24 hour moderation?

[Laurie]

Obviously these discussion forums are moderated. But do you have 24 hour moderation?
Sometimes if I post something, nothing happens for hours and hours. Maybe, if you
only have moderators in North America, then you should tell posters in other timezones
that it will be 7 hours or 16 hours or whatever until your post will be viewed and approved.

Of course, the best solution is to get some moderators all over the world:)

[David]

Yes, posts are moderated, but currently we don't have moderators in different time zones around the world. We hope we will! But right now sometimes it does take a while for something to be posted, even though some of us occasionally check the site at pretty odd hours for our time zone. You should see a notice saying that your post is being moderated. If you're not getting that notice, please let us know so we can get it fixed.

[Laurie]

David,

I took a screen image after I posted another message. I use firefox and the message
is hard to read because it is half in the purple banner and half out of the purple
banner. I will email you a copy of the image if you want.

[Laurie]

Plus the message only stays on the screen for a few seconds and then
the page redirects back to the forums. So it is easy to miss.

[spreynolds]

I saw the notice on my first post, but it flashed by so quickly I couldn't read much of it. :)

[adyer]

I'm not so keen on hiding posts until someone can look them over, and then not having a moderator available for many hours. Why not simply allow the messages to post where they can be seen and then follow up?

Anyway, what happens if a moderator declines to post a message after reviewing it? Is the author informed of this in any way?

[Starlight Rider]

I'm not so keen on hiding posts until someone can look them over, and then not having a moderator available for many hours. Why not simply allow the messages to post where they can be seen and then follow up?

I'm inclined to agree. The CS boards are the only ones I've ever seen that does this, and I participate in many such forums. It really shows a lack of trust. The problem is that one can never be sure the postings accurately reflect the views of the participants or if they are merely the thoughts that pass the screening.

In other forums, the occasional offensive post can be flagged by users pretty quickly if they are not caught by a moderator.

[E100]

Just so everyone knows, forums are moderated along the lines mentioned in the terms forum participants agree to when they register and as stated in the site's Terms of Service. What this basically means is that forum posts shouldn't be inappropriate, objectionable, obscene, hateful, threatening, defamatory, abusive, etc. Moderators typically would block any post that does not conform with these terms, and the person would be informed that the post would not appear on the site. Moderators don't edit messages (except to remove contact information such as phone numbers). When a post appears in the forums, it's what the person submitted, unchanged by any moderator.

Moderators generally are checking the forums 18 hours a day, sometimes more. Current moderators are in the eastern time zone of the US. As the site and forums develop, more moderators in more places, as well as 24-hour moderation, may be added. And while forums on many other sites aren't moderated, we know many that are, too.

Hope that relieves any concerns!

[Starlight Rider]

Just curious, E100, have your moderators had many posts that were objectionable, offensive, abusive, hateful, threatening, defamatory etc. that didn't get posted?

[adyer]

In my experience, every discussion board needs an enforceable policy against hateful, defamatory speech, fraud, phishing, etc.

Some boards I've seen practice "self-policing" wherein very little is done by moderators except to handle extreme cases, but leaves tone and content up to the users. That, too, is not good enough.

My concern with the other extreme -- this site, where nothing is allowed to post without prior management approval -- gives the impression that one has not seen everything that was written, and that only what agrees with management sees the light of day.

While this may not be reality, there is a liability for it to be perception. Management may only be looking for the very worst abuses that we see on a garden variety message board, but those who post want to know that voices with something to say will be heard. It may not always be warm and fuzzy but if we're going to discuss...let's discuss!

So far nothing I've said has been stifled so I have no reason to complain. Still, it's good for us to air any concerns here and I think making this discussion of the topic visible to all can help alleviate any concerns if indeed "the refs are letting the players play" (we're in basketball season, y'know!).

[E100]

I haven't polled all the moderators, but as far as I know we haven't had any abusive or hateful submissions (thank you, forum participants!). But one person wanted to start a thread about a book that has nothing to do with Christian Science. We figured this was inappropriate for a site about Christian Science, so we didn't post it and contacted the person to suggest that he probably could find a suitable online forum elsewhere--and a little later I did stumble across it online without even looking for it. (It may be worth noting, too, that sometimes such threads are more for advertising than discussion purposes.) So we moderate posts not to stifle honest and appropriate exchanges but to provide the best and safest environment for the entire community.

[Lulu333]

I don't think it shows a lack of trust...have any of your posts been altered in any way? I also belong to a wide variety of boards, and frankly, some of them are hard to wade through with the spam and nasty posts...I get that that's not a problem here, but if the only complaint is that it takes a bit of time to have your post responded to, I don't see that as much of a problem. Things seem to be going up in a fairly timely manner....

[adyer]

So far I agree with you, Lulu. This thread shows the variety of views on the subject and even if moderators leave things as they are this will help other posters understand how we are working together on it.

[Starlight Rider]

I have discovered that the "quick reply" feature does not go through the moderators but posts immediately. Now that I've pointed that out, I don't know how long that will last.

