Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml en-gb 30 Thu 29 Jan 2015 14:28:15 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=97#comment48 DMcN @ 48, you did seem somewhat to be implying that they might, in another thread, but in this particular case I was meaning the same phrase that had appeared in The Independent that morning turning up for the rest of the day in a large number of posts about Ross and wottsisname -- they may have been quoting from memory rather than googling, or they may have gone to the Indy website and lifted it I suppose. Sun 31 May 2009 19:33:49 GMT+1 David_McNickle http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=95#comment47 C_G 47, Are you saying that people on this blog use Google? Sun 31 May 2009 09:14:26 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=93#comment46 Charlie, I suspect that quite a lot of posts that go up on very controversial/popular threads about things like the Ross affair are copied from the same source -- so many of them use the same words to describe things, or the same phrases to express a feeling -- but I wouldn't like to assert they were from the same person; it seems likely that they are *quoting* the same person. I noticed for example that there were a fair few who used the same words as those in an opinion-piece I had read in one particular newspaper, all making the same point that was made in that newspaper by that columnist, and these appeared over the course of a day. I think the people who posted may simply not have bothered to read all the several hundred posts that had gone up before theirs. Fri 29 May 2009 17:10:40 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=91#comment45 fJd, every so often a name appears on the Beach that is quite clearly an alias posted by someone we all know under another name, but since it is entirely good-humoured and for fun I don't think the mods have ever objected. Fri 29 May 2009 17:06:51 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=89#comment44 What on Earth has happened to the Blog's numbering..? Fri 29 May 2009 15:53:28 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=87#comment43 Charlie (43)Intriguing....the plot thickens.As regards the example you site, it seems the means have little to do with the ends? This can only damage the cause I would have thought? Fri 29 May 2009 14:03:32 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=85#comment42 fjd 38Someone I know, earns a very good living indeed by analysing "textural structures and relationships" (think I got that right) to determine likely authorship. She's very a highly regarded professional and her services are much in demand. Good to know in these difficult days...Anyway, she's looked at the Blog on a number of occassions when I've been dabbling away.On one occassion recently, when I'd commented there were a HUGE number of posts to a thread that one might say was of "pressure group" interest, she formed the opinion that probably only three authors were actually involved - apart from a "three, possibly four" of this Blog's regulars.Almost every time she's looked she's determined there's one author posting under at least three names on the same thread.Of course, she could be wrong. But I wouldn't place my bet that way... Fri 29 May 2009 13:50:21 GMT+1 Sid http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=83#comment41 Gillianian - there is a 'Your Chance to stop doing something at the next general election thread, which came/went/came again. There is also now a Bill Cash thread which is a 404 case. Fri 29 May 2009 13:41:44 GMT+1 Gillianian http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=81#comment40 Me (39) Ah!! Would that be the 404 Page Not Found Thread?? Fri 29 May 2009 13:28:26 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=79#comment39 Hi Bis Sis,Nice idea about the charity football shirt logos. Fri 29 May 2009 13:28:23 GMT+1 Gillianian http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=77#comment38 Big Sis - sorry if I've picked you up wrong (did I miss a new thread?) but if this is the latest thread, there is no ''next'' ;o) Fri 29 May 2009 13:25:01 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=75#comment37 Further to my (35)If the answer is yes, then this demeans the whole idea of free and fair comment dosen't it? Fri 29 May 2009 13:20:12 GMT+1 eddiemair http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=73#comment36 No idea Big Sis. Baffled. Fri 29 May 2009 13:19:27 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=71#comment35 You could do that, but the mods will delete one of the accounts as soon as it is brought to their attention & they've confirmed both IDs belong to the same person. Fri 29 May 2009 13:19:09 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=69#comment34 Fred,I guess what I meant was more than one account (only word I can think of now) at the same time and, as has been pointed out, submit separate