x Turn on thread page Beta

Moderation statistics :) watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by geoking)
    Yes they are :curious: They are accountable to all and every user of this forum, as they are the customer...
    (Original post by Kittiara)
    I reckon, let the mods do what they do. They're members like us, helping out without even getting paid for it.
    As Kittiara has rightly pointed out, we're members too. We're volunteers on the site and we certainly don't get paid for any of our work.

    I really don't see how providing such statistics would benefit the community in the slightest, if I'm honest. Moderator actions stay between the Section Mods, Section Leaders, the Community Team and the member(s) concerned. As PQ said, this really just seems like something to satisfy curiosity more than anything else.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Geoking is pussyfooting around.

    I'll lay it out for you.

    He wants TSR to make the stats public to incentivise better moderation. He thinks that there are probably some statistics that will make the mods look bad and embarrassing them in this way will improve things.

    My take on it is that this would have been more appropriate last year, when the standard of moderation was frankly shocking.

    What I would say is that the more you try and say "that won't help" the worse it makes you look. Leave it to the CT. It's got nothing to do with you and almost anything you say will be a lose/lose.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    Geoking is pussyfooting around.

    I'll lay it out for you.

    He wants TSR to make the stats public to incentivise better moderation. He thinks that there are probably some statistics that will make the mods look bad and embarrassing them in this way will improve things.

    My take on it is that this would have been more appropriate last year, when the standard of moderation was frankly shocking.

    What I would say is that the more you try and say "that won't help" the worse it makes you look. Leave it to the CT. It's got nothing to do with you and almost anything you say will be a lose/lose.
    You're bitter because we got you banged to rights and we put you in your place. Nobody cared and still nobody cares what you think. It's the reason why your social groups get declined and you're shown virtually zero leniency for breaking the rules. You shot your bolt and you burned any goodwill the team had with you.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    In the interest in moderator transparency, can you release statistics to do with moderation on a monthly basis such as amount of cards issued, bans issued, and cards overturned.

    A healthy community is one where the moderation is transparent and accountable, and it would help everyone to know of pitfalls that can be avoided, and trend in the moderation
    Dreadful idea. This isn't a democracy. Mods are directly accountable to their Section Leaders, who in turn are accountable to the CT. The system works very well as it is. This kind of hippy commune transparency stuff is lovely in theory but it doesn't serve any positive purpose. Same with the loonies that advocate AAM being visible to all, or there being some sort of special tribunal of regular members to arbitrate complaints. Needless, pointless bureaucracy.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kittiara)
    x
    More like:
    (Original post by Potally_Tissed)
    No you wouldn't, but that doesn't make the users the customer. You're not paying anything to be here. Clearly it is in TSRs interests to keep users happy so that they keep coming back (and seeing adverts) but the business model does not involve you giving TSR any money, so you aren't their customer.
    The users are the customer. This is not up for debate as you obviously don't understand business models or web traffic :facepalm: By looking at adverts and contributing towards site traffic, I am providing the company with money directly and indirectly as they could sell their services (access to students etc) to other companies. How else do you think forums earn money? Magic? :lol:

    (Original post by Reluire)
    As Kittiara has rightly pointed out, we're members too. We're volunteers on the site and we certainly don't get paid for any of our work.

    I really don't see how providing such statistics would benefit the community in the slightest, if I'm honest. Moderator actions stay between the Section Mods, Section Leaders, the Community Team and the member(s) concerned. As PQ said, this really just seems like something to satisfy curiosity more than anything else.
    What does it matter if you are members as well and if you do or do not get paid...? Does that mean there should be no accountability and transparency in your actions? :confused:

    Which part about "transparency" and "accountability" are you guys failing to understand? At the moment with it all being a closed door process, it means anything can happen and that's not good for anyone is it? If you were concerned about providing a quality service, you would have already implemented this system. The fact you are trying to argue that those traits are little more than curiosity is alarming.

