Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Notes and Queries  permalink

Who runs the boards?

• Message 1. 

  Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 4th January 2012

  Tayler there seems to be much chatter that both you and the mods are employed not directly by the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú but by a company contracted to run the boards for the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú.
  
  And also suggestions that anyone revealing the name of said company is likely to be banned from the boards for life.
  
  All seems much fuss over little to me, as such contracting out is, for better or worse, the modern way.
  
  But a clarificatory comment might be useful?
  
  .

  Link to this forum: Who runs the boards?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Thursday, 5th January 2012

  Hi OI
  
  I'm not a Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú employee - which I think is probably common knowledge. I've been here for just over 2 years and was interviewed by Keri Davies, Vanessa Whitburn and a couple of other people (who run the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's message boards) for the job.
  
  In reply to the bit about the moderation company, I'll repost what Paul Wakely wrote back in March here for clarification:
  
  Hi All
  
  I just wanted to respond to three things (sorry for the long post, but I will be trapped in meetings most of the rest of the day, so it's a splurge and dash):
  
  1) Some of you have cited apparently bizarre moderation decisions - we know that mistakes get made, but considering the tens of thousands of moderation decisions made every week, they are reasonably rare, and we have an appeals process that manages to handle most of the more serious ones:
  
  www.bbc.co.uk/messag...
  
  I would also like to point out that there may sometimes be factors behind the scenes that you couldn't possibly know about. For example, members often alert a comment to tell us that a banned user has returned, and when we check it out it appears to be the case and we ban them again, and fail the post with an email explaining why their post has been removed and their account closed. But to you it may seem that a perfectly innocent post has been failed. We don't have the resources to be able to explain all these details each time, but I would ask that you bear it in mind that there may be more to it than first appears...
  
  2) to explain the removal of the message naming the moderation company: we don't allow the naming of the company on the boards or blogs because we've had so many cases where the discussion then became harassing towards individuals working for the company.
  
  It's a policy I'd like to change, but sadly we've just seen too many examples of appalling behaviour from users to allow it. It is of course easy to find the name of the company elsewhere on the web, and the company has nothing to hide as has been suggested here. It is simply that I don't consider a moderator who has to read content on the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú sites should have to sit and read personal abuse or threats aimed at them, which in the past has included the posting of individuals' home addresses. I am sure that no-one on this thread would do such a thing, but threads have gone that way depressingly often in the past. It is likely that you've never seen any messages like this because they are removed during moderation, but that doesn't mean they don't exist, or we're over-reacting - the mods and I have seen far too many.
  
  By the way, to my knowledge no-one has ever been banned just for mentioning the name of the moderation company, and I would overturn such a decision on appeal if I found that to be the case. We have only banned people who have also been breaking the house rules, repeatedly reposting removed material, or have been banned before.
  
  3) I'm a bit worried by the number of people on here who say they would never catpee - this is a reactively moderated board and as FotheringtonThomas has pointed out, means that the majority of posts won't be seen by Tayler or the mods unless they are complained about. Use the catpee wisely, but please do use it where it is needed...
  
  Paul Wakely, Editor, Moderation
  
  (from this post
  
  Tayler

  Link to this forum: Who runs the boards?

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 5th January 2012

  Thanks Tayler.
  
  I saw your link to that post on another thread, and have responded there, so will not repeat myself.
  
  My post has been subjected to moderation, so I hope it gets through to you. I do not think it breaks any rules - but who knows what rules there may be that I do not know?
  
  Are we at liberty to mention the name of your own company?

  Link to this forum: Who runs the boards?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Thursday, 5th January 2012

  Hi OI
  
  I make no secret of having my own company - it's how I make a living! And seeing as my head is always above the parapet here, so to speak, it would be a pointless exercise to try and keep it secret.
  
  Tayler

  Link to this forum: Who runs the boards?

Back to top