Community Constitution

[the hare]

Perhaps they could start the process by deleting the content belonging to those members who have been asking for their content to be deleted ?

Other than that I can't really see how they could achieve this to anyone's satisfaction. Can you imagine what t2w would look like if they gave the task to me ? Can you imagine what the site would look like if they gave the task to Tim ? Can you imagine what the site woul look like if you gave the task to a vendor ?

Can you imagine what the site would look like if this was done by committee ?

Determining the gems from the mountain of sh1t is too subjective, and anyone capable of doing so (and there's only one person on the team who could) isn't going to waste their time doing that. Furthermore its lulz vandalism, and that's an important consideration.

The real problem however is that as old rubbish was being deleted, it would be replaced by even worse content. the next post no doubt will be from Tim or Barjon informing everyone that its teh hare responsible for creating a great deal of the old rubbish, and constantly adding to the new stuff

I was pressing Tim on this point recently, and even he had to concede that there was a trade off between quality and quantity. As this post perfectly demonstrates, Members can't post quality all of the time, and if the site needs to generate traffic in order to meet its commercial objectives, a lot of that traffic is going to be of a less than perfect quality.

 

[pboyles]

I see we haven't had our daily wave of Chinese spam today. Maybe they have finally given up, I must say they were persistent, they lasted longer than the binary options guys.

 

[the hare]

I see we haven't had our daily wave of Chinese spam today. Maybe they have finally given up, I must say they were persistent, they lasted longer than the binary options guys.

t2w didn't become a marketers paradise overnight, it took a couple of years to promote that message, and if they are serious about reversing that situation (they may or may not be) then it's going to take some time for this message to trickle through

I am curious if t2w establishing any sort of metrics in order to determine if changes such as removing vendor links are having a positive effect on reducing spam, or if these changes are simply resulting in problems in other areas ?

 

[Trader333]

Spam has reduced partly because we have changed the registration process and partly because there has been active banning of known spam IP locations.

 

[barjon]

Perhaps they could start the process by deleting the content belonging to those members who have been asking for their content to be deleted ?

Other than that I can't really see how they could achieve this to anyone's satisfaction. Can you imagine what t2w would look like if they gave the task to me ? Can you imagine what the site would look like if they gave the task to Tim ? Can you imagine what the site woul look like if you gave the task to a vendor ?

Can you imagine what the site would look like if this was done by committee ?

Determining the gems from the mountain of sh1t is too subjective, and anyone capable of doing so (and there's only one person on the team who could) isn't going to waste their time doing that. Furthermore its lulz vandalism, and that's an important consideration.

The real problem however is that as old rubbish was being deleted, it would be replaced by even worse content. the next post no doubt will be from Tim or Barjon informing everyone that its teh hare responsible for creating a great deal of the old rubbish, and constantly adding to the new stuff

I was pressing Tim on this point recently, and even he had to concede that there was a trade off between quality and quantity. As this post perfectly demonstrates, Members can't post quality all of the time, and if the site needs to generate traffic in order to meet its commercial objectives, a lot of that traffic is going to be of a less than perfect quality.

It's not that difficult, Hare, just hugely time consuming. So far as threads are concerned "value" judgements aren't necessary - just what's captured the interest of members. And non-trading lulzy threads that were fun at the time don't hold much interest for anyone trawling through the archives, so they are easy.

So far as tidying up individual threads is concerned, Tim has done a lot of work removing extraneous "off-topic" posts in some of the best threads, but that is even more time consuming and beyond available resources to do much of it.

 

[pboyles]

there has been active banning of known spam IP locations.

Sounds a bit racist, like when they used to ban Irish people from guest houses in England.

 

[pboyles]

I think this is a new spammer, joined today, posting every 5 or 10 minutes.

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/members/444506-paulyj.html

 

[pboyles]

And another one to watch

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/members/444496-sniper450.html

Probably this guy

https://twitter.com/soumailaadamou

 

[neil]

I think this is a new spammer, joined today, posting every 5 or 10 minutes.

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/members/444506-paulyj.html

These guys really mess up the latest post/reading order for me (and many others I suspect).
I realise people need to post frequently within a thread (live trades for example) but couldn't T2W impose a ten minute wait for people waiting to open new threads?

 

[Trader333]

Sounds a bit racist, like when they used to ban Irish people from guest houses in England.

Well I am Irish descent so I understand this better than most but when I said known locations I meant as in the IP addresses of known spam farms

 

[Mr. Charts]

Are you saying IP doesn't stand for Irish People ?

