Balancing Moderation for a Thriving Community

[Rgbeard]

I have serious concerns and don’t know how to express them, and I’m hoping this thread becomes a good way to start.

I’d like to open a conversation about the importance of balance when it comes to forum moderation. Having been part of several online communities over the years, I’ve seen firsthand how critical a thoughtful moderation approach can be. When moderation is done well, it creates a respectful, engaging space. But I’ve also observed that overly aggressive moderation can inadvertently discourage members, stifling participation and, ultimately, the vibrancy of the community itself.

Overly stringent moderation can lead to an atmosphere where members feel hesitant to post or engage. If members are too worried about potentially violating the rules, they might simply hold back instead of sharing their perspectives. While we all want a positive and constructive space, a “chilled” atmosphere can make the forum feel less like a community and more like a set of guidelines, which can be intimidating. This can be especially true if members are receiving frequent warnings or if there is little transparency around the rationale for moderation decisions.

Another challenge with strict moderation is the risk of discouraging new members from fully joining in. If they see discussions frequently cut short, or if certain topics appear off-limits even when they might be relevant to the community’s mission, it can create the impression that their contributions aren’t welcome. For many forums, new members are a vital source of fresh perspectives and energy, and if those potential contributors don’t feel free to express themselves, they may not stick around.

Long-term members are at risk, too. In tight-knit communities, members often feel a personal investment in the forum. They come to see it as a second home. When moderation feels too restrictive or unpredictable, these members can feel disillusioned, leading them to disengage or leave. This, in turn, impacts the forum’s depth and diversity, as those members often bring valuable experience and insights. A loss of long-standing members can be hard to reverse and can alter the community dynamic in ways that affect everyone.

Ultimately, I believe moderation is best when it’s balanced and clear. Rules are essential for maintaining a positive space, but it’s equally important that members feel they can contribute without fear of being “policed” too stringently. By carefully considering where lines are drawn and ensuring communication around moderation is open, we can maintain a healthy, thriving forum that encourages both new and veteran members alike. Thank you to everyone who works to keep this balance and foster an inclusive space—it’s a difficult but incredibly important task.

POA has fought the trend and maintained its status as a surviving forum. I’ve seen other topic-specific forums (mostly motorcycle) die away and POOF. I’m watching this community suffer, and while I don’t have access to statistics, I can see with my own eyes the atrophy of our posts. How do we keep POA from swirling the bowl and becoming another statistic in the shrinking world of topic-specific Internet forums.

Conveniently, the ROC strictly prohibits discussing moderation, so I’m at risk of being POOFED just by posting this sincere attempt at helping our online community. I have concerns. *IF YOU SEE “EJECTION HANDLE PULLED”* - It’s been fun - and I’m rusty@desertjags.com

Dr. Russell G. "Rusty" Beard
MBA, PhD, ASEL, CFI, PA-32 guy, motorhead, former HOA President, etc. etc.

 

[Piperonca]

Common decency goes a long way (and both ways, moderators and members). It's like pornography: "I know it when I see it." Justice Stewart's opinion

 

[dans2992]

I am not seeing a lot of issues. Then again, maybe I’m just missing them.

The “third rail” is generally politics…

 

[Daleandee]

I can attest that it isn't a POA thing but recently it does seem that several forums are having difficulty with moderation. I believe POA is one of the better moderated forums that I am a member of.

There are sites where the "click" seems to get away with posting and saying almost anything but others are sent warnings & threats for doing the same. At times you can see a "pile on" of certain members when they make a small error in any post.

Some forums for particular aircraft or other vehicles, while claiming to be neutral and not company lapdogs, will thrash any member that holds any view that is not in line with their perceived beliefs, even when their beliefs are widely known to be incorrect. Go to a dedicated experimental aircraft site and start talking alternative engines and the long knives come out.

I could site examples but my fear is that those examples would travel back to the guilty and those liars would be furious at being publicly called out and then the ban hammer would come down. IMHO none of this applies to POA as I was serious when I stated that I believe this forum to be one of the better moderated forums I have been a member of over many years.

It ain't no perfect world and we just have to get used to that!

 

[Rgbeard]

I am not seeing a lot of issues. Then again, maybe I’m just missing them.

