Genealogy Chat

If a member has had a post requested for review, they should be told by whom and the reason why.

All this anonymous reporting is ridiculous and it would surely stop the majority of these requests if the reporter had to account for themselves. :-|

It has gone.

So the board police feel justified in what they did.

And in their little world they will bask in a glow of job well done, and if there are rules they are to be obeyed.

Oh, dear.

What are the BP going to do next?

Start burning books???

It just goes to show that the GR team have no sense of humour just like the board police :-D

Personally, I think they get a kick out of reporting. I have this horrible picture of them licking their lips, perspiration on their upper lip, finger all quiver ready to press the button .......

I saw the post by Jax that was reported and removed


and all I can say is ..................


someone was sadly lacking a sense of humour to report it


and GR staff also showed a lack of humour in removing it.



memo to self ..................... no joking allowed in the world of the Board Police :-(

If a joke is not allowed on the boards then this site might as well close.

Nothing was wrong with the post that was sent for review and in my opinion should have been put back on the thread.

Do the Team actually read anything that is sent for review?

GB .........................


there was a programme on one of our very well respected radio stations about 2 weeks ago.

It was about the rise of a new "job" in the internet world.

The "job" has become very popular with people who spend lots of time on the internet; those who have nothing else to do with themselves; and with students and others with some spare time and wanting to earn extra money.

It is ........................ moderating internet sites.

Yahoo, FB, and many other social media sites utilise this service.


People willing to do this "job" sign up with an organiser. There are a number of groups, apparently.

A post that is reported on any site using it is steered to the "organisers", who then directs it to one of the signed up people.

The person reviews the post, and acts "accordingly".

Only 3 internet sites were specifically mentioned, but also was the phrase "and many others".



Basically ...................... while these reviewers are SUPPOSED to act in accordance with each site's specific instructions, the radio programme that had researched the situation found that this did not happen, in many if not most cases.

Reported posts were subject to the whims of someone doing the "job" for a very short period of time.



I was told a number of years ago by GR that they used a "well-respected company of moderators who were well trained in moderating" ............... ie, even then, they did not use in-house staff.



so ................ ???????????????

So, as I have said elsewhere, is it possible that someone is being paid to RR posts??? :-0 :-0 :-0

That is a frightening thought

45 mins ago I sent a member a message about them displaying their email addy. They have opened my message but not gone back and edited their post.

Wonder if that post will get sent for review but it will not be me doing it.

So no one has the courage to send me a pm as to why they sent a post on this thread for review

of course not


the Board Police do not advertise their names. :-D