When will you be explaining the fan bois attacking anyone who questions the puppet master?

 

Interesting discussion.

Having been previously called a "fanboi" (choose your spelling) by another poster because I had the audacity to defend a product and vendor they were defaming... I'll chime in. I believe "vendetta-boi" behavior is at least as objectionable as true fanboi behavior, whatever that may be.

I absolutely believe that the raison d'etre for this forum is sharing of information - some of it good, some of it bad. I've learned TONS in the year I've spent here - good and bad - that have helped me make, overall, good decisions about how to spend my money. I'm glad that those who have had negative experiences, with both products and vendors, share those with the community. I factor those into my purchasing decisions.

That said, there are a number of posters who, perhaps due to their own personal negative experiences with a vendor, or perhaps due to some other motive, seem compelled to join in any discussion about the vendor's products - whether they have any information about the specific product or not - and do their best to shred the reputation of the vendor based on their own negative experience. While that gets REALLY tiresome the 10th time you've read it, I suppose that's defensible in the interest of ensuring that their opinion is heard, just as the positive opinions should be. It's the same as your right to picket in front of the Wal-Mart or wherever.

What is NOT defensible, in my opinion, is extending their remarks to question the rationale, motive, or intelligence of those who have had positive experiences and who are supporters of the particular product or vendor under discussion. I've personally been at the receiving end of folks implying that I'm either in the pocket of the vendor, or just deluding myself because I'm not willing to admit that I bought a product that's no good (even though my personal experience has been VERY good)... and that's just not nice, friendly behavior - no matter how polite the words you choose to use. And should be moderated in some manner. It's the equivalent of yelling "you're stupid to shop there" at everyone walking into the Wal-Mart.... which is not permitted in most physical jurisdictions.

 

This thread grew out of the Problems in the MINI matrix thread here in Site Feedback. I've pulled over a couple of the posts addressing that touch on a couple of aspects of this. I'd like to get other's thoughts on the matter and see if there is something we can do on the site to better serve the community.

Mark

My definitions:

Lover - vendor can do no wrong...ever. Would likely die for the vendor if called for duty.

Hater - vendor hater...no matter what the vendor does (including feeding hungry, starving children) is considered to ever be good enough...and they are beaten for it at any opportunity.

Shill - See the Wikipedia definition of shill. Someone that is cut a deal, paid, bartered product, or otherwise to promote a vendor's product. Especially as coming from a registered member so that the vendor doesn't have to join the site as a vendor.

Anti-shill - Compensated like a shill to bash and disparage another vendor's product or members of the site to make "their" vendor look better. Also, a group that finds entertainment in creating doubt, angst, or anger in the mind of new and veteran members by forcing threads off topic, casting in comments that appear to have some underlying meaning or fact but are not from a position of expertise. In other words stirring things up for the sake of entertainment.

Banterer - someone who makes inane comments or carries on "off topic" (PM appropriate) chit-chat with another member in a technical discussion thread, making others have to read through pages of drivel to find answers.

 

Banterer - someone who makes inane comments or carries on "off topic" (PM appropriate) chit-chat with another member in a technical discussion thread, making others have to read through pages of drivel to find answers.

Sometimes I don't think the following Guideline is enforced enough ...

ON-TOPIC
Posts must be on-topic, relating to discussion of MINI Cooper's or other North American Motoring discussion areas. Posts in the wrong discussion areas will be moved without notice and posts that are not on topic for any North American Motoring discussion area will be deleted without notice.

 

So, does being a lover and a shill counts double, or does the evil grow exponentially?

And a follow up question. You have stated that if one does not intend to buy, or does not own a product than he has no business voicing negative opinion. Does the same go for positive opinions? Case in point: the usual suspects were singing the praises of the M7 coilovers long before any made it into the country.

 

Added to my list. I agree with your assessment of being ON-TOPIC. Due to the amount of traffic on the site its often very difficult to go through all the posts and cull out posts that "appear" to be off-topic from the original intent of the thread creator. That said in just the threads I've been watching over the last couple of days there are a number of people that appear only to contribute (or purposely strive to add) the off-topic banter into threads. If I continue to observe this I'll issue start issuing infractions to them.

Mark

 

Is that a warning to all the popcorn eaters and IBTL posters?

 

No...its to those that appear to purposely try to derail a thread with OT banter. In my conversations with people, face to face and on the phone, conversations wander. What doesn't happen, usually, is that you get so far off track that you don't come back.

