Feedback for any improvements of the Madeleine McCann board.

[Holly Goodhead]

Although I have only joined in the debate here fairly recently I have been a member of the forum since early 2013 and a moderator for many years.  In the main I've posted on the Jeremy Bamber board and more recently Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando and now here.

All these cases are contentious and those interested enough to join a forum and contribute usually have strong views either way.  However this case more than others seems to generate a lot of animosity.  Why?

[Holly Goodhead]

Personally I would like to remove the 'like' facility.  It seems to me this is used to goad and throw fuel on the fire rather than acknowledging the time and effort someone has put in on a post.  Eg Myster obviously went to a lot of time and trouble over the following post which received only 1 'like' and it wasn't from me as I do not do the 'like' thing:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11027.msg556777#msg556777

And yet posts which are nothing more than spats can receive 3 or 4 likes which just reinforces what moderators are trying to reduce ie spats.

[jassi]

Although I have only joined in the debate here fairly recently I have been a member of the forum since early 2013 and a moderator for many years.  In the main I've posted on the Jeremy Bamber board and more recently Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando and now here.

All these cases are contentious and those interested enough to join a forum and contribute usually have strong views either way.  However this case more than others seems to generate a lot of animosity.  Why?

Study where and why much of the animosity originates and you will have your answer.

[Holly Goodhead]

https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849

You do not know what my personal views were on the image posted up by a moderator but it is not for one moderator to override another moderator.  You took the appropriate action and the matter was dealt with to your satisfaction. 

I do not know how anyone could regard the post I made about Anthro as anything other than complimentary? 

The fact some posters have been posting here a long time is irrelevant.  The fact remains many of the posts made here by long term contributors are of poor quality and in many instances are nothing more than childish spats. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Anthro made reference to the level of animosity on the forum several weeks ago:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10854.msg547028#msg547028

He/she's right and guess what its going to change! 

[Mr Gray]

https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849

You do not know what my personal views were on the image posted up by a moderator but it is not for one moderator to override another moderator.  You took the appropriate action and the matter was dealt with to your satisfaction. 

I do not know how anyone could regard the post I made about Anthro as anything other than complimentary? 

The fact some posters have been posting here a long time is irrelevant.  The fact remains many of the posts made here by long term contributors are of poor quality and in many instances are nothing more than childish spats.

I think you are wrong again.  Some are of poor quality  I think it's unfair to say many.  The point Re my posts shows that in this case it was, a mod who was making a poor quality post , and encouraging spats.  So that has to be part of the problem

[Holly Goodhead]

I think you are wrong again.  Some are of poor quality  I think it's unfair to say many.  The point Re my posts shows that in this case it was, a mod who was making a poor quality post , and encouraging spats.  So that has to be part of the problem

You say I'm wrong again but what are you comparing it with?  I have not seen you on other boards here dedicated to discussing single cases?  The Bamber case is highly contentious and yet when this board was active it only required 'light touch' moderation as posters in the main were respectful to the views of others and in the main stuck to the facts of the case.   

If you wish to discuss the appropriateness of any particular moderator then you will need to discuss this with John.   

[Mr Gray]

You say I'm wrong again but what are you comparing it with?  I have not seen you on other boards here dedicated to discussing single cases?  The Bamber case is highly contentious and yet when this board was active it only required 'light touch' moderation as posters in the main were respectful to the views of others and in the main stuck to the facts of the case.   

If you wish to discuss the appropriateness of any particular moderator then you will need to discuss this with John.

First thing us that when you say many... You are, stating opinion... Not fact.
I find your posts claiming to have solved the case to be if very poor quality...in fact absurd.  That's my opinion

[Holly Goodhead]

First thing us that when you say many... You are, stating opinion... Not fact.
I find your posts claiming to have solved the case to be if very poor quality...in fact absurd.  That's my opinion

Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other. 

You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.

[Mr Gray]

Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other. 

You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.

As it's been some time since you informed OG of your findings it looks like, I am factually correct. 

[Mr Gray]

Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other. 

You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.

It's obvious why this board has so much contention compared to others.  There is so much nadtiness directed at the McCanns both here... On other forums... And elsewhere.
That's, what fuels the cintentuon

[Holly Goodhead]

As it's been some time since you informed OG of your findings it looks like, I am factually correct.

This thread has been set up to discuss:

'Moderation And Feedback For Any Improvement Of The Madeleine McCann Forum'

Your posts re my suspect(s)/theory sent to OG are not really relevant.  A thread was set up to discuss such here:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10983.msg553079#msg553079

Or if you prefer I can start up a new thread 'Holly's claim she has cracked the case'?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Remove goading emoticons, remove likes, remove members, and you will be left with nothing, just a deeply boring series of threads about door mechanisms, fingerprint analysis techniques and creche logs.  Whatever you do decide to do however it needs to be CONSISTENT and applied by ALL moderators, not some, and only when it suits them, otherwise it just gets people really pissed off and is far more goading than any number of likes or emoticons.

[The General]

Remove goading emoticons, remove likes, remove members, and you will be left with nothing, just a deeply boring series of threads about door mechanisms, fingerprint analysis techniques and creche logs.  Whatever you do decide to do however it needs to be CONSISTENT and applied by ALL moderators, not some, and only when it suits them, otherwise it just gets people really pissed off and is far more goading than any number of likes or emoticons.

Word, sister.

[Anthro]

To my knowledge, Holly has never insulted me.