dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Selective censorship on a.net

Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:48 pm

While replying to an earlier thread one of the moderator claimed, there is no agenda, but

On AI171 intercept thread, flame bait posts were left alone but mods are deleting anyone responds to the flame bait. Explain how posts #8 and #11 are related or any value to the thread.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1357465

EK bookings down 35%, same issue.

What is the logic behind this selective enforcement of rules and selective censorship? Is there an agenda to promote negative news of AI and bury negative news of EK?

It will help members save typing.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:00 pm

Maybe it is because the mods don't read every single post made in every single thread?

Unless they personally read the posts in a thread, the mods will only react to posts that are reported to them. No matter how bad a post is, if they don't personally read it, and no-one reports it then it's going to remain.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 4636
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:44 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
On AI171 intercept thread, flame bait posts were left alone but mods are deleting anyone responds to the flame bait. Explain how posts #8 and #11 are related or any value to the thread.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1357465

Have you used the report post function to bring those particular posts to the attention of the moderators?

V/F
Having trouble with a malware spam popup advert on A.net mobile site? Share details at viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1363111

"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
 
dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:12 pm

Well, thread was sanitized at least twice and a mod posted about both AI pilots sleeping from a very credible source.

My post with reference to another intercept and issues with guard frequency over Europe was deleted.

Hard to believe mods wouldn't notice me me posts.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 4636
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:01 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Well, thread was sanitized at least twice and a mod posted about both AI pilots sleeping from a very credible source.

My post with reference to another intercept and issues with guard frequency over Europe was deleted.

Hard to believe mods wouldn't notice me me posts.

I can't talk for the current moderators, but when I used to serve in the role it was not unusual to respond to delete suggestions by looking at the suggested post, the ones it replied to, and going from there, without thoroughly reading the whole thread. That and sometimes one might read something and not realise the offence that it is causing others. That's where the suggest delete button (or the report button now, the triangle icon with the question mark, in case you haven't seen it since it isn't exactly spelled out) was really useful.

One thing I'm wondering is that deletions used to be emailed, so you'd know why the post was deleted (I would say in my time between 50% and 60% of the posts I deleted were because they contained reference to a previous post which had been deleted, and in the absence of being able to edit user's posts, something moderators weren't permitted to do, the only option was to delete the post even if it was otherwise entirely fine). Do these deletion emails still go out? If not, that needs to be addressed - it is hard to raise the standard by deleting posts when people don't understand for what reason their post has been deleted.

V/F
Having trouble with a malware spam popup advert on A.net mobile site? Share details at viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1363111

"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
SQ22
Crew
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Mon Mar 13, 2017 6:03 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
Well, thread was sanitized at least twice and a mod posted about both AI pilots sleeping from a very credible source.

My post with reference to another intercept and issues with guard frequency over Europe was deleted.

Hard to believe mods wouldn't notice me me posts.

I can't talk for the current moderators, but when I used to serve in the role it was not unusual to respond to delete suggestions by looking at the suggested post, the ones it replied to, and going from there, without thoroughly reading the whole thread. That and sometimes one might read something and not realise the offence that it is causing others. That's where the suggest delete button (or the report button now, the triangle icon with the question mark, in case you haven't seen it since it isn't exactly spelled out) was really useful.

One thing I'm wondering is that deletions used to be emailed, so you'd know why the post was deleted (I would say in my time between 50% and 60% of the posts I deleted were because they contained reference to a previous post which had been deleted, and in the absence of being able to edit user's posts, something moderators weren't permitted to do, the only option was to delete the post even if it was otherwise entirely fine). Do these deletion emails still go out? If not, that needs to be addressed - it is hard to raise the standard by deleting posts when people don't understand for what reason their post has been deleted.

V/F


I was not on duty yesterday, so I can't comment on the handling yesterday. Anyway it currently looks like everything is now okay. If not please make a request for deletion of the specific post and we can have a look at the post.

I am handling it exactly as described above. When threads are not too long I am checking the whole thread, but if they are getting to long its difficult.

Regarding deletions used to be emailed, this function disappeared with the old website and we have adressed it to get it back asap.
 
dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:29 pm

Another example of selective scrubbing, leaving initial flame-bait was left intact but others were warned, selectively sanitized and finally locked the thread.

Flame-bait is the reason threads go off-topic, not responses to flame-bait.

On a thread about to loss of comm and intercept, these posts are about everything else.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1358195


#7

The stories of Air India 787 pilots washing out at Oman and other 787 carriers makes a lot of sense now. It is still a feudalism system where connected people get the prestigious jobs.


