RSS Feed Available AddThis - Bookmarking and Sharing Button Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Some Details About How We Moderate Our Forums and Why

by Will Morgenweck on 12 Jan 2011 11:12 PM

My previous blog post generated some comments about moderation.  This is a topic I have been meaning to write about since I was asked about it at Day of DotNetNuke Chicago.  This is probably going to be a two part blog post.  The first part is going to cover specifics around our forums and how we handle moderation.  

All of our forums are moderated, which means certain users might need to have their content approved before it is available on the site.  The primary reason for all the forums to be moderated is to prevent forum spam and bots.  Even with the forums being moderated, Active Forums allows us to set certain roles as "Trusted", which means we can control who is actually being moderated.  All Customers start off as trusted users within the forums which means they can by-pass moderation and their posts will appear immediately.  This happens as soon as you buy a product and never changes unless your account is set to not trusted.   Our support forums are moderated for everyone and currently we only have a couple users that are marked as not trusted, but allow me to explain why our support forums are moderated.

Personally, I hate having to deal with moderation, but it is a necessary evil in my opinion.  However, I will be the first one to say that we need to do a better job.  Again, all of our forums are moderated, but the customer role is added to all forums with trust permission, except for the support forums.  Occasionally, we do mis-configure a forum, which was the case for my blog and why some customers have been moderated for their replies here.  This forum was setup giving Active Forums Enterprise Support customers trust permission, which has now been corrected for customers.  I'm also going to make sure all other forums are properly configured as well.  

We have several reasons why we moderate our support forums.   Contrary to what some might want you to believe, we aren't hiding anything and we aren't trying to silence customers.  It's absolutely ridiculous for us, or any business, to try and hide customer generated content.  It just can't be done.  If you wanted to let the world know how bad you think we are, it would take no time at all.  There are plenty of other forums that get much more exposure than ours.  I think this is fairly obvious to most of our customers, but some (mainly those that find themselves moderated) like to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt over the fact they a moderated. It's just something we have to deal.  

We moderate the support forums because of issues that have happened in the past which caused moderation to be a necessity.  In some cases we have actually protected customers by doing so.  We have had customers post usernames and passwords in a topic.  We have had some post inappropriate content from their site(not intentionally).  We have had customers post "ACTIVE FORUMS GOT HACKED" when it was really their hosting provider and nothing to do with our products.  And yes, we have had customers post critical and sensitive bugs that we wanted to promptly address prior to public knowledge.  I have had customers disagree with me about these reasons in the past and I'm perfectly fine with others disagreeing with me now, but this is the way we run our site.

Since I have been running Active Modules, I have only set one customer to not-trusted because of their comments.  We had a disagreement about what he felt was a security issue and wanted to use our forums to gather support to force us to make the change.  I didn't have a problem with him sharing his concern on the forums or trying to get feedback from others customers, it was his approach.  Creating a false panic because you need a feature for your specific project doesn't sit well with me.  That was a long time ago and that customer is no longer moderated. 

There are times when I will set a user as moderated, but it is very rare.  Right now we have very few users that are set to not trusted.  I've gone back through the list and at the time of this post there are less than 10 moderated users out of 10,000+.  The number one way to get yourself moderated is to continuously post topics in the wrong forum.  I also give plenty of chances to help you better understand where content belongs.  I'll reply to a post letting you know where it should have been placed and in some cases I'll send you an email.  This might sound petty to some, but it's time consuming.  After awhile it becomes easier to just set the user to moderated and know that I will have to move the topic appropriately at that time.  There are couple other things you could do to end up being moderated, but those are really my own personal decisions.  It isn't anything personal.  It usually has to do with how much time I have to spent watching, reading and then dealing with the content of your post.  Usually exaggerations and posting the same thing over and over again will make me look for the moderate button.  

