Knowledge Base
Community

Some very nasty people in this 'community'

Started by: orlf
On: 03/02/2019 | 20:43
Replies: 54
Reply

by: kath72
on: 07/02/2019 | 20:33 edited: 07/02/2019 | 21:50

@t_will wrote:

@kath72 wrote:

@t_will
Thanks for the explanation which is probably really helpful for some of our newer members

My question would be when we see someone repeatedly posting prejudiced stuff which is removed but they are allowed to continue posting, how many times before would they need to post discriminatory material before they are deemed a bigot?

I’m sure you have no definitive number but you can see my point I think

There certainly comes a point where we would consider that our efforts to work with them to change their behaviour were not effective. It becomes a question of  whether that member will continue to post unacceptable things, which is a helpful distinction - it allows us to focus on the effect of the behaviour rather than the person.

 

You're right, there's no strike system or definitive number of incidents, as it depends on the context of the posts and the efforts of the member in question. We keep notes on the reports that we receive, the action that we have taken, and how the member has responded, and those notes are used as context to drive our decision making. If there is a recurring pattern of similar behaviour it will be apparent through those notes and we will escalate the action that needs to be taken as necessary. This can be more conversation, removal of Payback for the previous month or for a fixed term, removal of community access entirely, and further action in extreme cases.

 

I’m fairly certain that if told once that a picture is inappropriate it’s not that hard to not post any similar pictures ... in fact, we’re it me, I probably wouldn’t post any more pictures at all unless I were trying to test the limits 

 

 If this behaviour is persistent and doesn't appear to be changing, it's important that you mention it as part of the report that you make about the posts. That information is really helpful to the Educator making the decision about your report, as it gives them a leg up on how they should view the history of that member's behaviour from your perspective.

 

 

I'm very aware that I'm talking about this in the abstract, but that you might have some specific examples in mind. If you have reported them and not been satisfied with the result of the report, please feel free to contact me in PM and I'll make time to review the post and action that was taken on the report.

 

to be honest I’ve kind of given up bothering entering into pm conversations over this sort of thing 

I have a number of PMs left unread by educators where clearly they have decided the conversation is over, and s voupje where they never bothered reading tho opening pm to them  (including one from May 2017 which as the educator involved left a few months ago we can safely assume never will be) 

 

quite frankly you guys guys have your idea of the way you want the forums to be even if some of the content puts off potential customers (yes I do know someone who didn’t activate the sim because they didn’t want to be part of something that allowed some of the content) 

 

ive got better things to give my energy to at the moment! 

 

I would just add that I agree with @geu42 that I think there is significant unfairness in the way some are banned and others are not. The forum is a poorer place without her daughter and the others banned along with her... they were some of the people who really cared about making this place better continually reporting inappropriate material and suggesting ways things could be improved. Perhaps they made life uncomfortable for the educators and gave them work clearing inappropriate stuff but I’ve generally found in my 46 years of life that it is the things which are uncomfortable and hard work that help us grow and improve 

Message 41 of 55
by: natty_noo
on: 08/02/2019 | 11:19

@geu42 wrote:

@t_will wrote:

Without knowing the offending content (and I'm happy to review it should you want me to, as I'm sure would anyone else you trust in the community team), I have to take issue with the idea that we hide the posts and do little else. That paints a picture of us sweeping incidents like these under the rug, which is quite far from the reality.

 

I think there's an important distinction here - that between a post that is discriminatory, and a person who is bigoted. Neither are acceptable, but the former can be taught against, and the latter not. I imagine the frustration here is that in some cases, we consider a post inappropriate, whereas you consider a person unwelcome.

 

When a post is reported and we see that it is unacceptable, it is removed as a matter of course.  We do not want offensive content on the community. What we then do is discuss, in private, why the content was inappropriate, and attempt to educate the member as to why that post was in appropriate. That member may well continue to post, but if they post in a way that is not offensive, discriminatory or otherwise unacceptable, then that is a success, not a failure.

