Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Walkeia,genou,Anonymous,Fluke,barchid, for Donating to support the site

What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

Raise issues with Admin (Stooz, Clariman, Redsturgeon) e.g. alert to something important on the site or ask Admin about a moderation decision. You will be answered, but there is no response time guarantee.
IanTHughes
Lemon Slice
Posts: 864
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 394 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189893

Postby IanTHughes » December 29th, 2018, 11:44 am

Wizard wrote:Poster A says:
mentioned further up this thread that I was toying with swapping Unilever with Tate & Lyle, well this I did two hours ago. I can't be doing with uncertainty, and although I realise nothing is certain in investing, I can't see this Unilever deal doing much but causing more angst for UK holders of the shares, so no thanks, and goodbye Unilever. I might get some flak here, but peace of mind is important to me. It is a shame, as they were always a good mainstay in my HYP. But as a lower yielding share, and all this kerfuffle, I'm happier out of it. Good luck to those that are hanging in there.

Then later in the same thread Poster B says:
I genuinely never thought I'd sell my Unilever holdings. Today I sold out with the intention of buying back once all of this gets settled. I can't see it flying away from here so it will probably now be subject to a bid!!! But I don't like all of the shenanigans and feel better off out of it.

To me these sound like sales with a view to buying back, or at least potentially buying back, in the future that was then acted on only a month or so later. That feels like trading based on what has been said.

You are, whether deliberately or not, missing out the context for all this discussion about selling out of Unilever PLC (ULVR) which was the mooted suggestion that the company should be fully resident in The Netherlands rather than its current arrangement. It was also suggested by some that such a move would have introduced the possibility of a Dividend Withholding Tax on the dividends.

Now, I do not hold ULVR and, if I had done, I personally would have waited until the move was on for sure, but the possibility of owning a foreign share subject to a withholding tax was the reason for such HYP management, not simple market trading.

Wizard wrote:But there was not a single comment on this by a mod. Why? Well in my humble opinion it is not because of what was written, but who wrote it.

Well you will have to ask a Mod but I suspect that no such comment was made because no post was reported.

Wizard wrote:All I am saying is that a search for an absolute set of rules perfectly applied is fruitless, because the rules have been made and are being applied by humans, so human nature plays a part. Just work out where you sit in all this and you will have a better idea how your posts will be viewed and / or moderated.

There is no such search and, in my opinion at least, nor should there be. There are guidelines which the moderators will use to determine action or inaction when a post is reported to them as being "Off Topic" for the board. The fact that you and some others cannot understand these simple guidelines does not mean that they should be changed in any way, rather it is you and those others who must accept that guidelines are being applied, whether you comprehend them or not.


Ian

absolutezero
Lemon Slice
Posts: 404
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189896

Postby absolutezero » December 29th, 2018, 11:46 am

ReformedCharacter wrote:
absolutezero wrote:Motive is irrelevant. If you are a genuine HYPer then you NEVER sell unless the market does it for you.


I'm not disagreeing with you but I wonder how many of those who post on the HYP Practical board are 'genuine HYPers' in that respect, when I asked a similar question a little while ago, I think only one poster claimed to be one. This isn't a criticism of anyone, but does I think, show that by and large most posters do not actually follow the strict method and therefore it seems odd to assume otherwise.


Agreed. It is rather odd. If you could be bothered you could look at the posting history of those who complain the most about needing a pure board and I'm sure you would find times when they'd sold (sorry tinkered :roll: )

If they were strict HYPers then they'd not need a Practical board as there would be nothing to do! (Beyond buying new shares, checking dividend payments, dealing with the occasional rights issue (but the advice there is to do nothing so no discussion needed) and topping up existing holdings.)
A pure HYP board would have nothing on it but I'm thinking of buying ABC, what do you think? or [i]ABC dividend went XD on the 3rd, 6p paid on the 30th[/i]

Wizard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3228
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
Been thanked: 438 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189906

Postby Wizard » December 29th, 2018, 12:13 pm

IanTHughes wrote:...There are guidelines which the moderators will use to determine action or inaction when a post is reported to them as being "Off Topic" for the board. The fact that you and some others cannot understand these simple guidelines does not mean that they should be changed in any way, rather it is you and those others who must accept that guidelines are being applied, whether you comprehend them or not...