 

[the hare]

It's not that difficult, Hare, just hugely time consuming. So far as threads are concerned "value" judgements aren't necessary - just what's captured the interest of members. And non-trading lulzy threads that were fun at the time don't hold much interest for anyone trawling through the archives, so they are easy.

Another t2w car crash demonstrating that the left hand really doesn't know what the right hands doing. You guys should consider working for the BBC.

The following is a direct quote from your CEO on this very thread, and which totally contradicts your assertion that the task is easy.

"As PB has rightly pointed out, regardless of any other implications it requires someone to actually do it. This someone would need the knowledge to enable them to make the right call about what should stay or go (admittedly some of this will be pretty easy). They will also need to remain unbiased - one mans rubbish is another mans treasure kind of thing.

I don't have that person(s)."


So there we have it. Steve acknowledges that t2w doesn't have anyone with the knowledge to ake the right call (with the exception of the most obvious stuff). You on the other hand believe its not that difficult, simply a case of keeping what's popular (unless its popular lulz, in which case the rule doesn't apply) !

FFS just because something is popular doesn't mean it's quality content, I despair with you people.

I'm brought this up previously, and I will bring it up again. The moderation team, content management team and Steve are pulling in 3 different directions. Non of you have the slightest clue of the direction in which you are supposed to be pulling. Each element has their own contradictory opinions and agendas.

It needs sorting out, and quite honestly, heads are going to have to roll in order to achieve this. This situation where mods and content management representatives are continuously contradicting the CEO surely can't be allowed to continue.

 

[barjon]

Another t2w car crash demonstrating that the left hand really doesn't know what the right hands doing. You guys should consider working for the BBC.

The following is a direct quote from your CEO on this very thread, and which totally contradicts your assertion that the task is easy.

"As PB has rightly pointed out, regardless of any other implications it requires someone to actually do it. This someone would need the knowledge to enable them to make the right call about what should stay or go (admittedly some of this will be pretty easy). They will also need to remain unbiased - one mans rubbish is another mans treasure kind of thing.

I don't have that person(s)."


So there we have it. Steve acknowledges that t2w doesn't have anyone with the knowledge to ake the right call (with the exception of the most obvious stuff). You on the other hand believe its not that difficult, simply a case of keeping what's popular (unless its popular lulz, in which case the rule doesn't apply) !

FFS just because something is popular doesn't mean it's quality content, I despair with you people.

I'm brought this up previously, and I will bring it up again. The moderation team, content management team and Steve are pulling in 3 different directions. Non of you have the slightest clue of the direction in which you are supposed to be pulling. Each element has their own contradictory opinions and agendas.

It needs sorting out, and quite honestly, heads are going to have to roll in order to achieve this. This situation where mods and content management representatives are continuously contradicting the CEO surely can't be allowed to continue.

No conflict, Hare. I've concentrated on the "easy bit" referred to by Steve which, to my mind, would encompass most of it. The more difficult judgement calls in terms of value depends on the extent to which you want to clean up the boards or threads and I share Steve's view of the difficulty in that because it would require someone with knowledge and still be damn nigh impossible because of the "one man's rubbish is another man's treasure" thing that Steve mentioned.

In any event, I'm not supposed to agree absolutely with Steve. My role is always to think of things squarely from the members perspective/interest and Steve has the wider consideration.

 

[Hakuna Matata]

...My role is always to think of things squarely from the members perspective/interest...

roflmao

 

[the hare]

In any event, I'm not supposed to agree absolutely with Steve. My role is always to think of things squarely from the members perspective/interest and Steve has the wider consideration.

My perception is that you are in complete disagreement with Steve. He states very clearly that he lacks a person or persons to undertake the task (and even you agree that this would be impossible due to the subjective nature of the undertaking)

I thought the moderators role was to implement rules and guidelines ? which of course may or may not be in the members interests. Members have a diverse range of interests anyway, and often contradictory. Your job as a moderator is to act in the best interests of t2w, those interests may be aligned with members, but on occasions they are certainly not (mentioning examples would no doubt get me banned, so I won't)

Surely you can see the problems in using the popularity of a thread to assess its merit. In an endeavor where the majority are usually wrong, you'd probably be better off using the inverse of that rule.

If you really do want to clear out some posts, then i am confident that zuppy, Arabian nights, bulldozer and mr Socco would have no objection whatsoever to you removing the posts that they have repeatedly asked to be deleted. It's a start isn't it.

