djmcnz

Please Turn On Ability To Change Topic

Recommended Posts

Like many members here, I've been involved with quite a number of forums over the years. It seems to me that the ones with the tightest rules are the ones that grow and prosper, and remain good places to visit, ask questions and learn. I know that this is a generalisation but it's been my personal experience.

I'm a mod on another forum (not RC). Membership is smaller than TC but daily post count is higher. That forum does not allow public discussion of rules or moderator's actions. Members cannot edit topic titles and can only edit their own posts for 30 minutes, after which you need a mod to do it for you. Mods there, as here, are unpaid volunteers. The rules may seem excessive to some, but they've been introduced because of members' actions. It really is a case of a few bad apples but there will always be someone who will abuse whatever freedom is given to them. I've seen it happen time after time, so I can understand the mods' reluctance on this issue.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it - and TC does not appear to be broken. Just my 2p...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only reason i would have liked it was for

A. spelling mistakes in your own topic title

and

B. updating "For Sale" or "Wanted" threads so that other users know that OP has sold or recieved what they wanted to.

it's not going to change and shouldn't be made a big deal, i can't see any real reson not to change it BUT i don't know the ins and outs nor have i put any great thought into it (I'm not looking for an explination btw).

I don't want to fall out with anyone over it, after all it's only the internet and there's a good regular community here but the first few back-and-forth posts on this thread had me laughing like mad :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was hoping terry.sc was going to reply as I didn't feel that part of the discussion concluded and I'm not sure the subsequent comments really added anything useful.

Apologies if it seems I'm a little late getting back to this, I have other things in real life that are more important for me to deal with right now, and it's been a week since I was last able to spend any time here, but I feel you do deserve an answer.

I was surprised and a little confused when I read your first reply. Perhaps it isn't representative of how you normally try to moderate and perhaps it was inappropriate of me to take that sample of one and extrapolate. For better or for worse I didn't feel the tone was suitable coming from a position of responsibility.
Apologies if you took the tone of my reply unsuitable, my reply was somewhat dismissive as there has been no real demand for a change, and judging by all the other replies I would have expected our reply of "no, but ask any mod and we will change it for you" to be a suitable answer that anyone else would have accepted and would have been the end of the discussion.
There is also a chance that we're both proceeding from a different premise. The ability to change titles is the default setting in ipboard, it has to be turned off. Most web forums do allow you to change your own topic titles, including but not limited to the following:
  • oOple.com
  • rcuniverse.com
  • rctech.net
  • tamiya.actieforum.com
  • xda-developers.com
  • androidforums.com

Whether it's a default setting or not is irrelevant, if it is left on that should be down to the site owner, and likely a legacy of this being the third forum software TC has used, it wasn't always ipboard. I'm sure we can all find lists of sites that prove our point, I know for example that rccrawler.com doesn't allow topic edits either, and of the ones you listed the only one I visit regularly also allows mild swearing and is known that moderators have amended entries in the feedback section. I also moderate rcracechat, where topic editing is the least of the restrictions on the forum. So in my own particular case almost half the r/c car sites I regularly visit have the same topic editing restrictions. The point is moot, we can always find more sites that back up both ends of the spectrum, and others have replied to also point this out.
You seem to be coming from the perspective that this isn't a typical function/request whereas my perspective is that, in this case, Tamiyaclub is atypical. I contest your claim that the "vast majority" of forums don't allow title editing. I'm just asking for "typical". I hope you understand now why I think the level of discussion required here is somewhat disproportionate to the request.
Again, your perspective of me stating "while other forums have similar restrictions" meaning Tamiyaclub is not the only site on the internet that doesn't allow topic editing, is that you then take that as meaning "vast majority" which I did not state at all. It is hard to discuss it when you make extreme assumptions like this which seem to be based on my disagreeing on your original assumption.

As for Tamiyaclub being stricter than other sites, the only real restriction that most forum members ever come across is not posting live ebay links that aren't your own. There are valid reasons for this, but to be honest it's not exactly difficult to circumvent it. If you want to level any "police state" accusations then please visit rcracechat, where non subscribers can't post any links or images, and even subscribers aren't allowed to link to shops that aren't advertisers. Of course if you had started this thread over there you would have reached you three strikes and been banned by now.

Also it seems on the majority of forums trying to criticise moderators would have the thread deleted and the poster warned. Remember at the end of the day each site is privately owned and sites are run how the site owner sees fit.

