# mixed messages



## scotu

> Do not reply to threads with no context. Report them to moderators.
> - Suggest, politely, to newbies that they read the forum rules and forum stickies before posting.


The above appears below the (go advanced) reply box. On one occasion when I did that, I included the rules that I thought the poster should pay attention to. I ended up with a deleted post and a message form a mod saying something like the mod team would rather have me report those posts that don't quite abide by the rules instead of telling the poster what to do. The reason? Well, it is the mod's job to fulfill moderator functions.

So my conclusion is that we may politely suggest to newbies that they read the rules but should refrain from informing them of the rules which prompted the suggestion. Is this correct?


----------



## jann

Hello scotu, 

Thanks for your question.  Maybe I can give you a general answer.  In the French-English forums, if a member posts a quote, link, or reference to "the Rules," we remove it.  We have learned from experience that the forums run most smoothly if moderation is left to the moderators.  This protects you from unpleasant replies, and it avoids unpleasant situations that the moderators would have to sort out after the fact.

This doesn't mean you can't help a new member learn the ropes! We love it when you reply to a context-less question with the very necessary, _"Can you please provide a little more context?"_  We appreciate members who reply to "How do you say X in French?" with a gentle, _"Please, can you make a first attempt? Then we'll be happy to help you."_  And there's no harm in adding a PS at the end of your response to say _"It would have been easier to understand your message if you hadn't written it in chatspeak."_   New members are also likely to appreciate a helpful hint at the end of a post such as _"PS. There's a helpful sticky [link] with tips to help you type accents."_

These sorts of gentle replies are great: they help remind everyone that we're not some sort of auto-translator, and that it is hard to write a high-quality answer to a low-quality question.  They also point out how we appreciate a little common sense, common courtesy and human interaction. Perhaps most importantly, these sorts of pleasant hints are not confrontational, and they do not require you to quote or refer to the forum rules.  

When it comes to multi-question threads, poorly chosen titles, incomprehensible chatspeak, unreasonably long translation/proofreading requests, inflammatory posts, questions outside the scope of our forums... in short, anything that obviously requires the intervention of a moderator... it is best if you simply report the thread and don't reply.  

I am not familiar with your specific situation, but perhaps this general explanation is relevant (and hopefully helpful!). 

Jann
French-English moderator


----------



## scotu

jann said:


> Hello scotu,
> 
> I am not familiar with your specific situation, but perhaps this general explanation is relevant (and hopefully helpful!). Jann


Actually my question was a general one. The specific situation was long ago, at the time the moderators message wasn't clear to me, but I understand it now. Your clarification is much appreciated. 
scotu


----------



## mally pense

jann said:


> We appreciate members who reply to "How do you say X in French?" with a gentle, _"Please, can you make a first attempt? Then we'll be happy to help you."_


 
A little consistency in this would be good. I'm not sure your view is shared by all the moderators, but I do appreciate you clarifying this point - at least I know I'm not going completely mad.

Mally


----------



## jann

> I'm not sure your view is shared by all the moderators, but I do appreciate you clarifying this point - at least I know I'm not going completely mad.


Perhaps I didn't make myself clear.  I tried to preface my remarks by saying that they were based on the way we generally do things in the French-English forum, and that they were not at all specific to scotu's particular case.  However, I can see how my word "general" (referring to the fact that I don't know about scotu's particular deleted posts) could have been misunderstood as a reference to all WR forums.

My post above applies only to how we generally do things in the French-English forums. Moderators on other WR forums may not treat first attempts in the exact same way, and indeed it would not make sense to do so on, for example, a monolingual forum where there are no translation requests.

As for cross-forum "consistency," this was discussed at length here, and I posted my views on the subject here.

I hope that's clearer this time. 

Jann


----------



## Sarasaki

Dear all,

I have a suggestion: Just like there is a field named "Specific word or phrase you would like to discuss" (when opening a new thread) can we have another one called "context" and make it a mandatory field so that users are forced to type in the details?


----------



## heidita

Sarasaki, I find that a great idea.


----------



## mally pense

jann said:


> Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I tried to preface my remarks by saying that they were based on the way we generally do things in the French-English forum, and that they were not at all specific to scotu's particular case. However, I can see how my word "general" (referring to the fact that I don't know about scotu's particular deleted posts) could have been misunderstood as a reference to all WR forums.
> 
> My post above applies only to how we generally do things in the French-English forums. Moderators on other WR forums may not treat first attempts in the exact same way, and indeed it would not make sense to do so on, for example, a monolingual forum where there are no translation requests.
> 
> As for cross-forum "consistency," this was discussed at length here, and I posted my views on the subject here.
> 
> I hope that's clearer this time.
> 
> Jann


 
Perhaps I should have said "A little consistency in this _in the French-English forum _would be good". Thanks for clarifying further. Now I _still_ know I'm not going completely mad.


----------



## Sarasaki

heidita said:


> Sarasaki, I find that a great idea.


 
Thank you for agreeing Heidita! I truly hope this suggestion can be implemented. I do not know the logistics involved though...I hope its not too cumbersome....

Sometimes I have noticed that after several users get away without giving any context, I see one scapegoat who will be rapped just because forum users have played enough guessing games  and cannot take another thread without a head or a tail . I for one feel bad for the scapegoat and users who genuinely want to be of help.


----------



## fenixpollo

Sarasaki said:


> Dear all,
> 
> I have a suggestion: Just like there is a field named "Specific word or phrase you would like to discuss" (when opening a new thread) can we have another one called "context" and make it a mandatory field so that users are forced to type in the details?


 Mike K. is working on such a modification to the new-thread form.  Good idea, Sarasaki!    Hopefully, it will be available before too long, but Mike's got to wrestle with the forum software to make it happen... so be patient.


----------



## mkellogg

> Mike K. is working on such a modification to the new-thread form.


I wish I were working on something like that!  Each post has two fields: the title and the message body.  Adding a third field would require too much modification of the forum structure.   Now that I think about it, maybe we should change "message:" to something else for the message body.

Jann and FP, let me know if you think we should change the text quoted in the first post, too.

Mike


----------



## Sarasaki

mkellogg said:


> I wish I were working on something like that! Each post has two fields: the title and the message body. Adding a third field would require too much modification of the forum structure.  Now that I think about it, maybe we should change "message:" to something else for the message body.
> 
> Jann and FP, let me know if you think we should change the text quoted in the first post, too.
> 
> Mike


 
Mike: here's another suggestion: Would it be easier to run a check for the word "context" when we hit the "submit reply" or "Preview Post" button? If there is no "context" can we then have a pop-up message asking the user to give a context?


----------



## mkellogg

Sarasaki said:


> Would it be easier to run a check for the word "context" when we hit the "submit reply" or "Preview Post" button? If there is no "context" can we then have a pop-up message asking the user to give a context?


I like that idea, and it might not be too hard to make it work.


----------



## TrentinaNE

Even if you have to search for the equivalent of _context_ in all the languages used at WRF, e.g., contesto? Besides, it's not necessary to use the word _context_ when providing it, and smark-alecks can still get around the issue by just adding the word to their messages without adding the actual substance...

I think *eternal vigilance* is the solution on this one. 

Elisabetta


----------



## Sarasaki

TrentinaNE said:


> Even if you have to search for the equivalent of _context_ in all the languages used at WRF, e.g., contesto? Besides, it's not necessary to use the word _context_ when providing it, and smark-alecks can still get around the issue by just adding the word to their messages without adding the actual substance...
> 
> I think *eternal vigilance* is the solution on this one.
> 
> Elisabetta


 
Elisabetta, I did wonder how Mike will program the "search for context" in all languages. I am not a programmer and cannot be of any help  I am hoping Mike the magician will find a work around . If not a search atleast a "pop-up" (on hitting the "submit reply" or "Preview Post" buttons) to remind people that "context will help forum users to give you an accurate answer" (or something to that effect....)

As for the smartalecks, well, we told them to give a context and now we are not obliged to help.


----------

