Main list ideas/problems

[Grey Wolf]

> Kathryn:
> > And then we said that we can't have
> > individuals messaging rule-breakers off-list because
> > if too many people did it the person might not take it
> > well.

This is Amanda just speaking as Amanda, not on behalf of the list 
admins.
> I really must be out of the loop. When did we say that?

It wasn't said by mods, it was reasoned a few posts back - and I 
whole-heartedly agree. One thing is getting an off-list mail telling 
you off for rule breaking and signed "<name> Elf, for the Admin Team", 
and another very different is getting told off by fellow members, with 
no official authority, for breaking the rules. Particularly if you get 
20 of those. Howlers are bad, but at least they're official.

> People [...] email the owners address pointing out actions
> they'd like taken. It *does* help, we appreciate it. Maybe you
> pointing it out will increase volume and help us keep a handle on 
> things better.

But then, of course, is that you'll suddenly get 10 times as many 
letters to the admins that you'll have to go through, check to see if 
the person being pointed was really breaking the rules, and decide what 
to do about it. That's the bad part of it, but I have to say that of 
all the cons of all the ideas so far, this is the least bad. I think it 
has many possibilities, in fact. Particularly coupled with a couple 
others.

Lita:
> I really liked the idea of closing the list for a short period of 
> time--say, a week. This would allow the mods to regroup. It would 
> also send a strong message to the list that many of the current 
> posting behaviors are not acceptable. This would also give time for 
> the moderators to make something of a fresh start.

I like this idea myself. I think that, in fact, it's already 
unnoficially happening. Many of the old-timers have fled the main list 
(hopefully not forever, although some might). Closing down the list 
would send a clear message: "This is *enough*". Those that are trying 
to obey the rules would hopefully understand the need for it, those 
that are breaking the rules might get bored and go to some other place 
were they can shout their ideas all they want without breaking rules. 
And of course, that would give the mods time to implement a new 
strategy, get maybe a group of rules-enforcers into place from their 
own number, and maybe remind everyone just how the list is suposed to 
work.

Judy Serenity:
> Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several 
> people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" 
> status for a certain amount of time. Think back to when you first 
> joined HPfGU. Would you have been upset if we had had this policy? 
> Would you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able 
> to post?

I would've left for a week, come back and posted in whichever thread 
seemed interesting. So that measure, in my case, would've been 
innefective. That said, my first post was one of my theories (not the 
first posted, the first written - didn't get through) on the working of 
magic (AK, to be exact). Not your usual newbie question. As usual for 
my posts of this kind, it was long, it was involved, and no-one 
answered it. The next one was on the working of the Veritaserum (this 
one *did* get answered. It sunk, in fact. Oh well, you can't win every 
round). But then, I'm not a good lurker - as most of you probably know. 

However I always read as much as I can on a subject before posting, 
because I try not to repeat what others have said. So I think I'm not 
the archetypical rule-breaker (I do have problems with English, 
particularly irregular verbs and double letters, but the list has been 
forgiving so far, for which I'm extremelly thankful).

> Grey Wolf (me!) said:
> <<<< The way I
> understand it, not all of the people blatantly breaking the rules in
> the main list can be unmoderated. Some must be moderated, and their
> low-quality posts are getting through. <<<<
> 
> Very few problem posts get through pendings. [...] You can check for 
> yourself that most problem posts come
> from unmoderated members. [...](If you see problems posts that were
> moderated, feel free to drop us an email and let us know!) 

I stand corrected - sorry for the assumption. However, I still hold 
that the rule-breakers were allowed to be unmoderated a little too 
soon. That's why I said the moderated status is not working - you're 
suposed to learn the rules while under it, so you don't break them once 
out. And it is not happening. Granted, my first ideas for solutioning 
it weren't exactly viable, but I think colectively we're getting there.

>  Just because a member has been around for a while, doesn't
> necessarily mean that member follows the rules.  So, I disagree with
> your claim, Grey Wolf, that moderators would not be needed on the
> main list if we had separate list for newbies.  If the problem were
> just with the new members, we would have been able to fix it already. 

