Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

This topic was created by Bradley Hardleigh-Hadderchance .

  1. Bradley Hardleigh-Hadderchance

    Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

    You're putting me off my stroke.

    Was it something I said? Maybe it would be better to just ban me?

    I thought El Reg had gone all 24 hour weekender?

    Am I down on some kind of dissident list?

    I really take a lot of time to post the shit I do here. I double check my sources, so you don't have to.

    I might make mistakes, but what the hell is going on with you there?

    I thought that posts would be automatically approved by known members and only trouble makers were vetted. I feel like I'm being worse than vetted.

    Seriously, fucking sort it out.

    Are you short staffed? Is it personal? I see others comments going through with no problem.

    I would have sent you a personal mail, but you don't have one. I took half an hour out of my life to find it but couldn't. You will now smugly point me in the right direction. I hope.

    1. Solmyr ibn Wali Barad

      Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

      Are you absolutely sure that all your comments are delayed?

      Because pre-moderation doesn't necessarily mean you're on the naughty step. It may have been enabled for some specific articles only, by the author's will.

    2. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

      "Am I down on some kind of dissident list?"

      No, you were posting on one of Andrew's articles, so you went into a queue. Nothing personal; all of Andrew's stories require pre-mod to keep away the anti-Andrew brigade.

      That's the size of it.

      C.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

        No, you were posting on one of Andrew's articles, so you went into a queue. Nothing personal; all of Andrew's stories require pre-mod to keep away the anti-Andrew brigade.

        I just happened across this and almost sprayed my coffee over the keyboard! IME comments on Andrew's articles don't have to be "anti-Andrew" to never see the light of day, they just have to disagree (however politely) with what he's written. If you can craft a combined anti-copyright and pro-Google comment then your contribution is destined for the deeper regions of Hades. :-)

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

        "all of Andrew's stories require pre-mod to keep away the anti-Andrew brigade."

        That should tell you something right there.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

          Let's clarify this. Anti-Andrew viewpoint- whatever. Ad homs, often vicious - they're not getting through.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. Dan 55 Silver badge

              Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

              An AO article has two waves of moderation...

              1. An anti-offensive moderation that all moded articles have.

              2. An anti-Andrew moderation mopping up behind a few hours later by person(s) unknown.

              Of course, it's his article so it's his rules. But it does nothing to improve the articles.

      3. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Marco Fontani

      Re: Why does it take 8 hours for my posts to be approved?

      Bottom of the page, "send us news tips" has tons of contact information, and also links to the FAQ about Who, what, why, when, where to contact.

  2. Lionel Baden

    you are absolutley correct but, he did state that other comments went through fine though, as far as i understood certain words will also autoflag your comment for moderation so using a swear word could cause pause for moderation even if your not on the list.

    I would like to know whether i was being moderated as well. I try to polite, but I have had the odd angry post.

    **hijack (usage will probably cause moderation pause my apologies)

    I would also like to receive a response from thereg on my other posts in the forums, but I just got ignored :/

    feel like no point in posting here.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      As far as I understand it - El Reg don't do keyword scanning. Certainly I occasionally deploy a swearword or two. It's currently 16:42 and I'm hitting post - so let's fucking test the bastards...

      Most Andrew Orlowski articles go on pre-mod. Which means all comments get put in the queue until they get round to it. That's going to be a long time at weekends. When they're mostly in the pub. Even if they've got a Weekend Register, they're probably still publishing the articles from the pub...

      They're also likely to put anything legal on pre-mod. If they bother to open comments at all.

      However, having been a moderator on the forums of an online game with a million users, I'd like to make a couple of observations. For context El Reg I think has 5-10m readers. We had about 150 volunteer mods to keep the forums in order. Admittedly that was because of the game being global with 30-40 languages. But moderation is expensive and time-consuming. The Register have said they don't have mods, but their subbies and whichever hacks have a minute spare go on the forums to try to keep order. That means the pre-moderation queues will also be longer.

      Secondly that also means you're not likely to get an explanation as to why your post was nuked. They'll just go on gut feeling as to allow/kill, and move on to the next thing.

      Thirdly this is a pretty damned lenient forum. You can get away with swearing and quite a bit of off-topicness. As well as general silliness and a bit of good-natured abuse.

      They've got their house-rules at the top of the comment box. Have a read of them. I don't know what your offending post said, but if you were having a good old go at the hack what wrote an article, what did you expect? It's their website, and their forums. Try arguing the points, and not the man. Start calling authors shils or idiots, and you're liable to get modded. If it's not that, were you losing it a bit with other commentards? What do you mean by "the odd angry post"?