 

We see far greater success with this approach than we do with removing someone from the community entirely, too - what we often see is that if we suspend someone from the community without that discussion being in place and them understanding what is and isn't acceptable, they attempt to continue to return on multiple accounts and attempt to evade detection and suspension in order to continue posting in the same way. Discussion about the issue and engaging with someone is often the best way to ensure that these messages are not posted.

 

There are, of course, circumstances where we don't go through this procedure - for example, in the case where discriminatory practice is clearly intentional, extreme, and irredeemable. There is no place on the community for those people, and that's one of the very few things that will earn someone an immediate ban from our community without discussion.

 

Basically, you can't teach a racist not to be a racist, but you can teach - or at least try to teach - someone that something they did was offensive in a way they didn't understand.

I won't pick apart you post @t_will , i could, but i've said it all before.

 

What i will say is, as far as banning goes, you've allowed someone back three times after suspensions. Their behaviour still hasn't changed though, so why are some afforded that treatment over others, say like my daughter and the other four who were hung out to dry after far less suspensions? 

 

And right now, this very minute, there's someone who is barred from posting anywhere in the community, all his buttons are greyed out. He hasn't had the big red ban page, or an email from the community inbox to give any explanation as to why it's happened, so he's completely confused as to what's going on.

 

Are you saying he can still actually log in @geu42 , but can't post? I didn't think that was possible tbh. If someone is banned, as you know because of your daughter, if they attempt to log in to the forum they get the ban notice, they can only access their account, not their community account.

 

Why allow someone to log in but not post? It just seems a bit odd. @t_will , is this a new thing or another glitch?

Message 42 of 55
by: paul_d_
community giff-staffer

on: 08/02/2019 | 12:06

Hi @natty_noo

 

Thanks for posting. I saw your post and wanted to give you a response asap.

 

We do have the facility to stop a member from posting on the community (very similar to a community suspension) so we can have a discussion, this doesn't mean that the member is suspended. It only means that we would like to have a conversation with the member prior to the member posting again on the community.

 

In these situations / cases the member will ALWAYS receive a PM (which they can still read and reply to),  if the members PM's are turned off we will automatically email the member.  

 

If no email has been received by the member then it may be worthwhile checking their registered email address here: https://www.giffgaff.com/profile/details#email  to make sure that it is up to date.

 

If the member doesn't respond then the temporary block on posting will remain in place or in some cases may be upgraded to a temporary suspension depending on the circumstances.

 

We have had this facility for some time but rarely use it however it is useful as an alternative to escalating straight to a community suspension. No one likes to see that red banner when they attempt to access the community so we try to make things a little more constructive when we have that conversation so that our discussion doesn't focus around the suspension but more on the behaviour that lead to us taking the action that we have. 

 

Hope this helps to make things a little clearer .

 

Paul.

giffgaff Educator

Message 43 of 55
by: natty_noo
on: 08/02/2019 | 12:46
@paul_d_

Thanks for the explanation, but going by @geu42 's post, the person in question has no idea because he hasn't had an email. Hopefully he'll check again.

But tbh, i think it's a rather cruel way to do things, not constructive at all. Either suspend someone or don't, but don't dangle what they can't access in front of them. It's not fair to do that to anyone.
Message 44 of 55
by: geu42
on: 08/02/2019 | 15:58
Thank you for explaining that in detail @paul_d_ , so his suspicions have been confirmed, he's banned, for now anyway. That's truly shocking.

Who's next i wonder, me, for speaking my mind where the unfairness is concerned, and questioning the inconsistencies in educating? I find it very strange that the ones trying to make this place (a bit) better, are the ones that ultimately get the ban.

But the racists and homophobics (after a slap on the wrist) get to stay. That can't be denied either because two of them are still posting.

Which begs the question, why is racism/homophobia tolerated over sarcasm? I know at least five people who'd like to know.
Message 45 of 55
by: stephenpperry
on: 10/02/2019 | 11:43

You’re totally right to raise it, I’ve notived more and more of this too. There needs to be clearer rules about what the “community” means and ecoevts and a much easier way to report users and their comments. I’m glad to see you had some resolution to your experience but it should never have happened in the first place. 

