Menu
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Reply to thread
Click here to become an Official Member of BMW Club Malaysia
Download Form
Home
Forums
Site Options
Site Enquiries, Comments and Suggestions
A good initiative by the CMs on ensuring that members are not taken advantage Part II
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wuzzles" data-source="post: 668067" data-attributes="member: 2736"><p>Just my 2 cents and I'll try to keep my personal opinion IF what actually transpired was right or wrong out of it.</p><p></p><p>1) It seem unclear if the <u>action / initiative</u> was implemeted by a moderator or a CM because there is no segregation of duties. Coincidently, both are of the same and make things unclear. <strong>Suggestion:</strong> (like in many other previous post) - CM to provide this clarity. </p><p></p><p>2) <strong>Suggestion: </strong>Example, when you get banned/moderated/repremanded in the forum, this is done by the Moderators. A moderator CAN be from part of the CM (not ideal but I can see the reason why it is this way). But to me, a Moderator moderates. S/he action is based on the set rules created onwer/caretaker/commitee.</p><p></p><p><strong>Suggestion: </strong>When an action is taken within scope of moderatorion, you sign off -Moderator-. People know you are just doing your duty and a reason why ie. Foul language, no commercial posting, spam etc. There is no screaming of dictatorship etc etc. If a person is not happy that a 'moderator' has gone to far, raise this to the commitee and let the commitee decide if indeed this action was too far or not based on what the moderator scope is.</p><p></p><p>3) Urgent and not urgent. <strong>Suggestion:</strong> where things are in the grey and are <u>not</u> time critical, actions are delayed until the moderator(s) can bring this up to the commitee to discuss and provide a approved way forward.</p><p></p><p>When thing <u>are</u> time critical and action needs to be taken ASAP etc., the moderator should <u>never </u>exercise any power beyond or outside his/her moderation scope. </p><p></p><p>However, office bearer who act on behalf of the club can take an action on the forum (as they can in the real world). Sign off as CM and provide a reason why action couldn't wait. You are responsible for your actions within this time period and you'll have to answer to your peers in the commitee. More often, this are 'fire fighting scenario' that needed actions fast. Outcome of discussion should either be an agreement to include into future moderation duties OR an simple explanation / apology that the action taken may not have been really required, now in hindsight.</p><p></p><p>5) Any good initiative should be discussed and agreed by the CMs prior to going Live and communicated.</p><p></p><p>6) Any follow-on action, pls take it offline or use the PM first</p><p></p><p>Life isn't supposed to be sooo serious. Keep thing clear, keep things simple and I'm sure everyone can co-exist and live together.. cheers!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wuzzles, post: 668067, member: 2736"] Just my 2 cents and I'll try to keep my personal opinion IF what actually transpired was right or wrong out of it. 1) It seem unclear if the [U]action / initiative[/U] was implemeted by a moderator or a CM because there is no segregation of duties. Coincidently, both are of the same and make things unclear. [B]Suggestion:[/B] (like in many other previous post) - CM to provide this clarity. 2) [B]Suggestion: [/B]Example, when you get banned/moderated/repremanded in the forum, this is done by the Moderators. A moderator CAN be from part of the CM (not ideal but I can see the reason why it is this way). But to me, a Moderator moderates. S/he action is based on the set rules created onwer/caretaker/commitee. [B]Suggestion: [/B]When an action is taken within scope of moderatorion, you sign off -Moderator-. People know you are just doing your duty and a reason why ie. Foul language, no commercial posting, spam etc. There is no screaming of dictatorship etc etc. If a person is not happy that a 'moderator' has gone to far, raise this to the commitee and let the commitee decide if indeed this action was too far or not based on what the moderator scope is. 3) Urgent and not urgent. [B]Suggestion:[/B] where things are in the grey and are [U]not[/U] time critical, actions are delayed until the moderator(s) can bring this up to the commitee to discuss and provide a approved way forward. When thing [U]are[/U] time critical and action needs to be taken ASAP etc., the moderator should [U]never [/U]exercise any power beyond or outside his/her moderation scope. However, office bearer who act on behalf of the club can take an action on the forum (as they can in the real world). Sign off as CM and provide a reason why action couldn't wait. You are responsible for your actions within this time period and you'll have to answer to your peers in the commitee. More often, this are 'fire fighting scenario' that needed actions fast. Outcome of discussion should either be an agreement to include into future moderation duties OR an simple explanation / apology that the action taken may not have been really required, now in hindsight. 5) Any good initiative should be discussed and agreed by the CMs prior to going Live and communicated. 6) Any follow-on action, pls take it offline or use the PM first Life isn't supposed to be sooo serious. Keep thing clear, keep things simple and I'm sure everyone can co-exist and live together.. cheers! [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Site Options
Site Enquiries, Comments and Suggestions
A good initiative by the CMs on ensuring that members are not taken advantage Part II
Top
Bottom
