Question For the Moderators
If someone repeatedly has posts deleted by the moderators, doesn't/shouldn't a ban eventually kick in?
I know that sometimes you delete posts that are fairly innocent but part of a string of posts that you want to get rid of. I am not referring to those. I refer to accounts whose posts are repeatedly deleted by you - time and again.
When someone has posts supposedly "removed by the community" I believe a progressive sytem of bannings automatically kicks in (which you can reverse). Shouldn't there be a similar system for serial moderator-led deletees?
I just wonder if it's equitable for one person to be kicked off because they were targeted by malicious reporting, whereas another person may post repeatedly offensive material but be allowed to continue because the community either chose to deal with it another way (ignoring or responding) or waited for the moderators instead.
Allowing a system of bannings to kick in may also save you mods some work - I know you have all been very busy lately, and I thank you for your work.
Comments
-
It is my observation that women in great numbers are leaving BCO or choose to no longer post
-
Good morning, Luan. And, why is that your impression? And, exactly why did you choose to post it here? I thought you were a stickler for staying on topic. Your comment has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
-
I think Athena's idea is something that should be looked into. The present system hardly seems eqiutable, but that is just my opinion.
-
I don't like that automated program that suspends/bans based on 'Community' reports ... it has caused nothing but trouble since it was instituted.
I would much rather that any suspension or banning required a decision ... and action ... by the Moderators to do so.
And it should be reserved for only very severe cases of misbehavior IMO.
-
Thank you Athena. I've had the same question. Especially when the person who is having her comments, and entire threads deleted by the Moderators, keeps changing her name, or adding additional names ( sometimes referred to as "sock puppets") and continuing the same type of posting that was deleted by the Moderators.
It just doesn't make sense. I completely agree with what WhiteRabbit has posted. As Luan just joined in March, 2011, I don't understand her "observation" or why she is posting it in this thread. Maybe it's the "sock puppets" who are no longer posting?
-
These "sock puppets" or multiple personalities are a huge problem here, IMHO. The madness around here lately is really damaging the very fabric of BCO and it needs to stopped. These sock puppets are here, evidently, to stir up controversy (for their entertainment or power games or...?), since they never show any honest efforts to discuss the ideas put forth.
Dear Mods, again - is there a reason why multiple IDs are allowed here? There really isn't a single legitimate reason I can think of; only cowardly sniping and controversy-stirring.
-
I was actually thinking about this as I was walking this a.m., if you can believe it -- because I find what is happening on BCO so distasteful and disheartening. But it's still hard for me to grasp if the most offending parties are just socially inept (in which case I feel sorry for them), or something more menacing, which I'm beginning to believe due to the changed i.d.'s and suspicion of multiple i.d.'s. For the most part, I've tried to just steer clear of the silly, bickering threads. However, I have to say, there have been so many of them in recent weeks, it's really changed the tone of BCO -- at least for me. And when I see those i.d.'s pop up on "normal" threads, I think, "Oh, boy... here we go... how long before this thread becomes combative and is ruined."
Sorry, but I agree, something has to be done.
I also think that lifting the 5 posts per day for newbies might need to be re-thought. While a pain, when we had it, it seemed to give more value to a membership. Not sure going back to 5 per day is necessary, but some sort of limit. Deanna
-
Supporting what Deanna said. The nadir, I thought, until further posts, was when one of the Sock Puppets, now posting under a different name, actually POSTED and "thanked" her other sock puppets by NAME in the post for their "support" of her ideas.
I just find it all so, well, creepy comes to mind, and I too think it poisons the atmosphere for people who have been helped by other posters over the years on BC.org, and want to share their experiences to help others with breast cancer. So many of these newer posts seem to be just cartoons, attacking cartoons, mock tee shirts, just makes me sad. And likely to stop trying to keep BC.org as the place it was when it helpd me so much. If the Moderators aren't doing anything about it, there really isn't much we as a community can do. It does pollute so many threads.
