Moderators should be able to delete "Irrelevant" posts

[Austman]

Please, please, please AFF do this.

It's long overdue. Please add a post deletion reason "irrelevant" for moderators to use.

Too many important topics are being hijacked by stupid, irrelevant, pointless posts. Please don't let these topic bullies get away with it. When a post has nothing at all to do with the topic, please have a moderator delete it.

 

[medhead]

Irrelevant. mods can already delete any post they want, including for being off topic. Also since there is no reason seen on a deleted post, being as it's deleted and no one can see it, there no need for an irrelevant reason.

Fwiw if you're referring to what I think you're referring to, I also find it extremely frustrating. However, I've trained myself to skip past.

 

[boomy]

I suggest to delete this pointless thread.

 

[opusman]

Too many important topics are being hijacked by stupid, irrelevant, pointless posts. Please don't let these topic bullies get away with it. When a post has nothing at all to do with the topic, please have a moderator delete it.

Welcome to the Internet. Where have you been all these years??!

 

[Mattg]

I know what you're talking about and also find it a bit frustrating at times when a post does not answer a question and goes off on a tangent about wide body aircraft or some other topic. It's worse though when a question is answered with information that is not accurate. Not sure whether or not there is scope for mods to do anything about it; I personally try to filter out irrelevant posts.

 

[codash1099]

I agree!

(Posts like this one should also be deleted! They add nothing except to the posters post count. Use the "like" button)

 

[Austman]

Welcome to the Internet. Where have you been all these years??!

Well it IS done elsewhere on the internet. Increasingly so I note.

Agreeing with a post, even if it's just posting a "+1" at least adds something to the post, although a "like" might be better. And there are topics that are obviously humorous where silly posts can add to the fun. And there are those that just seem to want to increase their post count (maybe the number of likes a poster gets is a better measure of the poster's AFF contribution than the number of posts?).

But it's not them that I'm on about. It's where quite serious topics are hijacked by completely rubbish posts that add nothing at all to the topic. These posts sometimes seem designed just to derail the conversation. The irrelevant post itself sometimes might not be much - but all the counter posts to it can go on and on - for pages sometimes - which can ruin the thread. I think this lowers the value of AFF. I know you can skip past them but sometimes you have to skip a lot!

In other internet fora, moderators can delete posts and replace it with an "irrelevant" comment. And they often then delete any chain it caused.

Maybe AFF mods already do this? If so I think they should apply it a bit more often!

 

[admin]

I understand and (at times) share your frustration.

But please keep in mind that AFF is a public forum with members from diverse backgrounds, interests, posting styles etc This is both a positive and a negative: it adds to AFF’s “colour and vibrancy”, but can result in posts which some members consider to be inappropriate or off-topic. Of course, other members might have a different view.

We do encourage diversity of opinions, and in general if a post meets our Terms of Service and is broadly on topic, it is considered to be valid and stays.

If you feel that a post is way off topic, breaches our Terms of Service, or contains misleading/incorrect information, please use the “Report Post” function which sends an email to all Moderators. Action will then be taken, if deemed necessary.

 

[opusman]

Fair point, but I guess the issue is that the moderators are all volunteers and probably busy, and it would be an enormous burden to police every thread to that level of detail.

And I'm not sure what problem it would really solve. If a thread goes off-topic and you're finding it too hard to read, just stop reading it. I'd much rather have a forum that was open and all members felt they could speak their mind freely without having to worry about the forum police shutting them down.

 

[dajop]

And I'm not sure what problem it would really solve. If a thread goes off-topic and you're finding it too hard to read, just stop reading it. I'd much rather have a forum that was open and all members felt they could speak their mind freely without having to worry about the forum police shutting them down.

Yes exactly.

I suggest anyone who finds OT posts a problem direct their energies to Flyertalk instead, where I have seen swathes of posts are deleted by the "forum police" for being slightly off topic (which is often IMHO OTT and says more about the mods than most of the posters).

On AFF unless posts get abusive/personal, reveal personal info, or overly political the mods seem to have a fairly light touch which is a good thing.

 

[anat0l]

There was one point in time on AFF where the opposite was kind of being complained about - moderators (or particular moderators) appearing to be overzealous in either deleting off-topic posts or fervently splitting them off to new threads. The main thrust of those claiming overzealous behaviour was that whilst the posts were not strictly on topic, they added colour or qualification to the main line thread, or in other cases the degree of distraction of the "off-topic" posts were not as significant to warrant the moderator's actions. I say this carefully, of course, because disputing a moderator's action is against the ToS.

I don't know if we have the balance right or ever did, but I have little problem with the current way things are going. Internet forums are always going to be a case of stop-and-go reading (unless it is one of those special threads with solid material without interdispersed commentary, then locked). I agree with admin that reporting a post (in a set of posts, as the case may be) if a thread appears to be running off the rails would be the way to go, and then moderators will delete or split off the off-topic posts as necessary.