#19
Of course India is the best.... otherwise you must be racist.

India - land of the fake pilots.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... tes-in-air

4000 of them?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.ndtv.co ... -rum%3Doff

Fake health Certs?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.timesof ... 953380.cms

Showing up drunk

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2011 ... drunk.html

Some twice!!

http://m.timesofindia.com/city/delhi/Ai ... 061969.cms


#20
First of all, most of the links above are from India media.

Secondly, I'm not one to ever say all is rosy in China, nor one to say Chinese aviation is perfect - just look at the Shenzhen air scandal. You can do a lot more than smoking in cockpits, believe me, and I've sat in a row 1 of a Chinese 737 with an airline chairman who went into the airline cockpit for a smoke upon approach into a tricky airport in southwest China after "cabin secured" announcement.

However, two wrongs don't make a right, and neither does being critical of aviation standards in India make me a racist. I've spend a lot of time working in aviation in India, so know the good from the bad. I've met (former minister) Patel, head of AAI and the regulator for example. Yes, India is amazing, frustrating and distracting at the same time and for every three steps forward, two back are also taken.

I'll end with a Korean quote...

The bad plowman quarrels with his ox.



#24
A lot of those fake Indian pilots ended up in other parts of Asia. It was a well know problem with some of the LCCs.

Union member of not, do you agree that a pilot caught drunk twice deserves to be flying again in 36 months, or do you prefer to deflect?


#38
Contract very much still in place, thanks. Have I dissed Patel or AAI?

Rather than blaming PR, how about perhaps apportioning some of the blame to AI?

Finally, the pilot you said was fired for being caught drunk TWICE wasn't fired. He was grounded for 36 months. Do you think that's good enough?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.timesof ... 061969.cms

In case of a violation, a pilot’s licence will be suspended for three months for a first time offence. For a second violation, the pilot’s license is suspended for three years. A third time offence leads to a cancellation of the pilot’s license.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 14569
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:38 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Another example of selective scrubbing, leaving initial flame-bait was left intact but others were warned, selectively sanitized and finally locked the thread.

Flame-bait is the reason threads go off-topic, not responses to flame-bait.

On a thread about to loss of comm and intercept, these posts are about everything else.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1358195


#7

The stories of Air India 787 pilots washing out at Oman and other 787 carriers makes a lot of sense now. It is still a feudalism system where connected people get the prestigious jobs.


#19
Of course India is the best.... otherwise you must be racist.

India - land of the fake pilots.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... tes-in-air

4000 of them?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.ndtv.co ... -rum%3Doff

Fake health Certs?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.timesof ... 953380.cms

Showing up drunk

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2011 ... drunk.html

Some twice!!

http://m.timesofindia.com/city/delhi/Ai ... 061969.cms


#20
First of all, most of the links above are from India media.

Secondly, I'm not one to ever say all is rosy in China, nor one to say Chinese aviation is perfect - just look at the Shenzhen air scandal. You can do a lot more than smoking in cockpits, believe me, and I've sat in a row 1 of a Chinese 737 with an airline chairman who went into the airline cockpit for a smoke upon approach into a tricky airport in southwest China after "cabin secured" announcement.

However, two wrongs don't make a right, and neither does being critical of aviation standards in India make me a racist. I've spend a lot of time working in aviation in India, so know the good from the bad. I've met (former minister) Patel, head of AAI and the regulator for example. Yes, India is amazing, frustrating and distracting at the same time and for every three steps forward, two back are also taken.

I'll end with a Korean quote...

The bad plowman quarrels with his ox.



#24
A lot of those fake Indian pilots ended up in other parts of Asia. It was a well know problem with some of the LCCs.

Union member of not, do you agree that a pilot caught drunk twice deserves to be flying again in 36 months, or do you prefer to deflect?


#38
Contract very much still in place, thanks. Have I dissed Patel or AAI?

Rather than blaming PR, how about perhaps apportioning some of the blame to AI?

Finally, the pilot you said was fired for being caught drunk TWICE wasn't fired. He was grounded for 36 months. Do you think that's good enough?

https://www.google.com.hk/amp/m.timesof ... 061969.cms

In case of a violation, a pilot’s licence will be suspended for three months for a first time offence. For a second violation, the pilot’s license is suspended for three years. A third time offence leads to a cancellation of the pilot’s license.