I agree that having moderators is important and essential to maintaining civil discourse, but how tight does that control really need to be? There's a fine line between moderation and censorship. None of the explanations given thus far explain why every single post needs to be pre-screened. Profanity filters take care of the most objectional posts automatically. Moderators can read and delete other posts in a timely fashion, and the membership can help by flagging inappropriate posts.

The fact, as E100 reported that only one post - not objectionable but merely off topic - was held back so far indicates that full pre-screening really isn't all that necessary.

I can't help but wonder, though, about the book the deleted poster wanted to discuss. Was he or she wanting to compare/contrast it with Christian Science, or was it completely unrelated? The reason I ask is because I read a lot of different books on spirituality, not just official church publications, and I may bring them up from time to time. I may in the future also wish to discuss them in the light of CS.

OK, off my soapbox.

[adyer]

The fact, as E100 reported that only one post - not objectionable but merely off topic - was held back so far indicates that full pre-screening really isn't all that necessary.
First, Startlight, I'll muddy the waters by saying that this can be a great discussion board if we don't start a habit of getting off-topic. It's easy to do.

For example, I do understand that it's a bit more brutal to delete a thread than never to start one. You think you feel censored when your words never see the light of day...just try getting a post up and then taken down! So I can support the moderators' desire to provide some consistency on the forum, avoiding the now-you-see-it-now-you-don't look that happens when threads and posts suddenly disappear.

Having said that, let me also say that it appears that quick-reply messages are posted but not really. It shows up in context of the thread but if you refresh you'll see it's not there yet. Weird...I don't know what's up with that.

Anyway, I'm not unhappy with things. As I said before, this thread can be the best argument in support that the moderators in fact post opposing arguments. The topics seem focused on CS and that's as it should be. I don't want to sift through threads about New Age as if it's similar to Christian Science or stuff like that. This is about the teachings of Mary Baker Eddy, as far as I'm concerned.

[goodwinh]

Having managed forums before, I would have to agree with "adyer".

Posts can be totally inappropriate!

Moderators prevent responsea based on emotional impluse or those who "like" to try to incite instead of respond honestly.

You can instantly "edit" your post if you need to tweak it for typos etc... which I appreciate :)

[jocah]

CHET-NUN spell mercy or grace

Peace be unto you.

Thanks for this new website.

Here is my feeling on the moderation or editing of my posts:

My posts are complete thoughts. Should a moderator for some reason want to cut out part of one of my messages, I prefer that it not be posted at all.

If they do not want to post all of what I wrote, they in essence ought not post any of it. I would hate to see a message of mine edited then posted with my name on it.

If there is need for clarification or alteration of a statement, then we could discuss it before posting or not posting.

May the Lord reward all the writers and workers of this site.

Jocah

[NYCtown]

CHET-NUN spell mercy or grace

Peace be unto you.

Thanks for this new website.

Here is my feeling on the moderation or editing of my posts:

My posts are complete thoughts. Should a moderator for some reason want to cut out part of one of my messages, I prefer that it not be posted at all.

If they do not want to post all of what I wrote, they in essence ought not post any of it. I would hate to see a message of mine edited then posted with my name on it.

If there is need for clarification or alteration of a statement, then we could discuss it before posting or not posting.

May the Lord reward all the writers and workers of this site.

Jocah
I'm a moderator on the site. I would never edit a user's post without the poster's permission. If there were an issue, I'd contact the user and explain, then he could edit his post, if he chose to.

Have to say, though, that I haven't had to do that here at christianscience.com!

[jocah]

CHET-NUN

NYCtown wrote:
"I would never edit a user's post without the poster's permission."

Thank you! That's good.

adyer wrote:
"I don't want to sift through threads about New Age as if it's similar to Christian Science or stuff like that. This is about the teachings of Mary Baker Eddy, as far as I'm concerned."

Each student of Christian Science has their divinely designated fields of work. Mine tend to be more controversial than others it seems. For instance, sports and gardening and careers and schools find ready listeners in testimony meetings or online forums.

But when I bring up stuff that I am discovering in the fields of Judah and Ishmael (that is, Hebrew and Islamic roots), it tends to draw immediate and unjust censorship from "officials".

A devoted student of Christian Science may talk readily in the vocabulary of their field. This is both convenient for the student and instructional to their hearers. But the too-quick-to-judge often think the speaker is astray, or is trying to lead others astray. Maybe he is rather asking for your advice about his mission into an unusual and sometimes dangerous field. Mutual conferring is a right and wise thing to do.

I believe a forum like this needs moderation. But beware of borrowing ignorant public opinion as a criteria for judging a topic. Most of society is, at present, in ignorant or malicious opposition to Christ Science. Yet many students listen to the news that the opponents of CS present and take it as factual and correct.

Eternal Mind is going to call each one of us to account about how thoroughly we have imbibed and applied His/Her Science. I pray we all may develop a better awareness of the respect and duty (Arabic: taqwah) that is due to our Father-Mother.

I advise moderators to avoid taking matters into their own hands. But rather patiently confer with one another, and the authors, until a common preference is reached. This is the best way to avoid "unmerited censure" on such a vast topic as the Science of Man.

Asalamu alaykum; peace be unto you!
Jocah

FOR STUDY:
Bible: Proverbs 18'13
S. and H. x-13; 9-2