The “third rail” is generally politics…

For the most recent Ban Hammer recipient that I know of, the “Third rail” was puppies?

And this was a long-time member.

Off-topic misplaced or something?

Oh and I guess this post violates ROC just because I’m trying to expand the discussion to include specific concerns.

 

[Salty]

Thank you for posting the OP. Well said.

I’ve always been supportive of the moderation here, but the last week or so it seems like things have gone very sideways.

 

[Baked Potato]

For the most recent Ban Hammer recipient that I know of, the “Third rail” was puppies?

And this was a long-time member.

Off-topic misplaced or something?

Oh and I guess this post violates ROC just because I’m trying to expand the discussion to include specific concerns.

He created a thinly-disguised thread about the election results, then when that was locked he posted a new thread asking if he could post about his new new puppies (but using a stock photo of puppies), then created that new thread called "Really?" when that one was locked. I'm not sure if there was a more incendiary post he made in the last one that was deleted.

 

[asicer]

I can't comment on deleted posts that I have not seen, but I would like to point out that there are phrases that demonstrate better professionalism than "pearl-clutching".

 

[Jim K]

At the risk of disobeying the rule on not discussing locked threads...

The one you're referencing likes to dance on the line of politics on occasion. He's not alone. I like him, and sincerely hope it's a short break and not a real ban, and that he will come back. I can think of a few others who like to "live on the edge" in the other direction and occasionally get smacked too. One in particular long time member who got a short ban and came back.

I spend way too much time on here and can't say I've noticed excessive moderation recently. I am concerned however with the apparent dissension within the MC and the frankly unprofessional comments posted under the MC account in those threads. Slightly inflammatory posts should be posted under moderator's own name, not hiding behind the MC account. That's crap. That account should only be used for completely objective statements vetted by the entire MC.

I see a fair bit of complaining by both sides of the political fence about their side being over-moderated, which probably means it's about even. My preference would be for a little less overall, but I feel like it's less now than it was when I showed up.

I'm going to be pretty ****ed if this place disappears; I have a lot of memories stored on here.

IBTL?

 

[murphey]

I, for one, come here because there IS no politics (or only politics that pertain specifically to the FAA or local airports or local communities that are anti-aviation). I just left the Piper Aviation forum because there wasn't any way to avoid the politics. There's a specific forum for it over there, many participants ignore the rules. There's also an attitude that if you don't agree, then fie on you and they start piling on. There's very little way to have a reasonable conversation. Unfortunately, this attitude is far too prevalent in general.

Fortunately, around here, we only start to pile on when it's a discussion of high/low wing or Bo's.

 

[Rgbeard]

He created a thinly-disguised thread about the election results, then when that was locked he posted a new thread asking if he could post about his new new puppies (but using a stock photo of puppies), then created that new thread called "Really?" when that one was locked. I'm not sure if there was a more incendiary post he made in the last one that was deleted.

Thanks for letting me know. I didn’t see any of this, and honestly don’t come here for politics (and never find it).

 

[mandm]

As a previously banned member, I can say the only time I’ve been banned is when I said the C word (California or China lol) or talked about politics. Yeah the thread got off topic, and I think it’s better to not have politics in our discussions (I don’t even think we talked politics at the fly-in’s). BUT the MC should not permanently ban people, unless said member only contributes rubbish. They know what each of us add to the forum and thus can see when we are hinting at something and MC takes it personal and starts deleting stuff and pulling ejection handles, sure that’s fine, but come on, tell the person to calm down and come back in a few days, show some tact with it.

POA has good content right now and a lot of forums are dying. And if the content is no longer there then people will stop visiting the website. I’ve done that (stopped visiting them) on many other forums that were not getting enough valuable content. So POA also has to be careful about who they ban and how often. Anyway I try to contribute positively to the forum and I think these comments can help the MC remember that we are all here for a good time and to take a chill pill when needed.

Note: I haven’t followed the puppy forum incident (I think I saw it for a moment but don’t know what it’s about), I come on here less often, probably because it’s less gossip and more airplane, which is also perfectly fine too. I don’t need another time wasting hobby haha.

 

[eman1200]

booo hoo hoo, OP. get used to it. it's cyclical, it used to be FAR worse. and it will get worse and it may get better over time. I too was a little surprised in the tone/wording of the 3 responses from the mod(s) on those 3 threads but lost literally zero seconds of sleep about it. based on the wording I'm pretty confident I know who the individual mod was and was a little surprised at the tone but who cares. there are a few that will delete posts solely because they don't agree with what's being said, not because it breaks any rules. it is pretty effing annoying but at this point I'm used to it and it doesn't phase me much. while I try to avoid a lot of the back and forth threads, sometimes I do get involved and if I get the ban, oh well, whadyagonnado. trust me, it used to be much, much worse. yeah, you know who you are. anyways, there are the "you broke a rule" bans and there's the "I disagree with what was said so I'm gonna ban you" bans. the latter are the annoying ones, but again, I won't not say something because of that and if I get banned, whatever. there's too much other good stuff going on to worry about if someone got butthurt over a comment.

 

[RyanB]

This thread opens up a discussion that is worthwhile of having.

I think it should be noted that we - the MC - don’t agree on everything and that’s normal, but I do know we each have at least two things in common and that’s a love for aviation and wanting to see the forum succeed; it’s just the path we take to do so is seen differently by some of us. The concern that I have been having, is that I am afraid the approach to moderation we’re currently taking, is going to have an adverse effect on our long term success. I say that, because I note the forum statistics that we have in the admin panel, which show a steadily decreasing number of daily posts and our users active have also experienced a decline. Why is this? It could be due to over moderation, but of course it could be due to many other life factors - frankly I don’t know. That said, as someone who loves this forum deeply, it makes me nervous and sad to keep seeing the activity in a descent.

My question for all of you great folks, as I am just interested to know from a feedback perspective - what are we as the MC doing well and what things could we do better? Do the people want to see political discourse be allowed? Do you want it prohibited? Do you want looser moderation, or are we doing well as-is? Feedback from our valued members is critical for our long term success and I don’t think we do enough of it. Without the participation of each of you, well, we wouldn’t have a forum.

I get a bit sentimental at times, but I can’t help but recall the early days when this place was busting at the seams with user participation and we really were the front porch of aviation. Of course we’re nearly approaching two decades of this forum (WOW!) and I want us to keep going for another twenty years or beyond! Those early days were different. Yeah the discourse might have been a bit more brash at times with political and religious discussion being allowed in the spin zone, but we’ve also lost so many good, knowledgeable and valued members and we simply cannot afford to lose more.

So please, provide us feedback, I want to hear from YOU!

 

[Jim K]

the forum statistics that we have in the admin panel, which show a steadily decreasing number of daily posts and our users active have also experienced a decline.

Is this year-over year? I've noticed a cyclical nature to this place. Generally it does tend to pick up a bit in the winter though.

 

[eman1200]

@mscard88 for PoA President!!!

 

[RyanB]

Is this year-over year? I've noticed a cyclical nature to this place. Generally it does tend to pick up a bit in the winter though.

Yes, YoY. About eight years ago, we used to have on average 875 daily users, now we’re down to around 625, while the daily posts have just about been cut in half during that same time. It’s a concern I’ve been keeping my eye on and wondering how (or if) we can fix it.

 

[Jim K]

Yes, YoY. About eight years ago, we used to have on average 875 daily users, now we’re down to around 625, while the daily posts have just about been cut in half during that same time. It’s a concern I’ve been keeping my eye on and wondering how (or if) we can fix it.

Interesting. That's a pretty awesome tool then. I'm curious how we look now compared to 5 years ago when I came on board. It feels about the same to me. Feels maybe a little quieter the last 6 months or so. TBH, one of the reasons I prefer this place to BT, aside from the lack of brand snobbery, is that every new thread doesn't get immediately swamped by three pages of the same people saying essentially the same things. A bit less busy, but still enough new stuff to be interesting.

 

[RyanB]

Interesting. That's a pretty awesome tool then. I'm curious how we look now compared to 5 years ago when I came on board. It feels about the same to me. Feels maybe a little quieter the last 6 months or so. TBH, one of the reasons I prefer this place to BT, aside from the lack of brand snobbery, is that every new thread doesn't get immediately swamped by three pages of the same people saying essentially the same things. A bit less busy, but still enough new stuff to be interesting.

Here’s a snapshot from the date you joined to today.

 

[geezer]

I am active on 4 forums.

I have had a whopping 2 posts deleted, one of which was here. That is a 20 plus year accumulation of posting actively.

The tiresome personal point of view back and forth threads annoy me, but I simply quit following those threads.

In general, the deletions seem reasonable, and as long as bans are short, they are good for the POA.


asicer said:
I can't comment on deleted posts that I have not seen, but I would like to point out that there are phrases that demonstrate better professionalism than "pearl-clutching".

I fully agree that was inappropriate terminology for the MC, and assume it will not be repeated. I suspect the other moderators have already addressed this issue, in house, as it should. A public apology is not needed, in my opinion.

Thanks for the statistics, they are very interesting.

 

[Jim_R]

I wonder how that compares to forum participation broadly. I think there is a general decline in forum participation overall. I'm not entirely sure if anything's replacing it, though at least for a while comparable/complementary Facebook sites were seeing far more engagement compared to their message forum counterparts, at least in the small corners of the Internet I'm engaged in.

I also wonder if there's any correlation to the broader population of private pilots / aviation enthusiasts. Everyone's always talking about "the decline of GA". Maybe you're watching it happen through the proxy of forum engagement?

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

This topic is so, so long overdue IMHO.

It makes me think of a quote: "just because there's a pile of **** in the road doesn't mean you have to walk through it".

Unfortunately, there's a predictable set of members that cannot resist the urge to get involved in topics (usually political) they know will only end 1 way. In my experience they act the role of the moral high ground and are essentially the grievance warriors of PoA. And though I may agree with their views much of the time, they inevitably cause threads to spin.

But it ends the same way.

At best, a thread lock.
At worst, we lose a member who has been here 10 years, so we can keep our resident non-moderator thought police happy.

***I say this next part with respect to the (unpaid) mods. I know it's the kind of role where you're damned if you do and damned if you don't***

But if you're serious about community building then why not kick the ****ers off who are hell bent on making everyone's lives more miserable on here (you know exactly who they are). Or the trolls who write posts like "WhErE can I meEt GaY PiLoTs?!?" (I remember having to explicitly ask the mods to shut down that ******** on at least 1 occasion).

The people I wouldn't kick to the curb are the 10+ year members making slightly snide remarks after a heated election, who might be gloating for a hot minute. We're all adults. Just don't engage.

 

[RyanShort1]

I for one am a huge fan of forums vs other forms of social media. Perhaps we all need to do a bit better about spreading the word to newer pilots. I think a lot of younger folks don't realize the advantages of the forum format over things like Facebook and Instagram or Tacky-tick.

As far as the moderation is concerned, I've had posts deleted before where I thought I had managed to stay at least obliquely clear of the rules, and some mod decided it got too close even though I did actually attempt to keep it within the lines. However, I didn't get a ban and got over it, and at the end of the day, I wasn't so upset to leave or throw a fit. I agree with whoever it was above that implied that we're supposed to be adults and act like it.

 

[geezer]

I think the last 5 years are a poor time to look for important trends. Working from home pushed up the activity of many of the posters here, and on my other sites as well. As the members slowly returned to offices, the opportunity to post diminished.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

@mscard88 for PoA President!!!

Boobies!!

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

I think the last 5 years are a poor time to look for important trends. Working from home pushed up the activity of many of the posters here, and on my other sites as well. As the members slowly returned to offices, the opportunity to post diminished.

I agree with this. Don’t use the pandemic peak as the baseline. If you look at mid-2023 it looks like an increasing trend over the last year and a half or so.

 

[Racerx]

I think before the handle gets pulled POA "supporters" should get a yay or nay vote.

As far as declining statistics. I think there's a general malaise that isn't unique to this place.

 

[dmspilot]

I say that, because I note the forum statistics that we have in the admin panel, which show a steadily decreasing number of daily posts and our users active have also experienced a decline. Why is this? It could be due to over moderation, but of course it could be due to many other life factors - frankly I don’t know. That said, as someone who loves this forum deeply, it makes me nervous and sad to keep seeing the activity in a descent.

It's not specific to POA. Monolithic social media sites have largely replaced forums. Too bad, because I've been reading reddit r/flying for a few months and it's cringeworthy how much banal crap gets posted every day. Everything from "Should I be an airline pilot?" dozens of times every single day to "I have my PPL and Instrument, now I'm working on my commercial and just did my 3rd XC and got scared." Make it stop.

My question for all of you great folks, as I am just interested to know from a feedback perspective - what are we as the MC doing well and what things could we do better? Do the people want to see political discourse be allowed? Do you want it prohibited? Do you want looser moderation, or are we doing well as-is? Feedback from our valued members is critical for our long term success and I don’t think we do enough of it. Without the participation of each of you, well, we wouldn’t have a forum.

I think you have a good balance. However, I'm not crazy about the rule "Bans and warnings, actual or suspected, shall not be discussed on the forums." I've seen people punished because they asked "Was so-and-so banned?" and I don't think that's a good policy. There should be at least some transparency.

 

[dell30rb]

Getting rid of the politics allowed forum was the beginning of the end of my regular participation at POA.

I realize it’s difficult to moderate and a challenge to keep politics confined to certain areas of a forum. At the same time, you don’t have a real community if you completely ban discussion on politics. It feels very gross to me, I value free speech and debate.

 

[murphey]

I think before the handle gets pulled POA "supporters" should get a yay or nay vote.

As far as declining statistics. I think there's a general malaise that isn't unique to this place.

I think the malaise is in many areas of today's world. I know I've been flying much less this year
1) I thought teaching college as a retirement gig would give me lots of time to fly,
2) I'm no longer involved running the local Young Eagle program so I though that would give me lots more time to fly,
3) I thought we'd have fantastic weather for more time to fly
4) shall I go on?

I'm busier than I ever was as an engineer. I've taken on 2 "unofficial partners" in the cherokee. Both are on my insurance, they pay for avgas when they go flying and help tidy up the hangar. This keeps the cherokee flying, because I haven't been able to on a regular basis.

At school, we're so short of faculty that no one has time to chat about s**t in general, no time to review and update the syllabi - which are sorely in need of updating, no time to remove out of date courses and create new ones to address new technologies, and so on. I see my neighbors when I'm walking the dog, but no one's really interested in anything other than chatting about the dogs. We don't even complain about the HOA mangement anymore, just not worth the effort. It's as if everyone knows (or feels) that any conversation is going to end up ranting about current events, and no one wants to go there. I called a couple friends this past week, left messages but haven't heard back. I think everyone is just tired of the past [pick a number] of years of discord and animosity so we're just recoiling and hiding.

 

[RyanShort1]

Getting rid of the politics allowed forum was the beginning of the end of my regular participation at POA.

I realize it’s difficult to moderate and a challenge to keep politics confined to certain areas of a forum. At the same time, you don’t have a real community if you completely ban discussion on politics. It feels very gross to me, I value free speech and debate.

That, and there's a definitive aspect of politics that does affect our ability to fly. It's a fine line and I don't envy the mods.

 

[Dana]

I think the level of moderation here is about right. Being a mod myself over on the homebuiltairplanes forum, I know it's not easy; we all have lives outside the forum (shocking, I know). We both have a "no politics" rule which IMO is necessary to keep things civil. Over there we have to deal with the fringe crazies in the new technology subforums, but mostly the discussion is pretty serious. If there's a problem that can't be dealt with by deleting a few posts or a PM to the offender, we usually go for a temporary ban. Repeated bad behavior gets a permanent ban, but most get the message. The tough ones are long time users who usually post valuable content but occasionally go off the rails.

 

[murphey]

Getting rid of the politics allowed forum was the beginning of the end of my regular participation at POA.

I realize it’s difficult to moderate and a challenge to keep politics confined to certain areas of a forum. At the same time, you don’t have a real community if you completely ban discussion on politics. It feels very gross to me, I value free speech and debate.

It's very difficult to maintain courtesy and decorum these days when politics is in play. It's rare that it can be reasonable, rational debate - in fact it's almost impossible. IRL I avoid political discussions with everyone regardless whether we agree on the topic or not. There's only 2 outcomes - total agreement (preaching to the choir) or rabid disagreement leading to verbal hostility.

I'm reminded of original SNL with Danny & Jane doing the takeoff on Point/CounterPoint. Jane would present a calm and rational position and Danny would respond, "Jane, you ignorant slut".

Items in my Course Policies that is read and handed out in my computer science classes:
#2 There are no religious or political discussions in this class
#3 Mac v Windows is both.

 

[kmacht]

Moderating isn’t the problem if you have people complaining when a thread gets locked or someone gets banned. The problem is that you have not defined the rules explicitly enough. Moderators should only be referring back to the posted rules when deleting something or banning someone. Those rules need to be specific and the consequences for violating them defined. It should not be up to a moderator to interpret the rules or make judgement calls and it should be no surprise to anyone as to why a thread got locked, a post deleted, or a member banned. If you can’t write down the specific rules that people must follow to use the forum then you will forever have chaos and people getting bent out of shape. If a thread comes along like the “name my puppy” thread where it doesn’t clearly violate a rule but misses the intent then you need to update the rules to be more specific. As soon as your moderators start letting some things slide but not others then your site rules no longer mean anything. Just like when raising a child, you need clear rules for them to follow and to be consistent in enforcing them. We can debate what those rules should be but they need to be specific.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Getting rid of the politics allowed forum was the beginning of the end of my regular participation at POA.

I realize it’s difficult to moderate and a challenge to keep politics confined to certain areas of a forum. At the same time, you don’t have a real community if you completely ban discussion on politics. It feels very gross to me, I value free speech and debate.

There are plenty of places where you can discuss politics. The problem is that those places become a constant barrage of poo-slinging (have you seen Facebook lately?).

That said, any discussion we have on topics like FAA legislation, government regulation of flying, fuel regulations, and public discussion over transportation policy have an inherent political side to them. These topics are really valuable - including the political side to them - but everyone needs to keep the emotion and vitriol out of it if we want to keep the discussions useful. Using campaign rhetoric slogans and obvious hyperbolic attacks absolutely should be off-limits, IMO. Finding the line is not easy, but give the moderators credit for trying.

 

[Jim_R]

Moderating isn’t the problem if you have people complaining when a thread gets locked or someone gets banned. The problem is that you have not defined the rules explicitly enough. Moderators should only be referring back to the posted rules when deleting something or banning someone. Those rules need to be specific and the consequences for violating them defined. It should not be up to a moderator to interpret the rules or make judgement calls and it should be no surprise to anyone as to why a thread got locked, a post deleted, or a member banned.

If rules could be written such that there was no interpretation required, there would never have been such a thing as a "lawyer". It's unrealistic to think that moderation rules can ever be so clear cut that every situation is instantly agreed to by everyone involved.

 

[X3 Skier]

We can debate what those rules should be but they need to be specific.

Frankly, strict definition of something like this is impossible IMNSHO.

I am totally happy with the way this forum is moderated and am totally opposed to any political discussion that is not directly related to aviation regulation. As mentioned earlier, political stuff is like Potter Stewart said about Porn, "I know it when I see it".

There's a plethora of places for political discussion ranging from safe spaces to echo chambers to the wild west where just about anything goes. If anybody wants to get into that world, please do.

I have a couple of post deleted for some reason unknown to me in the time I've been a member. No big deal to me and I didn't cry about it.

Keep up the good work Mods.

 

[geezer]

Rules that are comprehensive enough to exactly describe all possible in appropriate activity are so long that no one reads them, so back to square one.

Simple rules that are general and somewhat vague, so that the moderators can make judgement calls in the context of the thread are to be preferred.

I count myself as one who has not bothered to read all the rules here, as I have little desire to even come close to being offensive, but have learned much from the strident debates on whether an individual, or a particular post, has crossed the line.

I would be quite happy if more content went the delete route, as immaterial to the topic, but that would produce a firestorm of censorship complaints, so they remain.

 

[jbarrass]

I think the mods do a good job of getting it "about right" which is all you can ask. There are fragile feelings on each side and they do a good job of keeping it on the centerline.

Personally, I'd like less moderation. If a post annoys me i just hit the next button and not engage with the trolls (actually not many here compared to say, a corvette forum) it's generally easy to do.

But at the end of the day this place is pretty well run.

 

[BrainDoc]

I’m pretty new here and have avoided joining online communities because inevitably some individuals derail into topics that are not part of the focus. If it’s not specifically related to aviation then I’m out. Not interested. There’s a plethora of political and religious views to be found elsewhere. I support moderation 100% if the topics deviate from the focus of this community; aviation.