Timeline for Explaining Moderation Actions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:59 | comment | added | George Cummins | @kevin628 I still don't think this issue is a prevalent as you do. Some users are doing it wrong, sure. But many, many more are doing it right (or are at least benefiting from those that do). And still others are doing it wrong, but will figure it out eventually on their own. Users that want to learn, will. Those that don't should not be coddled. But either way, the site's focus should be maintained because it does a better job of helping large numbers of people than the forums. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:55 | comment | added | Servy | @kevin628 So you don't care what the policy is, you're just doing whatever you want, and then you're complaining when the site policy is enforced, preventing you from doing what you want, despite the fact that the site doesn't enforce it's policies. Hrmmm. You are correct, as I've stated, that comments aren't deleted as often as they should be. The solution then is to find ways of deleting comments that should be deleted, or preventing them from being posted, not to change the site policy. If you have suggestions as to how to find comments that should be deleted, please post it. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:51 | comment | added | kevin628 | @GeorgeCummins But your users are using it like a forum. Is that hard to see? You summon a document, and that's great, but although the document says, "Comments are this and that, but not that other thing," your users aren't fulfilling that. There's a function called "comments", and people use it like replies (ironically, just like we're doing here). Thus, there is a conflict of policy against users, and it results in a lot of garbage and a lot of wasted effort by moderators. Keep the policy, fine, but realize there's a costly problem: users don't care about the policy. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:41 | comment | added | George Cummins | @kevin628 The policy shouldn't change, because the effect would be to make SE more forum-like and we are intentionally avoiding that. As for trying to change the users, the comment-privilege documentation is explicit and is given to all users when they reach that privilege level. If one chooses to ignore the documentation and is confused as a result, tough. That particular user may have a less-than-satisfying experience, but the experience is greatly improved for the vast number of users who benefit from the clean Q and A approach. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:33 | comment | added | kevin628 | @GeorgeCummins Again, you dismiss the user and instead emphasize the policies. Policy dictates that comments are ephemeral. Users dictate that comments are replies that persist forever. The policy and the user are conflicted. Moderators as janitors explains the problem nicely: they clean the vomit, but they don't stop the cause of vomit. I'll admit to you: for as long as I've been using SE products, I've considered comments replies. Not post-it notes. If SE has ordained comments to be ephemeral but users don't see that, shouldn't SE change its policies, or try to change the user? | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:12 | comment | added | George Cummins | @kevin628 It seems that you are still giving comments an elevated status (like driving) and that you consider their removal to be a punishment (like a speeding ticket). The system already gives a provides detailed explanations and references for the things that matter: questions and answers. Moderating comments is more akin to janitorial work: a janitor shouldn't have to ask for permission or explain why he threw away a paper cup that was left on a table after a meeting. Sometimes he gets it wrong and throws away a cup that someone was using, but nobody cares overmuch; it's just a cup. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:12 | comment | added | Servy | @kevin628 It is common to see comments on deleted answers explaining the problems with it, particularly in the case of very new users. With respect to comments, they really aren't deleted nearly as much as they probably should be; users learn to use the more based on the examples of others, and through experimentation, and as has been said if there is a problem that's not isolated a moderator can contact a user to explain a problematic behavior. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 20:07 | comment | added | kevin628 | @Servy A person learns little when action is taken against them with no accompanying explanation. Want to stop low quality comments and answers? Then convey to the user the reason why the community thought that answer or comment was low quality. Why do police officers ask, "Do you know how fast you were going?" followed by, "Do you know what the speed limit is?" Imagine if they never said a word or never gave you a ticket but still charged you for the incident. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:51 | comment | added | Servy | @kevin628 Which is why we work so hard to help users understand that we're different, through resources such as the help page, rather than simply emulating and allowing the behavior that was so frustrating it motivated the site founders to create a radically different system specifically to avoid that exact behavior. Having SE devolve into a forum would effectively mean the site was a failure. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:36 | comment | added | kevin628 | @GeorgeCummins Good question. The Internet has been molded by traditional forum message boards, and a very large portion of the incoming users are going to treat SE sites as forums (I know I did because 1) that was my prior experience, and 2) nothing suggested that SE or SO were any different from a forum). | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:29 | comment | added | George Cummins | (cont'd) If users have to wade through comments (some relevant, some not) to find useful information, how are the SE sites different than the forums that exist everywhere else? | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:28 | comment | added | George Cummins | @kevin628 Your point is well taken, but there are two reasons that I don't think the issue is as big as you have made it out to be. First, I don't see that this is a common problem, either in my real activity on the various sites or reflected in Meta posts about the subject. Second, the site's stated goal is to produce questions and answers. Elevating comments to the type of status you recommend would change that goal and cause the site to become forum-like. (cont'd) | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:24 | comment | added | kevin628 | @GeorgeCummins I regularly find in my job that when I engineer a feature in software that it is never used the exact way I intended it to be used. Instead, I sit down with real users and quietly observe how they use what I've created (if they use it at all). I can have on my little clipboard the rules of my feature, but I never expect the user to follow them, nor am I disturbed when they don't. It's unreasonable. I don't know how SE approaches its SDLC, but I would be a bit startled if they preferred rules over users. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:18 | comment | added | George Cummins | @kevin628 If valuable information is never merged into the question or answers, someone isn't using the site correctly. Those with edit privileges should add the info to the appropriate place. The documentation is clear on the nature of comments, so there isn't an excuse for using them incorrectly. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:18 | comment | added | Servy | @kevin628 Some examples of ways comments are de-emphasized include: limiting comments to users with over 50 rep, only showing the first X comments, and forcing users to click to show more, using a smaller font for comments, not allowing extensive editing for comments, forcing a rather short char limit on comments, not having revisions for comments, not providing or removing rep based on comments, not indexing comments in search, and specifically saying all over the place that comments aren't 1st class citizens. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:14 | comment | added | kevin628 | @Servy Were those "pains" valuable? I still regularly see answers with large comment threads under them, but none of the valuable information is merged back into the answer. If there's even one case of that, then comments are value-added. Hiding all comments under an extra click-to-show link would be a better effort toward emphasizing the ephemeral nature of comments. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:11 | comment | added | Servy | @kevin628 Comments exist primarily to encourage people to improve existing posts. You ask clarifying questions in comments so that the author will edit the answer to your question into the post; you point out mistakes, flaws, problems with content in comments so that users edit the post to address those issues. The goal, in all of these cases, is for the post itself to be edited to incorporate the important information. The comment is therefore temporary and can be deleted. SE has taken pains to ensure comments are de-emphisised. In part, by not having deletion reasons for them. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:08 | comment | added | kevin628 | If they could all be deleted tomorrow, then why have comments at all? I regularly look at comments for deeper explanation, or perhaps because other considerations were discussed. If those could be deleted, then the entire user experience around comments needs to be heavily de-emphasized. Comments are, as I've always seen it on Stack Exchange, important because there are plenty of profound observations or questions users can ask that wouldn't sufficiently fit in an answer. Comments are value-added. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:04 | comment | added | George Cummins | In the case of deleted questions and answers, the system already provides such notification. With comments, it simply isn't necessary; the documentation clearly explains that comments are temporary. Commenters should write them with the understanding that they could all be deleted tomorrow. It is a complete waste of time to force the system or a moderator to explain why a temporary comment was deleted. They are temporary and can be deleted for any reason. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 19:00 | comment | added | kevin628 | I have trouble believing this is true. Consider that if a comment is deleted based on the fact that several community members requested it be deleted, then there should already be an explanation there. It need only be delivered to the user. And that can be automated without placing any additional burden on the moderators. It's what I'd call a "workflow" feature. | |
| Aug 7, 2013 at 18:56 | history | answered | George Cummins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |