Forum Moderators: open
---------------------------
"What has happend to DMOZ
They no longer seem to care."
"Can't add site to DMOZ since March(!)
Problem with DMOZ submission"
"Dmoz!
How much longer?"
"DMOZ latest directory
When will it...."
"Dmoz Submission
I know this has been discussed time and time again, but...."
"DMOZ and "Last update: Jurasic Period"
Why aren’t editors required to edit categories semi-regularly?"
"Resource-Zone.com problems?
My UserID has been deleted, and my posts now show as from another user?'
----------------------
That's only a few of the titles on the first page... :(
You get the idea. Some topics are waaay off topic. Others are rehashes of discussions which are a little ways down the page or maybe had just fallen off Page One. Others are trolls from the get-go and some are just so unfocused as to be about anything. I'm not asking for moderating every _post_ but surely the new threads could be reviewed by our two moderators for appropriateness using the Google model found in Brett's opening post at [webmasterworld.com...]
One thing I've noticed is that the pre-moderating of the Google forum is driving some of the "I want an answer right now" folks to the Directories forum with the justification that if it's about Google's _directory_ then it is ok to ask. Perhaps this is true, but I'd really like the Google premoderation rules to follow to the Google Directories forum for consistency. They're interrelated and the problems of one are, to a smaller extent, following to the other.
I'm mostly seeing problems with threads related to dmoz.org and to directory.google.com. For some strange reason the inappropriateness almost disappears when discussing any other directory.
Some topics are waaay off topic
Now that makes sense :o)
I must say that I dissagree. I think public forums should NOT review original threads before being made public. You will have the situation of a thread, that may be of use and interest to thousands, being 'knocked back' on the thoughts/ideas/beliefs of one person. Or, the post might be edited and loose all impact and it's original intention.
Think of it this way. You work for a large coporation and naturally have access to emails in and out. The man at the top decides (quite within his rights) to have ALL original incoming and outgoing emails "reviewed".... and whether the emails gets out/in in it's original context, or at all, all hinges on Billy the butcher.
There are too many whiny, vague, or useless titles leading to, well, low-quality discussions -
It could well be argued that this very thread is "whiny, vague" or has a "useless title". I doubt VERY much that changing a subject heading, editing a thread ect (based on the thoughts and beliefs of one person) will increase the "quality" of discussion at all. In fact, I think the opposite will happen. Posts will be delayed, users will get frustrated and feel like mushrooms.
JMHO :o)
Dave
...in this instance I think that he is quite right to bring the problem up.
[webmasterworld.com...]
Is a thread without an aim or purpose. And it is not an isolated example.
The forum is one that I am interested in reading. kctipton may not agree, but there have been some good threads, and some interesting points raised, which I hope would have been discussed (if not acted on ) internally by DMOZ.
Of late (like the Google threads before the changes) I tend to steer clear of the Directories forum. Anything that can be done to bring it "back on course" would be welcome.
Pre-moderation was required in the Google forum due to the fact that it became cluttered and it was *impossible* to sort through the nonsense to find the useful threads. The directory forum doesn't come close to matching neither the activity level nor the clutter experienced in the Google forum.
When I see a whiny, "useless," or repeat thread (which occurs often, as kctipton correctly pointed out), I simply exit the thread. Just because a thread is useless to me doesn't mean that someone else might not find interest in reading it. I'm not being forced to click on it and keep reading.
However - what I do like is the idea of the directory forum moderator(s) being active in re-naming vague topics to a more appropriate title. That would certainly help in keeping threads more focused while not having to resort to something drastic like pre-moderation.
We don't need ten posts a day that say the same thing, but we do need to be reminded that major problems exist and may continue to exist until there are basic structural changes in DMOZ. We also need the opportunity to remind new members that they can help be part of the solution by volunteering.
Personally, I can say that a times a particularly effective "whine" post has motivated me to jump in and make sure my tiny category hasn't built up a backlog... :)
So... while I don't specifically object to premoderation (if feasible from a moderator standpoint), I think any such premoderation should be done with a light touch and only the most redundant or objectionable posts edited or deleted, and that the moderation be free of pro-DMOZ or con-DMOZ bias.
I agree that Directories could be better reading but the volume of noise is an order of magnitude below Google at its worst.
A post voting system, slashdot style, has been the plan for the entire board for a long time and we expect it to be deployed very soon. If we could just clone Brett...
The drastic solution would be simply to close down that forum. The number of useful posts is so small compared to the total that it would be no great loss.
An alternative would be to moderate all posts (not only the start of threads) and to ruthlessly exclude the inappropriate ones.
The charter is explicit:
We are not the ODP help desk.
and
And please remember: No whining is allowed.
Enforcing these two rules, plus the general rules about civility that seem to be applied effortlessly elsewhere on WebmasterWorld, might make that forum a useful place once again.
Maybe skibum has a better feel for this, but it seems like many of the "I'm not listed, help" posts are from new members. Each post, though, tends to provoke a rash of comments from those who don't think year-plus submittal backlogs in some cats is a problem, and those who do.
I suppose more severe post-moderation could be employed - that might be less moderator intensive and wouldn't delay legit posts. Post that are found to be redundant complaints about listing time could be deleted with a quick note to the poster and a link to the charter (or FAQ/KB).
Contrary to some of the guesswork and suppositions, pre-mod is not a purely subjective call, it's soundly based on time-tested principles that are clearly laid out in the Terms of Service [webmasterworld.com] and the Google News Forum Charter [webmasterworld.com].
