Community Forum or Farce? MODERATOR PLEASE READ!

Question

I've just scanned the headings for the most recent 300 or so threads in this sub-forum, and can find only ONE that has been "Locked" - my own recent "+iTunes a victim of the obesity epidemic+"?
Your Help documentation states that "+Only the original topic poster has the option to mark replies as either Helpful or Solved ... *the originator* can also end the discussion by marking the topic as "answered+"."
I did NOT mark the topic "answered" or a reply "Solved". After wasting a lot of time typing a reply to recent posts, only to have it rejected because someone chose to close the thread while I was typing, I eventually discovered that it had been marked "+assumed answered+" by "_a moderator_". (Help doesn't say anything about "+assumed answered+").
More time spent working out that I can change it back to "unanswered", only to find that that doesn't appear to make any difference - the thread remains locked.
Can you at least advise why the arbitrary decision? Why just my thread out of at least the most recent 300? Why a thread that minutes earlier had had a reply posted by someone else? Why not even the courtesy of advice or explanation when a current thread gets closed down by some anonymous person?

Answer 1

Thank you, joshz. I guess Rachel has been too busy to answer for herself, and I will assume that her comments are her own, and that she is not speaking on behalf of Apple.
Rachel, thanks for your input. What follows is both a reply to your post, and an attempt to address some broader issues that it raises.
First some background. I have been involved with microcomputers in the PC world, not the Mac world, since the day IBM released the first PC, and long before even the first version of Windows. (For "involved" read "working in the industry".) Until iTunes, I have had very little to do with Apple. That allegiance does not necessarily reflect a product choice - it has been partly through circumstances and career requirements. I have worked for/with large players in the industry (including IBM), and my career has placed me in many roles including moderating user forums and heading technical support departments.
So while new to these Apple Discussions, I would like to think that I come here with a little knowledge about the industry and its relevant practices, policies and ethics.
Some of us arguably misguided "PC folk" have long held a sometimes-concealed envy for the Apple world. From the outside, Apple has appeared to stand out as a more liberal and freethinking company/environment than the more formal, old school, mainstream of the industry. It is with genuine regret that my experience on these forums in the last few days has gone a long way towards destroying that perception.
My impression so far about Apple Discussions includes the opinion that its ranks are broadly made up of four categories of individuals...
- A very large number of users seeking help, some of which are not afraid to express their frustration about problems encountered (as one would expect in any such forum);
- A smaller number of users with a wealth of knowledge, and the commendable altruistic trait of offering assistance to others;
- A smaller subset of the previous category who can be and usually are just as helpful, but that though not directly associated with Apple (as far as we can tell), also bring with them a strange zeal, passion or obsession to defend Apple at all costs and in any situation - not always, IMHO, fairly or impartially. Apple is always right, the customer wrong. They unfortunately (again IMHO) can become quite condescending towards other users who sometimes may deserve it, but often do not. (They can appear to be self-appointed enforcers, but I will refer to them here as the loyalists.)
- An even smaller number of invisible hosts or moderators, including some that are undoubtedly doing a great job, but others (hopefully a small minority) that give the appearance of also getting carried away with too strict an enforcement or interpretation (often arbitrary) of "the rules" or their intent.
Rachel, to you and that "someone" that you mentioned who also sought to "set me straight" in my locked thread, I would say that the very "Help and Terms of Use" that you are both fond of quoting can give rise to some interpretations other than your own. (I take comfort in the clause that states, "Views expressed on the Site are not endorsed by Apple".) Here are a few random snippets, which I admit include my opinions - but respect them if you wish me to respect yours.
- The very first sentence reads... "Apple Discussions is a user-to-user support forum where experts and other Apple product users get together to discuss Apple products." And the name of the facility is Apple Discussions. Sorry, but I object to you and ed2345 trying to suggest that you know what constitutes a valid discussion, but I don't.
- "A user-to-user support forum" - with due respect, that could imply to some a slightly greater degree of user rights than what appears to be the case, or what you appear to endorse.