We will have to agree to disagree here. I feel there is scope for interputation of the guidelines (IMHO the fact they are called guidelines makes that clear), you feel an opinion / interpretation different to yours is a failure of understanding. I see no scope for us reaching agreement on this and the effort of trying to do so would probably be a waste of both of our time.

Terry.

IanTHughes
Lemon Slice
Posts: 864
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 394 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189910

Postby IanTHughes » December 29th, 2018, 12:22 pm

Wizard wrote: … you feel an opinion / interpretation different to yours is a failure of understanding.

You are wrong[Deleted] Typical of your use of a Straw Man argument.

Ian
Moderator Message:
Less than polite bit removed. - Chris

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2030
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 1193 times
Been thanked: 462 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189915

Postby csearle » December 29th, 2018, 12:40 pm

IanTHughes wrote:Well you will have to ask a Mod but I suspect that no such comment was made because no post was reported.
Reported posts do get attention; conversely unreported posts might get attention, depending upon if/when a moderator happens to read it. Sometimes, if the moderator in question sees quite an old post that might possibly be worthy of moderation when just posted, he/she might choose to judiciously ignore it as the the benefit of moderation has long since gone.

To address one other issue mentioned on this thread: AFAIK no distinction is made between posters when moderating. I've moderated posters from all groups, including one of the owners IIRC. C.

Arborbridge
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3491
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 675 times
Been thanked: 1127 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189916

Postby Arborbridge » December 29th, 2018, 12:46 pm

absolutezero wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:calling out those HYPers who don't allow themselves to sell, as being the problem.

There is a huge difference between 'not allowing' your self to sell and shutting down discussion of those who do 'allow' themselves.
. Maybe I inadvertently put my finger on a major difference between "tinkering" and "trading" when I used the word "reluctantly". Trading is done purposefully, tinkering is done reluctantly.

So you trade/sell/tinker! (No difference BTW. Just kidding yourself)
Motive is irrelevant. If you are a genuine HYPer then you NEVER sell unless the market does it for you.


I'm not sure where this gets us to, really. There must be very few times when people try to close down a discussion on tinkering on the grounds that it is "not HYP" - most of the posters occasionally talk about top ups or selling to re-balance or whatever, and I don't see a huge attempt to pour cold water on those folk. On the whole, the people who never change their portfolios are quite content to let live, and, I dare say, look on with some amusement at our antics and discussions.

When we come to what you call a "genuine" HYPer - I think we normally use "Pyadic" or "Dorisian" - you must be right, but most of us never claimed to be Pyadic, but normal fallible human beings. Think of it like Pythagoras and his celestially perfect geometry which only exists in the abstract. Down here on earth we have to make do with less perfect editions.

And coming back to where I believe I joined this discussion - I cannot agree that there is no different between trading and managing a HYP. I know there's a difference, most people will be aware of the difference, I've explained the difference: if you cannot recognise it, then there's no point in talking about it further: we will agree to disagree. You in your blinkered view (I would say) and me in my state of kidding myself. That way we can both have a happy new year :)

Dod101
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4057
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 797 times
Been thanked: 1436 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189921

Postby Dod101 » December 29th, 2018, 1:08 pm

I wonder if on this pleasant and philosophical note by Arb, we can wish each other a Happy New Year? It would seem a pity if we cannot enter a new year on a peaceful note (I know that we still have more than 48 hours in which to argue!)

I have resolved not to get involved in this sort of discussion at least pro tem.

Dod

Arborbridge
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3491
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 675 times
Been thanked: 1127 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189923

Postby Arborbridge » December 29th, 2018, 1:12 pm

Wizard wrote:Poster A says:
mentioned further up this thread that I was toying with swapping Unilever with Tate & Lyle, well this I did two hours ago. I can't be doing with uncertainty, and although I realise nothing is certain in investing, I can't see this Unilever deal doing much but causing more angst for UK holders of the shares, so no thanks, and goodbye Unilever. I might get some flak here, but peace of mind is important to me. It is a shame, as they were always a good mainstay in my HYP. But as a lower yielding share, and all this kerfuffle, I'm happier out of it. Good luck to those that are hanging in there.

