Non-members can still post on this message board.

[Nick Gromicko]

.... and it will only take 1 of many moderators to approve the post for it to become visible.

So the message board is still very much open to all.

[Jeff Moore]

Nick,
I was just wondering how long will it take for messages posted
by non members to show up. Not looking for exact amount of time
because I understand it is not an easy process to moderate this board.
I've been waiting for 35 min for one to show... and it was non inflamatory

[Chris Morrell]

Jeff,

For the first couple of days it might be a while (particularly if you're posting late at night) because staff is handling the moderation until we firm up moderation rules and appoint moderators. After that it shouldn't be that long at all.

[James H. Bushart]

I was led to understand that "moderation", at this time, is equal to simply this....

Delete posts from posters who have been banned from the message board...allow the remainder to post.

Is this correct, Nick?

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I was led to understand that "moderation", at this time, is equal to simply this....

Delete posts from posters who have been banned from the message board...allow the remainder to post.

Is this correct, Nick?

Ahh, No.

Good to have you back Jim.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Ahh, No.

Good to have you back Jim.

Nick????????????

[William Thacker]

Good Morning JB.

Bill

[Chris Morrell]

It goes slightly beyond that: non-member posts that are clear personal attacks, libel, or slander will be moderated. That includes non-members who have not been officially banned. But otherwise, non-members should have similar access to the board to what they had before.

[jlerch]

No waiting for members, non members will need patience during our transition.
The wait time is an inconvenience but hopefully not a deterrent to our guests.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by inxil

It goes slightly beyond that: non-member posts that are clear personal attacks, libel, or slander will be moderated. That includes non-members who have not been officially banned. But otherwise, non-members should have similar access to the board to what they had before.

If you mean "libel" and "slander" in their true legal sense, you have to take into consideration that both are required to be "untrue" and written in "malice". The "truth" of a statement is usually hard to judge from simply one post.

"Personal attacks" are also relative.

I've read some very bloody arguments with two professional electrical inspector teachers who hated each other, personally. Their opposing views on the issues made for interesting reading. It wasn't until one of them took the fight "off the board" and tried to affect the other's employment that NACHI chose to get involved, and we booted the offender out of the association and removed his rights to post.

Professional differences often become personal, during the discussion, and later the two debaters find and agree on common ground.

None of this can be determined by one who is outside of the discussion who is reading one single post.

NACHI lost its 2008 Member of the Year last night when his thread was uncerimoniously deleted where he was dealing with what he considered a very important issue.

Each deletion offends and diminishes, in a very public day, that person's worth to the community. How many "offenders" do you think will want to post again?

The banned should be banned and their posts should never see the light of day.

If you get enough complaints (you have a little triangle on each post in which to report them) for any particular post, you can move it to "Spam" where the poster and those offended by it can discuss it.

Censorship will kill this board and this board needs to be here.

One other point that not too many will disagree with.......Anyone who considers himself able to judge libel, slander or personal attack from one single post - and anyone with a desire to determine on his own what others should read - is unworthy for the job and should not be selected as a moderator.

[Chris Morrell]

Originally Posted by jbushart

If you mean "libel" and "slander" in their true legal sense, you have to take into consideration that both are required to be "untrue" and written in "malice". The "truth" of a statement is usually hard to judge from simply one post.

I do mean libel and slander in their true legal sense (mostly libel in the case of the message board). If a non-member is defaming a member, they have no place on this board.

Originally Posted by jbushart

"Personal attacks" are also relative.

Personal attacks are definitely relative, and I think we should err on the side of caution. If a non-member is clearly attacking a member, particularly if it's in an profane way, they shouldn't be allowed to post. Disagreements do not count as personal attacks.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by inxil

I do mean libel and slander in their true legal sense (mostly libel in the case of the message board). If a non-member is defaming a member, they have no place on this board.



Personal attacks are definitely relative, and I think we should err on the side of caution. If a non-member is clearly attacking a member, particularly if it's in an profane way, they shouldn't be allowed to post. Disagreements do not count as personal attacks.

You have the capacity to handle non-members in any manner you wish and those who you have described as libelous, slanderous, and defaming should simply be banned. To be banned, they need only convince you since they have no other rights to post other than those granted, by courtesy, in expectation of theirs.

Erring on the side of caution for personal attacks should be to allow them until there is a complaint. That is the caution that will preserve the integrity of the message board. Putting a moderator in-between two people trying to have an argument is going to antagonize both.

Your moderation should not exceed those who are banned from making any post and determining what non-member to ban is at your discretion.

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I was led to understand that "moderation", at this time, is equal to simply this....

Delete posts from posters who have been banned from the message board...allow the remainder to post.

Is this correct, Nick?

Not the way I understand it.

From what I've seen there will be no deletion of non-member posts. All non-members posts go into a queue for aproval before they appear on the board. Thus any post that would need deletion, should, in theory never see the board.

[klott]

Originally Posted by jbushart

If you mean "libel" and "slander" in their true legal sense, you have to take into consideration that both are required to be "untrue" and written in "malice". The "truth" of a statement is usually hard to judge from simply one post.

"Personal attacks" are also relative.

I've read some very bloody arguments with two professional electrical inspector teachers who hated each other, personally. Their opposing views on the issues made for interesting reading. It wasn't until one of them took the fight "off the board" and tried to affect the other's employment that NACHI chose to get involved, and we booted the offender out of the association and removed his rights to post.

Professional differences often become personal, during the discussion, and later the two debaters find and agree on common ground.

None of this can be determined by one who is outside of the discussion who is reading one single post.

NACHI lost its 2008 Member of the Year last night when his thread was uncerimoniously deleted where he was dealing with what he considered a very important issue.

Each deletion offends and diminishes, in a very public day, that person's worth to the community. How many "offenders" do you think will want to post again?

The banned should be banned and their posts should never see the light of day.

If you get enough complaints (you have a little triangle on each post in which to report them) for any particular post, you can move it to "Spam" where the poster and those offended by it can discuss it.

Censorship will kill this board and this board needs to be here.

One other point that not too many will disagree with.......Anyone who considers himself able to judge libel, slander or personal attack from one single post - and anyone with a desire to determine on his own what others should read - is unworthy for the job and should not be selected as a moderator.

The little triangles are worthless, mine was removed, after I reported one post. In other words, no matter what anyone said about me, I could not complain or report it.

[Chris Morrell]

Ken,

You don't have the "Report Post" button?