      My advice from my moderating days was, go away and read another piece after you've written that angry post. Then come back after a minute or two and re-read it before hitting submit. Or edit/delete if it's OTT. You have to work at it to get modded on here.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        I'd forgotten. No timestamps. Anyway that post appeared as soon as I hit submit. So no sweary-filters.

      2. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

        Re: I ain't Spartacus

        "El Reg don't do keyword scanning"

        Correct. Pretty much all your post is spot on.

        "The Register have said they don't have mods, but their subbies and whichever hacks have a minute spare go on the forums to try to keep order."

        Again, true.

        "Thirdly this is a pretty damned lenient forum."

        I'm glad you think so :) Pretty much anything goes as long as it's not going to get us in trouble or scare off others from taking part. (This is my summary of the rules; not a replacement of them.)

        C.

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
          Happy

          Re: I ain't Spartacus

          diodesign,

          I like the forums here and think they're nicely balanced between allowing free expression without descending into Lord of the Flies territory. I was rather impressed by what turned into a debate on Scottish indepence, given the appalling quality, and unpleasantness, of almost all the other debate on saw on the issue. Including some of the supposedly professionally moderated TV stuff.

          I've been listening to a podcast on Civil War history recently. And I notice that the Scottish Presbytarians don't do bishops. They have a Moderator. So as you're down South, and don't have anyone officially in charge of the forums, perhaps El Reg should have forum bishops? It might lend a nicely Pythonesque air to things...

          On the other hand, in true tabloid style:

          "Pretty much anything goes" Roars Register Reprobate in Rumble over Raunchy Regtard Ruminations

  3. Vimes

    Have you considered allowing contributors that have a good reputation in your view to serve as volunteer moderators here?

    I'm not sure I would have the time to do this myself - or even if I would qualify in your eyes - but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the other regulars would be willing to serve such a role.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Vimes,

      It makes sense. In the end it's got to be done by them. They're subject to scary UK libel laws, and sub judice. Both of which are taught to young journalists/subbies.

      But the easy route would simply be to empower certain users to have a 'disappear until moderator turns up' button. So they're effectively pushing offending posts back into the moderation queue. This is also good becasue normal users are on the forums anyway, so you just need to pick a few active ones, and job done.

      On the other hand, I'm not sure if it's needed. You don't see many posts that have been deleted by a moderator. Or many offending posts around that haven't been blasted yet. I can only recall hitting the report post button a handful of times since they put it there. So their current filtering system is pretty effective. Or it's just the quality of the commentards.

      That means they'd have to use volunteer mods to speed up the posting queue. And that consists of new accounts, people on the naughty step and Orlowski threads or legally-related ones where they're being cautious. Those are the ones they'll be all wusses about. It's also a different level of volunteering, rather than just asking a few people to keep an eye out - you're asking them to log into a message queue and read/approve/reject them. Perfectly doable, they could log mods into a version of the site where the queued messages show up in their normal place in threads, and the mods could hit an approve button that makes them visible to everyone else in their nomral course of reading around.

      But I suspect they'll prefer control to speed.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Vimes. Thanks for your kind offer

      Yes we considered this when we set up user forums - but we put it the idea on back burner and it stayed there ever since. Libel laws mean that we certainly won't have volunteer mods for article comments.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
        Devil

        Re: Vimes. Thanks for your kind offer

        Drewc,

        Cowards! Where's your sense of adventure?

  4. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: moderation question

      Look at the article's author. There's your answer.

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Kubla Cant Silver badge

    Comparison

    I think it's worth ponting out that the forums of El Reg are much more civilised, intelligent and readable than most other forums I've seen. I don't know whether it's the vigilance of the moderators or the moderation of the commentards, but the result is good.

    It's a shame that the comments sections of even quality newspapers seem to be populated by mouth-foaming carpet-biters. I was looking at some book reviews in The Spectator the other day, and it was depressing to see all the personal vituperation in the comments - on book reviews! The trouble is that once a few loonies get established in a forum they attract more loonies and scare off people who have reasonable opinions they'd like to share.

    It may be that the upvote/downvote button helps. When I see an opinion I disagree with, I can just click to downvote; so much easier than typing "@X: You are a malignant imbecile and anyone who agrees with you is a drivelling moron."

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: Comparison

      "I think it's worth ponting out that the forums of El Reg are much more civilised, intelligent and readable than most other forums I've seen. I don't know whether it's the vigilance of the moderators or the moderation of the commentards, but the result is good."

      Thanks. When a conversation/discussion is flowing, we leave well alone, go for the light touch or only get involved if someone reports a comment.

      By weeding out people who are just here to yell abuse at writers and daub e-graffiti on stories, and rejecting early signs of idiocy, we're clearing a space for a witty and knowledgable bunch of vocal readers.