 

[the hare]

roflmao

+1

One of those examples I was talking about yesterday where "the team" revert back to default settings

:clap:

Actually this highlights a problem that I've repeatedly raised with Steve. When Barjon or Tim, or trader33 posts, we have no idea if they are posting representing their role within t2w, or if they are simply posting personal opinions

I think Barjons comment about acting in the interest of members is a personal comment, but there's a danger that its perceived as t2w policy that the moderators are somehow representing the interests of the membership, rather than enforcing site guidelines.

 

[scose-no-doubt]

I don't think it would be hard. You look at what you want from the future and make sure that what you leave behind ties in? There's a reason that Wilmot isn't full of sheite. Precedent has lead all and sundry to believe that they can post whatever they like in this place whether it's trading related newb nonsense or selling robbery systems etc. If you don't cut the anchor that's dragging you down then why would you expect to move off into this new age?

This one man's rubbish things is a cop out too. Look at ftca bible trading for example. Despite whoever swears by it it's absolute bollox and that rule can be applied to prolly 80% of all threads whether trading related or not. Why wwould you leave up information that people think is treasure when you know it to be poison. Especially in an industry where people's money is on the line.

 

[barjon]

+1

.....I think Barjons comment about acting in the interest of members is a personal comment.........

Hare,

No, moderators were purposely set up as volunteers and independent from the T2W "business" and charged with moderating to the guidelines from the perspective of members interest. There's plenty on the boards - including a good few of yours - that T2W might wish were deleted, but the mods view them as legitimate so they are still there.

That situation is a little blurred at the moment with trader333 (staff) doing some modding to help out. It has also become blurred since I often defend T2W. Just to make it clear, that is always a personal view.

 

[barjon]

..................Why would you leave up information that people think is treasure when you know it to be poison............. .

Scose

Quite aside from the difficulty of any judgement call, it is generally the case that such things have been exposed for what they are by comments in the thread. To delete the thing would deny anyone searching the opportunity to see the legitimate criticism, so they would be left none the wiser about the merits or otherwise of the topic. So, would deletion be in members' interest or not?

Just a personal view

 

[the hare]

I don't think it would be hard. You look at what you want from the future and make sure that what you leave behind ties in? There's a reason that Wilmot isn't full of sheite. Precedent has lead all and sundry to believe that they can post whatever they like in this place whether it's trading related newb nonsense or selling robbery systems etc. If you don't cut the anchor that's dragging you down then why would you expect to move off into this new age?

This one man's rubbish things is a cop out too. Look at ftca bible trading for example. Despite whoever swears by it it's absolute bollox and that rule can be applied to prolly 80% of all threads whether trading related or not. Why wwould you leave up information that people think is treasure when you know it to be poison. Especially in an industry where people's money is on the line.

Wilmot is run by someone with a genuine interest in a particular subject area. I may be wrong, butI honestly don't think they where set up with a cynical objective of making a few bucks from advertisers. Furthermore they have a brand to protect, their accreditation scheme wouldn't really hold much weight if they for example published the HoCo article, or promoted Mr Spreadbettings latest ebook.

They have a vision, and a brand that they want to protect and promote, and more importantly, the people behind the venture have credibility in their chosen field, and are indusrty practitioners on a day to day basis.

t2w can't really be wilmot, and its pointless even trying. They are in a totally different business.

I've pointed out repeatedly that I don't believe that t2w even knows what it wants (and Tim tells me they do, and that its all explained on the about us page)

Up until 2 maybe 3 years ago the site drifted along, and the lack of an aggressively managed commercial agenda kept them out of trouble. However it's the perfectly reasonable commercial exploitation has led to the current problems. There's a market for t2w's product, and there always will be, but others saw the same opportunity and did it better (or perhaps more accurately there's a bit missing from the t2w machine that they can't seam to recognize)

It's easy to point to obvious threads, FTCA bible being a great example, but honestly, if you stripped out the lulz, how much different is that thread from say the rumpled ones never lose again thread, or even mr charts make money from trading thread. It's a very fine line.

If I was a cynic, I might argue that promoting poisonous material plays right into the hands of the very people who provide the revenue for businesses such as t2w to thrive.

After all, brokers don't pay people to post do they. Brokers don't provide training materials that are the source of intelligent nonsense regurgitated ad nauseum across dozens of trading sites. This stuff is just a conspiracy theory right ?

Having said all of that, your initial suggestion of defining what they want and then deleting anything that falls short of that standard is a valid and perfectly sensible way forward. Even if they only used Barjons suggestion of keeping the most popular threads it would work for the type of market they've been aiming for over the last few years.