    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Dreadful idea. This isn't a democracy. Mods are directly accountable to their Section Leaders, who in turn are accountable to the CT. The system works very well as it is. This kind of hippy commune transparency stuff is lovely in theory but it doesn't serve any positive purpose. Same with the loonies that advocate AAM being visible to all, or there being some sort of special tribunal of regular members to arbitrate complaints. Needless, pointless bureaucracy.
    If you worked in a company you would realise that it's not a dreadful idea, it's an essential idea for good moderation. Mods are accountable to SL, and CT, but it's entirely behind closed doors with almost certainly a huge amount of bias. The CT won't want to disagree with essentially free labour, and likewise the moderation community won't want to disagree on topics at it makes their life easier and keeps their reputation untarnished.

    If there's one statistic that will prove how poor the moderation is, look at how many cards are issued, how many are overturned, and then the training given to the moderators. Now, unless they have found a generation of supermensch, I suspect that something very ****ed up is going on behind the scenes, but as long as you people think transparency isn't needed, then we will never know. :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    Geoking is pussyfooting around.

    I'll lay it out for you.

    He wants TSR to make the stats public to incentivise better moderation. He thinks that there are probably some statistics that will make the mods look bad and embarrassing them in this way will improve things.

    My take on it is that this would have been more appropriate last year, when the standard of moderation was frankly shocking.

    What I would say is that the more you try and say "that won't help" the worse it makes you look. Leave it to the CT. It's got nothing to do with you and almost anything you say will be a lose/lose.
    Pretty much that. They won't ever do this because the CT don't want to push away free labour - it's more cost effective that way. However it's hilarious how many people are arguing that we don't need accountability and transparency, yet I wonder how many would argue that over topics like public spending and the Iraq War :rolleyes:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    More like:


    The users are the customer. This is not up for debate as you obviously don't understand business models or web traffic :facepalm: By looking at adverts and contributing towards site traffic, I am providing the company with money directly and indirectly as they could sell their services (access to students etc) to other companies. How else do you think forums earn money? Magic? :lol:


    What does it matter if you are members as well and if you do or do not get paid...? Does that mean there should be no accountability and transparency in your actions? :confused:

    Which part about "transparency" and "accountability" are you guys failing to understand? At the moment with it all being a closed door process, it means anything can happen and that's not good for anyone is it? If you were concerned about providing a quality service, you would have already implemented this system. The fact you are trying to argue that those traits are little more than curiosity is alarming.



    If you worked in a company you would realise that it's not a dreadful idea, it's an essential idea for good moderation. Mods are accountable to SL, and CT, but it's entirely behind closed doors with almost certainly a huge amount of bias. The CT won't want to disagree with essentially free labour, and likewise the moderation community won't want to disagree on topics at it makes their life easier and keeps their reputation untarnished.

    If there's one statistic that will prove how poor the moderation is, look at how many cards are issued, how many are overturned, and then the training given to the moderators. Now, unless they have found a generation of supermensch, I suspect that something very ****ed up is going on behind the scenes, but as long as you people think transparency isn't needed, then we will never know. :rolleyes:
    Yeah... the difference here is that I'm 28 - I've been a people manager for 5 years driving performance in a human resource led operation. I'm also an ex section leader on TSR and member of the team for nearly 5 and a half years before I retired last year. What qualifications do you have to support your opinion?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Yeah... the difference here is that I'm 28 - I've been a people manager for 5 years driving performance in a human resource led operation. I'm also an ex section leader on TSR and member of the team for nearly 5 and a half years before I retired last year. What qualifications do you have to support your opinion?
    I'm a manager in a multi-million pound organisation And I dare not think about where you work if you are able to say with a straight face that accountability and transparency are not needed. I think that's the real difference here! :lol:
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by geoking)

    If there's one statistic that will prove how poor the moderation is, look at how many cards are issued, how many are overturned, and then the training given to the moderators. Now, unless they have found a generation of supermensch, I suspect that something very ****ed up is going on behind the scenes, but as long as you people think transparency isn't needed, then we will never know. :rolleyes:
    I don't know anything about the training mods are provided with. I also don't expect mods to be perfect. I am sure that, as with everywhere, mistakes happen. Why do you think that something questionable is going on behind the scenes, though? And, once more, even if they did provide the stats, how would people be able to interpret them? Any rises and falls in any figures could have perfectly reasonable explanations.