Mark

 

Those fall into the 5th category: People who post just to see their post total increase.

 

NO ... we be .... Lurkers

We know better to say nothing in the thread because we have no real input. On the other side, the discussion is interesting. and popcorn merely expresses interest.

 

I think we both know they can be separate problems or be one in the same. The difficulty with assessing these goes back to intent. Is the poster someone with very little experience so that if he/she has a good experience with a vendor that they know no better than to speak highly of that vendor at all turns? Or is it that something has been comped, discounted, or given to them for being a loyal customer...in exchange for the positive testimony?

In my mind there is a big difference between an enthusiastic member/customer and one that apparently can find no wrong with anything a given vendor does. For example I'm an enthusiastic fan of Apple products. That said there are times when some constructive feedback is what they need so I wouldn't be able to say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of the products they produce, how they handle customer service, etc.

Any thoughts on how we might better moderate these kinds of issues on the site? Unfortunately it feels like there is little way to definitively "prove" what the intent of the poster is. When I suspect it it is because of a long-term posting history.


Mark

 

The only feasible thought I get goes back to a stronger moderation team. I do like the idea PGT presented. Should the need arise a mod could contact the potential violator, discuss the intent off line, consult with other mods, etc.

 

I concur - we could definitely use more mods... good ones who know how to apply an even hand, but also aren't afraid to crack the whip when it needs to be cracked. Being a mod is not a popularity contest - it's a very tough job to be fair and impartial!

I believe that we are looking to strengthen our Moderator team soon - which also includes removing current mods that aren't up to the task. I look forward to it, because many hands make light work!

 

So let's get some nominations from the community on members that would would be fair, knowledgeable, and are interested in creating a level playing field for the members of the site.

Mark

 

I would motion for another addition to the list...

Non-hater: May not be a lover of the vendor, but is opposed to the flaming from the haters. The Non-hater may have an issue with the lack of truth in the hater's claims , or just the biased negative comments being made.

 

If she's up to the task, I think MLWagner would make an EXCELLENT moderator. And I'm not just saying that because she's one of my favorite posters. I'm saying that because I can't imagine anyone not thinking she's one of the best posters. She's level-headed and knows how to tactfully deal with those who are not.

I think bamatt would also be good, but I fear she'd pull out too many of those funny emoticons when the situation would call for harsher actions.

 

Before you do that, if you haven't read https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...6&postcount=55 I'll repeat the essence here ... just my opinion.

"They [mod] should be helpful and jump in to explain to people via experience or knowledge of what they know in the area. I'm probably going to forget someone here but just by way of example, I am sorry if I forget somebody, Minihune is an excellent example of a mod for tires. He jumps right in being very helpful, he knows the answers and many people know he knows the answers.

I think any subforum mod should follow his lead. Just my opinion."

 

Wow, I never even heard of those two. Mark, how would the selection process go past the nomination phase?

 

Where you been ??

 

I guess that's just a testament of the size of this forum. I obviously have not frequented all the sections. But I do have a suggestion:

How about those that frequent the individual sub-forums nominate the mods? I also think that it should go without saying that certain members who fall in the previously described categories should automatically be disqualified.

 

In general, a new Mod will only be made a Mod in the forums that they frequent anyway, so this concern more or less takes care of itself.

A Core Moderator (i.e. a Mod on every forum) is generally someone who has already been a Mod for some time and has proven to be good at what they do, not to mention willing/able to help out in other forums as well.

 

Soliciting nominations for Mods from the membership never worked well in the site I was an admin, now back to being a part time behind the scenes only admin. We found that polling the current mods for suggestions and then looking back over their dealing on the site proved to better way to identify potential mods. At that point we'd discuss and pick new mods.

For site of this size a lot of mods are needed, the should be from multiple time zones to try and cover. Each of the subforums ideally would have 2-3 mods with exception for the subforums that have very little traffic. It's been my experience that those that raise their hands and say Pick me to be a mod make the worst ones.

 

Perhaps also adding on the Forums page under each section the name of the Mod(s) too. Chows example of Minihune is a great one. This way you don't have to search for who the mod is if something goes wrong or you need a question answered.

So for Tires, Wheels and Brakes....have it shown "Sponsored By" The Tire Rack. Then also having a "Moderated By".. Minihune

 

At the bottom of every forum, the moderator(s) of that forum is/are already listed... except of course in the case where no specific moderator is "assigned" to that forum.

 

I've never noticed that before, perhaps placement is why. However, thank you for pointing that out.