General Chat

Thank you for replying Katie. I'd like to say I wouldn't like to see the end of the instant removal of posts for review, simply because there are the occasional cases of personal details etc being shown, and it was logical that you would have put this facility on in the first place.


But ensuring free members cannot RR, therefore reducing the risk of abuse of the system I would have thought would be the obvious answer, and one that is under a little more than an option. It is just too easy to abuse as we have already seen.

Hi everyone,

I would just like to assure you all that we are taking this matter very seriously. As you know, we were experiencing unwarranted RR's only a week ago and once we had identified the member responsible, banned them from the site. However, it is possible that they have re-registered. We are looking into ways that we can stop this from happening.

Only allowing paid members to RR is an option that we are considering.

As soon as a post is RR'd, it is removed from the boards. This logic was implemented on the advice of our members as some abusive posts or posts with personal details in were not being removed quickly enough.

Obviously, because of the behaviour of possibly one or a small handful of members, we will now have to rethink this logic.

I apologise profusely for any distress or inconvenience this has caused to those being RR'd. Please can I ask for your patience whilst we identify and implement the best solution to stop this happening in the future. It is very upsetting for those being targeted, but please rest assured that we will be taking action against those responsible.

Thanks

Katie

Brought forward, as the Monday to Friday working week will have started.

I am very happy to sign.

Tess

I'm signing again as I have just been reported for a posting I made in February last year!!!!

About time this nonsense stopped,
I sign this wilingly.

Trish
:-| :-|

Carolyn

Olwen

After received an automate reply and having my whole thread removed (I only quoted part of T & C) I wrote to Katie as advised by a member asking for an explanation - still waiting for a reply, so whilst it may work for some - does not work for others.

spruce

Teresa

it is indeed worth pursuing things!


Back in early January, I had an OP reported and then the thread removed from Genealogy Chat.

Several more posts were reported and removed on Chat and Gen ealogy Chat at about the same time.

After about 4 emails from me, I finally got the following admissions .........

1. My thread and most of the other posts had been removed by MISTAKE

2. This had been done because "they had to be seen to be doing something" :-S :-S :-S


I also got a promise that my thread would be re-instated, but it had to be referred to the programmers ...... it is obviously very low in the list of priorities because it has still not reappeared :-(



My thread was a warning to be careful of what people posted because the RR'er was active!!

I posted it about midnight, it lasted until some time in the afternoon or early evening of the next day.



sylvia

Linda

Sylvia, I did exactly that a couple of weeks ago when my post was RRd and removed, resulting in the bog standard email reply. I replied to that asking for answers and got the usual 'we do not enter into conversations about individual posts' so I wrote again and was reassured that the removal of said post only produced an automated email, an apology and an assurance that this would not be a black mark against me.

It's worth persueing matters sometimes.

Thanks for adding everyone.

Our combined efforts with other members have at least got Genes attention on the matter :-D

Amanda 2003

Carol

Libby

Joan ..................


That is their standard reply. The one you get every time you ask about a post that has been RR'd. Just as there are standard replies for any other problem reported to Support.


It hasn't changed in at least 8 years .................. and was also used on the old Friends Reunited (parent company of GR) ................ the "old" version being the one started by Steve and then sold to ITV.

The only thing that changes is the name of the member and the name of the staff member. In other words, it is a standard form letter


It works, doesn't it?

Very few people bother sending a second email asking for more information, or pointing out why it is not telling the exact truth.


I now do continue with the "correspondence", getting more and more insistent that I want an answer from a human, not the one on the computer. It may take 4 or 5 emails, but eventually I get an acceptable, personal response!

I also have taken to saying on the first or second email that "Please do not give me the usual platitudes of ..........". I've had a pretty good response to that as well :-D



sylvia

Foggy

sue. :-)