supporting posts to bolster your point/s? Fri 29 May 2009 13:15:21 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=67#comment33 That would me a no-no, fjd(31)! Fri 29 May 2009 13:08:55 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=65#comment32 28 sod,30 Fred,I thought I heard once that if we were to field a GB team at the Olympics, Fifa would insist on the same at the world cup? In effect saying, you can't have it both ways guys, its unfair on the others?Don't know? Fri 29 May 2009 13:07:43 GMT+1 Big Sister http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=63#comment31 Now you see it, now you don't - What happened to the next page, Eddie? Fri 29 May 2009 13:04:11 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=61#comment30 Are you allowed to have more than one member name then? Fri 29 May 2009 12:57:59 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=59#comment29 Chris_G (27) Fear not, Fearless Fred is Free :-) My posts appear as I press the button on the mouse to click on the button on the screen ;-)SodomG (28) I think the issue with the "round ball" game is to do with Fifa, the individual FAs, etc all getting their collectives in a twist about whether this weakens the positions of the individual FAs in bargaining, future cup bids, etc... Plus you have some people such as one MSP (can't remember who) now calling for the head of the SFA to resign for letting this idea even be thought! The "odd-shaped ball) game, as ever, shows how things can (and sometimes should) be done :-) Fri 29 May 2009 12:56:29 GMT+1 Lady_Sue http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=57#comment28 Don't be too hard on the Mods. They're only human. I think. Fri 29 May 2009 12:46:08 GMT+1 SodomG http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=55#comment27 I've just heard a "snippet" on a rival radio station, (sorry, heinous crime, I know!), about the Home FAs agree to an England team representing GB at the 2012 Olympics! Why?Rugby Football Union players, who represent their national sides, happily put national representation to one side to play for a British Lions 15. Indeed, while national honours are sought after, the kudos of playing for a super-national side is equally as prized and is a fantastic honour to add to their CV.Are footballers sooooo proud, (or egotistical) that they couldn't forego national representation and agree to play nicely with players from their neighbouring national side? Surely it would be more representational of Great Britain for Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland to field their best players, alongside England's finest to try to gain a Gold medal for Good Ol' Blightey? Fri 29 May 2009 12:28:38 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=53#comment26 If I write an email to most BBC show's addresses, I receive a form reply that says "we get so many emails that we cannot possibly reply to them all; your email has been received and will be read" or words to that effect.If I write to PM about a complaint, using the address they offer, I get no reply of any kind. I'm by no means sure that anything I send to the address given gets through: certainly no strap-line of mine was ever acknowleged or used.If I complain to the moderators, I *may* but do not always get a reply about my complaint. If a post of mine is complained about and removed I *may* but generally do not get told this has happened; I may (well, I did once) get told why it has been done in any terms other than ones so general as to be completely useless as information.I can't be bothered with reading blanket justifications, to be honest. If I want to find something out and can be bothered, I might write to an individual member of the PM team, and on the one or two occasions I have done so, I've had a courteous reply from the individual I have written to, which was clearly to me and about my email rather than a generalised load of old rubbish.Fearless Fred, have they got round to admitting that you are allowed to be here, or are all your posts still being held up for hours in pre-moderation? Goodness knows, enough people have been mentioning this over several weeks and through all sorts of channels for it not to be unknown to the moderation team that this was/is a glitch in their system and that it ought to be dealt with. Fri 29 May 2009 12:27:38 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=51#comment25 mittfh 17Very good point. Do we also have, I wonder, "Bloggers" who persistently try to manipulate threads by refering others posts "unnecessarily", to the moderators..? Fri 29 May 2009 12:16:39 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=48#comment24 Sid 4Also, "You're" absolutely right.Speed is of the essence, for both "new" and "established" names. Fri 29 May 2009 12:10:37 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=46#comment23 Sid 4Your absolutely right. Speed is of the essence. Fri 29 May 2009 12:04:10 GMT+1 The Wrath Is