As I said in private chat with you, it would create a backlog far beyond the abilities of moderators to handle. I belong to a dozen or more forums, and NONE of them require preapproval to post a thread. There's a reason for it. It is faster, and more efficient to deal with a thread gone bad after it's gone bad. 99% of the threads are just fine.
But too many sites use this system and it is working well. Perhaps the site needs to recrute more and more moderators.
As an admin on another site, I can tell you that Rabbit's approach is the most feasible. I spend far more time killing off the spammers and twits. Correcting or deleting a thread after it starts is more efficient.
Well, ok. It might work in some sites and might not in others. About this website, it seems that a post-control isn't efficient. Not so long ago, Cheef_1976 has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. Nobody was able to control. Do you imagine? More than 2 weeks of trolling!!!! It wouldn't happened if the pre-approval system existed here.
That thread, amongst many, keep going becuase admin was not paying attention....exactly to my point.
As I said in private chat with you, it would create a backlog far beyond the abilities of moderators to handle. I belong to a dozen or more forums, and NONE of them require preapproval to post a thread. There's a reason for it. It is faster, and more efficient to deal with a thread gone bad after it's gone bad. 99% of the threads are just fine.
But too many sites use this system and it is working well. Perhaps the site needs to recrute more and more moderators.
As an admin on another site, I can tell you that Rabbit's approach is the most feasible. I spend far more time killing off the spammers and twits. Correcting or deleting a thread after it starts is more efficient.
Well, ok. It might work in some sites and might not in others. About this website, it seems that a post-control isn't efficient. Not so long ago, Cheef_1976 has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. Nobody was able to control. Do you imagine? More than 2 weeks of trolling!!!! It wouldn't happened if the pre-approval system existed here.
That thread, amongst many, keep going becuase admin was not paying attention....exactly to my point.
NO! It is not "admin" fault!!!
That idiotic thread would have died instantly if fools did not keep posting to it.
And yes, I was one of the fools who kept it active.
As I said in private chat with you, it would create a backlog far beyond the abilities of moderators to handle. I belong to a dozen or more forums, and NONE of them require preapproval to post a thread. There's a reason for it. It is faster, and more efficient to deal with a thread gone bad after it's gone bad. 99% of the threads are just fine.
But too many sites use this system and it is working well. Perhaps the site needs to recrute more and more moderators.
As an admin on another site, I can tell you that Rabbit's approach is the most feasible. I spend far more time killing off the spammers and twits. Correcting or deleting a thread after it starts is more efficient.
Well, ok. It might work in some sites and might not in others. About this website, it seems that a post-control isn't efficient. Not so long ago, Cheef_1976 has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. Nobody was able to control. Do you imagine? More than 2 weeks of trolling!!!! It wouldn't happened if the pre-approval system existed here.
That thread, amongst many, keep going becuase admin was not paying attention....exactly to my point.
NO! It is not "admin" fault!!!
That idiotic thread would have died instantly if fools did not keep posting to it.
And yes, I was one of the fools who kept it active.
Yes it was Admin's fault. They could have stepped in and deleted the garbage going on. That is evident for thier ability to delete the "Suspending my Donations" thread. When it is your site, you control the content, top to bottom and right to left.
As I said in private chat with you, it would create a backlog far beyond the abilities of moderators to handle. I belong to a dozen or more forums, and NONE of them require preapproval to post a thread. There's a reason for it. It is faster, and more efficient to deal with a thread gone bad after it's gone bad. 99% of the threads are just fine.
But too many sites use this system and it is working well. Perhaps the site needs to recrute more and more moderators.
As an admin on another site, I can tell you that Rabbit's approach is the most feasible. I spend far more time killing off the spammers and twits. Correcting or deleting a thread after it starts is more efficient.
Well, ok. It might work in some sites and might not in others. About this website, it seems that a post-control isn't efficient. Not so long ago, Cheef_1976 has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. Nobody was able to control. Do you imagine? More than 2 weeks of trolling!!!! It wouldn't happened if the pre-approval system existed here.
That thread, amongst many, keep going becuase admin was not paying attention....exactly to my point.
NO! It is not "admin" fault!!!
That idiotic thread would have died instantly if fools did not keep posting to it.
And yes, I was one of the fools who kept it active.
Yes it was Admin's fault. They could have stepped in and deleted the garbage going on. That is evident for thier ability to delete the "Suspending my Donations" thread. When it is your site, you control the content, top to bottom and right to left.
That's why the pre-control system I suggested is necessary. There are too many other threads that are still there while they shouldn't.
I do not think precontrol is needed, just leave the threads as read only to those who are not Cert, that would make it easier to moderate. and it would encourage certification to those who want to participate.
It is easy to post if you are just some spammer who know one knows who you are.
As I said in private chat with you, it would create a backlog far beyond the abilities of moderators to handle. I belong to a dozen or more forums, and NONE of them require preapproval to post a thread. There's a reason for it. It is faster, and more efficient to deal with a thread gone bad after it's gone bad. 99% of the threads are just fine.
But too many sites use this system and it is working well. Perhaps the site needs to recrute more and more moderators.
As an admin on another site, I can tell you that Rabbit's approach is the most feasible. I spend far more time killing off the spammers and twits. Correcting or deleting a thread after it starts is more efficient.
Well, ok. It might work in some sites and might not in others. About this website, it seems that a post-control isn't efficient. Not so long ago, Cheef_1976 has caused troubles for more than 2 weeks. Nobody was able to control. Do you imagine? More than 2 weeks of trolling!!!! It wouldn't happened if the pre-approval system existed here.
That idiotic thread would have died instantly if fools did not keep posting to it.
And yes, I was one of the fools who kept it active.
Ohhh - so Cheef caused so much trouble - look here - look there - hmmm what trouble - I don't see any trouble. Then I clicked of one or two of Cheefs posts some time ago and deciided i need not waist my time clicking on anymore Cheef posts or on the treads so I suppose i can not see so much trouble -
I can say with some accuracy 60 % here need to get out for awhile, get some air and live a little life outside of this superficial cess pool we have out on the web.
I have been in the social media places on the web nearly since such places have become available. I can never appreciate enough the power of one using the filter god put between our ears.
Any pre-control bears a seed of censorship. There would be a lot more point in more efficient after-control, like for instance a "vote-machine". Each thread an individual posting would have "like" and "delete" buttons and if like 80% or more of certified members within certain time frame (like 24 hrs or minimum 50 clicks) would vote for "delete", a posting or thread would be automatically gone. One receiving over 80% "like" hits again would be marked on a list in bold letters so easier for occasional users to select relevant threads. Simple as that. Peer-managed threads is most efficient way of doing aftercontrol and would not increase burden of any single person too much.
There are a lot of threads that are of limited interest to most of the readers. Some even seem to be obnoxious/repetitive etc. Nevertheless that given moment the OP may be bothered by the thing and thus concern being legitimate. Exception of course the constant flaming topics like erection, where a well-formulated subtopic "erection in nude environment" article would be a button on the front page or to be clicked during registration process and accessible easily any given time.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!