Q Talk

[stevieb]

@dooBdoo I share your frustration. I mostly steer clear of the 'opinion' posts over in Community Chat, but really, none of the threads are without the occasional rancor or differences of opinion. I try to walk a fine line because it isn't always clear what the traffic will bear or what will stand and what will be deemed unacceptable... Even since the shift to more moderation, there have been significant changes over time in what used to be allowed but no longer is... and, in some rare instances, what wasn't allowed but now will fly...

While it might not appear in the standards, I do recall reading at the time the new forums were foisted out there that 'poofing' would be a thing of the past and that deletions would be 'explained', or at least I thought I read that. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't think so. 

It does appear moderators are wearing several hats but just as we're continually told that the boards are the Q's and they can do with them as they will, it's also true that the Q determines the moderator's roles. Perhaps they need to consider whether or not the myriad of moderator roles hang together in a way that makes them both effective customer service personnel and board managers... 

Unlike many, I preferred the more loosely moderated boards that permitted actual discussion of a wider range of topics, even when things got a bit contentious, but it is what it is...

[SunValley]

I see another thread was just locked for going off topic. It didn’t, it just was a case of people having differing opinions on whether or not someone would be a good host, which was the point of the post, to solicit opinions. It was pretty tame too. There is no consistency.

[this is my nic]

As a society we have become easily offended and that certainly includes "Community forums".  IMO posting about a hosts on air actions is not a personal attack, or even unkind.  A personal attack would be saying that they are fat, ugly, stupid, that they are bad parents, their families are a mess, you know "personal" comments.   I have never read a post that came close to anything like that.  Stating a host, in one's opinion, is difficult to watch is not unkind or a personal attack.  The hosts are paid by us, the people who buy things from QVC;  we should be allowed to state our opinions about their on air behavior.   

[TY]

Most deleted comments get a reason stated by mods but some don't. I don't take it personally. I expect that it depends on the moderator and how busy they are at a given time. I know how the system works though. The comments are hidden from public view but are likely still visible to a moderator as boards are stored on parallel servers. That's generally how all message boards work nowadays.

[Johnnyeager]

@steviebyou are ever the voice of reason! I do remember back then that moderators said they would clearly explain the reason for an expungement.

And I still loathe being told by self-appointed moderators what I may or may not say......

Fortunately,  a couple of the biggest scolders appear to be gone!

[Junebug54]

@Johnnyeager  I agree about Stevie... I love her posts.  She is definitely a very intelligent person.   

[proudlyfromNJ]

---

@this is my nic wrote:

As a society we have become easily offended and that certainly includes "Community forums".  IMO posting about a hosts on air actions is not a personal attack, or even unkind.  A personal attack would be saying that they are fat, ugly, stupid, that they are bad parents, their families are a mess, you know "personal" comments.   I have never read a post that came close to anything like that.  Stating a host, in one's opinion, is difficult to watch is not unkind or a personal attack.  The hosts are paid by us, the people who buy things from QVC;  we should be allowed to state our opinions about their on air behavior.   

---

@this is my nic.  Call or email Corporate Offices. The Mods have no control over changing standards. State all your concerns about the hosts and how it would help QVC. They are always interested in making more money. If hosts improve so do sales.

[Johnnyeager]

Corporate at Q doesn't care about the behavior of their own hosts; they are too busy mucking things up down at HSN.

[dooBdoo]

---

@stevieb wrote:

@dooBdoo I share your frustration. I mostly steer clear of the 'opinion' posts over in Community Chat, but really, none of the threads are without the occasional rancor or differences of opinion. I try to walk a fine line because it isn't always clear what the traffic will bear or what will stand and what will be deemed unacceptable... Even since the shift to more moderation, there have been significant changes over time in what used to be allowed but no longer is... and, in some rare instances, what wasn't allowed but now will fly...

While it might not appear in the standards, I do recall reading at the time the new forums were foisted out there that 'poofing' would be a thing of the past and that deletions would be 'explained', or at least I thought I read that. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't think so. 

It does appear moderators are wearing several hats but just as we're continually told that the boards are the Q's and they can do with them as they will, it's also true that the Q determines the moderator's roles. Perhaps they need to consider whether or not the myriad of moderator roles hang together in a way that makes them both effective customer service personnel and board managers... 

Unlike many, I preferred the more loosely moderated boards that permitted actual discussion of a wider range of topics, even when things got a bit contentious, but it is what it is...

---

            Hi, @stevieb!😊   We're in agreement about most of this.   I just can't recall all the details of the survey and their response so I'm not sure about that, but I know it was posted and I'll see if I can locate it (I remember posting it a long time ago, so maybe it's still there).

            I like some of the changes, but in general am growing increasingly concerned about the standards application/enforcement that (to me) is hard to understand and, thus, hard with which to comply.   In the past, I helped moderate an international forum and we chose transparency -- we learned that when members have a better understanding of expectations there's less angst and the entire atmosphere is more positive.   The moderators of a forum don't have to be chummy with the members, and they sometimes have to make unpopular calls so a certain level of distance is necessary...   but an informed and educated posting population is essential (and this is a key point I feel QVC has completely failed to recognize).    I do not think this was the moderators' choice, but I do think QVC's powers-that-be have decided to keep us in the dark about forum expectations, decisions and management style and that's a poor customer relations choice in my opinion.

[stevieb]

---

@Johnnyeager wrote:

@steviebyou are ever the voice of reason! I do remember back then that moderators said they would clearly explain the reason for an expungement.

And I still loathe being told by self-appointed moderators what I may or may not say......

Fortunately,  a couple of the biggest scolders appear to be gone!

---

Thank you @Johnnyeager... And yes, I too think the 'unofficial' moderators are often more of a challenge than those actually charged with doing the job!