Deleting vs. Editing

Hi there,

What is your moderation philosophy?

When something violates your forum rules, do you:

1) Leave it with a big note about why it is wrong + warn member
2) Edit it out with a big note that it has been removed for violating rules + warn member
3) Delete it + warn member
4) Other

I have seen all styles and I just wonder what other admins do.

 

Depends upon what i am editing/deleting..if it directly affects the members posts then i will pm them them saying why...but i have also been known just to leave a note within the post saying why...like swearing removed or something like that.

 

Same here. I will edit out extreme swearing, and leave a note. If the whole post is no good, and can be deleted without affecting the entire thread, then I will delete it and pm the member with an explanation.

 

It depends on the offense. Spammers get their posts deleted and they are banned. People who post lists with commercial releases on them will get their lists deleted with a moderator note left in place of the list with a note left saying that is not allowed (and a link to our rules). If users are misbehaving, I take out my whip and tell them to cut it out in the thread. (We don't use the infraction system - I really don't like it.) We try not to delete any posts, but if some users are goofing off in our 'serious' forums, then we do take their posts and throw them into this one thread for removed posts that we keep in the lounge.

 

Most times I try to salvage the post, if it's an established member who doesn't usually step out of line. If it's a new account I'm more likely to think they're just a troll and get rid of them.

 

It's just part of running a forum...posts will get edited..everyday and night....I suppose it depends on how clean you want your forum to look...i hate swearing in public sections of our forums because it looks uncouth and not very professional..

 

Depends. If it's a small part of an otherwise good post, I'll just edit out the rule breaking bit and maybe contact the member by PM. If it's a spammy, useless post, I'll usually remove it the first few times, then warn the member by about the third or so time.

 

Well, we have swearing, but many words are censored out. I have seen some boards... well, like, let's say this board had a policy against talking about Miley Cyrus dancing.

So, I am a member and I posted:

zomg, did you guys see Miley dancing with a pole last night?

I have wondered is it better to delete the post with a *removed per rules* and have everyone contact me to find out what I did that the evil moderators removed...

or to just make the post disappear off the face of the earth...

or to publicly edit the post with a
:idiot: You broke the rules!



I think it depends on the post and the member.

:shrug:

 

If I have to edit a post, I do leave a short (hopefully not embarrassing) explanation of why it was edited. Better that people learn from the mistakes of others

 

i dont believe in editing or deleting post..
i think its best to warn a post and for everyone to see that the post was warned/infracted
so they know what is improper behavior

 

Even if the post contained content that was unacceptably inappropriate (i.e. harsh swearing, cursing, flaming, etc)?

 

yes... i think its the best way for other members to view what is unacceptable

 

I edit it - at times close the thread - and post a big warning as to why it was edited, outline what forum rules they broke and advise them and forum members that this type of discussion or whatever will not be tolerated.

 

We usually try to avoid any public discussions about moderation, as the issue can become further inflamed. We edit the post and PM the member about what we feel was not okay.

 

it depends. if the whole post broke the rules i will just delete it, and pm the member saying what rule they broke (or if its a repeated offence, warn or ban them)

if there was some of the post that is ok and can be left in, i will edit out the bit that was wrong and leave a note saying "edited for _________"