Then later in the same thread Poster B says:
I genuinely never thought I'd sell my Unilever holdings. Today I sold out with the intention of buying back once all of this gets settled. I can't see it flying away from here so it will probably now be subject to a bid!!! But I don't like all of the shenanigans and feel better off out of it.

To which Poster A replies:
Me neither Poster B, so I feel your pain. I'm not saying I'll never buy back in though, we'll see.

Just over a month later Poster A reported:
I totallly get where you’re coming from. It is nice to have a solid base to a HYP, however RB. Is not a high yielding share. Although I must admit that I brought Unilever back into my HYP the other day! Again!! I’m meddling to much for either my or my HYP’s health. But that’s it, I’m going to be stricter going forward. Digitallook may have done me a favour with no look November.


That feels like trading based on what has been said. But there was not a single comment on this by a mod. Why? Well in my humble opinion it is not because of what was written, but who wrote it.


Terry.


It's an interesting example, and one I could have quoted myself. When someone says he sold with the intention of buying back later, for me that rings alarm bells. I'd say that was a trader's mentality.
But the other poster, in my view, isn't displaying a trader's mentality. He's a HYPer who first sold because he was worried about the situation (no doubt egged on by reading too much chit-chat and for once taking it too seriously) - then realised he had overreacted and wanted to fix the situation. He isn't a natural trader but had a very human moment of being pushed into action he later regretted - a bit like someone who basically follows the path of being a Christian, but had a little lapse - though he is still a Christian.

And BTW, in the earlier post on the issue, he mentions the possibility of buying back later, if the position warrants it. He isn't wanting to trade but only saying - quite rightly - that if ULVR becomes HYPable again he would buy it - well wouldn't we all! (BTW, I had a moment like this when after many years, I decided to give up on Marks and Spencer, then soon afterwards had second thoughts, even to the extent of keeping the capital on hand in case I bought back. A mood I soon got over! But my point is: you might do these things even if you are certainly NOT a trader. Motive and context are important. )

As regards the mods, I have no problem with them not censuring this conversation: there is no basis to do so. The discussion was on topic in the context of a wider news about ULVR and think you are clutching at straws: possibly, if I may politely suggest - to justify feeling agrieved at some of your own problems on the boards when you notice the same remarks haven't been levelled at others. I my view the parallel you draw isn't sustainable, but I can understand why you believe it is.

Arb.

Arborbridge
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3491
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 675 times
Been thanked: 1127 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189925

Postby Arborbridge » December 29th, 2018, 1:13 pm

Dod101 wrote:I wonder if on this pleasant and philosophical note by Arb, we can wish each other a Happy New Year? It would seem a pity if we cannot enter a new year on a peaceful note (I know that we still have more than 48 hours in which to argue!)

I have resolved not to get involved in this sort of discussion at least pro tem.

Dod


I'm not sure whether my most recent post provides your answer - or not, Dod!

But yes, I hope we all have a Happy New Year.

Wizard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3228
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
Been thanked: 438 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189956

Postby Wizard » December 29th, 2018, 4:51 pm

Arborbridge wrote:...As regards the mods, I have no problem with them not censuring this conversation: there is no basis to do so. The discussion was on topic in the context of a wider news about ULVR and think you are clutching at straws: possibly, if I may politely suggest - to justify feeling agrieved at some of your own problems on the boards when you notice the same remarks haven't been levelled at others. I my view the parallel you draw isn't sustainable, but I can understand why you believe it is...

