Deleted  permalink

Points of View Message Board Blog Post 5

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 901 - 20 of 1436
  • Message 901. 

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Nick

    I seem to remember you saying that the Television board was the busiest board. Were you simply bean counting posters names, or, did you have access to "official figures"?

    Report message1

  • Message 902

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Curmy

    he's still mastering 'Quotes'  

    Don't worry Curmy, maybe Nick is deciding to re-introduce the "Quote" button, for those who hate all the rigmaroll and coding. smiley - ok

    Report message2

  • Message 903

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    I hope so Niclara, goodness knows why they ever did away with them !

    Report message3

  • Message 904

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    OK, a really quick, and very unscientific headcount, but, simply taking the "Green Room" thread, and ONLY the first 100 postings, there are 24 "regulars" (and I haven't even made an appearance at that stage smiley - laugh).

    That is ONE thread dating from 12th December 2008. There is nothing to say that some of the "newer" posters are not now "regulars". The names I counted as "regulars", DO still post regularly. So, 24 "regulars" in the first 100 (ONE HUNDRED) postings of ONE thread. smiley - erm

    And, yet, Martin says that there are 50 or so "regulars" to the board(s).

    MY experiment of "professional experience" (I've been on these boards most days for years, right up to now smiley - ok), is probably more rounded than a former hosts idea of what the status quo is with posters.

    Sorry, waylaid by phone call, part way through posting this. smiley - doh

    Report message4

  • Message 905

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Curmy

    THE reason we were given for the "Quote" button being taken away, was that posters were multi-quoting in their comments. The hope was that by making us have to cut and past and add coding that we wouldn't multi-quote smiley - doh smiley - laugh

    Think also, there was the problem that if you quoted from a comment which was subsequently hidden your posting would also be hidden.

    But the way the moderation is being handled at the minute your posting can be hidden for saying "Good morning". smiley - doh

    Report message5

  • Message 906

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    So looks like I'm not going to be given an answer about why I'm being pre-modded on here then.

    I guess that'll have to be your own unanswerable question then Nick.

    They're certainly stacking up over there in the BBC Communities HQ aren't they?

    To plunder the words of another contributor to the BBC's once great heritage…

    "Ah. This is obviously some strange usage of the word "community" that I hadn't previously been aware of"

    Report message6

  • Message 907

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    We don't discuss decisions about individual users on the boards but if you go to:
    www.bbc.co.uk/messag...

    and contact the Central Communities Team they will get in touch with you and tell you why.

  • Message 908

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    NiclaraMartin - The quote you remember is from this blog post:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    ...and it is these numbers that I will be revealing after I've added a few more and checked them.

  • Message 909

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Ah, Nick. I've had some interesting dealings with the CCT today. Would you like me to elucidate on their 'new' house rules on moderation, the one they don't publicise? The one that contradicts very clealy the reactively moderated boards popup:
    www.bbc.co.uk/messag...

    It's brilliant. Turns out a message doesn't even have to be complained about to be moderated or removed any longer. Apparently certain words in messages or users (their wording) are routinely monitored and passed to moderators for closer forensic examination. Good eh? Not quite what it says in the rules, but there you go.

    Is this the first of the improvements we can expect? You might want to change that pop-up though. People would get the impression it's a free house here.



    Report message9

  • Message 910

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Thanks Nick, but I already know the reason. I suspect you do as well by now and there is no GOOD reason is there? Certainly nothing that applies to this board.

    My question was actually a general one. If pre-mod is applied across the whole network I don't understand why I had a separate bout of it when I first started posting here at the end of last year, when I'd been off pre-mod for months on the 6MMB. If that's the way things work then if I've never had a post modded on this board (which I haven’t) Jem's little problem with me on the 6MMB shouldn't really have any bearing on this here should it? Not if there's any sense of fair play within your office.