Come http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=44#comment22 This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules. Ha! Fri 29 May 2009 12:01:18 GMT+1 Charlie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=42#comment21 The Moderators actions are sometimes difficult to understand. Very difficult.Yesterday, I posted this to the "Julie Kirkbride..." thread:"13. At 5:45pm on 28 May 2009, Charlie wrote:L_S 10Re the son. I understand the "Kirkbride/Mackay" son is around 9-years.Mr Mackay has a son and daughter (I believe) from a previous marriage, which may account for an 18-year old...Parliament is arcane and skewed (by history) AGAINST women. This urgently needs correcting with actuarial weighting of benefits in favour of women (or single men) who are responsible for the care and up-bringing of "children".Also the hours in which Parliament sits are, for the 21st Century, disturbing..."... The post was removed. By the time I looked today, it's replaced. No explanation... But it's removal prevented me from responding to a question from another blogger because I couldn't refer to exactly what I'd written.A few weeks ago Roger Sawyer as PM editor had two posts he made on the evenings prog and bloggers comments removed. I read them both and saw nothing improper in them.Overall, I feel the "mods" should be more helpful and, indeed accountable. Fri 29 May 2009 12:00:41 GMT+1 Mrs Effingham http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=40#comment20 Awaiting moderation. Fri 29 May 2009 11:51:10 GMT+1 steelpulse http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=38#comment19 I will try a keep my blog moderate.Orange raspberries!Twice recently I have jeered at the Beebs offer to me as a listener to put questions to politicians.It is because they the politicians or wannabee politicians do NOT actually answer the questions.Drag Me To Hell a film poster right next to a European Election recruitment poster in my locale. Exactly I thought! Drag me to something akin to it at least. A few days ago it - poster area - was just a filmic Blue Screen which I preferred. The British National Party. It is well known on this site that as a loyal Brit I am keen to join them and add to their perfection (sounds a bit like Star Trek's the Borg but hey....) but when asked why I a mixed race Brit or black, Asian etc Brit cannot join Sky News a few days back - mention is made of the Black Police Association I think? And answer is NOT squashed there and then.Hence my jeer - "Orange raspberries". Because that as an answer to that question is just as relevant in my opinion. Dah! It was mentioned Black Police Association - 2 years ago too as a reason I cannot join - so at least it is consistent. I miss Sarah Palin. Answers were not airbrushed of all meaning and the USA voters knew what they were being offered. Black Police Association? You are as black man or woman and employed in a Police capacity - you can join this I take it? They the Association are not running for dogcatcher as far as I know.The British National Party. I, their spokesperson decide who and who is not British and the decision is British are all one colour?So a mixed race I can vote for them to represent my country in Europe but I cannot join them? That as the Americans might say is "Rich" with irony. Fri 29 May 2009 11:18:19 GMT+1 Anne P. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=36#comment18 T8-eh-T8 (18) hadn't heard of 'sock puppets' before though I know the phenomenon - like it. Fri 29 May 2009 10:48:39 GMT+1 T8-eh-T8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=34#comment17 M17 mittfhWe get this on the Religion Message Boards all the time.Sometimes surly atheists who want to give believers a kicking before disappearing. Sometimes YEC's and evangelicals who want to tell everyone how evil they are and how much they are going to suffer eternal tortment etc. General trolling really.We sometimes get sock puppets, same person with a couple of ID's, who post supporting messages to themselves in order to establish the veracity of their, often bizarre, point.TBH it is usually not difficult to figure out, and many of us know each other from other forums so are familiar with styles and formats of the rogue posters.The Religion Message Boards are quite heavily moderated though, and because of the subject matter people can often become offended or offensive at the drop of a hat. Fri 29 May 2009 10:42:41 GMT+1 mittfh http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=32#comment16 How about discussing "persistant offenders" - people who routinely post contentious stuff, but when they sense the mods / regulars are onto them, simply abandon their existing nickname and create a new blog ID...I won't mention any nicknames, but regulars will know who in particular I'm thinking of... Fri 29 May 2009 10:36:13 GMT+1 The Wrath Is Come http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=30#comment15 Who