status-resolved Why Would NamePros Encourage Conflict Over Objectivity

[Ategy]

Re this thread:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/sh...olls-about-the-company-they-work-for.1168693/

It seems @frank-germany didn't even start this topic, and that it was split off by a moderator from another discussion?
(@Mod Team Echo @Mod Team Bravo @Mod Team Alfa @Mod Team Foxtrot)

Seriously .. why the heck would @NamePros create a new thread with a title seemingly about polls in general at NamePros, but actually specifically place the first post targeting a specific company (Epik in this case), as opposed to what would be VASTLY more appropriate with a fresh post inviting people to discuss the pros and cons of whether there should be restrictions as to who can vote in polls?

Not only did you drop the ball here in doing something extremely unclear, unprofessional and off-topic .. but ultimately you're encouraging off-topic conflict .. I just don't understand why this was done the way it was .. and how anyone didn't see things unfolding exactly the unproductive way it has.

Seriously .. I know @NamePros is looking for more and more and more shortcuts to compensate for the HUGE lack of moderation/administration coverage/participation, but at some point you're going to have to start actually making a minimum of effort and involvement in this community!

 

[Echo Mod Team]

Re this thread:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/sh...olls-about-the-company-they-work-for.1168693/

It seems @frank-germany didn't even start this topic, and that it was split off by a moderator from another discussion?
(@Mod Team Echo @Mod Team Bravo @Mod Team Alfa @Mod Team Foxtrot)

Seriously .. why the heck would @NamePros create a new thread with a title seemingly about polls in general at NamePros, but actually specifically place the first post targeting a specific company (Epik in this case), as opposed to what would be VASTLY more appropriate with a fresh post inviting people to discuss the pros and cons of whether there should be restrictions as to who can vote in polls?

Not only did you drop the ball here in doing something extremely unclear, unprofessional and off-topic .. but ultimately you're encouraging off-topic conflict .. I just don't understand why this was done the way it was .. and how anyone didn't see things unfolding exactly the unproductive way it has.

Seriously .. I know @NamePros is looking for more and more and more shortcuts to compensate for the HUGE lack of moderation/administration coverage/participation, but at some point you're going to have to start actually making a minimum of effort and involvement in this community!

Hello,

namePros policy requires that a single off-topic comment be removed if it can not stand on it's own as a new topic, however, when an off-topic comment can stand on it's own as a new topic (Without violating a rule) and has multiple replies engaging it, it is moved to it's own thread with a new topic to preserve the new conversation and not to disrupt the original topic it was side-tracking.

The particular new thread you referenced is talking about polls and whether or not namePros or any other platform should allow members of a company to vote in a poll.

It's a legitimate question that should not be silenced or censored.

The question/topic can also be beneficial to the namePros community as feedback or a suggestion in the comments and feedback forum, so moderator teams, staff, and management can review it.

The above is the primary reason why it was moved to the forum it's in now.

Keep in mind, the post(s) were moved, not edited. They remain in the same context and order as they were in the previous thread, in which they took the thread off-topic. Whether the quoted first post was there or here, it still existed in the format and context it was originally in.

If the quoted member had picked Dan.com or another company as the example to their question/feedback, would it make any difference?

An example, is all that quote was providing. An example of how the number of employees of one company (Regardless what company it was) may or may not be able to influence a poll and whether they should be allowed to vote in polls on namePros or anywhere else that involved the company they are employed by.

It is in this teams opinion that the above reason(s) for moving said thread to the comments and feedback forum to help better namePros and keep polls fair (if applicable), was the right thing to do. To better the community and preserve more accurate data/votes.

Can you provide a reason as to why namePros should not want to improve or regulate polls to be more fair for all members participating with the least amount of influence/manipulation?

If there's something we may have missed, please let us know so we can re-evaluate how we handle feedback/suggestion topics like this one.

Thanks,

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

Press the up-arrow in the first post of that thread; it takes you to where the conversation was split from.

The alternative is to delete everything you see in that thread. Would you prefer that?

Moving off-topic posts preserves the topic and allows the conversation to take place where it should: in its own thread, with its own topic.

Those are the only two options, delete or move, because anything else takes too much time or is technically infeasible.

Take your pick.