It's good to see from the other replies that others seem to be happy with the job we are doing.

I would like a mod to contact Chris on these matters. I think this is more appropriate than a direct approach from a member, it will have more influence coming from a mod and is probably more in line with Chris' expectations.
In situations like this when someone is upset with our moderating we always suggest the complainant going direct to Chris, after all if you were upset with your manager at work you wouldn't ask him to pass on your complaint about his behaviour to his manager. After all, if we contacted Chris ourselves on your behalf you can see that it would be from our own point of view. At the end of the day it's Chris's website not ours, we just follow the rules he has laid down. If you contact him directly and convince him to make a change then there's nothing we can do to block it. It also gets around the problem of Chris's work, where sometimes he gets back instantly as he is in his office, while if he is working elsewhere in the world it can take several days before we hear from him. Gets a bit tiring when we send a message and don't hear back, while having to deal with a member who is convinced we are being obstructive. Hopefully you can now see why our ultimate response is to contact Chris directly.
In the interests of transparency this isn't the only constructive suggestion for improvement I have for the forum and I would be disappointed if we got distracted by the particular discussion at the expense of general improvements to the forum. My arguments for other changes aren't too different from the ones I present above. When you're happy to hear these I would be happy to share them.
We would be happy to discuss constructive improvements, although the arguments for have to be stronger than "because other sites have it" and should be put over in a more persuasive way than this one.

In this case you asked if we would allow it. As in the past year there have been a total of 3 times we have been asked to change thread titles and as each time takes only a minute or two we are happy to put up with what is a minor inconvenience considering the amount of times it occurs, so we said we wouldn't change the setting. Rather than accepting the decision or suggesting turning it on for a trial period your reply was dismissive of my reply with an attack on our moderating and an insistence that we change the settings even though we had already said no. It is hard to get anyone to agree with your suggestions while at the same time attacking what they are currently doing.

Coming up with a suggestion and having a valid reason for it that will help the majority of members will always be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps people should be more careful when filling in their topic field? Or if the topic needs changing substancially how about starting a new thread or asking the mod to change it. Seriously how often do people need to change the topic? Be cool to lock other peoples threads, please turn on that ability :)

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reply terry.sc, apprecaited.

In situations like this when someone is upset with our moderating we always suggest the complainant going direct to Chris, after all if you were upset with your manager at work you wouldn't ask him to pass on your complaint about his behaviour to his manager.

In the interests of accuracy, I was referring to the rule, not the performance of the mods. If I felt I needed to complain about a mod I would do so myself directly to Chris or another mod.

...so we said we wouldn't change the setting.

I persisted because that's not how I interpreted your answer, I thought you had clearly stated "
couldn't
" as opposed to "
wouldn't
" change the rule. Perhaps that was my mistake.

Look there's a valid argument on both sides and I think it been trivialised in this tread to the detriment of the discussion. Your position is clear and I fully appreciate that it takes effort to change something without upsetting a balance.

I'm not going to argue any other suggestions, it takes far to much time and energy, here are my suggestions for a better forum, do with them as you wish. Because I realise some of these are polarising issues I don't intend to get involved in any debate it would be futile:

  • Forum incorrectly capitalises topics. I suspect this is to prevent things like - "H3Y l00Zers BuY THIS NOW!!!!!" but it breaks proper readability in many cases - "Nib Avante" is worse than "NIB AVANTE" - everybody can tolerate a little over-capitilisation probably moreso than than the current form. And hey, if somebody abuses it we all know mods can change the topic now... :D
  • There appears to be a rule or setting that appends a new post to the end of an older post if the posts were made consecutively in a defined timeframe. Well really, if I hit "reply" or "new post" I actually mean that, if I meant "edit" I would hit "edit". It seems unnecessary and because it's simple (albeit frustrating) to work around I wonder it it really serves a purpose? (Rhetorical)
  • Signatures, blah, blah - you know the arguments in the case (and I'm familiar with the counter-arguments) but I don't understand why you're not a little more liberal (i.e. remove HTML tags from the character count would be a nice half-way measure) and simply leave it up to the user to set whether they want to see sigs or not. You've disabled repeating so really, how much drama could it possibly cause? (Rhetorical)
  • I think the ebay link rule is plain stupid. It's offered under the guise of allowing hidden gems to remain hidden. This rule therefore helps the tiny minority and really dispossess the auction promoter and other people of the perfectly valid entitlement to participate in the auction. The rule defeats the main point of a public auction and endless posts are wasted working around the rule. Ultimately the community probably misses out on opportunities because of it.
  • "****" is not a profane word. It's been fundamentally altered by semantic change just the same as "****" has. It would easier to respect the profanity rule if it were applicable to 2011. For the sake of other readers the mods can see those words, one is a synonym for Dyke the other is a shortened version of Richard. Remember, there are only "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television"... wrapping people in cotton wool from the '60's is a bit lame.

