Moderation feedback

System
System Posts: 302 Online Community Programme Lead
edited July 2025 in People power
This discussion was created from comments split from: Means Testing PIP - Whats everyone thoughts?.

Comments

  • chiarieds
    chiarieds Community Member Posts: 17,413 Championing

    I think we all are here trying to help & support each other, as well as all disabled people .

    I will certainly apologise if this is the first time I've caused harm to another disabled person rather than supporting them. However, as has been mentioned, if support in this case isn't a prerequisite, I believe we were all civil even whilst most of us disagreed with means testing PIP giving reasons as to why. These reasons might not be deemed 'correct,' but were in the main from our personal experience & understanding.

    You know I have mentioned that perhaps I thought that the 'House rules' were there for a reason in a recent post that has since 'disappeared;' yet another post remains closed, tho very unfortunate comments remain within it, so I think we have a right to question this very 'questionable' moderation.

    I have the utmost respect for all the members I've gotten to know who have kindly responded here; I haven't the slightest antagonism towards @rubin16 & am sorry if he felt 'attacked.' What makes me not want to respond much on this forum recently however is Scope's 'moderation.'

    The responses here were mainly against means testing PIP; we won't always have a 'balanced argument,' which could happen with any query; we're being quietly told off for this happening.

  • Charlie_Alumni
    Charlie_Alumni Scope alumni Posts: 262 Empowering

    Hi all,

    There seems to have been some misunderstanding of the moderation actions here. It's my understanding the discussion was not closed due to differences of opinion, or because argument was not balanced. It was not closed to discourage conversation, sharing of lived experience or due to discussion of financial precarity. Open discussion and the sharing of lived experience and opinions has and will always be supported and encouraged on the community.

    As posted, it was closed initially to give the time for the team to review it fully. It was then kept closed temporarily because it contained language that was becoming uncivil. This is often done to allow the pace to slow and tensions to cool. When the discussion was reopened, a reminder was posted about keeping things civil in an attempt to stop things escalating further.

  • Community_Scope
    Community_Scope Posts: 2,434 Online Community Team

    We appreciate your feedback and understand the importance of maintaining open and constructive dialogue. 

     Our moderation protocols are designed to protect the integrity of discussions and ensure that they remain productive and inclusive, alongside keeping things civil. While it may seem that some threads are closed abruptly, this decision is often made to prevent further disruption and maintain a respectful environment. Moderation involves careful consideration by the team and often takes place behind the scenes to address issues discreetly and effectively, so it may seem like nothing is happening, or random comments are removed, but they are all done with careful consideration toward the community.

     Safeguarding is not just about preventing disruption; it is about creating a space where constructive dialogue can flourish. By prioritising safeguarding, we aim to uphold the values of respect, inclusivity, and equality, which are central to Scope's mission. We are committed to continuously reviewing and improving our practices to ensure that our community remains a welcoming and secure place for all.

    We acknowledge that communication regarding moderation decisions can sometimes fall short, and we are working to improve in this area, so the feed back is appreciated. If you have specific concerns or queries, please feel free to reach out to us directly, though please be aware there are some things we will be unable to discuss. 

     

    Thank you for your patience and understanding as we continue to refine our processes.

  • Community_Scope
    Community_Scope Posts: 2,434 Online Community Team
    edited July 2025

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts and feedback, it's appreciated. To avoid any confusion or misunderstandings, might we propose an actionable list of points of the changes you’d like to see on the community, any issues, ideas etc. which we can take away to review further.

    We do intend to arrange an opportunity for feedback across the community as a whole in the future, however we welcome proactive individual feedback such as this too, but would appreciate feedback being sent to community@scope.org.uk this streamlines things for everyone. 

  • chiarieds
    chiarieds Community Member Posts: 17,413 Championing
    edited July 2025

    @Community_Scope - I'm also of the opinion that I have said many similar things before, & I can't see why there should be any confusion necessitating my thoughts, if you were considering these, having to be sent privately (again).

    You can if you wish look back at ny comments to the community@scope.org.uk address from 6 May - 10 June & any previous contact by this mean, as well as what I've mentioned here.

    In brief, & in no particular order, & I personally would welcome other members feedback:

    1. I think the House Rules should matter, & everyone should abide by them.
    2. I welcome the Scope team interacting, but sometimes a satisfactory resolution isn't reached when your [the Scope team's] responses dwindle to nothing
    3. Factual content should matter more than unfounded speculation
    4. Passive aggressive comments should be 'nipped in the bud'
    5. As you get to know members you should understand the sort of person they are; are they likely to cause discord, or not?
    6. In order to be seen completely fair, & build up trust in our members, transparency really does matter.
    7. Personally I'd just like to know that action has been taken when something is reported, or I've otherwise contacted you; I don't need to know the details, which I know you can't give

    Now some questions:

    1. What is a member supposed to do first; report an issue, when sometimes such reports go unheeded, or even unacknowledged, or
    2. Defend your position, or anothers, hope to diffuse the situation, or, perhaps the Scope team feel we should say nothing & let members say what they will?
    3. Is it acceptable that members feel they need to take a break away from the forum or leave because of abusive comments? What do you feel you can do about this?