    So I guess I'll draw my own conclusions from that. I'm certainly not going to waste my time pleading for an answer from your office, when you and I both know all I'll get is whatever trumped up reason that can be cobbled together with vague reference to a loose interpretation of the 'house rules'.

    I and many others had hoped to deal with these issues intelligently within the BBC’s own internal structure, but you’re all making it very plain now that you’d rather us join the rest of the howling mob outside the gates. Just a shame the people posting on here that care about what’s going on at the BBC are treated in such an arms length way. I’m not necessarily including you in that because I don’t know enough about you, but I’m sure you know what I mean.

    Thanks for bothering to respond in some form though. You might pass that philosophy on to the others.

    Report message10

  • Message 911

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    NiclaraMartin - The quote you remember is from this blog post:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/... 


    smiley - laugh Touché Nick. smiley - laugh smiley - ok

    So, you DO have a sense of humour. Did you read the links to my postings, cause I'm not reading your blog, if you DON'T read MY linkage. smiley - winkeye

    ...and it is these numbers that I will be revealing after I've added a few more and checked them. 

    I think we'd be happy to settle for the figures as they are NOW, and wait for the "official figures" later.

    Report message11

  • Message 912

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Nick

    That joke would have had more effect if you had placed a smiley - winkeye smiley.

    That'll be your lesson for the day after you have learned how to use the Quote function.

    Report message12

  • Message 913

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 18th February 2009

    Guys

    From Nick's blog....

    Before the meeting Rowan shared some numbers for web traffic which supported what you've been telling me in comments about the value of the Television board. The Television board gets the vast majority of the traffic to the POV boards, getting twenty times the numbers of even the board's home page. 

    So, it seems, we should all be over on Television speaking to Rowan, asking her what the figures are. smiley - ok
    The Television board gets the vast majority of the traffic to the POV boards, getting twenty times the numbers of even the board's home page 

    So, according to Martin's "guestimate", less than two and a half "regulars" are visiting the "board's home page" smiley - doh One of whom MAY be a "regular", or two MAY be a "regular", or none MAY be a "regular", or half of a person MAY be a "regular". smiley - doh Statistics <pinchofsaltsmiley>


    Report message13

  • Message 914

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    Mozo - if you don't ask the question then you are unlikely to get an answer. Talk to the CCT.

  • Message 915

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    Any comments on my post Nick that the house rules pop up box does not represent the truth as to how messages are monitored and moderated?

    Report message15

  • Message 916

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    Niclaramartin.

    You blow my mind. smiley - laugh

    I'm just glad we're on the same side. smiley - hug

    Report message16

  • Message 917

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    She's certainly got a quick mind Mozo !

    Report message17

  • Message 918

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    In fact, let me clarify it for you:

    Your house rules pop up box states quite explicitly:

    'Reactive moderation - messages are only checked if a complaint is made about them. This approach is only used on boards for adults. If you see a message on a reactively moderated message board, that you think may break a house rule please use the complain about a post button to alert the moderator.'

    Yet from the CCT yesterday:

    'That the board is reactive does not necessarily mean that posts need to
    be complained about in order to be viewed by a moderator. Certain topic
    areas, users and key words may be sent to moderation at the discretion
    of the Communities Team.'

    See, they don't correlate. Are individual user's posts monitored or not. What's going on here? Can you square that circle?

    Maybe this is one for Jem. Wherever he may be.

    Report message18

  • Message 919

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    Guys smiley - hug

    I'm beloved of my local Social Work/Local Council smiley - laugh

    Actually, a few years ago, they thought it was easier to have me on Committees, so that they could keep an eye on me. Unfortunately, "keep your enemy close to you" backfired a bit on them. I just have better access to facts and fiures (and rumours) than I EVER had. smiley - doh

    Report message19

  • Message 920

    , in reply to this message.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Thursday, 19th February 2009

    I bet they head for the dug- outs and put their tin hats on when you get going Niclara smiley - laugh

    Report message20

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.



Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.