I think you are right to reference context Arb, ultimately any moderation decision will be influenced by context amongst other things. But it does reinforce that, whilst others may argue that the guidelines are totally clear and only a fool would not be able to understand them (I am not suggesting that is your view) I think it highlights why this is not so. But personally I still think saying 'I am selling, but may re-buy' or similar is pushing the boundaries of what may be described as trading - the only thing that you can rely on to determine if such a statement may, or may not, be reasonable is the motive and as others have said this can be 'spun'. I would also, politely, suggest that your view on that may be influenced by the fact I am pretty sure you will recall who Poster A was :) .

On your second point, put so politely ;) , I would not challenge this as I am as prone to behaving in that way as anyone else. But as you say I do believe, as I said above, that amongst the factors that influence moderation the identity of the author not without influence.

Terry.

Arborbridge
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3491
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 675 times
Been thanked: 1127 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#189974

Postby Arborbridge » December 29th, 2018, 6:18 pm

Wizard wrote:
On your second point, put so politely ;) , I would not challenge this as I am as prone to behaving in that way as anyone else.
Terry.


Me too - I think a bout of such thinking grabs most of us from time to time. 8-)

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3043
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 1565 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190098

Postby Gengulphus » December 30th, 2018, 2:55 pm

Wizard wrote:These are genuine quotes from HYP Practical threads, I have removed the names of the posters as I do not want to personalise it in that way. To me these sound like sales with a view to buying back, or at least potentially buying back, in the future that was then acted on only a month or so later. That feels like trading based on what has been said. But there was not a single comment on this by a mod. Why? Well in my humble opinion it is not because of what was written, but who wrote it.

IMHO it's not particularly likely to be the moderator basing their decisions about whether to take moderator action (*) on who wrote some comments rather than what they said.

What seems more likely to me is that it's readers basing their post-reporting actions on various combinations of context, who wrote the comments and their own opinions rather than on what the comments said. That's hard to avoid, particularly as most instances of it are probably not deliberate. For instance, Abraham favours a narrow definition of a board's topic, Bertram favours a wide definition, and they end up in a couple of discussions. In the first, Bertram makes comments that are outside the narrow definition but within the wide definition, and Abraham spots that and reports them as off-topic. In the second, Abraham makes similar comments without spotting that they're off-topic (it's far too easy to be blind to one's own faults...) and Bertram doesn't see anything wrong with them, so doesn't report them. If the moderators agree with the narrower definition, the outcome is that moderator action is taken against Bertram and not against Abraham, for exactly the same type of offense against the board's topic...

Or maybe Abraham doesn't make the comments concerned, but Caroline who largely agrees with him makes them instead. Abraham reads Caroline's post much less carefully than he reads Bertram's, as he's not seeing anything to disagree with in it. By the time he gets to Caroline's off-topic comments, he's skimming and he skims past them without noticing that they're there - whereas he was reading Bertram's post more carefully and did notice his off-topic comments. As a result, Bertram's off-topic comments get moderated and Caroline's don't.

And maybe Abraham doesn't automatically report off-topic comments that he sees, but instead tries to judge whether they're likely enough to cause trouble on the board to make it a good idea to trouble the moderators with them. On past experience, he believes (rightly or wrongly) that Bertram likes stirring up controversy on the board and is likely to provoke a reaction and respond in an inflammatory way when he gets it, whereas Caroline is likely to produce an "Oops, I phrased that badly" response if challenged on it. As a result, he reckons Bertram's comments are worth reporting in the hope of nipping future trouble in the bud, while Caroline's aren't because any future trouble is likely to be minimal.

Not saying that any of those scenarios or the many others I could think of (three is enough!) necessarily reflect well on Abraham. But his actions in each of them are IMHO understandable, and in particular lack the malice that is likely to characterise 'tactical reporting' and alert the moderators to reporters who are trying to 'game' the system...

(*) If the moderator does take action, the severity of the action might well depend on who wrote them: for instance, a pejorative comment from someone who hasn't got a record of making such comments might merely get edited out with a moderator comment saying that it's been deleted. One from someone who's been making such comments in the recent past and has ignored such editing out might get more serious action like a PM from the moderator telling them to stop it. One from someone who has ignored that as well might get a formal warning - I gather from the phpBB documentation and some moderator comments that such a facility exists in the software, though I've never seen it in action. One from someone who has ignored even that warning might result in them being banned... I think that's all as it should be: the moderators should not be obliged to co-operate with someone who is recklessly or maliciously wasting their time!