    To counterbalance this, I have received much appreciated support when I've needed it from previous members of the Scope team (I'm not sure if Morgan is still about). I also want to support each & everyone one of you, & thank present Scope team members when you have intervened in discussions appropriately, & you've all helped me, as you have other members. Just hoping we can move forward with this to keep this forum safe for all members, & better.

  • Community_Scope
    Community_Scope Posts: 2,434 Online Community Team

    We’re sorry you feel this way @Wheeled_Weapon and we understand how upsetting this experience has been for you.

     To be clear, we take all reports seriously and apply the same standards to everyone, regardless of who they are. No one gets special treatment on the community. Sometimes posts/comments are removed or retained based on whether they break house rules. It is not based on who wrote them.

     Your thread was removed because, as we explained in the screenshot you received, it was becoming uncivil and therefore breached our house rules. This was due to the behaviour of other members, not yourself. We want to be clear that the removal was not about silencing your voice or your experience. Our aim is always to maintain a safe and respectful space for everyone, and sometimes that means removing threads where conversations start to escalate, regardless of who is involved.

    That said, if anything has been left up that clearly breaks the rules then we will absolutely review it again. As a small team, we review every report thoroughly but the subjective nature of certain content means that sometimes our decisions may vary depending on who is moderating at the time. While we address all concerns seriously, there may be instances where a comment does not break our house rules, even if it feels upsetting to the person reporting.

    We are committed to maintaining a respectful and safe community for everyone and appreciate your understanding and patience. We want every member to feel safe and respected here and we’re sorry that hasn’t been your experience recently.

  • Rosie_Scope
    Rosie_Scope Posts: 9,142 Online Community Team

    Hi all,

    It's just me in today, so please forgive me if I'm not able to respond in detail to all the issues raised overnight. As much of it concerns moderation procedures and policy, I hope you can understand that it's difficult for me to speak on behalf of the whole team without consulting them first. But I just wanted to acknowledge your recent responses and let you know that we're not ignoring you or your feedback.

    I know there has been a lot of hurt and frustration with some of the recent discussions. While I won't be able to comment on the moderation procedures today, I've moved the Exorcism discussion away from public view.

    Thank you all for your contributions so far, and again, I'm really sorry I can't respond in greater detail to some of the issues discussed. Please continue to raise anything you feel needs to be said and we'll do our best to respond as a team once there are more of us available.

  • luvpink
    luvpink Community Member Posts: 5,341 Championing
    https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1053402#Comment_1053402

    I agree with you.

    I cannot believe that means testing reared its ugly head again and I found it to be hurtful and offensive.

  • Community_Scope
    Community_Scope Posts: 2,434 Online Community Team

    Good afternoon @mrsBB and @luvpink

    Thank you both for sharing how that thread made you feel, we really do appreciate your honesty.

    We absolutely understand that for many people in the community (and the community team!), PIP isn’t just a topic of conversation, it’s a vital part of daily life. Discussions that question or speculate about changes to financial support can understandably feel deeply personal and upsetting. We're sorry that the thread title felt hurtful to you, and that it led you to step back from the conversation.

    That said, part of our role as moderators is to allow space for a wide range of views and questions, provided they’re expressed respectfully or our own personal opinions on the subject. We recognise that what’s permissible under the rules and what feels supportive in the moment can sometimes feel at odds, especially in a diverse community like this one, where experiences and opinions vary so widely.

    We hear your concerns about safety and tone, and we take that seriously. While the original post didn’t break house rules, the emotional impact it had on some members, including you, is real, and we will be reflecting on how best to support respectful but sensitive discussion, alongside all of the other feedback received

    Thank you again for taking the time to explain how the post affected you.

  • Community_Scope
    Community_Scope Posts: 2,434 Online Community Team

    Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this discussion and shared their perspectives. We acknowledge that these topics raise strong and valid emotions, particularly as people have different experiences and responses to sensitive discussions, and we appreciate the feedback shared.

    As we’ve now launched a dedicated Feedback process and form, we’re going to close this thread so that any further thoughts can be shared through that more structured channel.

    You can access the feedback form here: Help us improve the community

    This helps us ensure feedback can be reviewed and recorded properly.

    Thanks again to all who contributed.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories