Update about sensitive spam filter

Bunny said:

Members do not have to choose between using this community or using the FB group.

This is getting muddled again.

I'm not going down another rabbit hole. 

The problem here is there is a charge to use the private Facebook group because you need to be a NAS member to access it. 

I accept, you don't have to pay.  You can choose to stay exclusively here, for free, but to use the 'other' peer-to-peer support function, you pay (and lose your anonymity). 

This is why I said bisect.  Two support groups in two places.  I accept you can choose to take part in both, but to me that represents a dilution of content & membership. 

That is unless the FB group doesn't work like that in practice, and doesn't act like a frontline support group.  

 

Sharon Mod said:

There is no reason moderators refer to “users” or “members” apart from personal practice.

Number   That's your question answered 

Hello

There is no reason moderators refer to “users” or “members” apart from personal practice. I have tended to write "Online Community users" but would be happy to use "Online Community members" if that was the preference of most people here. 

There is no plan to create a separate paid-for forum which replicates or replaces this Online Community. 

Thanks

Sharon Mod

overwhelmed & underwhelmed said:

If we bisect the users by having those who want to pay in one place, and those that don't or can't in another, it'll surely dilute both.  Won't it?   In terms of quality, and numbers taking part in both places.  

Members do not have to choose between using this community or using the FB group.

I'm in both, and I have shared many things here that I will never be willing to disclose in the FB group, where my identity is visible to everyone else.

Yes,  I realise.

I think we are going around in circles here.

overwhelmed & underwhelmed said:

I think that (above) explains a lot.  It does suggest there may be two forums, even.  Or just one subscription model, going forward.

is what I said to prompt this,  and Sharon Mod discounts the latter option.   It leaves the former.  I'm pleased we got there in the end.  

This forum, free at the point of use, and another which you pay to use.  That was my point in the first instance. 

NUMBER queried why we here are referred to as forum users, while some are called members too.  It all seems a little divisive, but perhaps we see why there's a need for different terminology. 

If we bisect the users by having those who want to pay in one place, and those that don't or can't in another, it'll surely dilute both.  Won't it?   In terms of quality, and numbers taking part in both places.  

overwhelmed & underwhelmed said:

they are linked with paying to become a member, which is wholly different from being a member on Facebook (which you can't charge for last I checked as Meta don't allow it).

Joining the NAS Facebook group requires application, and is restricted to members of the NAS. Membership is checked when people apply to join.

"Welcome to the National Autistic Society’s Member Facebook Group. And welcome to this exclusive member community. ** Please note this group is exclusively for those who have signed up to the National Autistic Society's membership at autism.org.uk/membership **"

https://m.facebook.com/groups/276059502920657

Bunny said:

Become a member” page explains, this refers to the NAS’s members-only Facebook group

I think you might misunderstand - or someone is.  These 'benefits' are listed as coming in the future, not already here.

AND they are linked with paying to become a member, which is wholly different from being a member on Facebook (which you can't charge for last I checked as Meta don't allow it).

https://www.autism.org.uk/get-involved/membership/new-membership-rates

if you go to that page, it then advertises members only peer-to-peer support as 'coming soon'

overwhelmed & underwhelmed said:

If you read further, it then appears that further features will be added to the Membership - including 

• A members-only online community for peer-to-peer support

As the “Become a member” page explains, this refers to the NAS’s members-only Facebook group, which already exists and is free for NAS members to join:

https://m.facebook.com/groups/276059502920657

A key difference is that, unlike here, participation in the FB group does not provide the benefit of anonymity. Not to mention that it also involves using a service provided by Facebook / Meta.

Sharon Mod said:

We will not be moving to a subscription model. The Online Community will remain free to use.

I appreciate your comment. 

However.  Both the 'Membership' and the 'Community' are accessed from the one website.

If you read further, it then appears that further features will be added to the Membership - including 

• A members-only online community for peer-to-peer support
  
  
  which seems very similar to the forum here.    Obviously you'd then wonder why you'd need to be a member of two peer-to-peer supportive autistic communities? 

Hello, 

We will not be moving to a subscription model. The Online Community will remain free to use.

National Autistic Society Membership is unrelated to the Online Community and is explained here: https://www.autism.org.uk/get-involved/membership

Many thanks

Sharon Mod

I think that (above) explains a lot.  It does suggest there may be two forums, even.  Or just one subscription model, going forward. 

There will always be "difference" if WE are allowed to be around!!

https://www.autism.org.uk/get-involved/membership/new-membership-rates

There's a difference...  

PS...It is interesting that we are now "users" rather than "members" ...... I wonder if there was an online meeting, or just a memo?

Ding, ding.....all change here please....for better or worse.

Dear "Moderation Team"

I think it would be helpful for us all, if you could clarify - aka de-obfuscate - this message.

As others have said below, the parameters that you mention in your OP are not things that EVER occur here.......and certainly not in any frequency that would account for the endless "moderation prisons" that YOUR dwindling membership seems to endure?

It is kind of you to attempt to communicate with your members in this way - it is applauded in principle........but can you do it with some "meaning" without compromising the wider security of the site, perhaps, please. maybe?

Yours,

Number.

SpikeyMark said:

So, if someone types "autistic"

I'd not think "autistic" is counted as a phrase.  But if you kept saying "Welcome to the forum" as some do, in some posts, it could be, for instance.  Or continually re-quoting the same as others have quoted, possibly. 

Perhaps it would be safer to lay-off quotes and links, as the infernal system clearly has an issue with repetition and URLs right now?  

What I'm trying to get to the bottom of is why a seemingly impossible set of trigger shown in Rosie's post are being set off. So, if someone types "autistic" and the previous post in the thread are counted too, is this why people are getting put into moderation left right and centre.

My posts have been marked as Spam a few times but I never did any of the above thanks anyway though, something to note when posting I guess.

SpikeyMark said:

if I type "The Moderation Team" here, does that count as one phrase or two phrases (added to your own sign off)?

One phrase, as each comment is judged by the spam filter individually.  It doesn't tot-up (you'd presume) 

You can't be penalised for previous comments containing same wording on the same thread, even by antiquated software, surely.  

Thanks Rosie,

Do you mean in a thread, rather than post? I don't think anyone has put 5 URLs and 10 repeated phrases in a single post.

For example, if I type "The Moderation Team" here, does that count as one phrase or two phrases (added to your own sign off)?