While it's a bit demanding on time and attention and causes a bit of a wait for some people at times, I have to say that for all intents and purposes the blatant TOS and Charter violations have virtually been eliminated - far easier to accomplish than dealing with them after the fact when more members are involved.
The main perk is that the stress level of both mods and admins, and members as well, has been cut down so immensely that it's practically been eliminated.
The bottom line with any community system is whether it's serving the needs of the majority of the membership at large.
Most of the unpleasantries in the ODP forum are actually in blatant disregard and violation of the TOS and Charter to begin with. What's difficult is having to go through and literally massacre threads to remove them. It's also quite unfair for anyone to have to do that - those should not be posted there in the first place. IMNSHO those posting what's clearly in violation are showing gross disrespect for the moderator, the admins and the other members of this community.
It's my best guess that if the supposition that those posts are done deliberately in total disregard of groundrules is incorrect, then the offenders in question must not have read the Terms of Service or the Charter before posting - in which case they most likely did the exact same thing when submitting their sites to ODP. If it is the case that those individuals neglected to read the guidelines prior to submission, then if they're not included, it may not be because of long queues. It's highly likely that their submissions get chucked because they didn't RTFM in the first place. That seems to be a logical assumption based on what we see evidenced here.
That said, pre-moderation would probably be a good idea for that forum, but wouldn't deal with most of the issues that come up downstream. There are many threads that might not seem like much at first, but could end up wonderful and productive discussions - if there weren't people jumping in each and every time and hijacking threads with spewing the same ole same ole repetitive, assumptive, presumptuous, inane guff we've heard a thousand times before.
I for one am tired of outlaws turning threads into street fights because of their frustration over their own agendas. They just plain need to read the board guidelines and follow them. Simple as that.
I for one am tired of outlaws turning threads into street fights because of their frustration over their own agendas. They just plain need to read the board guidelines and follow them. Simple as that.
And if they don't follow them, they should be booted out of WebmasterWorld. Three strikes ...
I'll stop complaining; the moderators and admins did an outstanding job making Forum3 fit for human consumption once again. Thanks!
I agree that forums can become repetitive, but that is only the case for the frequent visitors(ones that answer not ask). The ones that are after information will always ask rather than search through many many topics. After all, that is the very idea of a forum, ask questions, give answers, and exchange ideas. if not, we might as well not have a forum and simply search Google for our answers.
If the same questions are getting asked again and again, so what, don't read the thread. Premoderation is a huge step backwards for any forum. All that ever ends up happening is, a user joins, he/she DARES to ask a qustion that has been asked x times before, the moderators delete it, the member is left sitting like a mushroom, he/she leaves or gets very frustated not knowing just what has gone wrong. You end up with a forum full of question answerers with no, or very little, questions to answer.
With premoderation all you get to see is what the moderator wants to hear. Come on guys, it's the year 2003 not 1975!
Dave
Now that would make the board better.
Dave
I try to add a question to the premoderated forum and it always states:
"On Hold: This discussion is temporarily on hold pending administrative review.
This simply means there was something about the post worth reviewing before public viewing.
It could also mean work is being performed on the thread or forum."
This happens each time (very annoying) and all 5 that I have tried to post never end up being posted....after a week. No feedback, no reason why, just zip!
If certain forums are to be premoderated it is only human courtesy to at least let the poster know why "Billy the butcher" deleted it. It seems like moderators forget (or do not care) that it is real live humans posting geniune earnest questions.
Dave
This is the Webmaster World tagline from the home page. An 'advanced web professional' does not post about the simple and widely known topic of ODP inclusion troubles.
The knowledge gap of the major headache issues like ODP, Google updates, dynamic page issues etc is closed very quickly by most people. We are just experiencing a hiccup with many newbie’s right now because of the recent notoriety of Google.
IMHO the great numbers of newbie posts will resolve itself and subside pretty soon.
Moderation in advance, please? More moderators please?
Moderation in advance, please? More moderators please?
Ironic words, in fact an ironic thread, begun and continued by a DMOZ editor. If we follow your advice, not only will folks be unable to get listings in DMOZ, but they will be unable to discuss it...
WBF
If you have a vested interest in DMOZ, maybe you should adopt the same attitude. Good things could happen.
Calling people "whiners" when they voice complaints, is just a bully tactic.
Now, everybody go drink your warm kool-aid and quit whining!
Agreed. But, don't forget that it's also a way to vent a little frustration and should be taken lightly IMO....
Nick
Yep, agree with that.
I Always_consider_the source.
a way to vent a little frustration
And there is a lot of frustration with DMOZ as exhibited by the threads.
The Directories forum gives people a chance to speak with and interact with DMOZ editors as equals. WW members don't have to just go away with tails between legs after the (sometimes) paternalistic responses editors dole out at resource zone; they can reply honestly and argue their points as long as they stay within the (usually) mannerly bounds of WW.
DMOZ does have some problems. Webmasters do sometimes get frustrated.
The situation is not going to change, the WW threads do get repetitive and boring -- but it is one of the only publicly available places for DMOZ to get honest feedback. Conversely, editors have used it to give heads up on changes and some actually very good advice.
The forum serves a purpose: honest (mostly) mannerly dialogue on an equal footing.
Just my 2 cents,
Jim
(Still not in DMOZ, doesn't really care, just vented some frustration.)
Personally speaking, it's a shame but no skin off my nose, as it was one of the few areas where I felt able to give back a little of what I had received here.
Must go anyway, the bank manager is on the phone asking when I can expect my "black payments" from ODP submitters...
BTW, john316, I don't think the degree of embarrassing flirting and fawning that goes on with GoogleGuy is matched in the Directories forum, do you?
