Originally posted by SEAJ at 20-6-2012 23:38
especially DArtagnan ...
My opinion is "the meaning is in the outcome you get, not in your intention when writing"
Of course I saw you posting all those comments, and I said nothing ... so I've not paid much attention to whether they work or not ... did you track to see if your ratings work OK?
Did you get replies and responses?
Did the people you rated become more enthusiastic about posting, more informatively?
Or did they just disappear with their tail hanging limply down?
... and what about all the newbies who only saw the opening line on your rating, permanently on display on the thread, and were put off by it?
When I feel the urge to confront someone's actions, I believe a one-size-fits-all approach has limited success.
I try to follow the principles of
- tolerating and encouraging individuality and diversity
- giving people a chance to find their own way to fit in and to fix themselves if they are disruptive
- escalating only when necessary and
- always only escalating gradually and progressively.
What all that means in practice is, when I see someone doing something against the community rules, or doing something I feel is potentially disruptive,
I first wait to see if they do it again, or is it part of a bigger pattern
then, only if they are persistently disruptive, do I approach them
My view is the respectful way to give feedback in an open forum like this is to
1. investigate their history, and take it into account
2. write a PM, outlining something you like about their contribution, what they did that is disruptive, how what they did affects others, and what you want them to do differently in future
3. only if they ignore the feedback and continue, would I use a (publicly visible) rating, +A first, -A if they ignore the feedback
4. using -K if they continue to repeat
5. and escalate to mods, with the full history, if they don't respond to -K
I guess that sounds like a LOT more work than a knee-jerk copy-and-paste of a standard text, doesn't it?
And yes, it IS a LOT more work than a knee-jerk copy-and-paste of a standard text!!
But I also believe taking the time to make an individual response a lot more likely to get a positive outcome than shooting from the hip ...
Oh, and I ALSO believe it is NOT AT ALL necessary to confront all infractions equally - that's a robotic approach, which assumes each person ignores the actions of all other people.
To maintain appropriate discipline while allowing freedom and rewarding self-discipline, it is sufficient to confront the most extreme infractions only "pour encourager les autres". Others will see what took place, and will take the feedback you gave to someone else to heart as if you directed it to them.
Longwinded? Sorry ... you did ask ... and this IS the ICT!!!