Errr... I never claimed that. Ummm... I discarded my idea of separate 
lists publicly a few posts back, but you know me - I can't let this 
sort of missinformation lying around. The idea behind two lists was to 
substitute the pending system (which is active moderation) for a pasive 
moderation. It doesn't work, but that's unimportant know. The important 
point was that is was a way to give the mods *more time* to moderate 
the main list, since it needs moderating because the unmoderated 
members are breaking the rules. My reasoning went: mods should be 
telling those people off. Why aren't they doing it? Because they've got 
too many pendings, mostly. How do we solve that? No more pendings. And 
from there, the idea of newbie list was born. But, as I say, that is 
out of the window now. The reasons against it are too bad, IMO.

>  A big part of the problem is that sloppiness is contagious.  When
> members see someone else not snipping and so forth, some of them
> start to feel that they can do it, too. No question, we need to fix
> this ASAP.

Yep, my point precisely. Of course, since mods still have pendings, 
mods are still short on time. That's why I think a week (or two) of 
closed list might give you time to regroup and grow and apply 
solutions. It is in esence the same reasoning as before - get those 
pending messeges out of the way, give you time to do something else.

I realise that I might be centering too much on pendings, but as I 
understand it, right now, they are so time consuming that it saps away 
all energy, which is why the main list has gone unsupervised (and has 
fallen into chaos).

> As for pendings serving no purpose, let me tell you that these days,
> most pending messages are either rejected or edited (usually for
> snipping) before being allowed on the main list.   So, if we let new
> members post without having their posts reviewed first, we'd have a
> lot more posts that really break the rules.  Also, it's not clear how
> new members would even learn the rules.

OK, another clarification: I said they're not serving any purpose 
*right now*. I loved the idea of moderated status, and was the reason 
why I joined in the first place. But *right now* the moderated status 
is not managing it's purpose of teaching the new members the rules. I 
wish it did work, but it doesn't. I've come to realise since that post 
that the trouble is not at the moderated status end, but rather in what 
you brilliantly call "contagious sloppiness". I'm sorry I lashed out 
against the moderated status - I really like it, and I can asure you I 
don't want it to disapear. But at the time, it seemed one of the 
problems to solve, since it seems to be broken.

> If we don't tell
> them exactly what they are doing wrong, they won't change.  This is
> one of the reasons why doing pendings takes so long -- each time a
> message breaks one or more rules (which is most pending messages) the
> elf has to send an email to the new member, explaining what needs to
> be changed. 

I wonder... could you simply send a brief note, like "one liner" or 
"FAQ-covered" or "spelling"? This would make it much faster (although, 
admitedly, it would be breaking a rule youselves), by leaving them to 
work out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Then again, I think 
Cindy mentioned that such sort messages don't work, since they're 
ignored or even worse discussed. That's why I think closing the list 
might be better. Give you breathing room, stop pendings from 
accumulating, etc.

> So, pendings overload is a main reason why we are having trouble
> dealing with problem posts by established members, and why so few of
> the elves post on the main list these days.   It is also why any
> solution that requires more messages to go through pendings isn't
> going to work.  In other words, ideas such as having all messages go
> through review by elves, or keeping new members on moderated status
> for a longer time, aren't practical because they require just too
> much work, even if the pool of elves were expanded.

That's clear enough, so that's out for now. But then, I've always aimed 
at reducing pendings. The question is what to do about it. And, right 
now, I think that this might be a good emergency plan:

1) Close the list for, say, two weeks. Elves take a day free to rest 
(or even more), then decide on the strategy to follow.

2) The strategy is put into motion with a silent list. For example, a 
group of sub-elves (elven enforecers? goblins?) track down and list 
rule-breakers in the main list, puts the worst back into moderation.

3) The mods send notices explaining all this to everyone, and train a 
few new elves to helps with pendings.

4) the list re-opens, hopefully with a calmer ambient. The enforcers 
keep an eye on the list, while the pendings are dealed with an 
increased group.

This plan (which is not mine, I nicked and borrowed from many members 
in this thread) *might* work. But then, at the time I thought a newbie 
list would work too, so I'm not 100% sure. Anyone willing to poke 
holes?

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf

PD: "Taking from one is stealing. Taking from many is research" Murphy 
Law. I still would like to be able to tag by name the members who fist 
posted those ideas in the 4-step plan, but I don't have that much time, 
sorry. All of you who came up with them, *thank you!*