For the record, we are horrible at approving posts.  Usually what happens is that topics will come in overnight and just get lost in the queue.  Then we get caught up with other posts, support tickets, emails and we just really drop the ball.  Not an excuse and I do apologize.  If you posted something recently that didn't get approved feel free to post again.  Now that I've updated the forums, it probably won't need to be moderated or I will make sure it goes through quickly.  If you have questions about why you are moderated feel free to send me a message and I'll do my best to explain.  Were you moderated before and wondering if that has changed? Leave a comment below and find out.  

Finally, if anyone wants to help us with approving posts or just wants to be able to keep us honest, let me know and I'll make you a moderator.  It would be good to have a few users that could back us up when we say we don't have anything to hide.

    9 Comments for Some Details About How We Moderate Our Forums and Why

    Cliff Hammock
    Cliff Hammock
    13 Jan 2011 10:36 AM

    Thanks for more insight into how AM operates. Your offer to allow non AM moderators should be enough to address any concerns. But you never know.
    NFXBeats
    NFXBeats
    13 Jan 2011 11:35 AM

    Your product is one of the more expensive modules I have invested (and worth it) in and I'm not given the level of trust I deserve - in my opinion. I am a second class citizen and I am doing more with your product than probably 80% of the other users.

    The primary reason for all the forums to be moderated is to prevent forum spam and bots.


    That doesn't sound logical to me. This forum gets relatively little traffic as it is. I just don't believe that spam and bots are that prevalent. Especially when you have to sign in to post.

    Contrary to what some might want you to believe, we aren't hiding anything and we aren't trying to silence customers.


    Well as a moderated user I know for a fact you have removed posts of mine and many of my posts never got approved.

    Someone posted about a bug you call "intended design" and I reply to them to show my support that it is a bug - in a thread you guys completely ignored I might add - my comment doesn't get approved. Twice.

    Just last month you deleted an entire thread in which you and I were debating something and IMO I was in the right.


    I have only set one customer to not-trusted because of their comments. We had a disagreement about what he felt was a security issue and wanted to use our forums to gather support to force us to make the change.


    Personally speaking I have never had a security issue disagreement with you yet I was set to not trusted. So again, I disagree with your statement.

    This might sound petty to some


    You are right about that. I think it's ironic that a community building site resorts to such measures. I am speaking as a person who was/is moderated not for spam, not for being a bot, but for having a strong opinion that were contrary to yours.

    For the record, we are horrible at approving posts....Not an excuse and I do apologize.


    For us moderated people, this is terrible support. If there are so few of us and you can't handle the load, what does that say about your team?

    As I said before, if you want to foster a real community, you need to allow free communication. Of the moderated people I am aware of, including myself, none of us want to destroy AM with our comments. Quite the contrary.

    If we are to remain moderated, I ask you again for about the 5th time... Please give us a way to see what we have posted that has not been approved. Bonus points if you at least send us a PM when something is rejected and a reason. At the very least it would help us understand why. Is this unreasonable?
    Will Morgenweck
    Will Morgenweck
    13 Jan 2011 11:58 AM
    www.activemodules.com
    Personally speaking I have never had a security issue disagreement with you yet I was set to not trusted. So again, I disagree with your statement.

    Guess what...I wasn't talking about you at all.

    Just last month you deleted an entire thread in which you and I were debating something and IMO I was in the right.

    I deleted it because two other customers emailed me stating that it looked completely unprofessional. I agreed.

    For us moderated people, this is terrible support. If there are so few of us and you can't handle the load, what does that say about your team?

    That's why we have a help desk.

    You are right about that. I think it's ironic that a community building site resorts to such measures. I am speaking as a person who was/is moderated not for spam, not for being a bot, but for having a strong opinion that were contrary to yours.

    You weren't moderated for your opinion. If that were the case I wouldn't have approved any of your posts. Looking back I should have approved your posts which contained all the insults you were throwing out to us and other customers. You were moderated because after I gave you my explanation that wasn't good enough for you. You went to every post you could find related to the subject to bump the topic back up. Which of course would require me to explain the situation over and over again. The only content that was hidden were the posts you made that insulted us and our customers.

