Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Censorship on eham  (Read 19961 times)
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2012, 07:18:39 PM »

Quote
OK Dave, I see your point there.  Consider this, however--What if the review--or the reviewer--that was referred to was the subject of some prior problem on this site?  If that were the case and the reviewer were banned, (yes, I believe that has happened)  do you think the website admins were within their rights to remove it?  Just food for thought.

Regarding your scenerio, In my case, none of the items you posit were in play, so nothing you suggested would apply here, I have never been banned from an on-line site, and have had only a very few posts moderated over the past 20 years of on-line use.  I posted a simple link to an off-site review, which was deleted for no apparent reason.   Prior to posting, I looked all over the site trying to find a set of posting rules, and found nothing to indicate this would trigger the moderator to remove my post, hence my concern. 

As far as the Moderators are concerned, they are, (and should be), allowed to do ANYTHING they want, fair or unfair, (as defined by the general consensus), it is after all, their site.  The site however will suffer the consequence of the admins "moderation" policy's over the long haul. That is to say, that if they moderate poorly, (as I believer happened to my post), and they do it often, (which appears to be happening as per this thread), then over the long haul people will notice, if people notice, then the posting process begins to erode and things go bad as users try and not offend the moderators, as opposed to speaking their minds in a fair, and reasonable way.  This destroys a site in the long run.  I know I will rethink any future contribution to this site as a result of this incident.

I believe that once the moderation issue was brought up, the moderators should have spoken up, and explained what happened, and why.  Remember, I wrote the moderator an e-mail, and asked what happened to my post, I got an answer, asking if it were a post or a review.  I answered the email, in a polite manor, covering the post, and got no reply back, so I know that at least for a moment I had a moderators attention, and then nothing...  This leads me to believe one of three things:

1.  The moderator does not care.
2.  The moderator forgot.
3.  The wrong moderator answered my email.

Any of the above is bad from my viewpoint.  I take my moderation duties seriously on Yahoo, and with 4K users in one group I moderate, if I behaved this way, the Yahoo users would have my head, as they should.  That is because I want the Yahoo users to be the forum, not just be people sending mail to each other in something I control.  It is important to me that the users control the group direction, not me...  I'm just the traffic cop, and I like it that way. 

I have heard nothing from the moderators, either here, or in private email, (as it should be done), so I am left in the dark, and what is worse, I went to the effort to look for something covering the posting rules, and found none.

Thanks for your reply,
Dave
NK7Z
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #46 on: July 18, 2012, 07:32:45 PM »

Quote
Seems you have a cheek! After all you are linking to a blog that is competing directly with the reviews section of eHam!

As I said maybe it is time to be a little more self-critical about what we post instead of blaming the moderators! Wink

73,

Fred EI4GMB

Fred,
You did not answer my question about where I alluded to knowing why my post was moderated, so I will assume you do not with do deal with that... 

Perhaps you are correct, perhaps eHam does not feel that other review sites are in their interests, (that would be sad in my opinion), but they have that right... 

You have posted the "don't blame the moderators" comment at least twice now, so I will deal with it:  I get to blame the moderators, when they do not post the rules, then enforce some hidden rule-set, which only they know, and not even bother to answer an email asking why...  Do they have to listen to me?  Nope, it is after all their forum.    However, I do get to blame, praise, thank, and/or ignore, anything I want to, it is after my thoughts...

73
Dave
NK7Z
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
EI4GMB
Member

Posts: 166




Ignore
« Reply #47 on: July 19, 2012, 06:47:42 AM »

You did not answer my question about where I alluded to knowing why my post was moderated, so I will assume you do not with do deal with that... 
73
Dave
NK7Z
http://www.nk7z.net

If eHam does not want me to post links to outside reviews...
Dave
NK7Z

dahhh! Grin

73,

Fred EI4GMB



Logged

'You can never plan the future by the past'

'Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.'

Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #48 on: July 19, 2012, 07:31:26 AM »

Quote

dahhh! Grin

73,

Fred EI4GMB



Fred,
I agree with you...  People should be more self critical regarding their posts...  Smiley

73
Dave
NK7Z
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
K5TR
Administrator

Posts: 385


WWW
« Reply #49 on: July 20, 2012, 05:17:43 PM »


Remember, I wrote the moderator an e-mail, and asked what happened to my post, I got an answer, asking if it were a post or a review.  I answered the email, in a polite manor, covering the post, and got no reply back, so I know that at least for a moment I had a moderators attention, and then nothing...  This leads me to believe one of three things:


I do know whom you emailed if it was me then I am sorry if I did not get back to you for some reason.  I do not know what the content of your post was - you say it was a link to a review on your site.  If the post was just a URL to a review on your site - then I would guess that is why it was removed.  The forums really should be about discussion in my view - not about posting posting a URL pointing to something on some other site.  That is not a discussion.  If you have a review of a product we do have a reviews section for product reviews. 

