Stevieb... I have a question for you

The Q, every so often, embarks on a 'kinder, gentler' approach to these boards... They probably poofed that thread because it was perceived by someone as derogatory toward that particular host... It used to be, years ago, that pretty much anything went on the boards, and then they started gradually turning up the heat with regard to posts that are critical of hosts and vendors... There was one host in particular, now gone for some time, who apparently complained quite a bit about negative posts about her and that seemed to initiate 'Round 1' of the 'clean-up' campaign and then more recently, a group of posters have been lobbying for the Q to deal with negative posts, so it appears this is their response to that... Incidentally, I read that thread and as of the time I read it, didn't see anything unduly harsh posted. It seemed primarily to be relatively reasoned opinions, some a bit snarky but nothing glaring, so unless it went south after I read it, I can only surmise that someone 'reported' a post as being non-compliant with 'community standards' and a web moderator agreed, or the web moderator himself felt it needed to go... In the upper right, there is a link to the infamous 'standards', though the consensus is they're applied somewhat unevenly.

Thanks for the reply. Think mgmt will ay anything to her?? Guess they don't like some of our criticisms

On 12/15/2014 stevieb said:

The Q, every so often, embarks on a 'kinder, gentler' approach to these boards... They probably poofed that thread because it was perceived by someone as derogatory toward that particular host... It used to be, years ago, that pretty much anything went on the boards, and then they started gradually turning up the heat with regard to posts that are critical of hosts and vendors... There was one host in particular, now gone for some time, who apparently complained quite a bit about negative posts about her and that seemed to initiate 'Round 1' of the 'clean-up' campaign and then more recently, a group of posters have been lobbying for the Q to deal with negative posts, so it appears this is their response to that... Incidentally, I read that thread and as of the time I read it, didn't see anything unduly harsh posted. It seemed primarily to be relatively reasoned opinions, some a bit snarky but nothing glaring, so unless it went south after I read it, I can only surmise that someone 'reported' a post as being non-compliant with 'community standards' and a web moderator agreed, or the web moderator himself felt it needed to go... In the upper right, there is a link to the infamous 'standards', though the consensus is they're applied somewhat unevenly.

Well said, stevieb! As usual! (Although I'm not aware of the reference to the past host.)

I saw the thread earlier today, and I didn't see anything especially outrageous either. But I've given up trying to understand how each moderator applies the standards. It's clearly different from one day to the next, or one work shift to the next.

With few exceptions, threads and posts are ephemeral, and when one bites the dust another will eventually show up.

On 12/15/2014 dooBdoo said:

On 12/15/2014 stevieb said:

The Q, every so often, embarks on a 'kinder, gentler' approach to these boards... They probably poofed that thread because it was perceived by someone as derogatory toward that particular host... It used to be, years ago, that pretty much anything went on the boards, and then they started gradually turning up the heat with regard to posts that are critical of hosts and vendors... There was one host in particular, now gone for some time, who apparently complained quite a bit about negative posts about her and that seemed to initiate 'Round 1' of the 'clean-up' campaign and then more recently, a group of posters have been lobbying for the Q to deal with negative posts, so it appears this is their response to that... Incidentally, I read that thread and as of the time I read it, didn't see anything unduly harsh posted. It seemed primarily to be relatively reasoned opinions, some a bit snarky but nothing glaring, so unless it went south after I read it, I can only surmise that someone 'reported' a post as being non-compliant with 'community standards' and a web moderator agreed, or the web moderator himself felt it needed to go... In the upper right, there is a link to the infamous 'standards', though the consensus is they're applied somewhat unevenly.

Well said, stevieb! As usual! (Although I'm not aware of the reference to the past host.)

I saw the thread earlier today, and I didn't see anything especially outrageous either. But I've given up trying to understand how each moderator applies the standards. It's clearly different from one day to the next, or one work shift to the next.

With few exceptions, threads and posts are ephemeral, and when one bites the dust another will eventually show up.

If it's the host I'm thinking of, "negative" doesn't even begin to describe some of the stuff I saw. It was an eye-opener for me as to how adults can behave when anonymous. But as to the dynamics of that (whether she complained or just maybe made some mention of it) and just what any of that had to do with any change in moderation, I have no clue.

It's a fine line they have to draw between allowing criticism and allowing vicious, sometimes scary comments. They'll surely never please everybody no matter what they do.

Agreed, SQ3 is correct, some of the stuff posted years ago about Patti Reilly was pretty coarse... Lisa too tolerated a fair amount of outright abuse over the years, but seems to have had a thicker skin and also enjoyed significant support... Patti had her fans, but the critics far, far out-shouted them.

On 12/15/2014 pnutsmom said:

Thanks for the reply. Think mgmt will ay anything to her?? Guess they don't like some of our criticisms

I tend to doubt it... There've been quite a few shout-outs on the boards for quite a while about some of JG's on-air behavior. Management seems to be encouraging hosts to be as 'in your face' as possible. They seem to assume it enhances sales... Who knows...

Ah. Thanks, suzyQ3 and stevieb, for clearing that up about the host. I wasn't watching QVC or reading here that much at that time, but I've definitely read about the cruel comments.

Suffice it to day that what I saw earlier today on the JG thread was tame by comparison to what used to transpire regularly, and candidly, what we still see some come up with with from time to time...