Gengulphus

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1556
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 332 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190112

Postby moorfield » December 30th, 2018, 5:21 pm

PinkDalek wrote:I took trading to mean buying and selling regularly, perhaps in view of political fears, capital gains or losses etc, with little regards to the HYP Guidance and high yield portfolio per se. Whereas the purist HYP includes LTB&H, as in:

“A long term buy and hold (LTBH) of these shares is envisaged.”

You wrote “I have sold all my retail, utility, housing and REITs shares in my HYP in the last three months and now sit 30% in cash - sales + dividends.”. That doesn’t sound like an HYP (as defined in the Guidance).



Quite agree. I think that "feel" or "smell" or "I don't like the look of today's share news/price fall" knee-jerk type of trading certainly isn't HYP.

However, any action that is measured and reasoned and can stand up to some scrutiny from other posters should be welcomed, because more likely than not readers can learn something useful from that ...

Another thought. Tinkering to me usually suggests a partial sale of a holding and thus can fit with the notion of LTBH (an exaggerated thought experiment: does buying 1000 RDSB shares and selling 1 after a period of time constitute LTBH of RDSB?). The medianic kind is the most obvious example we can draw from HYP Practical.

tjh290633
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3747
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 1273 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190115

Postby tjh290633 » December 30th, 2018, 5:48 pm

moorfield wrote:
PinkDalek wrote:I took trading to mean buying and selling regularly, perhaps in view of political fears, capital gains or losses etc, with little regards to the HYP Guidance and high yield portfolio per se. Whereas the purist HYP includes LTB&H, as in:

“A long term buy and hold (LTBH) of these shares is envisaged.”

You wrote “I have sold all my retail, utility, housing and REITs shares in my HYP in the last three months and now sit 30% in cash - sales + dividends.”. That doesn’t sound like an HYP (as defined in the Guidance).



Quite agree. I think that "feel" or "smell" or "I don't like the look of today's share news/price fall" knee-jerk type of trading certainly isn't HYP.

However, any action that is measured and reasoned and can stand up to some scrutiny from other posters should be welcomed, because more likely than not readers can learn something useful from that ...

Another thought. Tinkering to me usually suggests a partial sale of a holding and thus can fit with the notion of LTBH (an exaggerated thought experiment: does buying 1000 RDSB shares and selling 1 after a period of time constitute LTBH of RDSB?). The medianic kind is the most obvious example we can draw from HYP Practical.

On a few occasions I have sold shares completely to avoid an anticipated outcome. I sold Cadbury Scweppes to avoid getting DR Pepper; likewise I sold Vodafone to avoid getting Verizon; I sold HBoS when it was going to have a rights issue that looked doomed to failure; I sold Prudential when it proposed a massive rights issue to buy (I think) AIC.

I see that Yule Catto replaced CBRY, I bought back VOD after the split, I switched from HBOS into Cattles (not my best decision), and Bought Brit Insurance to replace PRU. In general the changes were income enhancing.

TJH

Lootman
Lemon Half
Posts: 6019
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 933 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190116

Postby Lootman » December 30th, 2018, 5:56 pm

Gengulphus wrote: . . he reckons Bertram's comments are worth reporting in the hope of nipping future trouble in the bud, while Caroline's aren't because any future trouble is likely to be minimal.

I do hope that Lemons do not base a decision on whether to report someone's post on the basis of their personal opinion of that other Lemon.

It may happen of course, but it is not desirable. One should endeavour to be fair, neutral and objective, if one is going to report posts at all (which in my case I rarely do anyway).

Gengulphus wrote: One from someone who has ignored that as well might get a formal warning - I gather from the phpBB documentation and some moderator comments that such a facility exists in the software, though I've never seen it in action.

Unless you had received such a warning yourself then it is unlikely whether you would know whether anyone else has, since such warnings should always be done in private, rather than in an attempt to cultivate shame by admonishing someone in public.