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

Seriously .. why the heck would @NamePros create a new thread with a title seemingly about polls in general at NamePros, but actually specifically place the first post targeting a specific company (Epik in this case)

10+ posts were moved to create that thread. The topic was not solely about Epik; it evolved into a broader topic.

The first post of the new thread is automatically selected based on whichever is the oldest post of the 10+ moved posts.

Moving off-topic posts preserves the topic and allows the conversation to take place where it should: in its own thread, with its own topic.

We've been doing this for years when secondary topics evolve in threads about a different topic; it not new.

Seriously .. I know @NamePros is looking for more and more and more shortcuts to compensate for the HUGE lack of moderation/administration coverage/participation, but at some point you're going to have to start actually making a minimum of effort and involvement in this community

Your statement is baseless, ignorant, and rude.

 

[Ategy]

The particular new thread you referenced is talking about polls and whether or not namePros or any other platform should allow members of a company to vote in a poll.

It's a legitimate question that should not be silenced or censored.

The question/topic can also be beneficial to the namePros community as feedback or a suggestion in the comments and feedback forum, so moderator teams, staff, and management can review it.

.. You really don't understand what I'm saying.

I have ZERO issues with there being a new topic about whether Staff from companies should or should not be allowed to vote.

What I am saying is that the way it was done by the moderation team was in a way that set up the topic to be completely off-topic, unobjective and confrontational.

You set it up with the first post being ...
"epik staff should not be allowed to vote here"

Seriously .. with that as an opening post do you honestly think the discussion was going to remain on topic?

What you should have done was simply start a new topic with an intelligent and constructive new post inviting people to give their opinion on whether staff from companies should or should not be allowed to vote in polls. Heck .. maybe even throw in a bit extra an what is or isn't technically possible so people don't waste too much time asking for things that just technically are not possible.

THAT would have been objective .. not deliberately creating a topic specifically with yet another post that trolls @epik / @Rob Monster (and yes .. it would have been equally bad if it had been ANY other company .. my whole point is that the question has nothing to do with any specific company)

Can you provide a reason as to why namePros should not want improve or regulate polls to be more fair for all members participating with the least amount of influence/manipulation?

To be very clear .. again I am NOT saying that at all and you are twisting the intention of my post! The problem I have is that indeed you should always be looking for ways to improve .. but the way you set up that discussion was only inviting confusion and off-topic conflict.

Furthermore it was done in a way that highlights more troll-like behaviour towards Epik ... which has gone way out of hand over the last few months and one of the reasons why I specifically think there needs to be more admin/mod involvement!

The alternative is to delete everything you see in that thread. Would you prefer that?

In this specific case .. Yes .. 100% that would have been the better solution if you truly wanted an objective and constructive discussion about polls! 200% in fact!

Also .. please do not twist this to mean that I think you should always delete posts instead of moving them (most of the time it's completely fine). But as a former mod/admin myself, I would never ever have set up that situation.

Those are the only two options because anything else takes too much time.

Well .. as one of the countless members who PAY to support this forum .. let me just say that I seriously don't think it's unreasonable to expect NamePros administration to devote a bit of time and energy into ensuring there is an adequate level of moderation.

With the exception of this specific incident (which I really don't get), my issue is not about the quality of moderation .. but simply the quantity of coverage. NamePros is a big forum with lots of members that post 24 hours a day .. is it really too much to ask to get you to get a few more moderators?

We've been doing this for years when secondary topics evolve in threads about a different topic; it not new.

Yes .. and the majority of the time it is completely appropriate. The fact none of you actually understand that for THIS SPECIFIC THREAD things were not done properly I guess just goes to show how involved you all are in this community! Are you really so disconnected that you don't see the problem with actually choosing to start a new topic with such an incredibly biased post as "epik staff should not be allowed to vote here" ???

Your statement is baseless, ignorant, and rude.

Maybe a big part of the problem is that you are all faceless and anonymous .. heck .. if you've actually read some of my other posts in this section you'll know that I've backed up my reasons for thinking there is a moderation shortage at NamePros multiple times .. IT IS NOT BASELESS AT ALL! And that was before you lost @Abdullah Abdullah and @Eric Lyon and whoever else.

