Bitcoin Forum

Recently I had a thread moved to "Service Discussion" and felt the moderators sting.

While it does actually pertain to MtGox it is more of a subtle commentary about the problems about doing business with bitcoin here it is;-

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=239479.new;topicseen#new

You will actualy have to read it though to get to the point.  John K went through it, pulled out a few people who were determined to "off track" it and left it in place, reasonable moderation I thought.

Later another moderator found it, was the title and them moved it to service discussion.

My proposed rule;-

# You must read a post before you moderate it.

Neil

Most of your blog post is about either your group buy or Mt Gox.

Correct, and my experiences doing business with bitcoin.

If your trying to imply that because it is about two services therefore it is a service your missing out on a lot in life.

I am sorry if I sound a bit snarky, but I feel like your just defending a bad moderation decision by relying on technicalities, if you have read the post (and you have at least skimmed it apparently) its a post about doing business with bitcoin.

You may want to come back to me as say something like "doing business with bitcoin" is a service but I honestly believe that if your going to be that narrow in your definition of things there is no such thing as general bitcoin and perhaps the category should be removed.

Regardless, I am not asking for my thread to be yanked back from the obscurity of being mislabeled as a service, I am asking for the moderation not to be so "knee jerk" and closed minded.

Neil

You are not a service. Your thread (and apparently blog post) is discussing services. Thus it belongs in service discussion.

BTW, what else is there on your blog that it managed to get into our content filter?

I'm still wondering why my post there has disappeared ???.

You got moderated :P .

I refer back to what I said about narrow definitions and the meaning of general.


I have no idea..  Does it give you an reason?  Who is your provider?

Neil

You're getting flagged for "potentially malicious software"

That's a new one I wonder if they are talking about bitcoin :P .  Perhaps they did a deep scan of my MinePeon images and worked out there is a copy of cgminer in there, that get flagged all the time (feel the sarcasm in that one :P).

What software/provider is it?  I would like to make a plea for my innocence.

No idea. It's a generic Bluecoat message. No indication which filter engine this is coming from.

No "commercial provider" per se. I'm on Internet2/X-WiN via the company proxy.

I have read the whole post, but it's primary about doing busiess with bitcoin services, not Bitcoin. Selling a cow for BTC is doing business with Bitcoin, getting your funds frozen because your exchange shut down withdrawals is doing business with Bitcoin services.

Feeling a bit defensive there?  Your example is not even about bitcoins (not even generally).  You're still relying on your narrow definitions to defend something that should not really be defended. 

I will go further this time to see if I convince you to open your definitions a bit, lets say I post a thread titled;-

"Bank of America is opening a service that allows people to exchange bitcoins!!!!!!"

By your definition you would be hitting the "Move Thread" button before you got to read the second exclamation mark.  Don't you think that perhaps that would be a mistake?  Even if you did not immediately move it as you say you would and read the post and it was indeed about a service do you really think you would still move it?

I know that I am going deeply into reductio ad absurdum with that example but you went there first and I am just pointing out that the argument "it has services in it therefore it is a service" is narrow minded.

Neil

I did read your post, looks like service discussion to me. With all the phishers and malicious links posted, I'm not going to click on every random blog post. Did you ever consider, that since there seems to be so much confusion over where it goes, maybe a title rename to more accurately reflect the content of the article would be in order?

Consensus seems to be it belongs there so I'll leave it where it is, but I won't complain if another mod with more time wants to double check it and move it if they feel so inclined.

@john, I deleted no posts.

You are talking about precisely 2 services. It seriously does not belong in Bitcoin Discussion IMO.


That's my point. It's not relevant to Bitcoin (the system), it can be about anything. Group buy of hardware and a financial institution freezing your funds? Totally about bitcoin and not about bitcoin services!


From what I read, there's a noteworthyness criteria.



I think OP is a bit annoyed that the mods are depriving him of juicy advertising revenue..

https://i.imgur.com/Tu6m4Rt.png

Now you have lost all respect from me all together.

Going back and changing your own post to say something different because you think it is better after someone has already replied to your post is darn right dishonest!

I hope you do that personally by the way just in case your misunderstanding my meaning.  You might want to lean a few things about fair play.

Neil

(sorry to anyone else that read that I have had enough of people with zero integrity today(I don't mean to rest of you by the way, just him))

Sorry, your point is meaningless to me at this point.

What? I frequently edit posts after posting a quick response to them. Good on you for responding to them fast enough, I guess. If I see someone has already replied to my post, then I'll make a new response, but you made a new response while I was in the middle of editing.

For example, I just added the last two sentences in an edit.

Thanks for the explanation, and I agree that it should not be moved back, moderators moderating moderators is a bad look.

But it does seem form your explanation that it was done more from a 'gut feeling' than an actual opinion at the time and while I understand that moderation of a forum like this must be a colossal pain in the ass I go back to what I commented at the very beginning.

Posts should be read before moderated.

I understand if you did not have time, I am just saying if you don't have time leave it to another moderator.

Neil

You could have raised a better point with the moderators getting paid per action:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=234009.0

bla bla bla  ...... I often do dishonest stuff ... bla bla bla

Lol, ok, please don't edit any of your posts, mkay?

It's not per action.

This post gave the impression that it is:

If by edit you mean change the content and meaning of a post after people have even a slightest chance to read it (i.e. after I hit post) then no I would never do that, I find that kind of thing reprehensible.

Neil

I split it off and sent it over here, since it was off-topic  :-\

I wouldn't worry about it, I believe it is a localized issue (I have privileges with two Internet2 backbone participates and neither showed an issue).  Also online threat advisory sites (even ones known to give false readings) all gave either a completely clean bill of health or marked the site as well as the external links as "benign" (which is equivalent).  I didn't bother going deeper than the main page but it seems like it might be mishitting a random rule or perhaps some social elements cause issues (heck it could just be word context, I've seen some oddly built filters in my time).

Also I didn't know moderators got paid; probably for the best in most cases (it's very easy to burn yourself out with such a task).