Attacking other threads as "juvenile" "homerooms" referring to people as "breast cancer groupies" is not acceptable.
-
To respond to a couple of the points that have been raised again in this thread:
- BCO is currently reviewing changes to the Community Rules that would, among other things, limit membership on the site to one per person.
- If there is the volume of reports to have a post temporarily removed by the Community, a moderator reviews every removal to confirm or reject it.
-
Thanks for the response. However, I still have the following question:
--Why are moderator-led deletions not considered --above and beyond all deletions-- in the decision to sanction/reprimand/ban a member?
Let me explain. Let's say that a post is "Removed by the Community." You, moderators, examine that post to see if it really did break BCO rules.
Scenario 1: Let's say that you decide that the post has violated a rule and deserves to stay erased. You let the removal stand. The system has an automatic ban (temporary or permanent) that you can either reverse or allow to stand. If you agree that a post merits deletion, you can let that ban stand.
Scenario 2: You examine the post and disagree with the removal. This has happened many times. In these cases, recently you have begun to reinstate the post AND reverse the system ban, which is absolutely fair.
But what happens when YOU, as moderators, come across several posts by a few posters that YOU deem so offensive as to erase? Doesn't that person/account deserve to also have a ban kick in?
I would think a moderator-led deletion, because not malicious (unlike many "community" reportings), and because well thought out, would be the most legitimate of all and would carry more weight and sanctions, no?
A person who has five or six posts deleted by the moderators in one day, and dozens over weeks, AND causes at least three threads to be shut down in a matter of weeks should not belong here.
-
moderators
I agree with Athena. Moderator generated deleions should have more weight in banning a member than those by the community.
-
1Athena1 we don't announce when action is taken, or what that action might be. When you see a post (or many posts) removed by moderators, there may be other actions being taken behind the scenes, ranging from PMs to temporary or permanent bans. If the person affected doesn't announce to her friends and allies that something has happened, those actions are invisible, as we believe they should be.
Your mods
-
Mods
Persons of this ilk are still here. I believe that is what is causing our distress.
-
Thank you again, Athena, for taking the time and energy to post in such detail. I admire and respect your trying to keep these boards as helpful as they were for many of us.
Especially when you wrote:
"A person who has five or six posts deleted by the moderators in one day, and dozens over weeks, AND causes at least three threads to be shut down in a matter of weeks should not belong here. "
Thanks again. I admit I was dismayed reading some of those threads deleted, and trying to refute commentson them.
-
Sure thing - thanks mods - that answers my question.
(Yikes - I write one line and there is a typo!)
-
Thanks Mods - that makes sense! thanks again for trying to keep it a safe space for women in such a difficult time.
-
Yes, definitely a big thanks to you, Mods! It's frustrating to see the same people under different aliases keep coming back to cause trouble. Sometimes they even admit to having different names, but sometimes not, though it's quite clear who they are. Anyone who has posts removed by the mods should be subject to close monitoring, again by the mods, and banned by IP or whatever, for continued disruptions.
Edited to clarify - by disruptions I mean intential provocation/troublemaking, and not disagreements. Disagreements with discussion/debate are useful. Propaganda and cartoons are not helpful.
-
Why the intense concern about who should and should not belong here, and exactly how far someone can go without being banned?
There may be a very few, very emotionally ill people who come here to "pretend" to have breast cancer. My reaction to them is pity, not anger.
Cancer, especially early in the process of diagnosis, and starting treatment is overwhelming, and people may react in ways that are inappropriate at times. You wouldn't want someone you cared about permanently "banned" from the site because they had a difficult day, or week, or even month would you?
The moderators have to balance making the information and support available on the site accessible to those who need it with keeping a civil tone throughout the site. It is a nearly impossible task. In an effort to do that, they seem to be frequently tweaking the rules and consequences to make them and the site function better. That is a good thing. They have been very responsive to the requests of the community. They don't have to keep us informed of every little update, and they have wide latitude in how they enforce or lift any consequences. They don't deserve to have every decision they make questioned, and scrutinized for absolute equality and fairness.