Complaints? Criticisms? Suggestions? I don't mind how they're received, they're offered with nothing but hope attached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. Forum incorrectly capitalises topics. I suspect this is to prevent things like - "H3Y l00Zers BuY THIS NOW!!!!!" but it breaks proper readability in many cases - "Nib Avante" is worse than "NIB AVANTE" - everybody can tolerate a little over-capitilisation probably moreso than than the current form. And hey, if somebody abuses it we all know mods can change the topic now... ;)
  2. There appears to be a rule or setting that appends a new post to the end of an older post if the posts were made consecutively in a defined timeframe. Well really, if I hit "reply" or "new post" I actually mean that, if I meant "edit" I would hit "edit". It seems unnecessary and because it's simple (albeit frustrating) to work around I wonder it it really serves a purpose? (Rhetorical)
  3. Signatures, blah, blah - you know the arguments in the case (and I'm familiar with the counter-arguments) but I don't understand why you're not a little more liberal (i.e. remove HTML tags from the character count would be a nice half-way measure) and simply leave it up to the user to set whether they want to see sigs or not. You've disabled repeating so really, how much drama could it possibly cause? (Rhetorical)
  4. I think the ebay link rule is plain stupid. It's offered under the guise of allowing hidden gems to remain hidden. This rule therefore helps the tiny minority and really dispossess the auction promoter and other people of the perfectly valid entitlement to participate in the auction. The rule defeats the main point of a public auction and endless posts are wasted working around the rule. Ultimately the community probably misses out on opportunities because of it.
  5. "****" is not a profane word. It's been fundamentally altered by semantic change just the same as "****" has. It would easier to respect the profanity rule if it were applicable to 2011. For the sake of other readers the mods can see those words, one is a synonym for Dyke the other is a shortened version of Richard. Remember, there are only "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television"... wrapping people in cotton wool from the '60's is a bit lame.

  1. Try N.I.B. Avante - Most people lazily write acronyms without the .s
  2. The 'append not reply' setting was added after complaints regarding some members replying endlessly to their own trades in order to bump them - it's not a selevtive setting, it's the whole forum or nothing, but it saves mods time merging posts and emailing 'offenders'. It only happens when the current poster was the last poster.
  3. Signatures have a limit. Whatever it was, someone would want it higher - the settings are what they are to keep the forum looking 'tidy' - an aesthetic choice by Chris. Having seen some forums where anything up to 800 x 600 is allowed, I have to agree with him. Try tinyurl for abbreviated links.
  4. The ebay rule is not only there to protect 'gems' - I don't actually believe that's all that relevant a reason any more - It's also there to stop discussions about the pricing of live auctions and whether seller X is a rip-off merchant for "this auction" - It has happened in the past and that's part of the reason the rule still exists. Personally, I don't see the problem with someone linking when another member needs a particular part, but at the same time, telling them what to search for achieves the same result anyway.
  5. The profanity filter isn't going to change - this isn't just for adults or society in 2011, it's to keep the boards 'amicable'. Should anyone called **** need the filters changed so people could talk to him, then that would need sorting. As it is, in the last 9 years, we've had loads of Riches [sp?], Richies and Richards, but no *****. Unfortunately, the possibility to use it as an offensive term still exists so, along with other 'anatomical slang, it's currently filtered. Armpit, elbow and kneecap are fine though. As for 'seven words you can never say on television', we're looking at television before 9pm UK here, and that's what the filters are based on. With a few younger posters on here now, the filters are staying as is.

For the sake of other readers, mods can't see filtered out words, only ones that bypass the filters by using misspellings and symbols instead of letters.

As far as I know, only board admin can write filtered words and not have them filtered (as proved above) but admin status does not unfilter words written by others. If you need to swear and spell it correctly, it's filtered out and nobody reads it at all, which is why I can only address the 'Richard' side of the profanity post.

There appears to be a growing consensus that misspelling profanity makes it ok to use on the forums - that is not the case - If you think the word spelt correctly is unsuitable for use on the forums, misspelling it doesn't lessen it's offensiveness - if we've decided to filter out a word, then either use a different word or spell it correctly and let the filters do their job.