And if phpBB does allow some kind of standardised software-generated warning then I doubt that it would be effective. Such things should be done in a personal way, with an explanation. At least if the Moderator hopes for a positive response to the warning rather than a negative one, which I assume is the case here.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3043
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 1565 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190157

Postby Gengulphus » December 31st, 2018, 3:06 am

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote: . . he reckons Bertram's comments are worth reporting in the hope of nipping future trouble in the bud, while Caroline's aren't because any future trouble is likely to be minimal.

I do hope that Lemons do not base a decision on whether to report someone's post on the basis of their personal opinion of that other Lemon.

Be realistic! Whatever your hopes, the chances that a population of a few thousand users of a website don't include some who will base their reports on their personal opinion of the poster are negligible. Especially as it may not be consciously based on that - if someone has experienced a particular type of post by a particular user causing trouble several times before, they might well just 'see trouble coming' and report when similar comments from another user would provoke a different reaction.

Lootman wrote:It may happen of course, but it is not desirable. ...

Opinions differ about that.

For instance, if someone posts in a seriously off-topic way, my reaction is likely to depend on my experience and impression of them. If I think they're likely to react well to it, I'll probably try to work out where they should have posted and reply to let them know where it is, and I'm only likely to report their post if either I find myself unable to decide or they're unlucky enough to have hit on a known 'flashpoint' for the board. In each case, I'll word my report appropriately - e.g. "I think this user needs some help finding the correct place to post, but I'm afraid I have no idea what it is! Can you help them?".

The same goes if I have no real idea how they're likely to react. But if I think they're likely to react badly by creating a whole lot of fuss about 'self-appointed censors' or such like, and especially if they've a record of doing so, I'll report it without hesitation - and my report is much more likely to be rather unsympathetic...

I consider this a good balance between being helpful and friendly to users who may just be a bit clueless about the site, being friendly to other users who don't really want their discussion disrupted by a massive on-board row, and not creating unnecessary work for the moderators (bearing in mind the fact that not reporting can create work for the moderators, by giving them a bigger mess to clean up if and when things do blow up). I will get it wrong from time to time, of course - but there's a safety net for that: if the moderator who deals with my report doesn't agree with it, they don't take action based on it (apart possibly from a PM to me) and no disruption at all happens to discussions on the board. (Unless of course events turn out to show that I was right to have reported it and the moderator wrong to have rejected the report - but the moderators reap what they've sown in that case!)

You are of course entirely free to hold a different opinion and think that what I do about such matters is not desirable.

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote: One from someone who has ignored that as well might get a formal warning - I gather from the phpBB documentation and some moderator comments that such a facility exists in the software, though I've never seen it in action.

Unless you had received such a warning yourself then it is unlikely whether you would know whether anyone else has, since such warnings should always be done in private, rather than in an attempt to cultivate shame by admonishing someone in public.

And if phpBB does allow some kind of standardised software-generated warning then I doubt that it would be effective. Such things should be done in a personal way, with an explanation. At least if the Moderator hopes for a positive response to the warning rather than a negative one, which I assume is the case here.

The phpBB software definitely does have facilities to support moderator warnings to users in some sort of formal way - anyone who wants to check up on that just needs to download the main phpBB documentation and search it for "warn" (*). The information supplied about them is a bit sparse: there's enough there to make it clear that the software keeps track of issued warnings, allowing moderators to check up on those that are extant and the system to automatically expire them after a specified number of days. But it's rather uninformative about the form that a warning takes - it could be anything from the software merely recording the fact that a moderator says they've issued a warning to a user, with the actual form of the warning totally up to the moderator, to a completely stylised "YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED" message that the user has to acknowledge before they can use any other board facilities. (Personally, I would hope that it does draw itself to the user's attention a bit more forcibly than e.g. the fact that "Private messages" is followed by "[1]" rather than "[0]" does - I definitely don't want to be in the state of having been warned by the moderators but unaware that I am! - but that it contains a decent explanation rather than just a 'tick box' one. Though what one hopes for is not always what one gets...)