It doesn't work any better in this situation than in a situation of trying to treat siblings who are different ages and have different needs exactly the same no matter what.
-
I have said it before and I will say it again. I am deeply grateful to our moderators. They do do a job I could not handle.
It has been very frustrating for me to see the same troublemakers over and over again. While I would not want you to air the dirty laundry in public so to speak it seemed to me not much was being done about them and that led to my frustration. It is good to know you are doing something about the problem and I am looking forward to quiet weekends on Breastcancer.org. Thank you so much for all you do.
-
Hi PatMom, I think most of us are grateful to the mods for their difficult job, and I don't think most of us are demanding or expecting them to justify their decisions or actions or to publicize everything. I think what most of us are hoping, is that the mods might consider our input with the goal of making BCO the helpful, supportive, and informational resource we come here for. And I think their recent changes have been great in moving in that direction.
It's not useful to allow the inmates to rule the asylum, regardless of our pity for their mental state. If they are not here to discuss breast cancer and its impact on our lives, then I believe those who come here with a clear agenda contrary to BCO's mission (breast cancer support) should promptly be shown the door.
-
Very well put, thenewme!
-
Thank you, thenewme. This really isn't a place that needs all those almost "spam" postings from other websites. Especially, when those posters refuse to answer the postings from the same website that refute what was taken out of context. I certainly don't mind someone expressing their point of view, from their own experience, but to generalize and make that an "Absolute Statement" applying across the board, is not helpful or supportive to getting the best information possible to women who most need it.
Thanks, again, thenewme
-
I'll just add my concern that this website seems to disregard copyright law entirely. It might be to the long term benefit of BCO to look into that. My understanding is that reproducing article from other websites in their entirety is frowned upon (whether or not they are credited is another matter). Typically, on other sites, the rule seems to be a paragraph or two and a link to the full article.
-
Revkat, the copyright issues are also concerning to me. I have heard of original content providers going after boards and blogs for misuse/overuse of content.
-
I think the mods are doing a great job. And they did answer Athena's original question.
I don't think BCO should do away with the discussion boards. I have lots of friends on this site and I don't want to lose my contact with them. The discussion boards were a real life saver for me once I started treatment and it was wonderful to have others to talk to who were going through the same thing.
Bren
-
WOW - speaking of showing exaclty what we were trying to explain to the Moderators. Conspiracy theories and reference to something which happened so long ago.
-
Ohmigosh no - don't get rid of the discussion boards!! I hope that wasn't suggested! They're what distinguishes BCO from other sites and what most of us come here for!
Rainbowpony, don't we have chat rooms here now? I've never used them, but I believe some people do. As for chatting privately, IMHO, this is a public discussion forum first and foremost. You can always PM whoever you want to chat privately with and communicate that way, or ask for their phone number or email address and chat all you want.
Edited to add: Oh, for crying out loud, Rainbowpony! For the gazillionth time, it's NOT about "banning my oponents" or "stifling" those I disagree with!! Give us a break. It's about maintaining the culture of respectful, honest, supportive breast cancer DISCUSSION most of us come here for. It's about disallowing troublemakers who come here to copy/paste propaganda here with no intentions of discussing or debating ideas. Disallow those who come here simply to use this site as their personal blog or cartoon sharing service, with no regard to what this place is about. Disallow those who get their jollies by stirring the pot. It's one thing to lose your temper sometimes or to cross the line sometimes, but it's pretty clear who's here to do what.
Categories
- All Categories
- 679 Advocacy and Fund-Raising
- 289 Advocacy
- 68 I've Donated to Breastcancer.org in honor of....
