A strict or lax administrator?

Strict or lax?

Is it better to be strict or lax with the community? What is your experience? What works best for you?

 

That all depends on if you want quality or quantity. This should be decided before going into forum administration.

I've always been strict to be perfectly honest with you. Strict in a sense where flaming and trolling is simply not allowed. Neither are broad and sweeping generalizations towards people. I've stepped away from the censoring though of bad words - I just make it clear in the rules that barracks language will not be allowed.

Now, some are more lax because the more lax you are, the more activity your forum will have. If you're looking for google ad clicks and traffic, flame wars drive in the traffic, controversy drives traffic. At the same time though you chase away good quality members.

So, considering that forums aren't real big money makers to begin with, I still prefer quality over quantity if it's going to be a hobby. The key getting good moderators... that can be a fiasco too though because some will want you to be lax while others like the strict. Then they disagree.

Either way, as a forum administrator you want to send ONE signal. If that signal is strict, make sure your moderators are on board with that and they too send that signal.

If you have an instance or a situation you are asking out being lax or strict with, feel free to ask. There are situations or examples where being strict can also be perceived as being lax, depends on who's looking at it.

 

Absolutely!

Yes, this is true. I usually prefer not to chase quality members away.

Wars and controversy might bring some temporary traffic. But in the long run, loss of some quality members will cause the community to fall apart. If the community falls apart, there will be no one to take part in the discussions. That will eventually result in the loss of traffic and clicks.

 

A bit of both, really.

If things get out of hand I have to step in and become the big bad guy. Otherwise we just have fun.

 

I'll keep the rules enforced but never come down on any members too hard.
I'm also the type of admin that will try to fit in as a member of the forum and get to know people.

So I wouldn't say I'm lax, but more fair.

 

i am quite lax, but if there is a problem i will sort it fairly and im not afraid to ban or warn members who are breaking the rules

 

pretty much the same for me. I make sure that everyone knows I'm around and if they need me they can p.m. me anytime. Nothing I hate more than admins who think they're to good to read their damn pm's. My members know that just becuz they may disagree with me or battle on sumthing with me, that they're not gonna get banned...lol...

All in all, I'd say im pretty lax and it returns 10 fold to me...

 

It depends on the community. If you're running a place with members that can't handle themselves very well, I'd be prone to act a bit more mature and serious. If it's a community with many close friends of mine who I know will follow the rules, I don't need to give off the impression that I'm too "strict".

 

As for me, I used to be a very lax admin. I really tried to befriend everyone and satisfy every member of my forum. And I noticed that all of them were very happy with me.

But then something happened and I realized that my behavior turned against me. People on my forum did not take me seriously because of my kindness. They started breaking the rules and some moderators became really arrogant.

I had to become very strict with them and they were very surprised and shocked by my behavior.

I think Administrator may be lax or strict, depending on the situation. But strict is more appealing to me now.

 

I would say both. My community rules are outlined when you first register and they are also posted around the site. If you spamming or trolling you are out, no questions asked. Personal attacks are not allowed. Those are my rules and it enforce them. When the rules aren't being broken I'm a more lax admin.

 

Re: Strict or lax?

I find both together works best.

You have to have strict rules and follow them or else you can create a trend that can get out of hand.

Though the strict rules need to be ones that your forum as a whole has contributed to.

When I make a new forum I often don't give it a set of rules for the first 6 - 12 months, or perhaps at the most a standard normal set of rules 'no spam, no big advertisements, no swearing in public forums' that sort of thing.

Though once the forum gets going a bit I ask the members; what's annoying you, what can be improved? and together we make a set of rules in a round about way.

Then when you get a member that breaks the rules you don't need to be as strict and enforcing. You can say something in a nice tone along the lines of ......

look, before X date we didn't have this rule in effect but due to Y we made rule Z. And I think you need to just double check the rules as post A has just kind of crossed that line. Perhaps read the rules and hit me back and we'll change that post you made between us so your point can still be made, whilst sticking to the rules. Thanks. Kind but also strict Admin.

I think the rules of a forum really do govern the member type that you get. And if you have non, or have loose rules, you're destined for trolls. If you enforce it quickly, use the persons name if you know it when you do, and sort out the problem before more respond to the offending post, you'll find the whole forum runs a lot smoother.

And less admin headache = more admin time being spent on the important stuff = a better forum = more members and unregistered readers enjoying the content. Can't be bad. :speechless:

 

I read this after posting my version of the same view.

Well done. It's exactly what I was saying, but I waffled in my usual way.

 

Re: Strict or lax?

Strict or lax? How about neither.

I recommend a word called "fair".

 

Re: Strict or lax?

 

Re: Strict or lax?

Agree. Fair is the best!

But different people understand this word differently. What seems fair to you, may not seem fair to the person who is banned or his friends.

 

For me, I'm both. I like to think of myself as approachable.
I am not unreasonable, and I will always listen to both persons side of the story. However should I need to be strict, I will be.

 

It depends on the situation, really. In general though, I enforce the rules fairly and equally. If that requires being strict in a situation, then so be it.

 

Naturally, I'm a very "lax" individual. When it comes to successfully managing a discussion community and doing so fairly, being strict is sometimes necessary to maintain order and promote proactive moderation behavior. As such, I would say that I am both a fair ("lax") and actively aware ("strict") administrator.

I deal with situations on a case-by-base basis.