    You should know by now that I did unmoderate you. I did this in hope that you would move on to something more constructive.


    Frozen DNN
    Frozen DNN
    13 Jan 2011 12:28 PM

    You should know by now that I did unmoderate you. I did this in hope that you would move on to something more constructive.


    This is a positive and a step in a right direction. Both of just shake it off and move on.

    Of course, these are just my 2 cents.
    drew curry
    drew curry
    13 Jan 2011 12:36 PM

    The only thing i would have taken from 'Beats post was this.

    Of the moderated people I am aware of, including myself, none of us want to destroy AM with our comments. Quite the contrary.


    ..this is an amazing thought from a vested client. Clients like this are hard to come by, and should be cherished, not validated against. Just a thought from somebody who has had to deal with many many clients over the years (gov't employees) who did NOT want me in their offices as my systems threatened their raison d'etre.
    NFXBeats
    NFXBeats
    13 Jan 2011 12:38 PM

    Guess what...I wasn't talking about you at all.


    That was my point. You weren't talking about me, yet I was moderated. So it was obviously not just one customer because it was me as well.

    Looking back I should have approved your posts which contained all the insults you were throwing out to us and other customers.


    I may have said most of your customer probably don't have a lot of traffic and multi-page posts and therefore would not see the "submit goes back to page one" intended design flaw. Including this forum. Thats what I recall saying.

    I did call your intended design decision stupid. Because frankly, it is. Imagine a user navigating to page 5 of a 10 page thread and replying to a post. He gets taken back to page 1. Now he as to remember what page he was on to get back to the flow of the conversation. I don't see how any reasonable person would think this design decision is a good one.

    Other things I said resulted in you creating your recent blog post seeking more input from users and I think that is a good thing. So despite you not liking my style of expressing myself, I see it bearing fruit and it's beneficial to the community at large.
    jbrunken
    jbrunken
    13 Jan 2011 12:46 PM

    Nice insight Will.

    This posts makes me think of a feature that would be super handy. Being able to make a user "trusted" in a certain forum only after they've made "x" number of posts in other forums. But I should probably bring that up somewhere else... :)
    Will Morgenweck
    Will Morgenweck
    13 Jan 2011 12:56 PM
    www.activemodules.com
    I did call your intended design decision stupid. Because frankly, it is. Imagine a user navigating to page 5 of a 10 page thread and replying to a post. He gets taken back to page 1. Now he as to remember what page he was on to get back to the flow of the conversation. I don't see how any reasonable person would think this design decision is a good one.

    I don't know how else to say it. All I said was that the existing behavior was the intended result due changes we had to make for vanity urls. I also said that it would be changed with the next release. If I could release a patch today just for this one issue I would. Posting the same thing over and over again, which forces us to explain our decision every time only wastes our time. That is the only reason why you were moderated. Can we please just move on to bigger and better things?
    Jashan Chittesh
    Jashan Chittesh
    15 Feb 2011 04:00 AM

    Posted By Will Morgenweck on 13 Jan 2011 12:12 AM

    For the record, we are horrible at approving posts.  Usually what happens is that topics will come in overnight and just get lost in the queue.  Then we get caught up with other posts, support tickets, emails and we just really drop the ball.  Not an excuse and I do apologize.

    I think that really is a problem. I agree that moderation does make sense and the reasons you gave certainly make sense to me, too. However, if you do moderate and then messages "get lost in the queue" you probably shouldn't moderate. If messages randomly get lost simply because no one's there to approve them (i.e. no one with enough time at their hands), it's not surprising that users will get frustrated ... and in case they wrote something that might be critical it's quite likely that they think it was moderated away intentionally.

    Anyways, it's great you posted about this ... I think what matters most with moderation is transparency.
    test
    Copyright 2012 by DotNetNuke Corporation / Terms of Use / Privacy