Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why is Madcat's thread closed ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why is Madcat's thread closed ...

    Back to inactiveness it is...
    This post has twin purposes; consider it a protest, and a way to inform those who I have regular contact with that emails and text are now the preferred ways of getting hold of me.

    Atlantis, your response to the "mods will not be publically challenged even for transparency" sits very wrong with me
    , but as usual you will not think, and will make some petty comment instead. I respect you for your knowledge of Indonesian law, but as a forum moderator, in the past few years you've grown very arrogant, to the point I think you shouldn't be in a moderator position anymore.

    Just to head you off at the pass:

    - No, I won't start my own forum. Yes, I'm perfectly capable of doing so and taking half this place with me.
    - Yes, I have my own blog. No, it's not interesting for anyone here.
    - Yes, you'll probably infract me. No, I don't particularly care.
    -
    Steady growth? If you're looking at the number of registered users, but of course. That number never goes down; active regular posters on the other hand? 40 perhaps? No, there is no growth. There is just people that show up, register, make one post, and make for the hills afterwards.
    That being said, perhaps I'll pop in from time to time but don't be counting on it




    Is this a mistake or is the topic not allowed to be discussed?

    Me too ...

    Very clear to me too as a casual member these days, the active number of users seems to be roughly around the same, always.
    Registered users also include of course our infamous banned members and as Madcat says the many who register, make a few posts then disappear into the ether...
    IknowthatyoubelieveyouunderstandwhatyouthinkIsaid, butI'mnotsureyourealisethatwhatyouheardisnotwhatI meant.

  • #2
    Moderator note: If you frequently check the "Who's on line" screen (as I do screening for spammers) you will find that the total readership at any one time rarely is less than 200 individuals, even in the wee hours Jakarta time. The number of regular posters is only one measure of the forum's usefulness and popularity.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by john madden View Post
      Moderator note: If you frequently check the "Who's on line" screen (as I do screening for spammers) you will find that the total readership at any one time rarely is less than 200 individuals, even in the wee hours Jakarta time. The number of regular posters is only one measure of the forum's usefulness and popularity.
      At the moment there are 20 Members and 250 guests, I personally don't look at guests as active members, but perhaps I'm just splitting hairs.
      I know that if I was an advertiser negotiating rates, I wouldn't be counting guests!

      Glad to see the thread has been reopened.
      IknowthatyoubelieveyouunderstandwhatyouthinkIsaid, butI'mnotsureyourealisethatwhatyouheardisnotwhatI meant.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by john madden View Post
        Moderator note: If you frequently check the "Who's on line" screen (as I do screening for spammers) you will find that the total readership at any one time rarely is less than 200 individuals, even in the wee hours Jakarta time. The number of regular posters is only one measure of the forum's usefulness and popularity.
        Just to make a point- if there were no regular posters then the 200 + viewers would have nothing to read.

        Sorry if you think I am being pedantic. xx


        and... I do frequently check the who's online... its any easy way to see if the mods are working (simple mathematics members online minus names shown - cos you are all ghosts ... but i have me crystal ball) .



        And out of all the "viewers" how many are genuine and how many are spammers or trawlers?

        I am curious now...
        Last edited by bad_azz; 18-02-13, 09:33.
        Cicak Magnet

        Comment


        • #5
          Have to agree, the statement from Atlantis, "mods will not be publically challenged even for transparency" is disturbing. One thing that's interesting, one of the closed threads attracted two moderator comments, this means that moderators are happy to continue commenting in a closed thread, but normal members are not allowed. Seems unfair!

          Watching some of the moderators actions, complete deletion of threads, it seems to be hit and miss in some cases. I just wish it was more consistent and fair...

          Comment


          • #6
            Mod note:

            PeteD -the second mod post to which you refer was added to illustrate that the correct way to "appeal" infractions is specifically addressed in the Posting Guidelines.

            BA - it's very difficult to answer your question "how many are spammers or trawlers?" other than to say that potential spammers are generally a tiny minority. For a start it's not possible to make a call until a User Profile is registered, so there's say 175+ at least that we don't know enough about. Then on a "normal" day we might detect and ban between 2 and 6 either before they post or on their first post. Rarely would this number exceed 10 a day. I can recall a few days where we experienced concerted attacks with dozens of spammers booted.

            So from all the above I again say that I think they are a tiny minority.

            Comment


            • #7
              and how many of your viewers are automated systems looking for buzz words...?
              such as marketing information and such?

              I am curious as - I notice almost as soon as I post a new topic it has almost instantly had several viewers even if it is in the wee small hours and even if the "who's online" system shows that nobody is even looking at the thread...


              I have soooo much to learn about these things...
              Last edited by bad_azz; 18-02-13, 10:15.
              Cicak Magnet

              Comment


              • #8
                We do our best to be consistent and fair. Alas, not only can we not read 100% of the posts, we couldn't make everybody happy all the time anyway, as opinions on what constitutes "consistent and fair" varies from poster to poster.

                I also think you (the generic "you") need to cut atlantis some slack. Remember he is not a native English speaker and his statement probably sounded harsher and more absolute than intended. Was it not atlantis who instigated the "Forum Life" channel? Also, he has done a prodigious job for a long time to keep this forum healthy and active, often with very little help. Many of his posts over the years - aside from the tremendous amount of useful information he has shared regarding legal matters - are thoughtful responses to moderator challenges that I am certain took him a long time to prepare. This is not the mark of an individual who doesn't believe in transparency. The fact of the matter is that moderating this forum takes a huge amount of time, it's a volunteer position, and atlantis, like all of us, has a life. Sometimes limits have to be set in terms of what it is realistic to accomplish.

                Of course, atlantis' excellent record does not place him or any of the mod team, myself included, above criticism. But you know, we don't just sit around looking for threads to close, posts to delete, or infractions to issue. We actually expend energy on behalf of the forum and its members. Right now there is a potentially serious behind-the-scenes issue we are discussing on behalf of a member. As another example, we also spent a fair amount of time trying to come up with a fair and productive policy regarding job listings and discrimination.

                Not that I'm defensive or anything Did I forget to mention that moderators are people too?

                Comment


                • #9
                  OK... As a moderator, what's your take on Atlantis's statement, [COLOR=#333333]"mods will not be publically challenged even for transparency"? I just think such a statement in an expat community forum is very [/COLOR][COLOR=#333333]insensitive. We strive to accept that often in this country, we have no other choice but to accept certain realities, that human rights problems do exist, and censorship happens far too often. Being that this forum is an "Expat Forum", you'd think that the owner(s) and moderators would be more open to transparency, and only censor threads when there was no other choice.
                  [/COLOR]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Paragraph 2 of my previous post is my take on atlantis' statement.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I believe that Atlantis was saying that the act of challenging mod decisions on infractions publicly was a breach of the posting guidelines, even if the challenge were under the guise of a search for transparency. We will take PMs about individual infractions for review, and will also respond to requests for clarification of general principles either by PM or on the board. We will also sometimes post more detailed background to an infraction when this could be instructive or beneficial for the forum.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bad_azz View Post
                        and how many of your viewers are automated systems looking for buzz words...?
                        such as marketing information and such?

                        I am curious as - I notice almost as soon as I post a new topic it has almost instantly had several viewers even if it is in the wee small hours and even if the "who's online" system shows that nobody is even looking at the thread...


                        I have soooo much to learn about these things...
                        Sorry BA - don't quite understand this. How would this be apparent? By them posting/spamming eventually? If so as above, if not I dunno.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          "And, no, moderators are NOT to be challenged publicly "for the sake of transparency"."

                          That's the full sentence of Atlantis' comment, in addition to a paragraph of other solutions:
                          And, no, moderators are NOT to be challenged publicly "for the sake of transparency". We communicate publicly any decision of importance for the sake of transparency and any of our decisions can be challenged and appealed to the owner or to any mod of one's choice by PM. We will review any argument submitted and answer any appeal sent to us but be aware that we are not interested in exhausting ourselves in a pointless and harassing communication. Once a decision is binding... well it's binding and it's time to move on.

                          IMO this makes sense. Just like an employee wouldn't prefer to be chided by his boss in public. Or an employer discussing an employee's annual review in public. The outcome of said discussions after both parties agree can and should be publicized (in terms of this forum). But the actual discussions are both irrelevant and inappropriate. If any of us are discussing against a mod's decision, do we need to bring in a crowd? or is our own opinion and logic enough?

                          That's my take on it anyway.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Just my opinion as a poster (not a mod) that getting all wrapped up in counting the number of posters who pass through, who are spammers, who are automated systems, etc. is a bit of an angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin exercise. All forums are subject to spambots and the like, and that may artificially inflate page views/membership numbers to some extent that is probably impossible for mere mortals to ascertain. Who cares? As evidence for "moderation is bad because I don't think our numbers show enough growth"-"moderation is good because we have more members"-"no we don't"-"yes we do", I think its hard to prove much of anything. I've seen the same arguments repeated in the same sort of way on other boards; we're not covering territory that hasn't been done to death already.

                            Particularly because of the purpose of LIIEF, a lot of posters do pass through and not stay - it's the nature of the beast. I've gotten to know several of them (temporary posters, not beasts, though I know a few of those too). A lot of them just aren't interested in sticking around ANY message board - they were very grateful for LIIEF because it gave them information when they were having trouble getting themselves grounded in Indonesia. Other people have reported to me that they find the tone of the forum to be too attacking/unfriendly for their taste, and while they may enjoy message boards in general, they didn't care for this one.

                            To be sure, my sample is liable to suffer from huge selection bias, but then, so does everyone's, since we all prefer our friends to be at least somewhat likeminded.

                            We're fortunate that so many people do stick around and contribute thoughtful posts over long periods of time, regardless of the many imperfections they find here.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Before I actually joined LIIEF I was one of those guest. For a couple years I just came to LIIEF and read what was going on. Once we finalized our move to Indonesia I became an active member.

                              As for the amount of members here, don't care. I just know that it is a valuable place to go for current information and in most cases intelligent discussions. As for the MODs, well, they seem to have kept the store open with stocked shelves for quite some time and I am appreciative of that.
                              [COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana]Some love to milk Apostate.[/FONT][/COLOR]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X