Kudos costs me nothing, so I give it freely .

I started writing a blog on design, technology and the future Take a look and let me know what you think!
Message 46 of 55
by: sandramoakley6
on: 10/02/2019 | 12:55
somone got banned for posting anti isis comments.
time to ask whos actulay in charge
Message 47 of 55
by: bighairytoe
on: 10/02/2019 | 13:30

There is loads of bullying going on and the elite members get off by lording the forums that they know better. It has and always be a problem with these forums when money and greed is involved. The big "I ams" pushing out the "I am nots". Too many groups of people join forces as being so called friends and when someone new joins or not in this collective group says something they don't like they jump on the individual. From past memory I was once told where to go and by using vulgar language by a member only for the member to remain get highly praised by gg because of there greed for payback and given an award... it really does show what giffgaff thinks of it's customers that some get away with things treated like royalty given awards when under it all you can see are money grabbers and only interest is one self

Message 48 of 55
Highlighted
by: k89bpa
on: 10/02/2019 | 18:46

@bighairytoe wrote:

There is loads of bullying going on and the elite members get off by lording the forums that they know better. 

I think this perception is wrong, but it is one which keeps coming up time and time again. 

 

There is no such thing as an "elite member", there are just people who think they/others are "elite members", something which has always been an issue that I've noticed here, (6/7yrs). 

 

The very best thing to do is to ignore that because it's never gonna stop. There will always be some members who are perceived or who perceive themselves as "elite" but it's nonsense. People who engage in that are living in their own little world and it's easier just to let them rather than attempt anything else. 

 

The real problem is the rest of your post, and I totally agree with everything that you said there. This place has always had cliques and not in a good way, we also have always had a fair amount of pretty duplicity, (sweetness and light in public but pretty spitefully motivated behind the scenes behaviour), especially from those cliques, but I'm not sure what giffgaff can do about it to be honest.

 

This place reminds me of a council estate. 

 

That's not a slight against council estates and people living there, I spent my entire childhood growing up on one and enjoying it for the most part, but they do tend to contain a certain type of person and breed a certain type of mentality among those living there, (as a kid I was separate from it but I did see it from the adults), which I've never experienced/witnessed anywhere other than council estates. 

 

Perhaps because I grew up in that environment it doesn't particularly bother me, I find it relatively easy to ignore, especially as I only see it when I am logged in, but for people not used to it, it has gotta look intimidating and unsavory. 

 

Honestly, to those people I'd probably suggest trying different communities for their entertainment/company, because I have absolutely no idea how giffgaff is gonna change those aspects of the community with the business model they have. Payback will continue to attract all kinds of people and so you're always gonna have the "council estate" melting pot kinda environment on here. 

Huawei P20 Pro | 9.0.0 | Data Plan: 80GB

Message 49 of 55
by: orlf
on: 16/02/2019 | 03:00

@t_will wrote:

Without knowing the offending content (and I'm happy to review it should you want me to, as I'm sure would anyone else you trust in the community team), I have to take issue with the idea that we hide the posts and do little else. That paints a picture of us sweeping incidents like these under the rug, which is quite far from the reality.

 

I think there's an important distinction here - that between a post that is discriminatory, and a person who is bigoted. Neither are acceptable, but the former can be taught against, and the latter not. I imagine the frustration here is that in some cases, we consider a post inappropriate, whereas you consider a person unwelcome.

 

Basically, you can't teach a racist not to be a racist, but you can teach - or at least try to teach - someone that something they did was offensive in a way they didn't understand.

 

If I understand correctly from the moderation team, posts are hidden in the sense they are moved to an area that staff can see, but which the public cannot.

 

On your other point, the rules say:

"We will not tolerate racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, any other form of discrimination or any behaviour intended to make people feel actively unwelcome on the forum."

 

From this I read that racism is unacceptable, and it doesn't really matter if the person is a racist or just misguided. The rules state zero tolerance towards racism, not zero tolerance towards racists.

 

I'm Orlf. It's a Norwegian name.
Message 50 of 55