Discussion Moderation
5 followers
0 Likes
Is it possible to moderate discussions within a subgroup?
What I am looking for is that if a member posts a discussion, the group manager would have to approve it before it shows up on the site. The group manager should get an email or some notification that there are pending messages waiting for approval - similar to Yahoo group discussions feature. I realize that group managers can delete discussions - but that is not what I am looking for.
Please let me know if group moderation is possible. I could not find any options for doing this.
Thanks,
SJ
13 Replies
Reply
Subgroup Membership is required to post Replies
Join Groupsite Champions now
Suggested Posts
| Topic | Replies | Likes | Views | Participants | Last Reply |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seeking Article with Overview of Online Communities | 1 | 0 | 1731 | ||
| Instructions for mobile | 1 | 0 | 2113 | ||
| How do I change the File Cabinet 'default folder' when uploading docs to the discussion forum? | 2 | 0 | 1817 |
Suresh,
This is not possible yet. Since it's something we would consider adding, any feedback you might have on how would like to see it implemented would be valuable to us.
Thanks for your response.
This is an important feature to have especially for business related forums. If a number of members respond with a lot of non-value added messages such as "I agree", "Me Too" etc, it becomes hard for other users who are looking for information as they would have to read through several messages before they find what they are looking for. This would also help avoid posting of inappropriate material to the group.
What I would like to see is an email message to the group moderator saying that there are pending messages. When the group moderator logs-in. They should be able to quickly review and approve or decline the messages that are posted. It may be important for some communities to delegate articles to specific experts for their opinion before a decision is made but that could be an advanced functionality. All decisions should probably be logged for review (if necessary).
If you are considering adding this feature, do you have thoughts on when this might be available? It would be good to view an online database of features that are planned and expected dates of release. Users may also be polled as to which feature(s) are more in demand so that you can prioritize appropriately. Well, that is another topic all together.
Suresh, we may be looking at implementing some content moderation and filtering protocols in the future but don't have firm plans or an estimated delivery date at this time. Regarding the ability to view an online database of planned features, what a great suggestion.
While it's unlikely we'd have a database of enhancements that users could view anytime soon, there may be some information we can announce via our public blog. I'll take this back to our team to see if there's any planned enhancement news we can publish this month.
Hi Joe, Diana,
I can not stop appreciated the kind of work you are doing. Wanted to add my thoughts to this discussion.
Moderation of groups is one primary feature that is preventing me from starting a professional group. We run a yahoo group which is moderated. The moderation feature is important for us for three reasons.
In all three cases, it is important to prevent useless content rather than detect and correct it. I feel this is one of the primary reasons why Yahoo has been very successful.
IMPORTANT - Most unmoderated Yahoo Groups become filthy or full of spams too soon and people start unsubscribing. When a group becomes large, it is practically impossible for Manager to keep visiting and removing unwanted content before it gets posted to all biweekly. It is the moderated groups that can grow and realise big social and professional objectives.
I hope that you add moderation sooner than later. If you poll successful community owners on this topic, I am sure there would be many who will be interested in having this.
We are using Collectivex for informal groups (alumni group) nevertheless and find it extremely interesting and interactive.
Thanks for this champions platform to allow us to reach you effectively.
Vikram, thanks for your thoughtful feedback (very helpful). We've looked at "discussion moderation" cautiously as we don't want to do anything that restricts the flow of conversation within groups.
For moderation, we've typically relied on 1) invite the right people, and 2) a well-stated mission and invitation. This has been a successful because people come to Groupsites to make things happen, and members know why they're there. We've seen very little flaming: any offenders are quickly identified and reported by the other group members, and then shut down by the manager and/or us.
That said, we realize we need to revisit this issue. And, this may be especially important to our larger, more public groups.
What do you think of the ability to "flag" content as a means of moderation? Kind of a "3x you're out" deal:
And, set some sort of threshold. If the same piece of content is flagged by 2-3+ members:
The above could potentially be separate from, or in addition to, auto-filtering measures to detect and flag content for review and removal.
Any feedback from our users on this idea? Any other suggestions for simple, effective ways to moderate discussions?
Again, our main concern is that we don't want to add anything that throttles back the conversation. (Time line for when we could implement discussion moderation is not determined).
I now find myself in need of a way to moderate a member without removing them. Their postings are immediate and if it is a reply it is sent by email to those subscribed to the thread.
I'd love to have this feature added to the future considerations list.
I have a question too. Would it be possible in a future to give permission to moderate a subforum or discussion group to one member without upgrading to wholw groupsite manager?
If yes, this will allow managers to get help from several members that will moderate discussions and subjects of their interest.
Also, any news about the filtering issue now?
Thank you so much
Laura - We have made no substantial progress in this area as we continue to wrestle with the trade off between moderation and free-flowing conversations.
One thing that effects our lack of urgency on this topic is the fact that 80% of our Groupsites are private, professional and invite only. This in effect, becomes its own form of moderation in that only the right people are invited for the right reasons.
That being said, we are also interested in helping the other 20% of our client base as well. We just haven't decided on an elegant way to do that yet.
Shaun
Shaun,
As a suggestion, a moderating feature could offered to group owners/managers on an optional (switch On or Off) basis. When the group gets too large or there are too many irrelevant or spammy posts, they could switch the moderation feature On and start filtering all new posts.
Our group has gotten along without it so far as there are several effective (and creative) ways to "work around" this issue by using existing features already in place.
For example:
Report abuse, email notification opt-ins, direct email contact with "problem" posters, editing (I let our members know that management reserves the right to edit posts for relevance and clarity) and the fact that we are a private, by request or invite-only professional group. Also, offending members can be easily enough removed from our site. When other (good) members see what happens to "bad" members, they are happy that things are well managed and under control. It makes them feel "safer" because the management cares enough to keep an eye on things.
So yes, all these things really help minimize the more serious "social" problems or attacks from spying competitors, etc.
But getting back to providing a moderation feature, I think the crux of it is: what is being posted and by whom? Most of our members are perfectly well behaved (civil, cooperative, friendly, professional, etc.), but sometimes they'll make a "blooper" on just one post based on a misunderstanding or having a "strong opinion" on something. In such case it's easy to approach them or simply edit their post and then let them know why it was edited. If this bothers them, we can discuss it or they can always quit and leave the group; otherwise they'll learn from their experience and become a better group member.
On the other hand, people that have an agenda will start showing their "true colors" fairly early in their membership history. They'll suddenly start spamming every topic with the same (copy & pasted) message or invent abusive things to attract huge amounts of unwelcome attention. These folks are easy to spot once they drop their "stink bombs" on the group. In most cases they are quickly shown the door and all their previous posts are quickly deleted! Bye, bye, there gone! No tears or memorial service!
Looking at this closer, I'm not sure if having a modertation tool (device, system or approach) will help me find these kinds of "bad apple" members any quicker. Without a moderation filter, at least the other members can plainly see what the "villans" are up to, so there can be a lot of consenses about removing distruptive members.
Were my "train of thought" is leading me (and perhaps you too) is that maybe only Public groups might find a moderator feature useful, but it won't be as effective or useful for more tightly-knit private groups because everyone is already watching out for each other.
Personally, if I had such feature, I would appreciate having it, but would use it only as a last resort... right about the time I'm ready to hit the REMOVE button for such member anyway!
That's my 2 cents on this. Hope it helps!
Michael
My group is in need of individual moderation. We have a person who has personal issues with one of the other members and we fear that she may retaliate in our public forum.
Just because our group is a private group does not mean it's not a public forum. Our members do not need to be exposed to someone's very possible rants and nastiness.
Right now we've set the group so that no one but mods can post on the discussion. We don't like that that's the only option we have right now (and because this is your only option it will completely shut down full communication within the group... which you've said you don't want). This of course won't stop her from replying to a discussion and running her mouth about private matters.
Please, please add moderation of individual members!
I totally agree with Lesa.
My group also is completely private - but members can and do still "go sour" or ignite flame wars. In a support-type forum, this is all the more likely as some members are just less stable to begin with.
As it stands, if someone turns especially "toxic," all we can do is block the individual entirely, which is extremely harsh to the member and makes us look like Nazis. Definitely not conducive to open communication!
If Yahoo and Google can do it, surely it can't be that difficult to implement?
Are you guys considering a "like" feature for dicussion topics/responses?
Hi Crystal,
We have considered a like feature. We have it listed on a future enhancement ticket. Unfortunately, the priority for this functionality is not very high.
Sincerely,
Celeste Sharper Wooten
Groupsite.com
Director, Client Services/Support