Have you reported them via the button or have you just complained about them here?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:48 pm

Another example. Third off-topic flame bait on this thread. First two were deleted. These are so prevalent as if though they are encouraged.

#15
Seems like a roundabout way to get spare parts.....

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1359537

scbriml wrote:
Have you reported them via the button or have you just complained about them here?

SD is used to game the system, absolutely no value, almost an excuse.

This habit of flame throwing will change only members get the message one side will not be encouraged. Rather scrubbing and warning those who reply to flame bait became regular order of business.
 
qf789
Crew
Posts: 2977
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Tue Apr 04, 2017 4:41 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Another example. Third off-topic flame bait on this thread. First two were deleted. These are so prevalent as if though they are encouraged.

#15
Seems like a roundabout way to get spare parts.....

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1359537


No its not another example. The first two were deleted two and a half hours before the third flamebait post was even made. Secondly you are wasting your time telling us what number post it is here as we can see all deleted posts and the post your were referring to was actually #22. As mentioned by scrimbl if you see a post that violates a rule report it by using the suggest deletion button or email the moderators as the forum rules state. I would also remind you that us moderators can not be everywhere all the time and therefore encourage users to report posts that violate the rules

Airliners.net will not and cannot review every message posted, and is furthermore not responsible for the content of any of these messages. If you believe a post or thread violates a rule, please bring this to our attention by using the "suggest delete" button. It would also be helpful if you indicated which rules you believe were broken.

If you have a problem with another user or if you dislike a thread or post and are able to show that it violates a rule, please use the "Suggest Deletion" button (see below). Just as posts have various levels of quality, so do suggestions for deletion. Take some time to explain why you feel a post should be removed.
 suggest deletion 

Alternatively, you may e-mail the Forum Moderators at moderators@airliners.net about the issue.

Do not respond to an inflammatory post and then suggest deletion of the same post. Simply suggest its deletion using the SD button.

If you are suggesting deletion of an entire thread because it is a duplicate of an earlier thread, please paste the URL of the first thread in the comment box of the SD form.

Do not use the SD button unfairly against one or more members in an attempt to limit their posts. Deletion suggestions from members are welcome and encouraged. But do not 'spam' the deletion queue because of a conflict with another member.

Do not use the SD button as a way of retaliating after having one of your own posts or threads removed.

Please only utilize the suggest deletion button once per post. Any user found to abuse/misuse the suggest deletion system will be suspended.
Forum Moderator
 
dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:40 pm

Another example of selective editing.

Cobra, Mongoose, Jellyfish, Elephants, Sharks are welcome but not Anacondas and a hypothetical Goats.

What is the logic?

viewtopic.php?t=1340177
 
qf789
Crew
Posts: 2977
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:02 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Another example of selective editing.

Cobra, Mongoose, Jellyfish, Elephants, Sharks are welcome but not Anacondas and a hypothetical Goats.

What is the logic?

viewtopic.php?t=1340177


You have been told before if you have an issue with a deletion to contact the moderators via email. Your post was NOT selective editing. There were multiple posts in the thread removed of which all of them were removed for the same reason. If you want to know why your post was deleted contact us as you have no proof that it was selective editing as you say.
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Crew
Posts: 1841
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:19 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Another example of selective editing.

Cobra, Mongoose, Jellyfish, Elephants, Sharks are welcome but not Anacondas and a hypothetical Goats.

What is the logic?

viewtopic.php?t=1340177

I'm really not sure what you hope to gain with this rolling thread of yours. As multiple people have explained, we simply cannot be everywhere at once. We don't selectively do anything -- we react to reported posts, we try our best to review the thread and follow up, but often it's not possible for us to keep up. There are plenty of instances when we only have time to review the reported post, quickly search for referenced posts, and move on to the next. Reported posts add up incredibly quickly in our queue.

If it still doesn't make sense, I'll simplify:

Step 1: You see offensive posts.
Step 2: You report offensive posts.
Step 3: We review offensive posts.
Step 4: Everything is better.

If people don't report the post, then there's a decent chance we either won't see it, or we won't see it in a timely manner. Airliners.net is supposed to be a community, and we therefore rely on the community to help us keep things happy. Simply reposting those comments here contributes absolutely nothing because it isn't a reporting mechanism, it's effectively complaining without providing solutions. Reporting the post IS the solution.
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6625
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:07 am

If non-offending and non-offensive posts, that do not breach any forum rules, disappear just because they have been later quoted in a post by somebody else who has then gone on to breach a forum rule in their reply, then that would be a form of selective censorship. I don't see any reason for a compliant post to be removed just because somebody with a different opinion has decided to quote it and go off the rails in their reply during a hissy fit.

