needed to control the board ... the ability to delete posts. Informing a poster why their post is being deleted and deleting the post prevents the post from becoming a source of contention and lets the poster know their disruption will not be tolerated.

It is an effective method. You could see it in action on #board-1125, if the incidents were not so rare that it would be a chore to dig them out. Instead of having you hunt for them, I'll describe the method as well as I can:

The board is administered by Zeev Hed. To keep his board focussed on his primary interest, trading, he:

1) provides a second board (#board-1245) for a particular type of post (i.e. political opinions) which he deems inappropriate on his "trading" board. When someone posts "political" material on the trading board, he responds to the poster by referring him to the "politics" board, and deletes the post.

2) When someone writes an offensive post, he responds with a simple declarative statement (something like "That is uncalled for"), and deletes the post.

The result is a high-traffic board with a minimum of disruption.

Administrators inclined to "engage" a disruptive poster in a rational debate are fighting a losing battle. Disruptive people have no interest in "being rational". Their purpose is to vent their spleen and disrupt the board. Many of them are small-minded enough to take pride in their ability to wreak havoc. The only way to stop such people is to remove their trash.

Applying this method can be difficult because disruptive people deliberately invoke emotional responses. It takes time to learn to not respond to their barbs. I suggest management encourage board administrators to use the tools available to them.

Occasionally, it may be appropriate for management to send an encouraging private message to the board administrator:

Dear Board Administrator,

We note that you are being harassed by an unruly poster. You have the ability to delete such posts. If you do so, we suggest you first respond with a simple statement telling the author why you are deleting the message, something like this:

"We are deleting your post because it is vulgar."

"We are deleting your post because it is offensive."

"We are deleting your post because you repeatedly make the same point."

There is no requirement that you tell the abuser why you are deleting the post, but the other participants on your board will understand and appreciate your effort to provide a congenial atmosphere for their messages.

iHub Management

It is possible that you already do this. If not, I hope you will consider the idea. As board administrators become better able to handle disruptive posters, your workload will diminish. You'll only have to deal with those phreshest of all phish ... the real piranhas.

Fred