I know there are many things lacking on the eham.net site - oh how I know - there are so many things - the list is long and growing.

As I recall the post removal system does not have a way for notification to the user at that time so perhaps we need to improve that from both a programming standpoint and a policy standpoint.

The reality is that very few posts are ever removed from the eham forums.
 
Logged

George
K5TR
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #50 on: July 20, 2012, 08:39:08 PM »

Hi George,

First, thank you for stating your position, it is nice to finally have an admin to the site become involved in this!  I fully support whatever decision you make, as it is your site, and you of course do have the last word in things, as it should be... 

My only issue was that I spent some time looking for a set of rules prior to posting the announcement, found none, and posted it.  Another ham began the thread on censorship and I had decided I was not going to get involved, however the ensuing attempted flogging, reminded me of the DX Police on 20 we all know and love so well, so I became involved in the discussion in order to clarify my position.   

If you have not reviewed the ENTIRE thread, both here, and "Website self promotion by eham posts", I would highly recommend you do.  The response I received was less than kind, and if it had happened on any of my Yahoo groups, I would have spoken to the individuals and let them know in no uncertain terms to tone it down as they do not represent my position.  Fortunately I have a hard skin, (been doing on-line moderation of groups for 15 or 20 years now, all the way back to the GEnie days), so I have seen that sort of person before; I realized they did not represent the site itself as they were not moderators of anything here.

In any case, I shall not post links to my or any other reviews here anymore and thank you for clarifying eHams position on this.  I am assuming a sig link is OK?  If not please let me know.

Dave
NK7Z
For reviews and setups see:
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
KI4SDY
Member

Posts: 1452




Ignore
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2012, 08:02:24 AM »

Posting "the rules" is a noble idea."

There is nothing "noble" about posting rules and educating the users of a resource concerning the proper use of that entity. In view of Webster's College Dictionary definition of the word, that would be a very narcissistic attitude to a logical first step effort at behavior modification. If posting rules has little or no effect on the public, why are millions spent by every developed country in the world posting highway signs, in an effort to procure compliance by drivers? Is it 100% effective? No! Nothing would be. However, it is effective enough to be worth the effort and expense. What would driving on the highway be like without traffic control signs? Chaos! Wink

"They either don't look around the site to see if there are rules, or they find rules but don't read them, or they read the rules and ignore them and post what they want anyway."

If you find that many users are not following your published rules, there is most likely a problem with the posting. Having looked over your effort, I would make the following comments and suggestions:

1. All or any eHam.net rules need to be published on the front page of the site and at the section where specific rules apply. Posted rules should be the first thing the user sees!  Shocked

2. Rules need to be clear and concise. That means short and specific, otherwise users will not take the time to read them or ignore them. Just like you said.  Cool

3. Rules should be properly labeled as such. Not as "policies" or other names that give users the impression they are optional.  Roll Eyes

4. Unposted and or ambiguous rules never accomplish anything and always cause dissent, as we see here. When users of a site are asking for posted rules to regulate themselves, that should be a clear message they are needed.  Angry

So, in comparison to highway signs that are posted, highly visible, repetitive, clear and concise, how do your rules measure up? Not too well. That is why you are not getting the desired results.  Wink
« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 08:59:26 AM by KI4SDY » Logged
AC4RD
Member

Posts: 1236




Ignore
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2012, 09:11:40 AM »

The reality is that very few posts are ever removed from the eham forums.

 .. and that very very few of us ever find "censorship" to be a problem here on eHam.net.  The rules are very simple, and they are the same rules that apply to life in general:  "Try to be nice to others.  Don't deliberately make trouble.  Don't be a jerk unless you have no other choice." 

The vast majority of eHam users know these "rules" whether they're written or not.  The vast majority of us try to respect those rules.   The vast majority don't understand why there's such a fuss about this.  (Or we DO understand why, but we're trying to be nice so we don't say it.) 
 
Logged
N2MG
Administrator

Posts: 122



« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2012, 12:30:41 PM »

^^^

What he said.

We've been through it before.

Mike N2MG
Logged
AC5UP
Member

Posts: 3822




Ignore
« Reply #54 on: July 24, 2012, 01:42:15 PM »

And then I think to myself, if the Lord High Rulers of this site truly were as draconian as some make them out to be..........................................






Would this thread still be here ??
 





