I'd point out that the repeated postings that eventually get deleted are virtually always under unregistered userids. Something to think about.
Yes that is true but we do abandon something we believe in, anonymity because probably less than 5 people really abuse it.
We are thinking of ways to combat it.
Requiring a validated e-mail and registration doesn't preclude anonymity.
Certainly a determined actor can still defeat such a system, but it increases the burden to persons inclined to do so.
I would think the current system disproportionately favors those disposed to incivility and bad faith "discussion" and it's no secret that the board has that reputation in the running community.
are a handful of posters who are obsessed about a particular issue and essentially make the boards much worse off because of it.
then explain existence of Adult, newname, and a few others that saturate threads with known falsehoods and continue to be allowed to exist on this forum?
There are posters whose views I may disagree with or who may feel strongly about an issue but don't go and create multiple threads on the same issue spamming the boards. I think there is a difference. Generally, I'd say unless you are starting threads on one topic we are going to evaluate the content of the individual post.
Would a happy medium require that you must be a registered user to start a thread?
Anonymous users can still post and vote, but this might cut down on duplicate posts and provocative troll posts.
I'm away from home so I don't have access to the statistics, but a while back I wrote a web scrapper that looked at threads started by unregistered vs registered users and which threads get deleted and the overwhelming majority of threads are started by unregistered users and virtually all of the threads that get deleted are started by unregistered users.
I'd suggest that a large part of the perceived moderation problem on LetsRun forum is because the current system makes moderation so difficult.
The moderating is out of control. Of course wejo will just deny everything but words are too easy, the actions of the moderators speak volumes. If a thread is not abusive, does not have illegal content, is not spam, then leave it alone.
While we support the principles of free speech we also want to foster a community within those priniciples.
Under your guidelines, we should let people post porn links on the site or let non-running threads dominate? Unlike say twitter, every thread, every post is treated equally. We don't prescreen content or use algorithms to limit the content with speech that isn't high value.
The way we handle this is by deleting low value threads.
I might be one of your 5 problems, and that really bothers me (honestly). I am not the poster that keeps writing the same posts. I don't copy and paste the same thing over and over, and I think a discerning reader can tell when a post is serious vs trolling. I've reached out like you requested (with no response, though I understand it's not been very long), and I’m more than willing to back off my issue, if you guys take some steps (easy ones) to back off.
As for moderation, if you're serious, then great. But, you'll have to excuse several of us "lifers" who will have to see it to believe it. You have good rules (or at least a decent start), but they're nowhere close to being enforced consistently. Not close. Some have claimed that you guys don't have control of your mods or even know who all the mods are. I can't see how that could be possible, but if it is, no wonder the moderation is as poor as it is. There's a thread started a year ago by a poster named mikeh33 (or something like that) about moderation, and it is going on 30 or 40-something pages. There are many posts that are just voicing grievances, but there are also many good suggestions that I think you should consider.
Lastly, I started a thread about why I appreciate you more than Rojo (which was totally an honest assessment), and I got banned for 6 days for it. So, maybe you need to add a rule that comments about you guys are forbidden.
What does that even mean? What is the standard for how "off" topic a conversation has become? Does the subject as chosen by the OP dictate? Conversations don't just stick on one thing but can fork based on what people say.
I'm perfectly fine with the moderation on this site and the Brojos are good guys in my opinion.
See this guy is one of our trouble makers as well.
Look at his username.
Should have added to the problematic things the posters who constantly target Greg and Deno. It's human nature I guess but I find it sad that people come on here and just target other posters.
Spammers are a problem with every forum but I didn't even post that. We just ban them and clean up when we can. Most problematic in the off hours. So we need more European moderators.
If you have an issue with a moderator email me directly. A very easy way to get something deleted or even banned is to go off topic in a thread about moderation. We can't have threads going off the rails to discuss moderation.
then explain existence of Adult, newname, and a few others that saturate threads with known falsehoods and continue to be allowed to exist on this forum?
There are posters whose views I may disagree with or who may feel strongly about an issue but don't go and create multiple threads on the same issue spamming the boards. I think there is a difference. Generally, I'd say unless you are starting threads on one topic we are going to evaluate the content of the individual post.
C'mon, wejo. Those two, and a handful of others, bring absolutely nothing of value to this site. It's truly disgusting that you give them a safe space to spread their lies and hate.
I might be one of your 5 problems, and that really bothers me (honestly). I am not the poster that keeps writing the same posts. I don't copy and paste the same thing over and over, and I think a discerning reader can tell when a post is serious vs trolling. I've reached out like you requested (with no response, though I understand it's not been very long), and I’m more than willing to back off my issue, if you guys take some steps (easy ones) to back off.
As for moderation, if you're serious, then great. But, you'll have to excuse several of us "lifers" who will have to see it to believe it. You have good rules (or at least a decent start), but they're nowhere close to being enforced consistently. Not close. Some have claimed that you guys don't have control of your mods or even know who all the mods are. I can't see how that could be possible, but if it is, no wonder the moderation is as poor as it is. There's a thread started a year ago by a poster named mikeh33 (or something like that) about moderation, and it is going on 30 or 40-something pages. There are many posts that are just voicing grievances, but there are also many good suggestions that I think you should consider.
Lastly, I started a thread about why I appreciate you more than Rojo (which was totally an honest assessment), and I got banned for 6 days for it. So, maybe you need to add a rule that comments about you guys are forbidden.
I see a very lengthy email from yesterday now. I'll write back now.
If you don't see anything by 1:30 pm eastern it was another person and write me again at
As for a thread that is 30-40 pages long complaining about moderation I haven't looked at that in months. I think a better course forward is to keep a thread like this open for a little bit and then lock it. That will make sure it gets my attention.
Would a happy medium require that you must be a registered user to start a thread?
Anonymous users can still post and vote, but this might cut down on duplicate posts and provocative troll posts.
Treating thread starters differently than thread posters is something we do to some extent but need to expand upon.
Wejo - why don't you employ an intern for $200 a week to review all thread deletions? Your mods deleted a thread a few weeks ago in which you had personally added to the title that you found the thread 'fascinating'. There was a thread where the OP claimed that his father had handtimed Roger Bannister's sub 4 mile at 4:00.6, and that he wanted to tell his story as he was getting on - and the mods deleted it. There was another thread on the subject of a world class miler in the 80's from South Africa who was prevented from competing internationally, and there was a great debate developing on whether he could have beaten the Brits - and the mods deleted it.
Plus, I keep telling you that at the end of the day it is costing you money. Your site is very likely being penalized by Google because so many threads get indexed and then deleted. Google considers that an unstable site and will penalize it hard. It would actually save you money by paying somebody competent $200 a week to review deleted threads.
This post was edited 28 seconds after it was posted.