[coastie65]

rasmasyean said:

What do you mean by you're a member of other forums? You just register like everyone else or you perform some duties there as a "team member"?
Does PC World hire you to moderate these forums and be a team member of other forums?

Are you like a professional moderator?

I've always wondered whether this was a job or hobby. Some sites don't have any moderators (or barely active ones) but they do have a lot of traffic so maybe they just don't hire ppl...or just don't care.

First, the mods on this forum are all volunteers. It can be a "Job" at times. :D We are NOT self appointed, but were asked. As for the other sites, I am just a member and they are sites of a special interest. One is MaximumPC and primarily for the tech aspect. Another is the " Unofficial" eMachines Forum. I try to help out with peoblems someone may be having as well as over at the other forum. I am also a member of XFIRE ( a gaming related forum ). I do not moderate on any of them, just visit from time to time. I spend a good deal of my time here. I have seen some pretty loosely moderated forums and in my opinion are lacking and not a lot of fun. No such thing as a "Professional" moderator as far as I know. From my experience they are all volunteers who were asked if they would like to moderate. Unfortunately there some that let it go to their heads and are a site killer as they tend to drive off members. Yeah, I just registered like everyone else. Same here, and at some point, I was asked if I would consider moderating. I don't have the time to moderate other sites as this one requires focus. coastie

[WinTard]

Cheers to your volunteer efforts, and that of your team! You all do a great job of keeping our community a safe and wonderful place. Thank you. :)

[coastie65]

Thanks Win. I am beginning to think this thread is destined to have occasional deviations, I guess as long as it wanders back on Topic without too big of a deviation, it is fine. Can't let it get hijacked. One character that comes to mind is the "Johnny Come lately" who manages to find his way to a thread long after the subject has expired.

[Shannon3277]

I don't know if you were talking to me but, yes, I just register like others, but I do volunteer moderating on a couple. One is a spirituality forum and the other is a private support-group board that is associated with another spirituality forum. I've seen a bit of everything...



As for sociopathy, I think the internet can bring out what is already there because it gives people a place to talk in relative anonymity and there is a place for basically everything.

[rgreen4]

It would be a whole lot easier if all members would treat each other with respect. On topics where members are attempting to help someone with a problem (the main focus of this webstie) there is almost no need to moderate. Unfortunately, the vast majority of our time is consumed with the news discussion threads where people post their opinions and then one of the characters in the article comes in and skewers them. There is not problem with disagreeing with the ideas of others, it when it starts to get personal and the use of obscenity starts that we have to step in. There are also trademark issues that have to be considered as well.

The actual term used in our position is Member Moderator.

[mpheadley]

I'm fascinated by what the "trademark issues" are, as I really hope that it's not that we can't say a company's name or slogan here especially if we're talking about that company or product.

[jon4pc1world]

While I recognize the intended humor (however sophomoric) & I also see the intent or thrust of this article,

I find it falling short of my expectations for PC world, & pcworld.com.

To repeat, I recognize the INTENDED humor, which fails to measure up to PC World's normal standard.

I also recognize the factual inaccuracies, as well

Page 5 says:
"Comment forums are made for divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate."
No, they are NOT!
Forums are made to EXCHANGE RELEVANT INFORMATION!
FIRST, FOREMOST, & ALWAYS!
So-called "divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate" are fine, for a political debate,
but they REALLY handicap (disable? cripple?) the exchange of relevant information.
Don't believe it? Ask Steve Bass, one of the moderators on the [broad_band] yahoo.com group.
(Incidentally, the illustrious Mr. Bass was previously a prominent writer at PC World.)
In general, I found this article far below PC World's usual standards,
as it is far too, too 'snarky,' snide, & sneeringly, contemptously supercilious & uncomplimentary,
w/out even pretending to offer some constructive information or guidance.
SOME of us may need to just stop being so darned unctuous
Hey, here's a thought: why don't YOU grow up?
In fact, page 10 says:
"I don't pretend to understand how this quirky character's brain works."

Maybe not, but you sure "pretend to understand how" EVERY "character's brain works" on those forums you seem to dislike so much.

Hey, is this article ALL about YOU?

Yes, we HAVE all seen these people before; it wasn't pleasant then, & it's not ANY more so now.

IF you can't find something interesting to write about, just post a poll for everyone to vote on.

At least you'lll offend fewer people that way.

Jon, or Mr. Manners to you, Mr. Smarty Pants.

[rgreen4]

I probably should have said copyright. It is not tollerated to advocate and post methods of bypassing copy protection on software and media. We routinely remove posts that tell how to bypass the copy protection on DVD's. I realize that some chafe at this, but the fact remains that it is currently a violation of Federal Law to remove the protection. The policy of this web site is to remove the posts, for after all while PC World cannot be held liable for everything that people post, they do incur risk from the more blatent posts that remain. Other sites may have a differeing policy, but then that is their site. Until we get a policy change from the editors and legal staff of PC World, we will continue to remove those posts. One moderator even has a document prepared on an effective way of copying the media awaiting a final decision my the magazine's management.

It is also the policy that when quoting an article, a few quick salient points be quoted and a link to the source be provided rather than quoting the entire article. We had a situation where the entire article of an author was posted and he requested it be removed and it was.

When posting an image from a commercial site, it is also preferred that the source be credited. For example if you post an image from a computer parts seller, then it is desired that you credit the image to the seller to eliminate confusion that you generated the image.

[rgreen4]

jon4pc1world said:

I also recognize the factual inaccuracies, as well



Page 5 says:
"Comment forums are made for divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate."

No, they are NOT!

Forums are made to EXCHANGE RELEVANT INFORMATION!

FIRST, FOREMOST, & ALWAYS!

So-called "divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate" are fine, for a political debate,
but they REALLY handicap (disable? cripple?) the exchange of relevant information.

Actually those exact words ("divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate") have been used many times in describing the purpose of the News Discussion forum (on which you just posted) by the editors and professional staff of PC World. And since they set the policy of the website, that is the way it is moderated. In the other areas where the intent is to answer questions posed by members about problems they are having or information they are seeking, it is aimed more at providing help and answers. In the General Talk area, it's about whatever the originator of a discussion wants it to be.

[WesTorso]

never mind

[squishie]

Perhaps I smell a book......."THE LIFE AND TIMES OF A FORUM MODERATOR" by Coastie.

[squishie]

Hello WinTard

Thanks for the hint. I always wondered why my images never worked. I would have never figured that out.

[Car54]

[quote name='rgreen4']
>

jon4pc1world said:

>
> I also recognize the factual inaccuracies, as well
>
>
> Page 5 says:
> "Comment forums are made for divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate."
>
> No, they are NOT!
>
> Forums are made to EXCHANGE RELEVANT INFORMATION!
>
> FIRST, FOREMOST, & ALWAYS!
>
> So-called "divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate" are fine, for a political debate,
> but they REALLY handicap (disable? cripple?) the exchange of relevant information.
>
> Actually those exact words ("divergent viewpoints and intelligent, spirited debate") have been used many times in describing the purpose of the News Discussion forum (on which you just posted) by the editors and professional staff of PC World. And since they set the policy of the website, that is the way it is moderated. In the other areas where the intent is to answer questions posed by members about problems they are having or information they are seeking, it is aimed more at providing help and answers. In the General Talk area, it's about whatever the originator of a discussion wants it to be.

Yes, and as the moderators have shown me in the past, that if I ever wanted to just view and exchange relevant, technical, helps and information, to go to the "Your View" settings, and to set it to only dispaly the topics, Communities, that I wanted to see. That way when you log in, you can see only those communities that intrest you. I have learned though, to appreciate the diversion of the General Talk forums, and getting to know some of the people here, in a more laid back enviroment. :)

[Kinman]