mods the mods? Fri 29 May 2009 10:30:54 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=28#comment14 Sorry, I must correct what I just wrote. The page saying to reply to the email that you get is still HERE, see the second bullet point in the first section. Oh dear. That may be one of the reasons why people get so hot under the collar over moderation.... Fri 29 May 2009 08:58:03 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=26#comment13 Sid (12) I agree on your second point. I spent two months trying to get an answer by replying to the email I was sent, and got nothing. I remember looking at one of the guideline pages, and it did say to reply to the email if you had a question, so it was a bit misleading at the time. I believe that page has been removed/altered. As soon as I drilled through to the "Contact Us" form I was extremely impressed at the speed of response (Thanks again, CC Team!). Fri 29 May 2009 08:53:03 GMT+1 pmmolly http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=24#comment12 Fifi (11)Ooooh!You naughty fifi!If only.......Mxx Fri 29 May 2009 08:52:21 GMT+1 Sid http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=22#comment11 FF @ 9I'll try that ... but meanwhile, if they don't accept incoming emails, they should say so. That's what the rest of the world does. Fri 29 May 2009 08:45:38 GMT+1 Fifi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=20#comment10 Great blog.(in the style of silver-fox) Fri 29 May 2009 08:43:48 GMT+1 SentIntheClowns http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=18#comment9 5No point. We'd recognise his voice.PS Eddie for Speaker. (I've forgiven him) Fri 29 May 2009 08:40:35 GMT+1 Fearless Fred http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=16#comment8 Sid (4) I believe the issue is that while they send emails from an account that is linked to a specific blog, that email account isn't monitored for incoming emails. There are ways of contacting the Central team that monitor the blog system via email, but they take a little digging through FAQs and Help pages to find. The team are very responsive when emailed that way. I can understand their desire not to be dragged into an argument each time a post is removed, as it would take up their entire day just on email ping-pong with disgruntled posters.... Fri 29 May 2009 08:38:06 GMT+1 Lady_Sue http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=14#comment7 Sid: good points all. I was aggrieved yesterday when my post was modded and I received no notification at all. It reappeared last night, way past the AM GB bedtime and I still don't know why it went AWOL. Annasee: good idea. Also worth checking the POV website this afternoon. Fri 29 May 2009 08:27:24 GMT+1 Big Sister http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=12#comment6 (6) - Very good! :o)) Fri 29 May 2009 08:22:37 GMT+1 funnyJoedunn http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=10#comment5 Blog Moderation....what we need is Mod Bloggeration! Fri 29 May 2009 08:21:16 GMT+1 annasee http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=8#comment4 Perhaps Eddie could interview a moderator sometime on PM? Anonymously, naturally. But it would be interesting to get the "other" point of view. Fri 29 May 2009 08:18:01 GMT+1 Sid http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=6#comment3 A speedy response is important. There's a post of mine from 13th May still awaiting moderation - but there's no point checking it now. The blogs move on so quickly that if a post is not restored within a couple of hours, the discussion will have moved on.I get particularly annoyed on behalf of those new to blogging who are encouraged by Eddie to have their say - only to be held up in the pre-mod queue while the rest of us have our say.While I'm here, I can tell you that writing actual letters (you know, paper, envelope, stamp) is not much use if you have a complaint. They just tell you to email the mods. In my experience, the mods never reply. Fri 29 May 2009 08:14:42 GMT+1 darkdesign http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=4#comment2 "...several million pounds that we're not going to get..."Poking the bear with a stick again, eh? Fri 29 May 2009 08:04:31 GMT+1 Lady_Sue http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=2#comment1 Very good to have a fuller explanation on this. It must be a difficult call at times and I'm sure few of us appreciate just how many different BBC websites are being monitored by the one team. Fri 29 May 2009 07:34:14 GMT+1 Big Sister http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2009/05/blog_moderation.shtml?page=0#comment0 I am bound to say that there will be some amongst us who will have wanted to quiz Paul on this topic - I hope he'll still accept comments!I'm sure I speak for others when I say that we appreciate all the individual interventions that members of the PM team do on our behalf. Fri 29 May 2009 07:25:34 GMT+1