Share
40 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1
clock Created with Sketch.
01/02/15
14:05
Share
Originally posted by simgrund
↑
[ Simgrund, point taken, and I happily stand corrected. ] 2 CentsWorth
Hello 2CW,
Thanks for your sensible re-examination of this forum’s tricky labyrinths.
Let’s then give a trial run to suggestion by seamisty as indicated:
“…… those that report PIF/OCV posts to be moderated should also be made
to post their reasons why on the related PIF thread before the post is moderated ?”
--------------------------------------------
Version 1.
if required to provide reasons “before the post is moderated”
-- I am posting this explanation regarding my intent to REPORT to Moderators
on post by xxxx of xxxx date and xxxx number.
My reasons are xxxxxxxxx, and especially xxXXczxxY.
I hope the moderators will act on this report and it’s a relief for me to expurgate
this issue from my system.
Comment: moderators may not act on the REPORT and the “Honest Poster”
will wear her/his non-event to their detrimental worst.
Version 2
if “should be made to post” (a coersion?) subsequent to REPORTing
and the Target Post is removed
-- These are my reasons for reporting to moderators this post:
xxxxx; Xxxxx (and so on). I am pleased to see it removed from public view.
Comment:
the “Honest Poster” will wear her/his dob-in-event to their detrimental worst.
Version 3
-- Run the original idea past HC Administration to see if they are prepared to deal
with inflated traffic in posts and added burden of catch-up courses in Graces of Patience.
Version 4
-- If it ain't broken...; IOWs leave things as they are.
--------------------------------------------
Any refinements to above versions?
And let's keep awareness of HotCopper fine guidelines on Expletive Reticence?
After all, we are Australians!
Cheers,
-------------------------------------------------------
Worry not Where Worry is not Warranted.
Expand
Hi Simgrund,
I think your offering of Version 1, carries the crux of Seamisty's suggestion, and I would be
quite happy to go with that.
Not only does this method give the original "POSTER" a chance to offer rebuttal,
it also provides them with an opportunity, after having read and digested the complainant's
POST, to remove the Offending Post themselves, thus relieving a Moderator of the need for
any action at all. This may also turn out to be, a Face-Saving move all around.
Do any of the versions you've offered, curry favour with yourself as yet?