Overall, it is not as if moderators do not already have the power being appealed by the OP. They can delete any posts that they want; reasons do not have to be provided and requesting one from a moderator could result in a warning or disciplinary action anyway. Moderators do have to give a categorical reason if you are served a warning or suspension (as I understand it, because the forum system makes them at least provide some sort of category which is communicated to the offender, e.g. bullying, spam, etc.).

I will admit I am guilty of this as well, but often I will flag my own post (e.g. prefacing it with "This is probably off topic, but...") as potentially diverting off topic, if that means it will even flag to a moderator that the post might be removed or split off.

 

[burmans]

Given our moderators are voluntary I don't really think they should be forced to spend the time needed to censor "irrelevant" posts. And the fact that you have put it in quotes highlights another issue, what is irrelevant to you may not be regarded as such by others and as anatol01 points out some level of off topic discussion is frankly a mark of a free & democratic society. For me there is no difference between online posting and off-line conversation - people will continue to make comments I regard as irrelevant or stupid, but that's just life, I can get over it easily enough.

If you think a particular commentator is continually prone you can set them to ignore! There are a couple of here I have done that with, ignore these people enough and they go and find other people to bore.

 

[basso]

Overall, it is not as if moderators do not already have the power being appealed by the OP. They can delete any posts that they want; reasons do not have to be provided and requesting one from a moderator could result in a warning or disciplinary action anyway.

Well, that is a problem. Trying to find out why a post was deleted resulting in disciplinary action.....

 

[anat0l]

...what is irrelevant to you may not be regarded as such by others and as anatol01 points out some level of off topic discussion is frankly a mark of a free & democratic society.

Actually I don't think that's a logical conclusion from what I expressed in my post, but going into a deeper discussion on this will not be productive. I just think to clarify that this is conclusion based on my position is inaccurate.

Well, that is a problem. Trying to find out why a post was deleted resulting in disciplinary action.....

Read the AFF Terms of Service and Posting Rules:

Notwithstanding our Terms of Service and Rules these 4 Guidelines are a simple reminder of what is NOT PERMITTED on AFF:
* Using AFF for commercial purposes
* Posting obscene or offensive content
* Attacking/bullying/threatening other members
* Discussing Moderator activities

These Guidelines apply to postings on our public forums AND personal messages (PMs). Whilst we recognise that PM are private by definition, if the recipient feels that the writer has breached these Guidelines in the PM and elects to take the matter further, they may report the PM. If appropriate, action will then be taken against the offending party.

In addition:

Access to AFF is a privilege, not a right.

Members who breach these rules may be disciplined. Discipline can take the form of removal/edit of offending post, a simple warning, an infraction, restriction of access, reduced service, or a temporary or permanent ban.

We have no obligation to provide an explanation regarding the reason for our action.

Any discipline action we take is not negotiable, nor is it up for discussion.

The moderators - by and large - are not that draconian, but the rules are there and it has been seen that members have been disciplined on the basis of flouting the underlined points in the first quotation block.

 

[turtlemichael]

Does anyone know a decent Italian restaurant in Rangoon?

 

[Austman]

Does anyone know a decent Italian restaurant in Rangoon?

I certainly expected a post like that! But those types of posts just get redirected to the correct thread.

Even the number of posts on subjects like wine and social meet-ups (which from the ones I've been to usually also mean wine) seems to me to be swamping the true travel information nature of AFF. But at least they are separate threads.

I suppose I meant "important topics" to mean actual travel topics and the fact that they can get hijacked by non-travel related posts or rants or mud throwing or just troll like behaviour.

I know it's tricky and a balance is required. But, sadly, I think AFF is becoming a diluted travel resource - it's getting swamped by irrelevance - and looking more and more ike a free-for-all Facebook like chat site.

I still like it - but it's not as appealing as it once was. It might just be me!

 

[opusman]

But, sadly, I think AFF is becoming a diluted travel resource - it's getting swamped by irrelevance - and looking more land more ike a free-for-all Facebook like chat site.

But (at least imo) AFF isn't here just to act as a "travel resource" where people can come in, get their questions answered and then go again. It's a social forum of like minded people who like to chat about travel related things. The fact that good tips can be had and useful information found is a by-product, not its raison d'etre. If all you want is tips without the social niceties then stick to reading ABT

 

[Austman]

It's a social forum of like minded people who like to chat about travel related things.

I've always thought it's primarily a travel forum with a social offshoot side to it. I'm fine with it being both. I just hope the travel forum part can stay as relevant and useful as it has been.

 

[Happy Trails]

Some of my best anagrams and one-liners have been consigned to the AFF memory hole.
I'm guessing because they were thought to be irrelevant.

 

[medhead]

Well, that is a problem. Trying to find out why a post was deleted resulting in disciplinary action.....

It's not a problem. Anat0l is overstated the situation. You can't question in public. In private is fine. I won't make a public comment about the the reply to private requests for information. But YMMV in terms of the reasoning returned.