Thread in question: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1365621
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90,717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9,306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 4636
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:25 am

777Jet wrote:
If non-offending and non-offensive posts, that do not breach any forum rules, disappear just because they have been later quoted in a post by somebody else who has then gone on to breach a forum rule in their reply, then that would be a form of selective censorship. I don't see any reason for a compliant post to be removed just because somebody with a different opinion has decided to quote it and go off the rails in their reply during a hissy fit.

Thread in question: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1365621

I think you may have gotten the wrong end of the stick here - the referenced post thing is that if a post is deleted, it has been standard practice to also delete the following posts which directly quote it, since otherwise the quote is now out of context. I don't believe the mods are deleting posts that are otherwise fine because someone quotes it then goes off the rails.

Since the change to the new forum software, an issue has arisen with this process of deleting reference posts now that we don't get notified of our posts being deleted. In the past when this would happen, I would be able to copy my deleted post from the email and post it again, minus the part which referenced the previous deleted post (the deletion notices for "referenced post deleted" even encouraged users to do that - I know because I wrote that particular deletion notice back in the day haha!). Now it is just gone, and if it was a long post that means a lot of work disappears. So I have a suggestion for the moderators: instead of deleting whole posts, can you edit the user's post to cut out reference to the previous deleted post, and leave an "edited by" tag at the bottom (perhaps along the lines of "Edited by [Mod name] to remove quote of earlier deleted post"). I see this type of editing by a moderator from time to time (I just saw one this morning, I can't recall the thread but if I come across it again I'll link it here), so I imagine it is possible, although I know in the past the moderators have been quite reluctant to edit users' posts (no doubt expecting the inevitible "The Mods are selectively editing my posts to change what I say" threads that will occur). I think doing it this way would help reduce the number of complaints people have about moderation, and also contribute to the flow of threads.

atcsundevil wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
Another example of selective editing.

Cobra, Mongoose, Jellyfish, Elephants, Sharks are welcome but not Anacondas and a hypothetical Goats.

What is the logic?

viewtopic.php?t=1340177

I'm really not sure what you hope to gain with this rolling thread of yours. As multiple people have explained, we simply cannot be everywhere at once. We don't selectively do anything -- we react to reported posts, we try our best to review the thread and follow up, but often it's not possible for us to keep up. There are plenty of instances when we only have time to review the reported post, quickly search for referenced posts, and move on to the next. Reported posts add up incredibly quickly in our queue.

If it still doesn't make sense, I'll simplify:

Step 1: You see offensive posts.
Step 2: You report offensive posts.
Step 3: We review offensive posts.
Step 4: Everything is better.

If people don't report the post, then there's a decent chance we either won't see it, or we won't see it in a timely manner. Airliners.net is supposed to be a community, and we therefore rely on the community to help us keep things happy. Simply reposting those comments here contributes absolutely nothing because it isn't a reporting mechanism, it's effectively complaining without providing solutions. Reporting the post IS the solution.

Thanks for this clear response atcsundevil! I wonder if part of the issue is people don't realise how to report posts. For me the exclamation mark in a triangle icon seems really obvious, but there may be others for whom it isn't. Certainly I've seen plenty of posts where people have maybe double posted, or changed their mind, and edited it to say "double, please delete", but when you click on the report button it takes you to the report menu, meaning it hasn't previously been reported. Another suggestion for the moderators: it would be good to have a sticky post at the top of the forums for a few months, maybe even permanently, pointing out this feature, and some other useful features, like which icons to click on to take you to the most recently read posts.

V/F
Having trouble with a malware spam popup advert on A.net mobile site? Share details at viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1363111

"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Crew
Posts: 1841
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:30 am

777Jet wrote:
If non-offending and non-offensive posts, that do not breach any forum rules, disappear just because they have been later quoted in a post by somebody else who has then gone on to breach a forum rule in their reply, then that would be a form of selective censorship. I don't see any reason for a compliant post to be removed just because somebody with a different opinion has decided to quote it and go off the rails in their reply during a hissy fit.

Thread in question: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1365621

That's not how a "referenced post" deletion works. A referenced post is when User A makes an offensive comment, and User B replies with A's post in their comment. User A's post would be deleted for the specific rules violation, and User B's would be deleted as a "referenced post deletion".

If User A writes a good post, and User B replies to it with an offending post, then only User B's comment is removed.

