Pre- or Post-moderation

In the Dog's Home thread, there was some discussion of whether the TARS Forum could move from the current pre-moderation where every message has to be approved by the moderator before it can be seen by the general membership and post-moderation where a message may be moderated (i.e. removed) after it has appreared and perhaps offended/misled some of the readers.

As posting on the Forum is only permited for TARS members, who seem a pretty calm bunch, I think that the advantages of post-moderation, which include a far lower workload for the moderator, would outweigh the damage of an offending message appearing for a few hours or even a day or two. One of these advantages would be to speed up the discussions which could enliven this Forum and make it more attractive for posters.

I am a moderator on TarBoard and I honestly cannot recall how many months it has been since we have actually had to remove a message because it was offensive. There have been some signals to contributors that are "standing into danger" occasionally when people have strayed too close to the shoals of  "forbidden" topics on TarBoard but no actual removals.

As someone who may not be considered calm at times. I do however agree with Adam. It would mean postings should appear immediately as per T/board and Facebook etc. or at least quickly.

If this would make any difference to the number of postings I am not sure, "one would live in hope if only to die in despair". As my old mother used to say.

Post-moderation sounds like a good idea.  If you look back over 2011 there have been quite a few conversations on the board, but we could certainly do with more participants.

Absolutely Nicola, some more views on topics would be great. Rather than just the faithful few.

I agree that post-moderation would be preferable, but I am not convinced at all that switching this Forum to post-moderation would result in an upturn in the volume of postings. It seems to me that over the last few years, the overall number of AR devotees wishing to post views on a web Forum has diminished, yet there are now two forums to choose from. It think it is inevitable that one of them will have a lean time. Tarboard has occasional quiet periods, but it has much brisker traffic than this Forum - it is over 15 years old and has a dedicated management team of 6, and is not restricted to TARS members. It is noticeable that many TARS stalwarts and ex-officers still choose Tarboard on which to express their views on AR topics, rather than here. When you see this happening, then alarm bells ring and you really wonder what future there is for this Forum.  On the basis that retaining the Forum adds no appreciable cost to the website charges, the answer to that question is that the Forum will just doddle along at this low level as long as there is someone willing to moderate it. Not a very rosy outlook, I'd say.

But there have been 25 topics on our board this year, all of some interest, and we need a board to talk about TARS as this isn't permitted onTarboard. Of course without wider participation it won't be a good way of DECIDING anything but what's wrong with sharing ideas and letting people know about items of interest? Personally I don't need a chat board to have constant activity....let's try to keep upbeat.