(*) They'll also find a number of hits that are warnings to the reader of the documentation about how to use the software rather than information about moderator warnings to users, but the total number of hits is perfectly manageable.

Gengulphus

Lootman
Lemon Half
Posts: 6019
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 933 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190160

Postby Lootman » December 31st, 2018, 3:32 am

Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote: . . he reckons Bertram's comments are worth reporting in the hope of nipping future trouble in the bud, while Caroline's aren't because any future trouble is likely to be minimal.

I do hope that Lemons do not base a decision on whether to report someone's post on the basis of their personal opinion of that other Lemon.

Be realistic! Whatever your hopes, the chances that a population of a few thousand users of a website don't include some who will base their reports on their personal opinion of the poster are negligible.

My point was not so much that it never happens. Lemons can be emotional and subjective, of course. I just don't think that the more experienced folks here should be encouraging that. Rather that it should not happen. One should be equitable about reporting others, and not allow personal biases to influence such behaviours.

Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:It may happen of course, but it is not desirable. ...

Opinions differ about that.

For instance, if someone posts in a seriously off-topic way, my reaction is likely to depend on my experience and impression of them. If I think they're likely to react well to it, I'll probably try to work out where they should have posted and reply to let them know where it is, and I'm only likely to report their post if either I find myself unable to decide or they're unlucky enough to have hit on a known 'flashpoint' for the board. In each case, I'll word my report appropriately - e.g. "I think this user needs some help finding the correct place to post, but I'm afraid I have no idea what it is! Can you help them?".

You are of course entirely free to hold a different opinion and think that what I do about such matters is not desirable.

Respectfully I think that is a tad arrogant. You are no more entitled to a view about whether the contributions of another are relevant than anyone else. You are neither a sponsor nor a moderator of this site, but rather a mere user. Nobody gave you the job of adjudication. It is quite simply not your job. Rather you are merely expressing a view of how you'd prefer this site to be.

I take a more nuanced view. If you make a post that offends me then I may report it if and only if it also technically breaches a site guideline. Otherwise I let it go, because I believe in free speech more than I believe in micro-management. Nobody appointed me as God of these Boards.

Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote: One from someone who has ignored that as well might get a formal warning - I gather from the phpBB documentation and some moderator comments that such a facility exists in the software, though I've never seen it in action.

Unless you had received such a warning yourself then it is unlikely whether you would know whether anyone else has, since such warnings should always be done in private, rather than in an attempt to cultivate shame by admonishing someone in public.

And if phpBB does allow some kind of standardised software-generated warning then I doubt that it would be effective. Such things should be done in a personal way, with an explanation. At least if the Moderator hopes for a positive response to the warning rather than a negative one, which I assume is the case here.

The phpBB software definitely does have facilities to support moderator warnings to users in some sort of formal way - anyone who wants to check up on that just needs to download the main phpBB documentation and search it for "warn" (*). The information supplied about them is a bit sparse: there's enough there to make it clear that the software keeps track of issued warnings, allowing moderators to check up on those that are extant and the system to automatically expire them after a specified number of days. But it's rather uninformative about the form that a warning takes - it could be anything from the software merely recording the fact that a moderator says they've issued a warning to a user, with the actual form of the warning totally up to the moderator, to a completely stylised "YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED" message that the user has to acknowledge before they can use any other board facilities.

I was not making a point about what the software can and cannot do so much as saying that an impersonal, software-produced warning is very likely to be ineffective. Partly because it probably contains no information that allows me to assess if the warning is justified. And partly because it may cause me to lose respect for the site sponsors if that is the only way that distaste is expressed, which is the death knell for any site.

A personal touch is vital if you are going to mess with someone. Even TMF was private and personal about such criticisms, even if they ultimately failed for other reasons.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3043
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 1565 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190165

Postby Gengulphus » December 31st, 2018, 5:30 am

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:Opinions differ about that.
...
You are of course entirely free to hold a different opinion and think that what I do about such matters is not desirable.