.
Logged

Never change a password on a Friday                
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 5855




Ignore
« Reply #55 on: July 25, 2012, 06:31:53 AM »

Good point.
Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 5855




Ignore
« Reply #56 on: July 25, 2012, 06:39:02 AM »

No matter what is done (or not done, as could be said) there are always going to be the few who think they're picked on and put down.  Poor them.  If they want exclusive rights to say and do as they please, let them start their own websites.  Guaranteed that there wouldn't be many people going to those websites though.....

E-ham webmasters and moderators do a good job just as they are doing it.  The simple proof of that is this is one of the top ham radio websites on the web today.

The solution for the miscreants and the malcontents is simple--go elsewhere and stop complaining.
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #57 on: July 26, 2012, 10:10:05 AM »

No matter what is done (or not done, as could be said) there are always going to be the few who think they're picked on and put down.  Poor them.  If they want exclusive rights to say and do as they please, let them start their own websites.  Guaranteed that there wouldn't be many people going to those websites though.....

E-ham webmasters and moderators do a good job just as they are doing it.  The simple proof of that is this is one of the top ham radio websites on the web today.

The solution for the miscreants and the malcontents is simple--go elsewhere and stop complaining.

The polarization level in this thread is interesting and amazing.  It seems the thread is moving to extremes when it does not have too, almost as if people are forcing the extreme point of view intentionally...

At no point have I said the moderators are not doing a good job, in fact, I have mentioned several times that they have the right to moderate as they see fit.  As someone else pointed out, the thread was left intact, after the moderator was here, that is a good thing. 

What I did do was to questioned one incident of moderation, in an intelligent, and polite manor.  The ensuing melee that occurred because I questioned a moderation process was totally out of hand, and in my opinion uncalled for.     

As far as I was concerned the event was over...  However the idea of being lumped in as as one of the "miscreants and the malcontents", and being "picked on" does not set well with me.  I hope you were not referring to my posts when you used the terms, "miscreants and the malcontents", and "picked on".  If so, please feel free to quote one of my posts, where I said or implied this.  If not, please accept my apology in advance for suggesting you might do this.

Thanks,
Dave
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
N2MG
Administrator

Posts: 122



« Reply #58 on: July 26, 2012, 11:12:08 AM »

Quote from: NK7Z
I get to blame the moderators, when they do not post the rules, then enforce some hidden rule-set, which only they know, and not even bother to answer an email asking why...

I don't believe the rules for the reviews are hidden.  Far from it. They are at the far right of the Product Reviews main page.

http://www.eham.net/reviews

Here are two that are applicable in your case.

Quote
Don't submit reviews that consist of links/pointers off-site.
Quote
eHam reserves the right to edit or remove reviews and/or products for any reason at any time without prior notice.

The rules are quite detailed.  NA4M, our reviews manager is quite sensitive to the wants and needs of the users who take the time to create a review and post it.  He doesn't want anyone's time wasted, including his own. 

Unfortunately, as it goes for owner's manuals it also goes for online FAQ pages: they don't get read.

Mike N2MG
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 733


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #59 on: July 26, 2012, 06:56:42 PM »

Hi Mike,

You quoted only a single line out of many messages, thus taking my text out of context and re-presenting it to support your position.  In order to clarify things for you; the quotes you provided were in response to a continuing thread from another ham, (containing dozens of lines of text), about how people should not blame the moderators for anything.  My quote is in actuality an answer to the other fellow hams thread, not directed at the moderators.  Although I do reserve the right to blame the moderators, (here, or anywhere else), for anything I feel is in error, just as they get to blame me for anything they see fit...  That does not make me right, nor does it make the moderators right, right being defined as morally correct.  As I have said in at least three posts, (and probably more), the moderators get to do anything they feel they want to, (they don't even have to be fair about it.  In this case, I believe it was an error, and not intentional that the moderators lost my email), it is their system, and they are in charge.  I would not have it any other way...  The moderators are responsible for the system and they must have God like powers...  You perhaps did not read all the messages?

Quote
Don't submit reviews that consist of links/pointers off-site.
Quote
Unfortunately, as it goes for owner's manuals it also goes for online FAQ pages: they don't get read.

Regarding the posted rules you supplied; my post was in the forums section, not the review portion of eHam.  You quoted a rule set from an entirely different section of eHam, (the review section), thus I am not surprised that I missed the rules as I searched the forums section of eHam only, which is where I posted.  Given that my post was not a review, (although it was a link to a review), it did not occur to me to search the review section.  In retrospect it probably would have been a good idea on my part to have looked there.  Had I seen the restriction on links in the Review section I would have not posted to the forums section with a link, as that would have violated the spirit the moderators are trying to set here.  Unfortunately, this renders your point about reading the FAQ's moot.  In any case,  the moderators clarified the point in a post, and I now understand that posting links to reviews is not acceptable to this site.

Thanks,
Dave
NK7Z
http://www.nk7z.net
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!