A screenshot of a post with words filtered (IP addresses blacked out in case you were wondering :D )

post-1185-1296123346_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys - I feel like I should be able to lock this thread...

Im with Gruntfuggly and think this thread has run its course, nothing new here please lock its ridiculous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Forum incorrectly capitalises topics. I suspect this is to prevent things like - "H3Y l00Zers BuY THIS NOW!!!!!" but it breaks proper readability in many cases - "Nib Avante" is worse than "NIB AVANTE" - everybody can tolerate a little over-capitilisation probably moreso than than the current form. And hey, if somebody abuses it we all know mods can change the topic now... <_<

I agree, it's annoying although more for the reasons mike_o gave earlier. Don't see why we can't have it turned off, but as it's only an on/off setting although if we do get lots of shouting in the titles it might have to be turned on again (highly unlikely though!)

There appears to be a rule or setting that appends a new post to the end of an older post if the posts were made consecutively in a defined timeframe. Well really, if I hit "reply" or "new post" I actually mean that, if I meant "edit" I would hit "edit". It seems unnecessary and because it's simple (albeit frustrating) to work around I wonder it it really serves a purpose? (Rhetorical)

As Twinset explained above, only something you come across if replying to your own posts within 48 hours to stop threads being bumped, but apparently doesn't work like it should and the thread still gets bumped up anyway. It only stops complaints as there's no evidence it has been bumped, the opposite of what the option is for. It's now been turned off.

Signatures, blah, blah - you know the arguments in the case (and I'm familiar with the counter-arguments) but I don't understand why you're not a little more liberal (i.e. remove HTML tags from the character count would be a nice half-way measure) and simply leave it up to the user to set whether they want to see sigs or not. You've disabled repeating so really, how much drama could it possibly cause? (Rhetorical)

Signature length has been covered before and as Chris has voiced his opinion of it to you in the past I doubt he'll change his mind. Plenty of ways around it using bit.ly or tinyurl unless you want to fill it with a stack of links. PM me to discuss this further to see if there's a way round it.

I think the ebay link rule is plain stupid. It's offered under the guise of allowing hidden gems to remain hidden. This rule therefore helps the tiny minority and really dispossess the auction promoter and other people of the perfectly valid entitlement to participate in the auction. The rule defeats the main point of a public auction and endless posts are wasted working around the rule. Ultimately the community probably misses out on opportunities because of it.

This "hiding hidden gems" is the only strawman argument that is dug up by detractors, and of all the arguments against the rule is the easiest to get around it. If you want to publicise a misspelt 'hidden gem' then there's nothing preventing you posting the auction title, the same goes for pointing others to spare parts you just tell them to search for the part number and then gives them the choice of which seller to go for if there are multiple parts available. To be honest most live links posted to help other members usually do their job before we manage to find them :blink:

The rule helps the majority as it stops discussions of live auctions, having been around here in the early days it got rather tiring dealing with "how much shall I bid on this", "wow this seller is having a laugh with his prices" and of course the old "I've found this Hornet on ebay" posts. Of course if an auction is worthy of discussion there's nothing to stop anyone discussing it after it's finished.

If you are worried about people missing out on hidden gems, you'll find the people who win those auctions have spotted it long before it would get posted on here.

"****" is not a profane word. It's been fundamentally altered by semantic change just the same as "****" has. It would easier to respect the profanity rule if it were applicable to 2011. For the sake of other readers the mods can see those words, one is a synonym for Dyke the other is a shortened version of Richard. Remember, there are only "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television"... wrapping people in cotton wool from the '60's is a bit lame.

Like Twinset has said, we haven't got a clue as to what swear words you post, they are asterisked out for us as well as members.

Chris keeps the site family friendly so anything that could be offensive he has added and as moderators we can't do anything about it. I'm sure we all talk differently when children are around us in real life, and you have to remember there could be young children reading this, I know I would be happy referring the 6-8 year old racers at my club to the TC forums while I wouldn't be comfortable sending them to Oople with the banter used there. Also remember that swear words have different levels of offensiveness in different countries.

Then again if you can't manage to say what you want to say without swearing, maybe you shouldn't be saying it in the first place.

You've got a couple of changes implemented, and the others are unlikely to be changed no matter how much you express your opinion.

If you want to discuss anything please continue by PM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now