      C.

      1. jake Silver badge

        @ diodesign (was: Re: Comparison)

        The meta-question is ... why do ElReg's moderators have such a thin skin?

        And why are such meta-questions invariably nixed, despite not targeting any particular ElReg writer?

        1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

          Re: @ diodesign (was: Re: Comparison)

          "why do ElReg's moderators have such a thin skin?"

          Surprise! We don't.

          C.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

            "Surprise! We don't."

            Care to comment in public on why many of my posts (over the last year or so that I've been on "the naughty step") have been rejected, despite not being against ElReg's published policy and procedure on posting?

            1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

              Re: Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

              "Care to comment in public on why many of my posts (over the last year or so that I've been on "the naughty step") have been rejected"

              Fine. You keep bitchin' on and on about moderation, which is noise, and you post corrections when you should email corrections@thereg so we can fix them ASAP. Many of your posts are allowed through.

              C.

              1. jake Silver badge
                Pint

                Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

                "You keep bitchin' on and on about moderation, which is noise"

                Only after (an) immoderate moderator(s) started rejecting my posts. Think about it.

                "and you post corrections when you should email corrections@thereg so we can fix them ASAP."

                I only post "corrections" to the forum(s) when I see a funny/punny side. See my reply to: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/17/new_horizons_surface_of_pluto/

                It's never malicious. Are you sure skins aren't thin?

                "Many of your posts are allowed through."

                True enough. If you're ever in the SF office, drop me a line. I'll buy you a beer.

                1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

                  Re: Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

                  > > You keep bitchin' on and on about moderation, which is noise"

                  > Only after (an) immoderate moderator(s) started rejecting my posts.

                  Thanks for posting comments and adding to the discussion. If something is rejected, just let it go.

                  > > and you post corrections when you should email corrections@thereg so we can fix them ASAP."

                  > It's never malicious. Are you sure skins aren't thin?

                  It's not about that. It's the fact that we don't have time to read every comment, and we do want every story to be accurate. So if you hide corrections in the comments, we may not see it, most readers won't see it, and it's a losing situation. If the correction is spotted, and the story fixed, the comment loses its context and becomes confusing.

                  It is so much more efficient to email us if you spot something bad. It's like posting a serious bug report in the app store reviews section on a popular app.

                  > > Many of your posts are allowed through.

                  > True enough. If you're ever in the SF office, drop me a line. I'll buy you a beer.

                  Ta. I am always in the SF office.

                  C.

                  1. jake Silver badge

                    Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

                    Case in point, my reply to:

                    http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2015/08/03/lottery_chief_resigns_after_winning_combo_partly_broadcast_on_live_tv_before_random_draw/

                    How was that anti-ElReg policy & procedure on commentard posting?

                    1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  2. jake Silver badge

                    Re: @ diodesign (was: Comparison)

                    "If something is rejected, just let it go."

                    That's all OK and fine. Your forum, your rules ... but why are posts that aren't against ElReg's published policy&procedure being rejected on a regular basis?

                    "It's the fact that we don't have time to read every comment"

                    Ah. I see. It's my handle, not my content. Again, your forum, your rules.

                    "and we do want every story to be accurate. So if you hide corrections in the comments, we may not see it, most readers won't see it, and it's a losing situation. If the correction is spotted, and the story fixed, the comment loses its context and becomes confusing."

                    So no biting the hand that bites the hand that feeds IT? Here I thought funny typos are funny, always (I've had my share of mea culpas and laughed at them myself!). Sure it's not thin skin?

                    "It is so much more efficient to email us if you spot something bad."

                    When posting such a comment in public, it's only when I spot a funny. Otherwise, email. From year dot. And it's not "bad", it's usually a typo that the splel chequer OKed.

                    "It's like posting a serious bug report in the app store reviews section on a popular app."

                    What's an app? I'm not exactly a consumer ... I use computers, not toasters.

                    "Ta. I am always in the SF office."

                    I'll let you know next time I'm in SF ... If you're heading for Sonoma or Napa county, let me know. If we both have time, I'm more than happy to meet face to face over a beer :-)

                    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  7. This post has been deleted by its author

  8. This post has been deleted by its author

  9. Dan 55 Silver badge

    On a similar subject

    Someone appears to have forgotten to set the flag allowing comments for Worstall's latest article.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/07/apple_results_size_pakistan_us_economy_etc_no_its_not/

  10. Your alien overlord - fear me
    Trollface

    I've just had a post 'awaiting moderator' - not an Andrew story either.

    Doesn't the SF/Southern Vulture offices mean the sun never sets on an el Reg forum? Or are they too busy cycling for charity and stuff ?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021