- Test
- 322 Walks, Runs and Fundraising Events for Breastcancer.org
- 5.6K Community Connections
- 282 Middle Age 40-60(ish) Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 53 Australians and New Zealanders Affected by Breast Cancer
- 208 Black Women or Men With Breast Cancer
- 684 Canadians Affected by Breast Cancer
- 1.5K Caring for Someone with Breast cancer
- 455 Caring for Someone with Stage IV or Mets
- 260 High Risk of Recurrence or Second Breast Cancer
- 22 International, Non-English Speakers With Breast Cancer
- 16 Latinas/Hispanics With Breast Cancer
- 189 LGBTQA+ With Breast Cancer
- 152 May Their Memory Live On
- 85 Member Matchup & Virtual Support Meetups
- 375 Members by Location
- 291 Older Than 60 Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 177 Singles With Breast Cancer
- 869 Young With Breast Cancer
- 50.4K Connecting With Others Who Have a Similar Diagnosis
- 204 Breast Cancer with Another Diagnosis or Comorbidity
- 4K DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
- 79 DCIS plus HER2-positive Microinvasion
- 529 Genetic Testing
- 2.2K HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
- 1.5K IBC (Inflammatory Breast Cancer)
- 3.4K IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
- 1.5K ILC (Invasive Lobular Carcinoma)
- 999 Just Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastasis
- 652 LCIS (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
- 193 Less Common Types of Breast Cancer
- 252 Male Breast Cancer
- 86 Mixed Type Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Not Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastases but Concerned
- 189 Palliative Therapy/Hospice Care
- 488 Second or Third Breast Cancer
- 1.2K Stage I Breast Cancer
- 313 Stage II Breast Cancer
- 3.8K Stage III Breast Cancer
- 2.5K Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
- 13.1K Day-to-Day Matters
- 132 All things COVID-19 or coronavirus
- 87 BCO Free-Cycle: Give or Trade Items Related to Breast Cancer
- 5.9K Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results
- 86 Coping with Holidays, Special Days and Anniversaries
- 828 Employment, Insurance, and Other Financial Issues
- 101 Family and Family Planning Matters
- Family Issues for Those Who Have Breast Cancer
- 26 Furry friends
- 1.8K Humor and Games
- 1.6K Mental Health: Because Cancer Doesn't Just Affect Your Breasts
- 706 Recipe Swap for Healthy Living
- 704 Recommend Your Resources
- 171 Sex & Relationship Matters
- 9 The Political Corner
- 874 Working on Your Fitness
- 4.5K Moving On & Finding Inspiration After Breast Cancer
- 394 Bonded by Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Life After Breast Cancer
- 806 Prayers and Spiritual Support
- 285 Who or What Inspires You?
- 28.7K Not Diagnosed But Concerned
- 1K Benign Breast Conditions
- 2.3K High Risk for Breast Cancer
- 18K Not Diagnosed But Worried
- 7.4K Waiting for Test Results
- 603 Site News and Announcements
- 560 Comments, Suggestions, Feature Requests
- 39 Mod Announcements, Breastcancer.org News, Blog Entries, Podcasts
- 4 Survey, Interview and Participant Requests: Need your Help!
- 61.9K Tests, Treatments & Side Effects
- 586 Alternative Medicine
- 255 Bone Health and Bone Loss
- 11.4K Breast Reconstruction
- 7.9K Chemotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 2.7K Complementary and Holistic Medicine and Treatment
- 775 Diagnosed and Waiting for Test Results
- 7.8K Hormonal Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 50 Immunotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 7.4K Just Diagnosed
- 1.4K Living Without Reconstruction After a Mastectomy
- 5.2K Lymphedema
- 3.6K Managing Side Effects of Breast Cancer and Its Treatment
- 591 Pain
- 3.9K Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 8.4K Surgery - Before, During, and After
- 109 Welcome to Breastcancer.org
- 98 Acknowledging and honoring our Community
- 11 Info & Resources for New Patients & Members From the Team