    I am not against transparency, by the way. And I am all for accountability. I just don't see how publishing these figures would help, given the nature of the work that moderators do.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kittiara)
    I don't know anything about the training mods are provided with. I also don't expect mods to be perfect. I am sure that, as with everywhere, mistakes happen. Why do you think that something questionable is going on behind the scenes, though? And, once more, even if they did provide the stats, how would people be able to interpret them? Any rises and falls in any figures could have perfectly reasonable explanations.

    I am not against transparency, by the way. And I am all for accountability. I just don't see how publishing these figures would help, given the nature of the work that moderators do.
    With the part in bold, I guarantee you that the statistics don't back it up. The figures would help in showing the error (read bias) rate, as well as general trends, what users to avoid (alt accounts), and the way the community is going. Less cards issued, the more productive the community is. The more issued, maybe something needs to be done and the community can actively help. As the mods aren't even aware of these figures, it actually shows a woeful amount of community management as it's overlooking a very important set of figures.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by geoking)
    With the part in bold, I guarantee you that the statistics don't back it up. The figures would help in showing the error (read bias) rate, as well as general trends, what users to avoid (alt accounts), and the way the community is going. Less cards issued, the more productive the community is. The more issued, maybe something needs to be done and the community can actively help. As the mods aren't even aware of these figures, it actually shows a woeful amount of community management as it's overlooking a very important set of figures.
    That's the thing, though. The error rate need not indicate bias. It may just be a genuine case of error or misunderstanding. Also, fewer cards issued may not be an indication of a productive community, nor is a higher amount of cards issued an indication of questionable activity on the part of the mods. Over the last couple of months I have reported so many spammers. I'm sure you've seen them around. Kitchens, "love remedies". One time chat was flooded with them. Those are the kind of posters that definitely need banning, but of course they will always return with new accounts, and there's nothing the mods, or TSR, or the community can do about it.

    What would be helpful, I agree, is improved interaction with the community. The rules can be ambiguous, and that can lead to misunderstanding. It is known that we get trolls here from the Misc (amongst others), and yes, it would be helpful for people to know to avoid them, because the kinds of threads they create can cause upset and get people worked up and into trouble. Of course, that's assuming that TSR knows who is who. I don't know if they do.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    I'm a manager in a multi-million pound organisation And I dare not think about where you work if you are able to say with a straight face that accountability and transparency are not needed. I think that's the real difference here! :lol:
    Look, I'm really not looking to turn this into a management **** wagging contest. I know more than you do. You're theorising what happens behind the scenes - I know what's happening behind the scenes and I have no particular loyalty to the team any more; if I thought it was *******s, I'd say - I'm just presenting you with the facts because they're right.

    You're missing the point here - the amount of oversight and review that takes place behind the scenes is considerable. Mods that get called to AAM frequently to answer to members are easy to spot and they placed under a lot of scrutiny by the SL's. Coaching and training is given. It really is not in the team's interest to blindly cover for each other, and in my experience, the team gets it right about >98-99% of the time, which for a human process where it's very difficult to set black and white rules, is pretty incredible.

    The process works and there are just some people that refuse to recognise that this is an internet forum owned by a private company - not a democratic socialist utopia. Doing things by committee takes forever and the team doesn't have the time or resource to waste - they're massively understaffed as it is.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Putting aside whether or not the userbase are "the customer" and if the moderation team are primarily accountable to them (although for the record, I agree with the majority here in that they aren't and they aren't), the top line stuff that we could disclose like volume of cards/overturns would be utterly meaningless without the information that cannot be disclosed and as such wouldn't increase our accountability in the slightest. Throwing out statistics without any real context is of no benefit to anybody.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    I agree - whilst I like the idea of knowing how many cards had been issued in a month, purely out of my own curiosity, I don't think that we would have the context we would need to actually get any use out of it...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    Putting aside whether or not the userbase are "the customer" and if the moderation team are primarily accountable to them (although for the record, I agree with the majority here in that they aren't and they aren't), the top line stuff that we could disclose like volume of cards/overturns would be utterly meaningless without the information that cannot be disclosed and as such wouldn't increase our accountability in the slightest. Throwing out statistics without any real context is of no benefit to anybody.
    I've never understood why some of the information can't be disclosed, especially if say, it's a black card? Confidentiality agreements? Data Protection Act?

    I think if mods revealed known trolls they've dealt with in the past, for example, it'd help the community.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    I've never understood why some of the information can't be disclosed, especially if say, it's a black card? Confidentiality agreements? Data Protection Act?

    I think if mods revealed known trolls they've dealt with in the past, for example, it'd help the community.
    It's always been the site's confidentiality policy, moderation affairs are only discussed between the user in question and the site staff (including the mods for the sake of this discussion). There are good reasons why applying this to all moderation actions is the best course of action, for example to protect users' privacy or other sensitive information.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    Without the users you wouldn't have the site :facepalm:

    Unis and advertisers are the revenue stream, users are the customer... It's quite clear that a lot of people don't understand business models here
    In a way, it's SORTA like facebook in the sense that people join up, use it etc... In turn, you get adverts thrown at you. The customers are those who provide the adverts.

    You're only really a customer if you pay for goods/services...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Look, I'm really not looking to turn this into a management **** wagging contest. I know more than you do. You're theorising what happens behind the scenes - I know what's happening behind the scenes and I have no particular loyalty to the team any more; if I thought it was *******s, I'd say - I'm just presenting you with the facts because they're right.

    You're missing the point here - the amount of oversight and review that takes place behind the scenes is considerable. Mods that get called to AAM frequently to answer to members are easy to spot and they placed under a lot of scrutiny by the SL's. Coaching and training is given. It really is not in the team's interest to blindly cover for each other, and in my experience, the team gets it right about >98-99% of the time, which for a human process where it's very difficult to set black and white rules, is pretty incredible.

    The process works and there are just some people that refuse to recognise that this is an internet forum owned by a private company - not a democratic socialist utopia. Doing things by committee takes forever and the team doesn't have the time or resource to waste - they're massively understaffed as it is.
    If it isn't in the teams interest to cover for each other, then how on earth do they have such a high success rate on what is ultimately a subjective job? A success rate that high for volunteers who have minimal training is not "incredible", it's total bull**** - no system is that perfect when it's based on judgement calls. Maybe if they had all had many years of experience in busy HR departments of different companies, sure, but they don't.

    Of course the process "works" because there is no accountability or transparency, there is no scope for it to go wrong :facepalm: If it wasn't working, how would you know? :confused:

    How the hell is what I'm suggesting reflective of not understanding that the forum is owned by a private company? Who said do things by committee? I hope your meetings aren't ran like this - someone makes a suggestion, and then you widly extrapolate what they mean
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    In a way, it's SORTA like facebook in the sense that people join up, use it etc... In turn, you get adverts thrown at you. The customers are those who provide the adverts.

    You're only really a customer if you pay for goods/services...
    From the business model I work in, I can tell you that categorically isn't true. You're a customer if you use a product provided by the company e.g. the forum. More so if you generate revenue for the business.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    From the business model I work in, I can tell you that categorically isn't true. You're a customer if you use a product provided by the company e.g. the forum. More so if you generate revenue for the business.
    OK let's say you ARE the customer, but as Gofre said, why do you need to see this? Where's the demand? What's the benefit to TSR? Any business would need to understand the benefits of doing well... any thing, even if it's customers want x

    Besides, looking at a "multi million pound company" they have a similar approach to TSR, in the sense that you are the product. Companies are the customer

    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/...off-hello-etsy

    Let's say it IS only 5 minutes of work (which it won't be... ), but then let's also say that that TSR would make way more money, by putting those efforts elsewhere ie: this would be a low priority, compared to something else, and again, you'd still need to say to TSR what exactly are the benefits?

    Working in a "multi million pound business" myself last year, I know how bloody freaking slow it is to get things done, because of bureaucracy(ie: Generally the bigger the organisation, the slower things get done)... - it took several months to move some kit from one part of the data centre, to another part of the data centre, in the same damn room...

    And TSR is in effect a "live production" environment - you'd need to go through testing elsewhere, and then see if it will work properly when "live" on the site.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 23, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.