Disclosing administrative actions on users' profiles (Staff: there are no plans to do this for now) Thread poster: Cilian O'Tuama
|
|---|
Would it be a useful feature if site/profile visitors could see if the owner of a profile is banned (temporarily or permanently) from participating in certain areas, and to have the reasons stated?
That would provide some clarity in many instances.
Censorship is not always wrong. But it's generally best to be open and honest.
And on a site for translators to help each other and to chat, the current amount of censorship is way OTT.
| | | |
Zea_Mays 
Italy
Local time: 18:17
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Would it be a useful feature if site/profile visitors could see if the owner of a profile is banned (temporarily or permanently) from participating in certain areas, and to have the reasons stated?
That would provide some clarity in many instances.
Censorship is not always wrong. But it's generally best to be open and honest.
And on a site for translators to help each other and to chat, the current amount of censorship is way OTT.
I didn't even know there is this kind of censorship on the site. What does this mean? People are blocked from participating in the forums for example? I was only aware of something going on related to one member in particular.
| | | |
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 18:17
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Do you have an example of such a profile?
| | | |
Kay Denney
France
Local time: 18:17
French to English
I can think of just one person, who was quite active here, posting funny stories. I seem to remember there was a problem and he disappeared. Then I saw a new account with a very similar name that popped up and again disappeared.
| | |
|
|
|
| Thank you for the suggestion, Cilian O'Tuama | Jun 24 |
What you describe is what at ProZ.com is actually called “administrative actions”, that is, actions taken on a user’s profile in line with site rules. These administrative actions can be broken down into warnings and blocks, defined case by case, still always in line with site rules. They can also be permanent or temporary.
The system of administrative actions has been in place for years now and just like... See more What you describe is what at ProZ.com is actually called “administrative actions”, that is, actions taken on a user’s profile in line with site rules. These administrative actions can be broken down into warnings and blocks, defined case by case, still always in line with site rules. They can also be permanent or temporary.
The system of administrative actions has been in place for years now and just like site rules, it has been introduced to extend and protect the pleasant, results-oriented atmosphere of the ProZ.com translation workplace.
Administrative actions can be seen by individual users in the “Admin” tab of profile pages. This tab is visible to the profile owner only and for the time being, there are no plans to disclose administrative actions recorded in users’ profiles publicly. However, if anyone thinks an administrative action recorded in their profile may be improper, they are encouraged to contact site staff and request a review of the action.
Thanks!
Lucia ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Zea_Mays wrote:
I didn't even know there is this kind of censorship on the site. What does this mean? People are blocked from participating in the forums for example? I was only aware of something going on related to one member in particular.
Thank you for your irony.
| | | |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Do you have an example of such a profile?
Mine!
I've been banned from posting for a month a couple of times, and my posts have been made subject to moderator approval a couple of times (most recently for more than 12 months).
| | | |
Lucia Leszinsky wrote:
The system of administrative actions has been in place for years now and just like site rules, it has been introduced to extend and protect the pleasant, results-oriented atmosphere of the ProZ.com translation workplace.
Thanks!
Lucia
I remember when I was a moderator 2009-10, only staff, mods and owner can see them
Visible to every member? No I strongly disagree.
Bye Lucia
[Edited at 2024-06-26 16:30 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Cilian O'Tuama
Germany
Local time: 18:17
German to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
It's become quite toxic, in the GER ENG arena at least.
Lucia Leszinsky wrote:
The system of administrative actions has been in place for years now and just like site rules, it has been introduced to extend and protect the pleasant, results-oriented atmosphere of the ProZ.com translation workplace.
And primarily I'd put that down to one particular user, whose name I probably can't mention here, right? Where's the rule?
C
[Edited at 2024-06-26 23:46 GMT]
| | | |
Zea_Mays
Italy
Local time: 18:17
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
Christel Zipfel wrote: Zea_Mays wrote:
I didn't even know there is this kind of censorship on the site. What does this mean? People are blocked from participating in the forums for example? I was only aware of something going on related to one member in particular. Thank you for your irony.
Well, call me naive, and perhaps I should have used "level" instead of "kind", but I didn't know people is blocked for weeks or months from being active on the site.
It is common having rules that allow moderators to take action against site users (a website is actually private property), but they need to follow common sense and should not be used to punish people you find bothersome. Regarding this point, there are unequivocal overreactions on this site.
The last example of disproportionate (and ridiculous) action that I remember was a forum user mentioning "my friend", which resulted in the deletion of the post because it was of "personal nature" or something of that kind.
Being "bothersome" myself, my posts in the Contest forums are subject to vetting and tend to be published with a delay of many days.
So while some people may know why action has been taken against them and accept it, in other cases moderators may need to try to be more neutral and not be tempted by the 'power' over others.
| | | |
Zea_Mays wrote: Christel Zipfel wrote: Zea_Mays wrote:
I didn't even know there is this kind of censorship on the site. What does this mean? People are blocked from participating in the forums for example? I was only aware of something going on related to one member in particular. Thank you for your irony. Well, call me naive, and perhaps I should have used "level" instead of "kind", but I didn't know people is blocked for weeks or months from being active on the site. It is common having rules that allow moderators to take action against site users (a website is actually private property), but they need to follow common sense and should not be used to punish people you find bothersome. Regarding this point, there are unequivocal overreactions on this site. The last example of disproportionate (and ridiculous) action that I remember was a forum user mentioning "my friend", which resulted in the deletion of the post because it was of "personal nature" or something of that kind. Being "bothersome" myself, my posts in the Contest forums are subject to vetting and tend to be published with a delay of many days. So while some people may know why action has been taken against them and accept it, in other cases moderators may need to try to be more neutral and not be tempted by the 'power' over others.
This is clearly written in the list of rules, also believe me nowadays moderators are very tolerant if compared with the ones in force in 2003-2008.
| | | |
Zea_Mays wrote:
my posts in the Contest forums are subject to vetting and tend to be published with a delay of many days.
Mine too. I think all posts in those forums are vetted. I think that's another bug.
It's not just troublemakers and rulebreakers who get vetted. I think it also applies to unverified non-paying users.
My bugbear is that vetted posts are entered into the thread based on the time/date they were originally written rather than when they are approved, and so get lost two pages down the discussion. I have suggested this be changed before but nothing has happened.
| | |
|
|
|
| If posts are published when they are approved... | Jun 27 |
Christopher Schröder wrote:
My bugbear is that vetted posts are entered into the thread based on the time/date they were originally written rather than when they are approved, and so get lost two pages down the discussion. I have suggested this be changed before but nothing has happened.
... they can equally be unrelated to what has been written in the meantime, unless the time and date when they were written is clearly indicated. Or otherwise, if they appear after they have been vetted, the time/date of their approval.
| | | |
Zea_Mays wrote:
I didn't even know there is this kind of censorship on the site. What does this mean? People are blocked from participating in the forums for example? I was only aware of something going on related to one member in particular.
...I am a subscriber only, still paying.
| | | |
Christel Zipfel wrote:
... they can equally be unrelated to what has been written in the meantime, unless the time and date when they were written is clearly indicated. Or otherwise, if they appear after they have been vetted, the time/date of their approval.
Didn’t think of that🙄😂
| | | |
Login to reply/comment 