If you have a post removed and it did not contain any kind of reference from another user's comment, then your comment was removed on the grounds of a rules violation. You are always welcome to email moderators with an inquiry into the deletion, and we do expect automated email notification to return shortly. It's not a standard feature of this site software, and was a relatively unique feature of the old site. That said, please don't email us with an angry, hate-filled rant (I'm not saying you'd do this!); please inquire the deletion, as it seems very often that when we do receive angry rants, there's always a very simple explanation.

VirginFlyer wrote:
So I have a suggestion for the moderators: instead of deleting whole posts, can you edit the user's post to cut out reference to the previous deleted post, and leave an "edited by" tag at the bottom (perhaps along the lines of "Edited by [Mod name] to remove quote of earlier deleted post"). I see this type of editing by a moderator from time to time (I just saw one this morning, I can't recall the thread but if I come across it again I'll link it here), so I imagine it is possible, although I know in the past the moderators have been quite reluctant to edit users' posts (no doubt expecting the inevitible "The Mods are selectively editing my posts to change what I say" threads that will occur). I think doing it this way would help reduce the number of complaints people have about moderation, and also contribute to the flow of threads.

We do expect the email notifications to return soon, so fingers crossed. The developers have been working on it and other much requested items (like the airport/airline code hover function) for a couple of months now, and we hope they'll roll it out soon.

To answer your suggestion: I get where you're coming from, but as you elude, it's a touchy issue. Currently, only Head Moderators have the "right" to edit portions of people's posts -- a right that is used extremely sparingly. Moderators can edit the titles of threads with a reason left in the opening post (most likely what you saw); while we can obviously delete entire posts, we cannot edit text. From a technical point of view, the rights are granted to us on the site software, but none of us use it because it's against our policy. Even Head Moderators very rarely edit user posts. We're accused of censorship enough as it is, but editing portions of posts would only intensify that, even if our reasoning is entirely rational. Some people love to think we're part of some government censorship conspiracy or something, I guess! The funny part is that we've had numerous companies and government agencies (not western, from what I've seen) request content removals, and unless it violates our standards on copyright claims or national security, we always tell them to go away. We stand up for our users' right to post, but we're still accused of censorship anyway.

I wish there were some sort of automatic function to remove the quoted portions of deleted posts to solve this issue, but obviously this isn't something at our disposal. In theory, it would be great to just go through and remove the quote but leave the post, especially because it truly sucks having to delete a really good post. In those cases, I will go out of my way to copy/paste the post and message the user, but this is unfortunately too tedious for us to do in every case.

If there's a strong mandate from users requesting that Moderators be given the ability to edit posts in lieu of referenced post deletion, then a change would certainly be considered. Our long held belief is that we do not have such a mandate.

VirginFlyer wrote:
Thanks for this clear response atcsundevil! I wonder if part of the issue is people don't realise how to report posts. For me the exclamation mark in a triangle icon seems really obvious, but there may be others for whom it isn't. Certainly I've seen plenty of posts where people have maybe double posted, or changed their mind, and edited it to say "double, please delete", but when you click on the report button it takes you to the report menu, meaning it hasn't previously been reported. Another suggestion for the moderators: it would be good to have a sticky post at the top of the forums for a few months, maybe even permanently, pointing out this feature, and some other useful features, like which icons to click on to take you to the most recently read posts.

V/F

I would love for there to be some kind of a required page to view for new users that has the major rules/code of conduct and a "how to" on working the forum. In the past, I've suggested that we sticky the forum rules and FAQs to the top of every forum page, but I didn't seem to have popular support. I agree that things like that are an issue, especially because in many cases users can still delete their own posts. Instead of that or flagging it for us, they'll write "double, please delete" in hopes that we'll find it. Sometimes I do, but it's hardly a guarantee.

I will make some suggestions and see where that takes us. We have a lot of users on this site, with some being more tech savvy than others, and I'm sure some would appreciate some kind of short FAQ/tutorial.
Forum Moderator
 
dtw2hyd
Topic Author
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:40 am

Everyone knows how SD/Report a post works. But with airline PR teams managing most threads, mechanical nature of this feature, and volunteer editors the system is rigged.

I am sure Vertical programmers can automate the feature to delete every reported post.

When there is an offensive flame bait post about Jennifer Lawrence, and several responses to that post, not deleting flame-bait is just an excuse because no one reported the post. BTW crew was discussing the topic.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6625
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:54 am

atcsundevil wrote:
we do expect automated email notification to return shortly. It's not a standard feature of this site software, and was a relatively unique feature of the old site.