Again .. it's not an attack on the current moderation team .. if anything I want whoever owns NamePros to support them better by making sure there is sufficient coverage and enough moderators so that you no longer have to reply to paying customers with statements like

Those are the only two options because anything else takes too much time.

Seriously .. by saying that .. you yourself are effectively saying "we don't care if there's a third and better choice .. we don't have the time or resources to do anything else".

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

You set it up with the first post being ...
"epik staff should not be allowed to vote here"

That was the first post that went off topic in the original thread. We did not choose the first post.

The first post of the new thread is automatically selected based on whichever is the oldest post in the thread.

What you should have done was simply start a new topic with an intelligent and constructive new post inviting people to give their opinion on whether staff from companies should or should not be allowed to vote in polls.

Even if we created a new thread ourselves, and then moved those off-topic posts to it, the same first post would have overridden ours. As explained, it is based on the oldest post.

In this specific case .. Yes .. 100% that would have been the better solution if you truly wanted an objective and constructive discussion about polls! 200% in fact!

In our experience, most members would disagree with you; they get far more upset when their posts are deleted than when they're moved, typically.

Seriously .. by saying that .. you yourself are effectively saying "we don't care if there's a third and better choice .. we don't have the time or resources to do anything else".

No, it means you don't understand what you're suggesting. The only way to accomplish what you've suggested is to require a lot of time from several teams, including our technical team, for a solution that would negligibly improve the existing solution and very rarely be needed. That is not a prudent use of time or resources, but instead of trying to fully understand why we handle it the way we do, you assumed negative reasons and insulted us.

 

[Ategy]

This is an example of what would have been a great way to start the discussion ...

Hello,

Typically, we leave things like this up to the thread creator. When a poll is created, the creator may state whether they want employees of affiliated companies to participate in the poll, along with any other criteria. If technically feasible, we will try to uphold that when it is brought to our attention as being violated, but it'd be impossible to guarantee since there could be affiliated voters that no one knows about. However, the criteria must be stated at the time the poll is created for us to help, not after in an edit or a subsequent post.

There are other complications that could arise, such as someone becoming an employee after they voted, and if that scenario isn't covered in the criteria by the poll's creator, then we would consider it allowed by default.

Another idea is to start a poll in a section where access is limited to certain members, such as in the Insiders Lounge.

We hope that helps.

Then beyond that all you would just need to add an invitation to others to contribute constructive ides.

With this specific case it's really doubly frustrating to me because I'm getting EXTREMELY tired of @frank-germany's constant trolling of anything and everything related to @epik and @Rob Monster. If he was constructive and on-topic with his criticism it would be easier to accept .. but it's just a constant barrage .. often multiple posts in a row. I'm getting rather tired of reporting them .. and I think it was a mistake to allow one his blind anti-Epik posts start a new discussion on something that should be for ALL companies, and not deliberately against Epik (or ANY other specific company).

Even if we created a new thread ourselves, and then moved those off-topic posts to it, the same first post would have overridden ours. As explained, it is based on the oldest post.

Do you really not have pre-generated phantom posts held in reserve specifically for this reason? What I'm talking about is certainly 100% possible. All you need to do is:

1- Find an obsolete post by a moderator (ideally from a topic in a moderator only forum)
2- Delete and replace the content with something like I quoted at the top of this post
3- Split that post from the thread it was in
4- Move it to this section
5- Merge with the posts to be split from the original thread

It's not hard or complicated .. I used to do it all the time in my old forum more than 15 years ago.

Going forward you should each (all moderators) create a few blank "phantom" single post threads in a moderator only forum .. so that in the future it'll be even easier. As all you'll need to do is go one of your "blank phantom" threads, then write the appropriate intro text (again, like your post I quoted at the top of this post), then move it into the appropriate forum, and then split/merge the off-topic posts from the original thread into the "phantom thread".

I mean .. if there's one thing we can agree on is that there are conflicts and that many topics go off-topic and need to be split .. a forum this size should be ready and prepared for what it happens.

 

[Rob Monster]

Well, it might be click bait.

If you want to get in the nuts of bolts of how opinion is directed, it was pretty much the Marxists who invented the practice of "brigading". They have been perfecting it on Twitter and elsewhere for years.

In the case of Epik, it is true that we have hired a lot of people lately. Some of them are domainers. How they choose to engage, or not on NamePros, is entirely their sovereign decision.

Both inside and outside of Epik, I encourage folks to think for themselves. If folks want to agree or disagree with me, publicly or privately, I invite that parliamentary debate.

As for companies participating, I think it would be cool if more companies got their staff to show up at NamePros. I bet the industry would be vastly stronger if company staff actually listened to customers.

As for the occasional trolls, I have it on good authority that the ones who don't bring cogent logic to the discourse are rapidly losing credibility.

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

Do you really not have pre-generated phantom posts held in reserve specifically for this reason?

No, we do not currently have any posts available that we can use for this purpose.

Going forward you should each (all moderators) create a few blank "phantom" single post threads in a moderator only forum

We’ve discussed your suggestion internally and decided that we are not going to change the policy/procedure at this time. There are many reasons that led to that decision, but here are some of them:

• NamePros wants to stay as neutral as possible (and out of the way), so interjecting ourselves into a topic that only exists because members want to discuss it (not us) does not make sense for several reasons, such as:
  • It makes it appear like we are sponsoring, supporting, or interested in the topic when all we’re doing is moving it.
  • It will likely result in more questions directed at us, which is in a topic that generally would not need our input otherwise.
  • It could be interpreted as NamePros inappropriately taking credit for the topic if it becomes popular, acclaimed, or eternally discussed.
• It’s a manipulation of the forum software that could cause unforeseen issues or confusion. For example:
  • Likes of a thread are based on the first post in the thread. If the first post that started the new topic has 50 likes and then we replace the first post with a post from us, then the thread's topic will change from 50 likes to 0 likes, which will make it less visible on the forums in places like Overview.
    
  • Readers may wonder, “Why was this thread created two years ago and now there are 10+ posts today discussing it that appear to have come from another recent thread?"

We believe the current policy is better, but thank you for the suggestion. It was worth considering.

 

[Lord Antares]

I deliberately stayed away from this whole epik drama this whole time but you are wrong. Namepros split that post into a thread because it was the one that brought up the ''issue''. They did nothing wrong. You are looking way too much into this.

Mod team, you're doing fine.

Also, can we just stop with this already? Posts against Epik flooding the forum are now flooding the forum lol.

 

[frank-germany]

Hello,

namePros policy requires that a single off-topic comment be removed if it can not stand on it's own as a new topic, however, when an off-topic comment can stand on it's own as a new topic (Without violating a rule) and has multiple replies engaging it, it is moved to it's own thread with a new topic to preserve the new conversation and not to disrupt the original topic it was side-tracking.

The particular new thread you referenced is talking about polls and whether or not namePros or any other platform should allow members of a company to vote in a poll.

It's a legitimate question that should not be silenced or censored.

The question/topic can also be beneficial to the namePros community as feedback or a suggestion in the comments and feedback forum, so moderator teams, staff, and management can review it.

The above is the primary reason why it was moved to the forum it's in now.

Keep in mind, the post(s) were moved, not edited. They remain in the same context and order as they were in the previous thread, in which they took the thread off-topic. Whether the quoted first post was there or here, it still existed in the format and context it was originally in.

If the quoted member had picked Dan.com or another company as the example to their question/feedback, would it make any difference?

An example, is all that quote was providing. An example of how the number of employees of one company (Regardless what company it was) may or may not be able to influence a poll and whether they should be allowed to vote in polls on namePros or anywhere else that involved the company they are employed by.

It is in this teams opinion that the above reason(s) for moving said thread to the comments and feedback forum to help better namePros and keep polls fair (if applicable), was the right thing to do. To better the community and preserve more accurate data/votes.

Can you provide a reason as to why namePros should not want to improve or regulate polls to be more fair for all members participating with the least amount of influence/manipulation?

If there's something we may have missed, please let us know so we can re-evaluate how we handle feedback/suggestion topics like this one.

Thanks,

thanks for explaining

I support that procedure


sorry if that thread, taken out of context, looks like a post opposing epik
that was actually not the case

it was against members of a company pushing a poll
in order to promote that company

accidentally it happens to be epik