How do you moderate people's comments?

In case they are important but offending, dishonest, humbling etc.

[everdictorg]

Hello everyone.
I run and admin a people's opinions online forum. Sometimes, people's comments are out of our TOS, however, they still might be true or intersting etc.

One could think it is simple to remove just a part of a comment and that's it, problem is solved, but then people might become agree and might not return to the website.

So, what is your experience about moderating people's comments? Share your experience.

[Longhaired Genius]

In the past I have removed just part of a forum message but now my policy is that a post either goes or stays in its entirety. Webmaster World style micromanagement is just too much work and leaves too much room for argument.

[tedster]

I've used both styles - even here on these forums - and either approach occasionally makes someone angry. All you can do is be straight about it, notify the member about the edit and explain the reason clearly. My first assumption is that the person was not aware and the infraction is innocent.

The key is always to do what's best for the long-term health of your forum. If someone leaves because of that -- well so be it. You cannot please all people and also have a healthy community.

So don't get too involved in the particular details of the specific post - that's a black hole. Just stick with maintaining your TOS in a consistent manner and nursing a healthy community atmosphere.

[Casethejoint]

Hey everdictorg - a interesting first post!

I find two things about editing posts: either people get disproportionately annoyed for a range of reasons, or they don't notice and you can't be sure they're digging your guidelines. I'm more inclined towards deleting a post in its entirety, but informing the user of why, with a link to the posting guidelines and a request to ask them to repost, rephrase or reconsider (or somesuch). I find I usually get a polite reply or a modified posting.

[rogerd]

Like others here, I use both approaches. If the TOS violation is small and self-contained, like a link in an otherwise useful post, I'll just snip the problem part.

If the problem affects many areas of the post, though, or if the post wouldn't make sense after editing, then the whole post goes.

From a moderating standpoint, a public edit with a brief note as to why not only informs the poster but also others. Of course, some members may not like being edited in public and actually prefer the whole post be removed.

You'll never make everyone happy - just do what makes most sense and move on.

[everdictorg]

All right, guys, thanks for your opinions:)
In addition I would have to think how to improve the rate of people commenting our articles and improve discussions at our site.
What is it to your experience, how many people in percents comment your articles compared to the number of total visitors that read the article?

Thanks.

[happyslob]

Interesting thread here...

I've found on my forums that I have a pretty polite crowd in general! lol So, the only messages I really need to moderate are those 'out there' ones that are either plain old SPAM or outrageously offensive, etc. Mostly, I have to remove offensive SPAM messages.

Take care,
Christina

[rogerd]

Welcome to WebmasterWorld, Christina. You must have well-behaved members if your only problem posts are spam & the like. :)

One way to soften the blow of editing or deleting a post, particularly for a long-term member, is to be sure to send a private message with an explanation and an acknowledgement of what that person contributes to the discussion.

Understanding the reason for an edit helps. Sometimes edits and the rules they are based on can seem arbitrary and capricious without the background.

[linear]

I agree completely with contacting the user. Most of the time, that lets you send the message that you welcome their participation but to stay in bounds.

As for commenting, one approach I have had excellent luck with is a simple vote:

Did this article help you? yes/no

which is diplayed at the end of the article along with the results:

231 out of 256 people found this article helpful.

Worked great. Make sure that your robots.txt precludes letting the spiders vote, though. :D

[Anlina]

I moderate a site with 3 million + members and we simply delete posts that violate the ToS, with a PM explaining why (we have an automated system to speed up this process). Edits are only used for very minor violations, (urls that cause the page to scroll sideways, links to inappropriate content that is being reported via the forums, such as sites that are designed to phish passwords from our site members etc.)

I've generally found that if you explain why a post has been deleted and provide a copy of the post content to the author they are pretty receptive to the deletion. I think major edits upset people more than deletion does, as editing can change the tone and context of the message and put words in the author's mouth (or take them away). Deleting allows them to edit their own content to be reposted if they choose.

As others mentioned, deletions with notification also ensures that the member knows that their post was in violation and from a time management standpoint it's much more efficient to delete a post than to play editor.