- "Constructive feedback about product features is welcome". Sorry, I thought that that was what my locked post was about.
One of the problems, in my view, is that some of the users for whom this facility is allegedly provided choose to treat that last quote as reading "+Constructive feedback ... is welcome as long as it does not include any negative remarks, nor attempts in any way to convey dissatisfaction or the suggestion that Apple is anything less than perfect+".
"Constructive feedback" carries an implication that something can be improved or is lacking. It is difficult for some to validate this without illustrating what is wrong or needs improvement. That task is made even more difficult if there is a bunch of people around waiting to jump on a well-intended contributor because in their view the thin hazy line between describing a problem and complaining about it has been crossed. You believe that "+Complaints are not constructive+". As another poster so aptly put it in another thread in which you also participated, we are left feeling that we must constantly "+walk on eggshells+". (He also suggested that these forums are suppressing free speech.)
Here is how I am left feeling: There is a surprising degree of paranoia in these forums, and they are conducted in a fashion that implies that criticism cannot be tolerated and dissent must be suppressed. (As a foreigner, I'll refrain from any comparisons to world politics or suggestions of great irony.)
As surprised as I have been to find this within Apple of all places, I am even more surprised at the degree of patronising defensiveness that appears to motivate some of the "contributions" of a small group of loyalists.
Time to walk on eggshells, and emphasize that I am attempting to express impressions that are generated here, and in no way am I trying to be "defamatory". My previous reference to Seinfeld's Soup Nazi was meant to be as light-hearted as its source. But my mind is now entertaining some uncomfortable comparisons with the Hitler Youth movement, trained to believe and preach that the leader can do no wrong, and that suggestions to the contrary must be stamped out.
(Yes, Kryten, I may have again invoked Godwin's Law, which I believe might be your way of saying that you believe that I’ve lost the argument. But I think that the "Fanboys" and "Post Count" segments may equally apply to some of the people that I am talking about.)
This group of users seems to condone arbitrary constraints on what can be said, and how. But please, people, at least be consistent. And try to teach by example. By all means, preach the sacred Terms of Use when it is appropriate. But one gets the impression that you interpret the TOU to fit your argument at the time. Rachel, you frequently jump in when someone bemoans Apple's lack of involvement here by emphasizing how the TOU clearly state that these are USER forums. Valid point, but in other situations you are just as quick to point out how this facility belongs to Apple, which entitles them to run it as they see fit. You seem to want to have it both ways.
Then we are so often chastised by the loyalist group for breaking the rules about content. They quote time and again the provision that submissions should be about technical support issues or constructive feedback. But Rachel you give the impression that you can sometimes bend the rule, or that your interpretation of what it means is superior to that of others. I don't complain about your posts in "How to stop Apple spam emails" nor, in "I very disappointed with Apple", your contribution about whether some company is an authorized reseller. I don't believe such posts to be about constructive product feedback or about technical support, but neither do I believe that it is for me to point that out to you.
Speaking of interpretation, you have called my locked thread "+something of a poll, also prohibited in the Terms of Use, seeking to get others to agree with your complaint+". With respect, that is your opinion and not necessarily factual. My feedback, which you chose to label a complaint, included the wish to find out if users with more experience agreed with my suggestion, or if there was a valid counter-argument. That is a form of seeking replies - the very purpose of the forum. I even asked for "an argument to tell me why I'm wrong", though in retrospect, and knowing what I do now, the choice of the word "argument" was unfortunate as it could lend itself to the wrong interpretation by some. (I meant "argument as in discussion", but I wasn't walking on eggshells at the time.) Loyalist traits aside, I think that to interpret that post only as a complaint and a poll is very narrow and shortsighted. (And please, don't reply that you were merely speculating on how the moderator may have seen it. (S)he can speak for him/herself, and there is a strong implied agreement in your wording.)
I'd like to make two points about the "Terms of Use". Firstly, in the corporate world just about every "agreement" contains provisions to cover any number of situations so that the first party can optionally rely on them if considered necessary. (The operative word being optionally.) This practice, initiated by lawyers to protect their client in all circumstances, does not in itself mean that all provisions, in their widest possible interpretation, should be strictly implemented or adhered to in every possible situation.
Secondly, the loyalists are also very fond of telling the rest of us that Apple owns these "user forums" and can therefore do as it sees fit. On the surface that seems valid, but IMHO you are implying an arrogance on the part of the company that does not benefit its image. Here is a counter-opinion: I am sick of suggestions that Apple is "doing us a favour". That's like asking me to bend down and thank the government for providing roads. WE pay for those roads with our taxes, and we pay for the government. And it is *the customer* that pays for all of Apple's (and most other companies’) facilities. I am grateful for the forums (or at least I was when first joining), but it strikes me as patronising to suggest that we should bow and give thanks for "a favour".
As to the various no doubt well-intended suggestions that I should find other forums in which to post, it seems a little strange to suggest that I should look elsewhere for the best place to discuss or ask about Apple matters. I would like to think that my other posts have been valid and may even have included a small contribution to (what should be) the cause. I am guilty of asking more than I have answered, but didn't all of you start out that way? If the loyalists don't like the way I write, or want me to change my personality before I am accepted in the community, forgive me for feeling that that is your problem, not mine. Apple may have the contentious right to ask me to go elsewhere, but I am not subscribing to an apparent class system of users.
Only because I'm posting this here, I find it necessary to duck some additional loyalist comeback by stating that this, perhaps the longest post that I've ever written, IS entirely "Feedback about Discussions" (even if I happen to be long-winded). And I won't dwell on someone's arbitrary distinction between feedback and complaint. The original post in this thread concluded with what I believe to be valid questions about the actions of moderators. In spite of reassurances from others that moderators do read all posts in THIS forum, and that this is the place for such questions, I have so far received no answers - just loyalist opinions. That includes Kryten's suggestion that I am "+going on an uncontrolled attack on the people that are tasked to moderate Apple Discussions+". Uncontrolled? By the way, that "attack" was directed not at "the people" in general, but at the actions of a particular moderator. Moreover, any plural use was limited by the phrase "such moderators" - I.e. those that may behave similarly. Though again I plead guilty to two mistakes - I wasn't walking on eggshells, and I broke the golden rule that says that we should not in any way question the behaviour of the company or its representatives.
Since I seem to be a rule-breaker, I'm about to risk adding more fuel to the fire. I'll close by including below a cut and pasted piece that was originally meant to be a reply in my locked thread to a loyalist post that it elicited. Reason for including it here is not just that I was denied a right of reply. I think it also addresses some of the above issues, and is direct "Feedback about Discussions".
=================================================================
ed2345 wrote:
According to the site terms of use that we have all agreed to, "your Submission should either be a technical support question or a technical support answer." However, if you are interested, a web search would surely turn up sites out there where you could get a good argument going! Cheers M8.
ed2345, I'm sure that many must be grateful for the sheer volume of posts under your belt, and that it demonstrates true community spirit.
However, before posting such comments about my submission and acting as the rules enforcer, may I suggest that "+People that live in glass houses+..."?
Firstly, it would seem that you have distorted the Terms of Use by selectively quoting only a part of clause 2.3. The actual wording (my emphasis) is...
from Terms of Use:
+"*Unless otherwise noted*, your Submission should either be a technical support question or a technical support answer. *Constructive feedback about product features is welcome as well*+."
I'd like to think that my post might be seen, at least in the eyes of some, as "+constructive feedback about product features+".
As with anything, that may be a matter of opinion and you may disagree. However, I reserve the right to my opinion that many of YOUR posts in other threads appear to have nothing whatsoever to do with EITHER technical issues OR product feedback. Just a few...
- Q: Where do I purchase songs not available in iTunes? Your post: Buy from Amazon.com.
- Where to find the Billboard Top 100 from previous years.
- The correct apostrophe use in "90's music" and whether "Think Different" is grammatically correct.
So apart from your arguably misleading statement about the terms of use, it also seems to be a case of "+Do as I say, not as I do+".
I prefer "+Live and let live+".
Cheers.