That would be great! The automated notification system on the old site was great because you knew the reason why each post was deleted, and, it was kind of a warning to improve your behavior if things were getting heated. Now posts just go missing, you don't know why, and the first you hear is when you get the personal e-mail from the mods - which might be too late if you've been very naughty! One suggestion; if the automated system comes back I think it would be good to receive the automated message in the PM inbox in here, instead of in our outside e-mail address that is linked to the site.

dtw2hyd wrote:
the system is rigged.


Oh Donald! LOL :D
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90,717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9,306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Crew
Posts: 1841
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Selective censorship on a.net

Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:00 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
Everyone knows how SD/Report a post works. But with airline PR teams managing most threads, mechanical nature of this feature, and volunteer editors the system is rigged.

I am sure Vertical programmers can automate the feature to delete every reported post.

When there is an offensive flame bait post about Jennifer Lawrence, and several responses to that post, not deleting flame-bait is just an excuse because no one reported the post. BTW crew was discussing the topic.

If you take a look at the crew page, a large portion of the crew who volunteer for this site are not moderators. There are only a little more than a dozen moderators, and we've all got lives and jobs. So indeed, no one reporting the post relies on one of us to stumble on something in a timely enough manner to satisfy you. None of us have the ability to sit at computers screening every post before it goes up. The thread you're referring to did have posts reported, and we responded appropriately, it just isn't always able to happen quickly enough.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "airline PR teams". This isn't FlyerTalk. I'm not aware of any representatives of any airline who post on this site. There are a number fans of airlines/manufacturers who are die-hard to a fault, and some of those people annoy us all...but they aren't paid shills peddling a PR agenda, they're exercising their right to an opinion as a user. There is also a healthy percentage of industry professionals -- as my username suggests, I am one of them myself. We're apt to defend the entity we work for, but it by no means indicates we represent the entity.

In reality, the only people who manage these threads are the users who post in them, with occasional intervention from moderators where necessary. The work we do has been shaped by nearly two decades of collaboration among the community to promote and enforce a set of rules most of us want to see exist here. As a longtime user of this site myself, I would not find it acceptable for an airline PR rep to manage our discussions, so it's a good thing they don't.

As a side note, not everyone knows how the Report Post function works, or that they have the ability to edit or delete their own posts within a specified time. We regularly see users requesting moderator attention or for us to delete a duplicate post, but without using the Report feature, it does nothing to alert us.

777Jet wrote:
That would be great! The automated notification system on the old site was great because you knew the reason why each post was deleted, and, it was kind of a warning to improve your behavior if things were getting heated. Now posts just go missing, you don't know why, and the first you hear is when you get the personal e-mail from the mods - which might be too late if you've been very naughty! One suggestion; if the automated system comes back I think it would be good to receive the automated message in the PM inbox in here, instead of in our outside e-mail address that is linked to the site.

We've been requesting for it to return for quite some time. We know it's frustrating for users, and it's very frustrating for us, too. We used to get Cc'ed on all deletions, warnings, and bans, so we knew who was causing trouble and what events were transpiring as soon as they occurred. We now lack that ability to be fully informed ourselves.

I was obviously a user for several years before becoming a moderator (all before the site switch), and I know that if my posts simply disappeared without explanation, I would be very upset. In that regard, I don't blame anyone at all for being frustrated; even if we were completely justified with the deletion, or even it's as innocent as a referenced post deletion, it neither corrects the issue nor lends credibility to our actions. It also strikes an immediately negative tone when they contact us, whereas a notification might have given them some previous understanding to approach the situation more rationally. Or they'll receive a warning or ban because of continued violations, but for them, it may have been the first time they've been made aware of a preexisting issue. Thus, warnings have replaced deletions as a first notification of an offense, and bans have replaced warnings.

I, like you and many others, hope the developers get that function live again very soon. They started working on it about two months ago, but it's been a while since I've heard an update. I'll inquire and hopefully get an answer soon.

As for PM notification, I'm sure it's a possibility. They've been working on email notification, so for now, I think we'll all take what we can get. Hopefully that's something we can gain further down the road, because it would certainly be more convenient for users. You're exactly right that automated notification of some kind is a good thing, and an absolute necessity in my mind. We need users to trust that we're doing right by them, even if we don't always agree; the transparency of notifying users of our actions is key to that trust.
Forum Moderator

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SunJiaXin and 2 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos