But a coherent policy would have seen the "Lib Dem Leadership Contest" thread closed 2 weeks ago when people started discussing Bush and Saddam, not now when they were discussing how channels broke the news of Mark Oaten's resignation. Or perhaps just a note to the people involved to tell them to move the discussion about Iraq to Metropol would have stopped the thread going so far off-topic.
I don't disagree with Asa's general aim of discouraging non-TV-related discussion - but I do think that a slightly higher threshold should be applied before threads are closed, instead of unnaturally trying to stifle discussion when there is a slight deviation from topic.
Also, I think an official widening of the Newsroom's remit to cover *how* stories are covered on the news channels and bulletins (not just nuts-and-bolts graphics, music, and presenters) would be healthy.
But there is a line to be drawn and clearly more general political discussions etc belong in the lounge.
Exactly. But a coherent policy would have seen the "Lib Dem Leadership Contest" thread closed 2 weeks ago when people started discussing Bush and Saddam, not now when they were discussing how channels broke the news of Mark Oaten's resignation. Or perhaps just a note to the people involved to tell them to move the discussion about Iraq to Metropol would have stopped the thread going so far off-topic.
If the rules are clear and coherent, why are people ignoring them and wouldn't it be better to do something about those people rather than closing threads only for others which do not conform to the rules to be opened?
I do have to agree with the sentiments of Dan and Londoner and at the risk of repeating what's already been said why, if there is a "coherent policy" wan't the said thread closed earlier?
I'm personally of the camp that beleive's TVF should expand the newsrooms "breif", what's the worse that happens? We all lose our presentation obsession? Somehow I doubt the likihood of that.
I must agree with the closure of the said thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with television news presentation, which is what I'm sure most people are here to discuss..
but most of the active threads in this forum aren't about "tv presentation", are they?
Here's a sample from the main page:
Coronation Street
Celebrity Big Brother
Dancing on Ice
Radio 1
Who here doesn't like reality TV???
NI Radio Times
old doctor who
Wham's Last Christmas on The Hits now
why aren't these closed?
there doesn't seem to be any distinction between these and the ones which have been closed recently.
why are some threads like this allowed and others not?
i do think it's a strong argument to say that most people come here for tv presentation matters, looking at what gets talked about in this forum, this is clearly not the case.
I must agree with the closure of the said thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with television news presentation, which is what I'm sure most people are here to discuss..
but most of the active threads in this forum aren't about "tv presentation", are they?
Here's a sample from the main page:
Coronation Street
Celebrity Big Brother
Dancing on Ice
Radio 1
Who here doesn't like reality TV???
NI Radio Times
old doctor who
Wham's Last Christmas on The Hits now
why aren't these closed?
there doesn't seem to be any distinction between these and the ones which have been closed recently.
why are some threads like this allowed and others not?
i do think it's a strong argument to say that most people come here for tv presentation matters, looking at what gets talked about in this forum, this is clearly not the case.
There's a very fine line, and it is a very difficult part of being a moderator. I'd love to see what you would do in the same shoes.
The thing with those topics you listed is that they're all from the TV Home Forum, not The Newsroom. This is where it is not clear cut. I personally feel that those threads are roughly acceptable because they are about popular television programming or news. The problem I have with The Newsroom is that when we start getting into news content discussion it ultimately leads to politics and there's then a very slippery slope into all sorts of highly charged disagreements which are a minefield to moderate. For example, who's side to you take in a political disagreement? Moderators are supposed to be impartial (I hope that's how I come across) and political debate puts us in a very difficult position. I'm not saying that we should stifle free speech and discussion, but I really think that sort of thing is more suitable to Metropol where there are dedicated moderators who can spend more time on these issues.
There's a very fine line, and it is a very difficult part of being a moderator. I'd love to see what you would do in the same shoes.
The thing with those topics you listed is that they're all from the TV Home Forum, not The Newsroom. This is where it is not clear cut. I personally feel that those threads are roughly acceptable because they are about popular television programming or news. The problem I have with The Newsroom is that when we start getting into news content discussion it ultimately leads to politics and there's then a very slippery slope into all sorts of highly charged disagreements which are a minefield to moderate. For example, who's side to you take in a political disagreement? Moderators are supposed to be impartial (I hope that's how I come across) and political debate puts us in a very difficult position. I'm not saying that we should stifle free speech and discussion, but I really think that sort of thing is more suitable to Metropol where there are dedicated moderators who can spend more time on these issues.
With respect, I don't think it is necessarily a moderators job to be impartial. Your opions on any given matter shouldn't particularly come into conflict with the task of efficient moderation.
More than anything, a moderator is there to act as a guiding member of the forum. Most members respond well to moderators steering a conversation back on track, but few appreciate threads being locked without further explanation. Unfortunaly this happens a lot, but I'm pleased to hear the intention is to give an explanation in future.
Should there be any doubt about whether a thread is more correctly placed in the Newsroom or Metropol, post it in Metropol and you are guaranteed* a welcome.
... and there's then a very slippery slope into all sorts of highly charged disagreements which are a minefield to moderate. For example, who's side to you take in a political disagreement? Moderators are supposed to be impartial (I hope that's how I come across) and political debate puts us in a very difficult position. I'm not saying that we should stifle free speech and discussion, but I really think that sort of thing is more suitable to Metropol where there are dedicated moderators who can spend more time on these issues.
oh give over.
you choose to close down discussions before the descend into anything that dares to veer beyond the scope of day to day inanity - in case they become a flash point AND YET you choose to give imbecilic members the benefit of the doubt even though they are by far the reason behind most of the problems
not only do you wind up the membership by failing to act upon the morons, you further wind people up by locking threads without the common decency to explain why a thread is locked.
i don't know how other people feel - but asa's ambition to create a system whereby mods can insert pre-written reasons only serves to highlight the contempt with which the mods hold the membership. a line or 2 explaining SPECIFICALLY why a thread is closed is not an awful lot to ask - you could say it is the point of being a moderator.
(i use the word "you" in a very loose sense to refer to the mod team as a whole)
The reason is mainly because it's got nothing to do with news presentation or the like. The thread just descended into general conversation and there's nothing wrong with that...if you're on Metropol. The Lounge there was created for that exact reason.
.
When I eventually get my Lounge confirmation email through I may be able to post on there.....
The reason is mainly because it's got nothing to do with news presentation or the like. The thread just descended into general conversation and there's nothing wrong with that...if you're on Metropol. The Lounge there was created for that exact reason.
.
When I eventually get my Lounge confirmation email through I may be able to post on there.....
If you would like to send me your email by PM I will see if I can assist you.
... and there's then a very slippery slope into all sorts of highly charged disagreements which are a minefield to moderate. For example, who's side to you take in a political disagreement? Moderators are supposed to be impartial (I hope that's how I come across) and political debate puts us in a very difficult position. I'm not saying that we should stifle free speech and discussion, but I really think that sort of thing is more suitable to Metropol where there are dedicated moderators who can spend more time on these issues.
oh give over.
you choose to close down discussions before the descend into anything that dares to veer beyond the scope of day to day inanity - in case they become a flash point AND YET you choose to give imbecilic members the benefit of the doubt even though they are by far the reason behind most of the problems
not only do you wind up the membership by failing to act upon the morons, you further wind people up by locking threads without the common decency to explain why a thread is locked.
i don't know how other people feel - but asa's ambition to create a system whereby mods can insert pre-written reasons only serves to highlight the contempt with which the mods hold the membership. a line or 2 explaining SPECIFICALLY why a thread is closed is not an awful lot to ask - you could say it is the point of being a moderator.
(i use the word "you" in a very loose sense to refer to the mod team as a whole)
I still resent the fact you refer to the "mod team as a whole". I'd like to point out, when have I ever closed a thread without good reason?
I'm a bit torn, but I think there does need to be a clear policy on the issue....HOWEVER I think discouraging talk that deviates slightly from the topic is a mistake. When you're talking news, you're going to get into the coverage, the editorial decisions, what should be broadcast and what shouldn't be. It's going to get political whether you like it or not.
I personally think the discussion of issues of the day is a welcome break from some of the dross that gets posted elsewhere on this forum and others. Most people here that partake are very intelligent people and put forward arguments that I'd never even dream of. To stifle such a flow of natural conversation is a massive mistake.
As far as I'm concerned, I've never had a problem with people talking about the X Factor or Big Brother in the TV Home Forum - so WHY should I have a problem with people in the Newsroom discussing what goes out on the news bulletins / channels!? The answer is...I don't. Carry on, I welcome it.
Who knows it might just bring out some of that intelligent discussion we are so sorely lacking in.
So don't tar me with a "mod team", "them moderators", "the moderation", "soderator" or "numpty" brush.
You may find treat me with the respect I deserve, and I might just be there to support you when you need it.
... and there's then a very slippery slope into all sorts of highly charged disagreements which are a minefield to moderate. For example, who's side to you take in a political disagreement? Moderators are supposed to be impartial (I hope that's how I come across) and political debate puts us in a very difficult position. I'm not saying that we should stifle free speech and discussion, but I really think that sort of thing is more suitable to Metropol where there are dedicated moderators who can spend more time on these issues.
oh give over.
you choose to close down discussions before the descend into anything that dares to veer beyond the scope of day to day inanity - in case they become a flash point AND YET you choose to give imbecilic members the benefit of the doubt even though they are by far the reason behind most of the problems
not only do you wind up the membership by failing to act upon the morons, you further wind people up by locking threads without the common decency to explain why a thread is locked.
i don't know how other people feel - but asa's ambition to create a system whereby mods can insert pre-written reasons only serves to highlight the contempt with which the mods hold the membership. a line or 2 explaining SPECIFICALLY why a thread is closed is not an awful lot to ask - you could say it is the point of being a moderator.
(i use the word "you" in a very loose sense to refer to the mod team as a whole)
I still resent the fact you refer to the "mod team as a whole". I'd like to point out, when have I ever closed a thread without good reason?
I'm a bit torn, but I think there does need to be a clear policy on the issue....HOWEVER I think discouraging talk that deviates slightly from the topic is a mistake. When you're talking news, you're going to get into the coverage, the editorial decisions, what should be broadcast and what shouldn't be. It's going to get political whether you like it or not.
I personally think the discussion of issues of the day is a welcome break from some of the dross that gets posted elsewhere on this forum and others. Most people here that partake are very intelligent people and put forward arguments that I'd never even dream of. To stifle such a flow of natural conversation is a massive mistake.
As far as I'm concerned, I've never had a problem with people talking about the X Factor or Big Brother in the TV Home Forum - so WHY should I have a problem with people in the Newsroom discussing what goes out on the news bulletins / channels!? The answer is...I don't. Carry on, I welcome it.
Who knows it might just bring out some of that intelligent discussion we are so sorely lacking in.
So don't tar me with a "mod team", "them moderators", "the moderation", "soderator" or "numpty" brush.
You may find treat me with the respect I deserve, and I might just be there to support you when you need it.
There's a very fine line, and it is a very difficult part of being a moderator.
Indeed but perhaps a bit more friendly guidance wouldn't go amiss when people go off topic or break rules, rather than the seeming all-or-nothing approach of silence or thread-closing?
