Staff abuse - views?

[tobyjugg2]

It seems to me that this site is negatively impacted by the whims of staff personal prejudices.

 

Here is seems to be a prime example:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?449234-Chinese-economy-worrying-!

 

Conniff makes a blatantly offensive remark (it seems to me), which was apparently quite rightly challenged (hard to tell as conniff unapproved it) and Conniff then deletes the post, and when further seemingly rightly challenged closes the thread.

 

Very damaging and damning to the site it seems to me.

[unclebulgaria67]

I cannot see the point in an argument. Yes some people are not politically correct and people take exception to it.

 

I find the stereotyping of nations people or a nation a very difficult subject. People regularly talks about Nigerian sc*ms, because there have been a large number coming from that country. But they have a population of 100 million and i am sure most do a honest days work.

 

I think common sense should be used. Unless something is obviously offensive, it should be ignored, without calling them a racist.

 

All British people are uptight, emotionally restrained, mild alcoholics, who eat roast beef every Sunday.

[tobyjugg2]

Not every Sunday., and less of the insulting 'mild'

 

But staff should be squeeky clean when acting as agents of this site, and closing threads and deleting posts is definately staff privilege.

 

I didn't post this thread lightly, staff is a difficult position but these repeated 'imposing of staff personal opinion will undoubtedly damage the site. It affected me when I first came here years ago which is why I just used this site to see others experiences for so long.

 

and its not just Conniff by any means, he just happened to be involved in what looks like a current double whammy that nudged me into action.

[fletch70]

Well without China we would not be using our iphones and ipads or many of the things we take for granted . There are however a totally varied range of political beliefs and values on this site, some i dislike .

 

I do feel that removing a post because you feel it is a personal attack is somewhat akin to censorship and to me would have been better off with a swift rebuttal.

It is no secret that I have very different political views to conniff

[silverfox1961]

Hi

As a site team member, it does come across that you have a view against one member and if you feel that one of the site team has over stepped the line, you have a right to complain about it. you can email [email protected].

 

As an aside, we are not staff (as such). We are volunteers. Staff get paid !

 

With a forum this size, we are always going to get differing opinions but those opinions should be shared with a modicum of respect.

[AndyOrch]

It seems to me that this site is negatively impacted by the whims of staff personal prejudices.

 

Here is seems to be a prime example:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?449234-Chinese-economy-worrying-!

 

Conniff makes a blatantly offensive remark (it seems to me), which was apparently quite rightly challenged (hard to tell as conniff unapproved it) and Conniff then deletes the post, and when further seemingly rightly challenged closes the thread.

 

Very damaging and damning to the site it seems to me.

 

Thread amended and now open:wink:

[tobyjugg2]

Hi

As a site team member, it does come across that you have a view against one member and if you feel that one of the site team has over stepped the line, you have a right to complain about it. you can email [email protected].

 

Both your and Sabresheeps accusations that I have some sort of vendetta against Conniff is false and unreasonable. In fact I think Sabresheep is a worse offender in many ways.

I didn't post this thread lightly, staff is a difficult position but these repeated 'imposing of staff personal opinion will undoubtedly damage the site. It affected me when I first came here years ago which is why I just used this site to see others experiences for so long.

 

and its not just Conniff by any means, he just happened to be involved in what looks like a current double whammy that nudged me into action.

 

and regarding a private complaint, I thought about that, but in keeping with my reasons for doing this I believed that publicly raising this was better than a private complaint.

 

This certainly isn't a vendetta against Conniff, he just seemed to be a perfect example at the time it came to a head for me.

 

I note that a moderator has deleted my post in the other thread despite or perhaps because it references apparent poor practice of someone promoting this site elsewhere and then calling people there 'schills'.

Beggars belief really.

 

 

AND I absolutely agree with your point that differing opinions should be shared with a modicum of respect.

Physicians heal thyselfs.

Edited July 24, 2015 by tobyjugg2
'you' changed to 'a moderator'

[estellyn]

I think this discussion is pretty pointless. If we have a complaint against a site team member, then we make a complaint and it is dealt with. I've had my own issues with a team member and it was adjudicated by the team and I accepted their handling of the situation. This is a forum on which we are guests and the site team members are not of our choosing, and if we have a big problem we have the option to complain, either as an individual or as a group if a specific site team member's actions become an ongoing issue. We also have the option not to post.

 

I personally don't believe that individual team members should be 'named and shamed' on a forum post in the bear garden. My advice would be that if a number of members believe the ongoing actions of a team member are unacceptable then they can put a complaint together and submit it via the appropriate process. The complaint will be looked into and a decision will be made. And if we don't like the outcome we can choose to stay or go elsewhere.

 

ETA: On the whole I find the site to be pretty well moderated in comparison with others I know. But sadly it only takes one bad apple.....

[Nystagmite]

I've not had a problem with abuse from the staff team on this forum. In fact, any staff member I've had dealings with, have been pleasant.

 

I help moderate a forum (because of the nature of the forum, we have other rules we need to follow too) and there are rules to follow. If you don't follow the rules, you get de-modded. There are certain users on that site who have problems with the staff members over there - they tend to be trouble makers always getting banned.

[tobyjugg2]

I've had my own issues with a team member and it was adjudicated by the team and I accepted their handling of the situation.

 

Its good that your problems with a team member were addressed to your satisfaction, and well done you for having the mettle to raise them, but I find it rather sad that the issues appear to have continued for others.

Hopefully the more public format will go even further in addressing the issues making it better for all, which was my intent.

 

 

ETA: On the whole I find the site to be pretty well moderated in comparison with others I know. But sadly it only takes one bad apple.....

 

Absolutely. Well said.

[Nystagmite]

I've been on forums where the moderation has been pretty much non-existent. And then there's the favouritism / side taking when I did raise issues of bullying, etc.

[SabreSheep]

Whilst I welcome criticism and I do take it (As long as it is constructive) it is vital to mention that in some cases actions taken may appear to non site team members as a bit harsh etc. This is particulaly so if the members cannot see the full picture. On that point it needs to be noted that we cannot publicly explain why we take all the actions we do. Moderation simply does not work that way.

 

That being said, you will have noticed more recently that when a thread is closed etc we try to add more communication so that there is at least a reason given.

 

In my case, I always flag things for co-site team members to review before I moderate (IF) I am involved in a thread. I like a Second pair of eyes to review what I do. I will even take advice. Do I get it wrong, Yes, I am not a paid member of staff, I am perhaps one of the newest Site Team Members. IF you review my threads properly, you will see that I always grant at least one public warning before taking big action unless it is a more serious violation of the Site rules.

In threads I am actively involved in, unless someone turns against other members I tend to be abit less "Highly Strung", after all, I can take criticism, but as soon as someone starts attacking other members or violating the rules where I am not such a target, I have to act.

 

The issue of naming and shaming really is counter productive. Volunteers can go very easily and then if the wrong atmosphere develops, harder to recruit.

 

That being said, some of peoples complaints do have a point. There is a complaints procedure there and things *DO* happen behind the scenes.

 

I would welcome anyone making a constructive complaints through the procedures about my conduct. This is one way that Both I and the rest of the Site Team can learn to improve the experience here. I suspect the rest of the Site team feel the same way.

 

It is also worth mentioning that as a Team, we are very diverse as well. Some people more harsh, some younger, some more set in their ways. It is good that the Team reflects the diverse users that access this forum, it also allows us to have a broader base to offer more advice etc. Like every Human Being, Mistakes will be made. There is nothing to be gained by a Public Witch Hunt unless one actively wishes to encourage discord.

[estellyn]

Its good that your problems with a team member were addressed to your satisfaction

 

I didn't say it was addressed to my satisfaction - just that I accepted their handling of the situation. Unfortunately this is one bad apple that needs to go, but that's not my call, and it's up to admin to decide what they are and are not happy to accept in a site team member. I decided to accept things and continue posting on the forum (though I nearly left). And that's the decision we have - accept how things are, make an official complaint, or don't come back.

[caro]

I didn't say it was addressed to my satisfaction - just that I accepted their handling of the situation. Unfortunately this is one bad apple that needs to go, but that's not my call, and it's up to the site team to decide what they are and are not happy to accept in a fellow site team member. I decided to accept things and continue posting on the forum (though I nearly left). And that's the decision we have - accept how things are, make an official complaint, or don't come back.

 

 

Not strictly right. Problems with site team or complaints about them are dealt with by admin. Glad you decided to stay.

[estellyn]

Not strictly right. Problems with site team or complaints about them are dealt with by admin. Glad you decided to stay.

 

Thanks for the correction, I'll correct my post. I'm glad I decided to stay too

[consumerag1]

The standard of moderation on the forum is poor. For examples, there is an ongoing problem over on the employment forum where some contributors are overly negative and on occasion even insulting to OPs, but this goes virtually unchecked.

I too have had issues with sabresheep and silverfox, one couldn’t accept that they had made an incorrect post and got caught up in an argument on a post they were actively contributing to, and the other one blindly jumped to defend a fellow site team member and refused to look at a complaint.

The most important thing a moderator can offer is moderation, so having moderator access to a forum which that person is actively contributing to is a non-starter. People with moderator access need to be properly trained and be able to take criticism. Please remember why the forum exists CAG, its for the OPs!

[unclebulgaria67]

Why not complain to admin using your real CAG user name. Admin is done by site owners/staff. Site mods are mostly volunteers, the same as others who reply to posts.

 

If you feel there is a problem with a thread, send the details to admin. If you think information is wrong, you can add comments on threads saying why it is wrong. A robust debate is welcomed.

[tobyjugg2]

Why not complain to admin using your real CAG user name. Admin is done by site owners/staff. Site mods are mostly volunteers, the same as others who reply to posts.

It concerns me that someone feels they need to hide who they are to complain.

 

I think we already see the issues with the 'behind closed doors' decision process promoted in sabresheeps post, just as much as secret/anonymous complaints.

 

Does anyone really support or believe in a secret decision made 'behind closed doors' after posts are deleted from view and threads closed?

 

(and yes clearly abusive and posts with potentially illegal content should be immediately deleted or hidden - but with a clear explanation of why in the thread in my opinion - not just vanished with no explanation or notice)

Edited July 31, 2015 by tobyjugg2
by to in

[citizenB]

The standard of moderation on the forum is poor. For examples, there is an ongoing problem over on the employment forum where some contributors are overly negative and on occasion even insulting to OPs, but this goes virtually unchecked.

I too have had issues with sabresheep and silverfox, one couldn’t accept that they had made an incorrect post and got caught up in an argument on a post they were actively contributing to, and the other one blindly jumped to defend a fellow site team member and refused to look at a complaint.

The most important thing a moderator can offer is moderation, so having moderator access to a forum which that person is actively contributing to is a non-starter. People with moderator access need to be properly trained and be able to take criticism. Please remember why the forum exists CAG, its for the OPs!

 

You have been registered for just one day and made just one post - this one, yet claim to have issues with sabresheep and silverfox.

 

Please let us know exactly what these issues are ?

Edited July 31, 2015 by citizenB

[tobyjugg2]

Care to explain why the new user was banned rather than encouraged to post under their usual CG id or at least clarify their issues?

 

If the new id was because of a fear of retribution or victimisation, you have just proven it valid.

[SabreSheep]

I suspect the person who posted was someone who was banned and therefore has attempted to evade moderation.

 

Stop making demands you have no right to make

 

If you do not like the way this forum is run, vent your opinions fine, but if things are not what you like, feel free to go elsewhere

Edited July 31, 2015 by SabreSheep
adding sentance

[tobyjugg2]

I suspect the person who posted was someone who was banned and therefore has attempted to evade moderation.

 

Stop making demands you have no right to make

 

If you do not like the way this forum is run, vent your opinions fine, but if things are not what you like, feel free to go elsewhere

 

I made no demand. I asked if anyone cared to explain?

But thanks for the explanation that you suspected the user was already banned.

[SabreSheep]

For the record, I was not involved in this banned user issue, nor confirm or deny anything. Just offering ONE possible explanation.

 

And for the record, phrasing things like that to imply I made the ban is unacceptable.

[fletch70]

I made no demand. I asked if anyone cared to explain?

But thanks for the explanation that you suspected the user was already banned.

 

It is no secret that I have been a huge pain in the backside to the site team over the years however you need to realise that this is not a democracy and there is no right to freedom of speech . Now I may disagree with that but if you want to be part of the site thats how it works.

They are very good at identifying spammers or people signing up under different usernames once they have been banned. I have my suspicions as to what technology they use for this but on the whole IP addresses , O.S. and Browsers are enough to give you a fair degree of certainty -all this is available to those with back room access every time you log on. Trust me they will know my approximate location, the fact I am using Win 7 32 bit and Chrome to type this oh and my ISP

 

Of course the site teams make mistakes, even Bankfodder has made mistakes

 

I do think that there should be a fair and open dispute resolution service but that is just my opinion.

 

I have found at least two members of the site team to be more than fair and helpful , confrontational approaches rarely work

[tobyjugg2]

For the record, I was not involved in this banned user issue, nor confirm or deny anything. Just offering ONE possible explanation.

 

And for the record, phrasing things like that to imply I made the ban is unacceptable.

 

I was simply taking you at your written word sabresheep. Apologies for the misunderstanding, which was almost certainly wrongly coloured by my negative perspective on the issue and you now I have reread it after your response:

 

"I suspect the person who posted was someone who was banned and therefore has attempted to evade moderation"