Can't believe you can classify 13 kinds of jerks online (including here). By the way, this topic is longggggggggg overdue.
Actually about a half of it I can easily forgive.
The "first" guy is pretty cute actually, at least among the least annoying. "The Self-Promoter" are often spam marketing.
Sermonator often are the ones who are crazy at debate about of topic stuffs. Antagonizer is similar. These are among the infamous ones.
I don't think peacekeepers are that bad. It is a nice gesture to tell others to watch the language (although most likely the other won't care). It may increase the traffic a bit, but at least they are NOT one of the jerks.
Smarty Pants are not all bad also. Yes, some are intentionally mess with you. But some really provide supplemental info if the article has some info that is not accurate.
Fanboys are infamous also, keep debating for debating's sake. Argue PS3/360 over the other, or XP/vista, PC/Mac, MS/apple. And often time they tend to write longggggggggggg paragraphs that few bother to finish them.
Conspiracy Theorists are fine, the theory can be used as jokes, as long as they are not too crazy.
I didn't see many Signature Dorks, and I can forgive one word also, the same as first guy, among the least annoying.
What I hated the most besides the 3 infamous, are those keep bashing others using bad words for no reason, make a fool out of themselves and don't know (or care)it (I REALLY hate people use bad language online). They think that because people just see their username, they can do whatever they want.
I also hate those who intentionally post the same longggggggggggg article (often off topic) to spam the page, people have to keep scrolling to skip them.
The bad news is, there are more and more comment areas in different sites. And as long as these areas exist, there will be jerks there like the H1N1 virus spreading around. It depends on the mods to strictly enforce the rules and delete bad posts. Of course, there are idiots to keep making new accounts and continue to spam. Well, what else can you do to those who got too much time on their time?
I think any person who go online for the first time should take the internet class 101: how to have proper manner and respect others online (or don't touch the internet at all).

[mpheadley]

Thanks for clarifying that, as trademark is a very narrow copyright issue.

[coastie65]

squishie said:

Perhaps I smell a book......."THE LIFE AND TIMES OF A FORUM MODERATOR" by Coastie.

:D I do read em, no time to write em, if I was so inclined to begin with. :D

[Foxylady48180]

You guys and gals are doing fine; myself, I couldn't handle it. KEEP UP THE EFFORT!

[Shannon3277]

I hear you about the 'same long article'. Also 'Signature', on some forums they appear to be one in the same.
Another good one could be 'Proof-texter':

Related to Signature, Proof-texter will spend an inordinate amount of time finding quotes from other sources to make his points for him. He is different from Signature in that he will use the quotes for his entire post, not just his by-line. Instead of arguing a point or contributing to a discussion with his own words, he will take things like Bible verses and famous quotes out of context and post them as 'proof' of his point. These are especially prolific on religion or political fora. The fact that other members don't consider the source of their quotes to be authoritative or simply don't care doesn't faze him, because he thinks his understanding of Life, the Universe and Everything is the only valid one. If someone disagrees or points out inconsistencies in his quotes, they are accused of disagreeing with God or whoever said the quote, and not him. He usually gets the meaning of the quotes completely backwards, but you can't tell him that, because he knows everything.

There's also those people who post large pictures or use huge fonts and end up screwing up everyone's screen so that you have to move your scroll all the way to the right to see what they are posting...as well as anything else on the page.

[wildroseTN]

One jerk you forgot is the one who simply posts "Photoshopped" for any pic he sees.

[TurtleShroom]

What a great article! I loved it and found it hilarious at how well you nailed down the folks that are just plain annoying.

Alas, I've been guilty of Sermonating. Contrary to the article, the Sermonators aren't usually Christians or religous folks, they are, at least on YouTube, actually Atheists, who double as Antagonizers. I've gone on many a video only to see a four page "Jesus if fake rotfl you love god" thing. In the case of me, I would be compelled to be that one guy who stands FOR the faith, only to get slammed by about five other Sermonators/Antagonizers who laugh at me for believing in God. I'd counter with facts, ironically making me a Smarty Pants (though I try to make my facts accurate). In most cases, they would retreat and resort to cowardly deleting my comments because they didn't like them.

As you can also tell, I'm long winded. Would that make me Mister Credintials?

Conspiracy Theorists are my favorite, though! I just love how they are so scared of the Federal Reserve, or how they think America caused 9/11 as an inside job. I always like to say "The Federal Reserve ate my homework" because of it.

I've been guilty of a Smarty Pants error, though I hope I have my facts straight before counterng. I've been guilty of Peacekeeping when people start swearing on chat rooms, and I'm always a major target BY Sermonators because I have a religion and they hate it.

In fact, my parents banned me from commenting on YouTube videos because I always battle Sermonators who attack religion in places they don't belong.

Great article. I really enjoyed it! Thank you for brightening my day!

:)