Respectfully I think that is a tad arrogant. You are no more entitled to a view about whether the contributions of another are relevant than anyone else. You are neither a sponsor nor a moderator of this site, but rather a mere user. Nobody gave you the job of adjudication. It is quite simply not your job. Rather you are merely expressing a view of how you'd prefer this site to be.

It seems that you don't actually have anything significant to say about the opinions I expressed - which is fine.

But instead you are telling me what views I'm entitled to hold, what my status is on this site, what jobs I have (hint: all jobs on the TLF site are voluntarily undertaken), etc. The words "a tad arrogant" do indeed seem appropriate...

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:The phpBB software definitely does have facilities to support moderator warnings to users in some sort of formal way - anyone who wants to check up on that just needs to download the main phpBB documentation and search it for "warn" (*). The information supplied about them is a bit sparse: there's enough there to make it clear that the software keeps track of issued warnings, allowing moderators to check up on those that are extant and the system to automatically expire them after a specified number of days. But it's rather uninformative about the form that a warning takes - it could be anything from the software merely recording the fact that a moderator says they've issued a warning to a user, with the actual form of the warning totally up to the moderator, to a completely stylised "YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED" message that the user has to acknowledge before they can use any other board facilities.

I was not making a point about what the software can and cannot do so much as saying that an impersonal, software-produced warning is very likely to be ineffective. ...

No problem about that - I was just expanding on what I knew about such warnings from the phpBB documentation, for the benefit of anyone interested (no assumption that they include you). Basically, I know that they exist and the software provides some facilities for tracking them, but not what form they take.

Gengulphus

Lootman
Lemon Half
Posts: 6019
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 933 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190229

Postby Lootman » December 31st, 2018, 1:28 pm

Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:Opinions differ about that.
...
You are of course entirely free to hold a different opinion and think that what I do about such matters is not desirable.

Respectfully I think that is a tad arrogant. You are no more entitled to a view about whether the contributions of another are relevant than anyone else. You are neither a sponsor nor a moderator of this site, but rather a mere user. Nobody gave you the job of adjudication. It is quite simply not your job. Rather you are merely expressing a view of how you'd prefer this site to be.

It seems that you don't actually have anything significant to say about the opinions I expressed - which is fine.

But instead you are telling me what views I'm entitled to hold, what my status is on this site, what jobs I have (hint: all jobs on the TLF site are voluntarily undertaken), etc. The words "a tad arrogant" do indeed seem appropriate...

No, I was doing more than that. I was suggesting that "play the man; not the ball" is not a constructive way to decide which posts to report. We should all strike to be consistent in which posts we report and not allow our personal biases and prejudices to inform that.

Now that said, I am not sure whether you were merely stating that some people do not follow that rule. If that is all you are saying then I'd agree that may be the case, but still deem that an undesirable trait. Whereas if you are saying that you personally base your decisions on WHAT to report based on WHO made the post, then that is "playing the man; not the ball".

I'm not claiming any moral high ground here. Since I rarely if ever report a post I am not tempted to make such "performative" reports. If I were a serial reporter I concede I might be tempted in the same way. We all have personal preferences. But the reality is that few things I read here upset me enough to want to censor others, and I find it very easy to ignore such posts anyway.

But this site is best served if people are as impartial as they can be when reporting things to the authorities. And if a Lemon gets a reputation for picking on some people and not others, it is quite likely that their post reports will be denied more often if their objectivity is brought into question in that way.
.
As for any warnings, I was arguing that they are best done in a personal and informative way, rather than by rote. Rather like how a football referee will usually talk to a player rather than just hand out yellow cards here and there. If Lemons are just summarily and dispassionately castigated then they may lose respect for the site and its ethos.

melonfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2844
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
Has thanked: 1188 times
Been thanked: 649 times

Re: What is tinkering if not trading in a HYP?

#190252

Postby melonfool » December 31st, 2018, 3:13 pm

Lootman wrote:because I believe in free speech more than I believe in micro-management.


Yes, because obviously ONLY those two extremes exist. Obviously.

:roll:

Mel


Return to “Room 101”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests