What is the point of the warning if this happens?

DerStrom8

Joined Feb 20, 2011
2,390
So it is okay for a "well-respected member" to go out of their way to insert themselves into threads for the sole purpose of mocking and insulting another member? Is that the atmosphere that you promoted on these other boards where you were a moderator? Mods should do nothing about that (except, of course, ban the member being mocked and insulted so that the "well-respected member" feels good)?
You should know better WBahn. That was covered in the very beginning of that bullet point. OF COURSE corrective action should be taken against the offending member, respected or not, if they mock and insult another member. That's part of FOLLOWING THE TOS like I stated right from the start. But you ALSO need to exercise COMMON SENSE and LOOK AT THE MEMBER who is CAUSING THE PROBLEMS IN THE FIRST PLACE!

You guys have been focusing too much on the members reacting to the troublesome member and not enough on the member himself.

Keep in mind that my post is not intended to bring that member into the discussion. It's more of a general statement about what is wrong with this site.
 

ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,874
Ok, I told myself I wasn't going to respond anymore but this has gotten way out of hand. Let's get this straight:

1) Moderators are no better than the other members. Get that through your thick heads. @ScottWang this is mainly in response to your post quoted above. That type of talk, that you moderators are "better" than everyone else, is downright unacceptable and is part of the reason why this forum has gone down the toilet.

2) Moderating is not that much of a difficult job, so stop acting like it is. If it's so hard for you, then you're obviously not cut out for it and don't belong on the moderating team.

3) Being a moderator is not really any different from being a regular member. You just happen to have a few extra tools you can use if you see a spammer or troll, or a report of either one.
I don't know what other mods think, but I do think I'm not better than other members, what's reason caused you think that I felt I'm better than other members?

4) Just because you have the power to edit or delete posts doesn't mean you should take every opportunity to use it. Many of you moderators have become drunk with this power and it comes across loud and clear. If you feel like you have a lot of power over other people, you are not in a good position to be a moderator and should step down.
Have you ever seen any posts that I delete inappropriate?
Have you ever seen I use any power to edit any post inappropriate?

5) It's imperative that you follow the ToS but it's even more imperative that you use common sense. If one member is riling up a large group of well-respected members, it's time to look at that one member. Don't tell the group of respected members to just ignore him. Suppose there is a crazy man with a gun going around shooting people. Do you go after the group of people being attacked and tell them to wear bulletproof vests? Sure, it might work temporarily, but wouldn't it make more sense to go after the shooter and stop his crazy behavior? The "ignore" tool (bulletproof vest) might help in the short run, but it should not be the permanent solution.
The details I already told you.

6) If a member posts something offensive or inappropriate, by all means moderate or delete it (or, if it's not extremely pressing, message the poster and ask him/her to remove it). However, it is common courtesy (and the responsibility of the moderators) to NOTIFY THE MEMBER who posted it and explain WHY it was removed. Disappearing posts with no explanation reflect very poorly on the moderating team and is a very unprofessional way to conduct business.
I'm not sure what are you talking about, but when I delete any post always including the reason.

This is all spoken from the point of view of a moderator on another forum, so I'm not just an angry member. I do have some experience in this matter, and I know corruption when I see it. Many of the staff members here have become corrupt megalomaniacs and they're mainly the ones creating a hostile atmosphere for the regulars who care about the future of this site. I have lost so much respect for you guys (and gals) and you have greatly disappointed me. I know I'm not the only one that feels this way.
As we always saying that, every forum has it's own rules, when I get in a forum then I will follow the rules, I'm also the moderator of three ee forums in Taiwan, so I have been through a lots of things, and deal with many different members, if I go to ETO or other forums then I will follow their rules, you are here, will you follow the rules of the forum?

Moderators, take a step back and look at the threads like this. Read what the members are saying and try to see it from their point of view. They are calling into question the moderators' tactics, which is exactly what you've asked them to do--If they disagree with the rules or the way they are enforced, bring it to your attention. So far, instead of trying to understand their point of view, you simply defend yourselves and don't try to find ways to compromise and find methods that work for everyone. That is not "keeping the peace", which is the entire purpose of moderators on a forum.
As I said that I'm also a member, so what I think is you, me or other members only has the rights to do the suggestion, if the decision didn't match what you want then you will protest, but I don't, maybe I don't like the results, but I will respect the results, so you have the problem or me, who will be a trouble of a forum, please think of you are a moderator of another forum, should you do that?
 
Just a simple observation, I think most people dont actually know the real reason for thread locking of necro posts, those with a background or interest in marketing will know exactly why its done.

As simple member you forget one important thing, this site is worth around $186,000, people pay $70,000+ a year to advertise here (all together). They do that because of the traffic, if the mere 'MEMBERS' left and no one answered questions for free your business would be dead, there is roughly how many employees~12? and the ones that do the real work make this place worth $180K+ are ALL the unpaid employees you call members.
Think about it, your a business trying to kill off the people whop make you your money. Not a great strategy is it
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
Just a simple observation, I think most people dont actually know the real reason for thread locking of necro posts, those with a background or interest in marketing will know exactly why its done.

As simple member you forget one important thing, this site is worth around $186,000, people pay $70,000+ a year to advertise here (all together). They do that because of the traffic, if the mere 'MEMBERS' left and no one answered questions for free your business would be dead, there is roughly how many employees~12? and the ones that do the real work make this place worth $180K+ are ALL the unpaid employees you call members.
Think about it, your a business trying to kill off the people whop make you your money. Not a great strategy is it
Although the forum posts are a major draw for AAC visitors, I see no benefit to the owners for locking threads. Of course, I only have 30 years experience in marketing.

And your math makes no sense.
 
Although the forum posts are a major draw for AAC visitors, I see no benefit to the owners for locking threads. Of course, I only have 30 years experience in marketing.

And your math makes no sense.
Google, who sets the rules for on-line search results, has not been around for 30 years. And, if you don't understand on-line valuations and current theories of how Google's unpublished rules value ads viewed on a site, then 30 years don't really count.
 

ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,874
If the moderation team fails to "agree with" and one gets enough support from the other members, the recourse is a message to jrap. The moderators are NOT the final word. This does not mean I don't support the moderating team, it just illustrates an unwritten recourse process.

I haven't ran across something I felt strongly about to change the rules. Like I said, I've seen some labor intensive ideas being bantered about, but upon further review, it's a tasking I wouldn't assign to a moderation team. For the record, I am a common member here. I have moderated in other forums. Undue tasking on volunteer moderators is unnecessary.
...
So you really know what we can do and what we can't do ... :)
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
Google, who sets the rules for on-line search results, has not been around for 30 years. And, if you don't understand on-line valuations and current theories of how Google's unpublished rules value ads viewed on a site, then 30 years don't really count.

Then, perhaps you will enlighten me with the connection between locking threads and SEO.
 

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,868
And your math makes no sense.
Please do elaborate on what is wrong with the numbers?

I think LG makes a fairly common and largely overlooked point about the reality of business.
If you keep pissing off your customer base that holds the company up eventually you don't have the cash flow to keep it alive.

But what do I know. It's not like we all have seen businesses go under due to the company ownership being more concerned about playing their internal politics than with their trying to actually keep their paying customer base happy and wanting their services. :rolleyes:

Personally as of lately I see maybe one to two technical threads a week, if that, that I feel are worth my contributing any of my knowledge to any more.
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
Generally, businesses need $100k (minimum) in sales per employee per year to survive, which for 12 employees computes to annual revenue of at least $1.2M, so "$70,000+ a year to advertise here (all together)" is only a drop in the bucket.

We know that AAC has at least 5 employees (probably more,) which translates to a minimum annual revenue requirement of $500k. Generally, (again) businesses with little or no capital assets are valued at two to three times annual sales, which would put the value of AAC at more like $1-1.5M.

Note that I do not know any facts about AAC's finances, and I have no idea if any of the numbers posted by LGM are correct or not, but they certainly don't compute by the metrics I use.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
16,289
People don't pay for advertising based on just traffic. It's more closely tied to click-through rates, and then the ultimate effectiveness of those clicks being converted to revenue.

Look on this page. There's not a single ad to click on and I don't think I've clicked one since I've been here. I may register as traffic, but I'm useless when it comes to charging for ad placements.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
16,289
Note that I do not know any facts about AAC's finances, and I have no idea if any of the numbers posted by LGM are correct or not, but they certainly don't compute by the metrics I use.
I think that the gap would be due to Google's evaluation (same as LGM's?) has nothing to do with the ads coming from the primary sponsors. The ads placed here by Google are just peripheral compared to the ads from the bigger sponsors.
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
I may register as traffic, but I'm useless when it comes to charging for ad placements.
Me too. And that's not just here; I almost never click an ad anywhere on the web. If I see something in an ad that I am interested in, I will try to find out about it without clicking on it. (I know; I'm goofy that way.)

Back when I had a marketing budget and bought ads (not on the internet,) I wanted to see some proof that my ad dollars were creating sales or good will or product awareness or something. Now, with on-line ads, proof of performance may be possible, but I don't know how.
 

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,868
Generally, businesses need $100k (minimum) in sales per employee per year to survive, which for 12 employees computes to annual revenue of at least $1.2M, so "$70,000+ a year to advertise here (all together)" is only a drop in the bucket.

We know that AAC has at least 5 employees (probably more,) which translates to a minimum annual revenue requirement of $500k. Generally, (again) businesses with little or no capital assets are valued at two to three times annual sales, which would put the value of AAC at more like $1-1.5M.
Well then obviously this topic and discussion needs to be taken up with the paid staff not the free will staff. :oops:

So who is the paid staff here anyway? o_O

Also how do they factor advert payment to forums, or any sites for that matter, when dealing with people like me who run adblockers set to kill everything and outrightly ignore whatever aggregate that does make it past them? Obviously that marketing dollars are doing no good with me.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
16,289
I only click on ads to "punish" whoever placed them, because I know my click will cost them a nickel or whatever. Take that, Amazon!
 

Sinus23

Joined Sep 7, 2013
245
I only click on ads to "punish" whoever placed them, because I know my click will cost them a nickel or whatever. Take that, Amazon!
And a part of that nickel goes to the site you were browsing? Asked the person that has never been in that field of business.
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
Well then obviously this topic and discussion needs to be taken up with the paid staff not the free will staff. :oops:

So who is the paid staff here anyway? o_O

Also how do they factor advert payment to forums, or any sites for that matter, when dealing with people like me who run adblockers set to kill everything and outrightly ignore whatever aggregate that does make it past them? Obviously that marketing dollars are doing no good with me.
I can't answer your second question, but here is the answer to your first (plus one more who's not listed.)
 
Well since you ask I will tell you, and I actually dont think the mods are aware of the real reason for this strange rule. But I know the site owners are.

So valuations etc are a bit of a distraction, Lets look at how a site is valued and more importantly how your per add rate is valued.
Google dosnt just do this other companies decide what your worth.

The days of just traffic alone dictating what your worth are long gone!! It was too easy for bots and certain tricks to up this figure, people even used pass through techniques for other sites thy used.

So part of the equation for a forum would be number of members joining per month and numbers already mixed with NEW posts per month. So while you can fake new posts they are also to filter with search bots. SO what does this has to do with not locking a necro post until AFTER someone has posted after a certain time?

Well the hard part is to ge your traffic increase rate match new member rate and harder still to get all that match new thread rate. Getting people to sign up can be difficult, getting then to make a new thread on top is harder still.

So user does a search sees a thread they want to answer or ask a question on, the thread isnt locked so they join up, you have the hard part done he has joined. He asks the question and bam the thread is locked, but a good number will think 'oh I got rules wrong' and will post a BRAND NEW thread on yet another same topic, so you get the increase in traffic converted to larger number of new registered users and this matches an increase in new threads. Its a clever marketing way of upping the ad value of a forum site, it has zero to do with SEO or click rates. Those were all worked out years ago and new techniques for working out what a site is worth paying per word of add is now in use.

No one knows the exact formulae but ACC has it about right, the reason you can tell is mouser is its next biggest rival in traffic worth at £1.2m.

So ok you been doing it 30 years, but things move on, new techniques are developed, long gone are the days of hiding keywords in the same colour as the page. For reasons I wont go into I know the marketing people at sil labs very well, as some here from another forum will know very well
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
25,314
Well then obviously this topic and discussion needs to be taken up with the paid staff not the free will staff. :oops:

So who is the paid staff here anyway? o_O

Also how do they factor advert payment to forums, or any sites for that matter, when dealing with people like me who run adblockers set to kill everything and outrightly ignore whatever aggregate that does make it past them? Obviously that marketing dollars are doing no good with me.
Marketing dollars do no good with the vast majority of people -- that's not the goal. Marketing dollars spent on a Mercedes-Benz commercial does no good with me and does no good with the overwhelming fraction of people that will see or hear it, so then why would Mercedes-Benz spend money on advertising? The goal is to do enough good with enough people to produce an acceptable return on investment.

Most people will not click on the ads in a forum. Many people will use adblockers of one kind or another. That's the reality of the marketplace and estimates for both are factored in to rate schedules, just as are the number of people that don't see the commercials on TV because they get up and go to the bathroom or flip channels during commercials or use software to block the ads. As long as enough people do see the ad and as long as enough of them act on it, the ad pays for itself.
 

tracecom

Joined Apr 16, 2010
3,944
Well since you ask I will tell you, and I actually dont think the mods are aware of the real reason for this strange rule. But I know the site owners are.

So valuations etc are a bit of a distraction, Lets look at how a site is valued and more importantly how your per add rate is valued.
Google dosnt just do this other companies decide what your worth.

The days of just traffic alone dictating what your worth are long gone!! It was too easy for bots and certain tricks to up this figure, people even used pass through techniques for other sites thy used.

So part of the equation for a forum would be number of members joining per month and numbers already mixed with NEW posts per month. So while you can fake new posts they are also to filter with search bots. SO what does this has to do with not locking a necro post until AFTER someone has posted after a certain time?

Well the hard part is to ge your traffic increase rate match new member rate and harder still to get all that match new thread rate. Getting people to sign up can be difficult, getting then to make a new thread on top is harder still.

So user does a search sees a thread they want to answer or ask a question on, the thread isnt locked so they join up, you have the hard part done he has joined. He asks the question and bam the thread is locked, but a good number will think 'oh I got rules wrong' and will post a BRAND NEW thread on yet another same topic, so you get the increase in traffic converted to larger number of new registered users and this matches an increase in new threads. Its a clever marketing way of upping the ad value of a forum site, it has zero to do with SEO or click rates. Those were all worked out years ago and new techniques for working out what a site is worth paying per word of add is now in use.

No one knows the exact formulae but ACC has it about right, the reason you can tell is mouser is its next biggest rival in traffic worth at £1.2m.

So ok you been doing it 30 years, but things move on, new techniques are developed, long gone are the days of hiding keywords in the same colour as the page. For reasons I wont go into I know the marketing people at sil labs very well, as some here from another forum will know very well
I would be a fool to argue with you.
 
Top