What a good moderator should do

[David Sucher]

As much as I appreciate the efforts of Paul Farkas, I have a few complaints about his forum. When threads run 4-5 pages, readers who have already read the thread might tend to pass over a new post to that thread. In other words the threads themselves are cumbersome when they become large.

I just posted a new thread about reagarding another existing thread. My bet is Paul will drop this new thread and place the post onto an existing thread which means it probably won't get read because previous readers will decide that they have already read the thread.

Paul, my suggestion is to break up the threads so that at least the more recent posts have a new platform. Running through 54 posts from the last 4 or 5 months to get to a new one is OK but there should be an alternative for easier viewing.

Just some thoughts. Perhaps Paul you may be over-moderating.

 

[Paul Farkas]

The Administrator Responds

Dear David:

I appreciate that after being a member of seniordoc.org for 1 month you have suggestions on how to improve our web site. I assume you have made the effort of investigating all the various features of the site before making your recommendations.

Let’s take them one at a time.

1. You began the topic with the title “ What a Good Moderator Should Do”. OK I give up tell me. Break up topics?

By the way I’m not a Moderator, I'm the Administrator of the entire web site. We have Moderators for each Forum. Susan Resnick moderates the Clinical and Research Forum where you have challenged Seniordocs to discuss your favorite topic. I regret the response has been so poor.

2. You indicate that a response will be lost because our Seniordocs write such long posts.

When a response is made to a post all individuals who participated in the discussion receive an automatic e-mail. The topic goes to the top of the Forum. In the upper left hand corner of the topic there is a note that says, “Go to the first unread post”. Participants do not have to re- read every post.

3. You began a new topic today in the Clinical and Research Forum with the title “Sam is Working in the Dark”. You indicated I would move it. How can I move it when I don’t know what you are talking about or where it belongs?

I assume it is a topic, we were discussing in the past. If you would have added your comment to the bottom of the topic in question, it would have alerted "Base in Prism Sam" that there is a critic who wants to talk. All others involved in the topic would have received notification that the romantic world of Base In Prism is now being discussed again.

Your approach beginning a new forum does not make sense. Please explain your thinking.

We have new members joining us daily. We expect that none have reading or comprehension difficulties. They can read the well thought out lengthy posts on a single topic.

If this requires too much concentration there is another web site that will remain nameless since I am forbidden to mention seniordoc.org on their web site (talk about petty), where the posts are short and you can begin as many topics as you would like. I welcome the comparison. Hint they are sponsored by SECO and love to accept sponsorship.

Seniordoc.org was designed and built by a recognized expert in Medical Internet Technology. He remains our web master. Without his expertise and pro bono effort we would not be able to afford to run this site without corporate or organizational sponsorship.

You are the first to really criticize the mechanics of the web site. Criticism is OK but be certain you understand all the features before doing so.

For now we will maintain our policy of encouraging new ideas, debate and criticism of optometric organizations and companies when necessary. That is why we do not accept sponsorship.

No post will be limited in length. If our readership has difficulty with comprehension, we have plenty of members who can take care of them. Base In Prisms and Cortico-steroids are waiting to cure these unfortunates.

Thank you for your help in attempting to improve seniordoc.org.

Paul

 

[AdminWolf]

Changes/modifications

Hi David!

I'm the one who actually built this site. Thanks for the comments.

One reason that we keep so many old threads visible is because the nature of the messages here; the topics are, for the most part, ageless. (the major problems with optometry appear not to shift too greatly from year to year.)

So, when new people sign on to the site, it's easier for them to look at a few old threads with many messages, rather than a lot of threads with just a few messages.

Keeping the topics this way also makes topic searches easier.

I agree though there is a point where things can get too long. A balance must be reached, but it's hard to know exactly what that balance is, particularly when people use so many different methods to connect to the site.

For example, having to scroll through 5 separate pages seems like a burden to those of us with broadband (because we can download 100 messages in the blink of an eye.) But for those on a super-slow dial-up, pagination is critical, because it breaks up the pages into sizes that are reasonable for slow connections.

Again, it's a balancing act

thanks again for the input
adam

 

[David Sucher]

I stand guilty on all counts. I think I touched a nerve. Sorry.
Thank you for the information. I think Adam is a little closer to what I was complaining about. To Adam I suggest that you post the newest replies first. If someone is interested in the the full thread, then they could go to the end and move up. Seems friendlier that way, don't you think?David

 

[Tom Miller]

Paul and Adam,

One person complaining is not too bad. I would consider that a great success.

Tom

 

[Peter Dodge]

Greetings Colleagues:

I also wonder if most recent posts placed first wouldn't be useful. But, I lack enough practice with seniordoc to do other than just make a note to this effect.

And I am sure I join many others in appreciating how valuable seniordoc has become as a forum for expression of ideas.

In any event, in order to encorage openness, we must all practice tact which happens not to be my forte, prey tell.

Regards,

Peter "everyone's entitled to MY opinion" Dodge

 

[David Sucher]

Peter,
Pray tell (never really understood that expression), how can I get some of your "tact" as you may know I am in desparate need of some.
David

 

[Paul Farkas]

Count Me In

Hi Peter and David:

As someone who never did learn to "play well with others" maybe we should form a club. Open discussion, sometimes heated is essential to the continued success and value of seniordoc.org.

That is exactly why we have the Private Forums. We keep these discussions in our Optometric Family.

David, you will be happy to know I moved the "Magic Bullet" topic up to the top of the Clinical and Research Forum. I placed a lock on the discussion. I agree that 3 pages is enough. Additional discussions will continue on the topic you began, "Sam is Working in the Dark".

All the participants who contributed to the previous topic should have received an e mail so I hope there will be some discussion. I appreciate your interest and hope you get great feed back.

Paul

 

[Peter Dodge]

all practice tact which happens not to be my forte, prey tell.

To David:

I was trying to be clever by writing "Prey tell" after "forte" in the above sentence as a sort of pun with Pred Forte. But apparently I was lost in my own literary world. This literary failing is the result of the B- I think I received in my sophmore year Romantic Poetry class at Swarthmore.

I'll try to connect the dots better next time.

As far as tact is concerned, Everything I Needde to Know I Failed To Learn in Kindergarden.

Regards,

Peter