As stated in the readings by Grimes et al (2008), it is unlikely to have all four of the governing documents--Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, Software License Agreements, and Community Standards--within a given network. xAble makes available the Terms and Conditions (TaC), Privacy Policy and the Help and FAQs.
- The TAC outlines the rules of engagement, including how the site should be used, what the site will not tolerate, and legalities (this is similar to the description given by Grimes et al for the Software License Agreements, although as explained by Grimes et al, "there is no universally accepted naming scheme" (9) for these documents).
- The Privacy Policy is straightforward, stating how the site intends to manage the information revealed by the user and who has access to private information.
- The Help and FAQs is unfortunately not as helpful as one would hope. While it does give a helpful overview of the purpose and functionality of xAble, it does not go into detail about how to use the site. This also does not cover community standards, including how and what to post, but it does offer suggestions about how to invite friends. (One attempt by a user to request a "how to" file for the system on the forum was met with agreement from a single user. The request did not take, and no file has been created since the posting.)
Scenario 1: Spam (of course)
As with most Social Networks, spamming is not tolerated. xAble's TAC states that any user who "transmits or posts any unsolicited or unauthorized advertising, "spam," junk mail, "chain letters," "pyramid schemes," etc." will not be tolerated. xAble also reserves the right to terminate on these grounds. However, within the past week, the forum has been inundated with spam messages selling all sorts of products (see Figure 1).
Solution 1:
It may be most helpful for the spam to be completely ignored. Kollock and Smith (1996) offer a suggestion to implement a control mechanism where other users don't restrict deviant behavior, but instead only discourage it by ignoring or expressing irritation (12). While this can be helpful, it is not always the most plausible way to deal with the situation. The xAble forums offer a count for the times the post is viewed. This may be motivation enough for spammers to continue posting and negate any affects of informal sanctions.
For this instance, I suggest it would be most helpful to instate network authority to delete or ban the user. The authorities could start by deleting the content, and if it persists, then the offending user could be terminated. This is considered "graduated punishments ranign from insignificant fines all the way to banishment" (Kollock and Smith, 1996, 12). The spammers are not contributors aside from the product they are selling. These free-riders are destructive to the forum because of the sea of posts they've created. Members now have to wade through the spam to find the real content, which is sometimes more effort than is necessary. This could cause a destructive effect for forum use.
Scenario 2: Profanity
In the search for violations of the official rules, I quickly discovered that most of the rule breaking had to do with sex and obscenity. For instance, the network allows browsing of photos that members post. After a few brief clicks, I found two instances where explicit material was captured. xAble does not allow nudity or obscene gestures. Although the nudity is borderline, it still seems to be enough to question the rules (see Figure 2).
Solution 2:
Perhaps the best solution to dealing with these issues is the inception of oversight. xAble already makes use of a rating system for each post, blog, photo, video, or audio. It would be an easy transition to allow a type of peer moderation. For instance, a user could down rate the photo above which would affect their "X" rank, a ranking system much like Answerbag, but less effective. Another solution would be to install a moderating feature where the user could easily report the offense to the authority. Peer oversight is an effective means of ensuring quality. If the users know they can be rated and the photo be taken down, they are less likely to be motivated to post in the first place (Cosley et al, 2005).
Scenario 3: Sex
xAble describes explicit sex as "any material that depicts, in actual or simulated form, or explicitly describes, in a predominantly sexual context, human genitalia, any act of sexual intercourse, any act of sadism or masochism, or any other erotic subject directly related to the foregoing." As such, a feature video that is posted in the top slot on the video page should be determined inappropriate and in violation of the sites rules (see Figure 3). The video was created by a user, Professir X, who is a professed rapper that communicates his life as a disabled person. The video starts innocently enough, with Professir X picking up on a woman. Throughout the video, the woman proceeds to unbutton her shirt (and I guess I should say that she is gifted in this area), grind on Professor X, take a bath (yes, she's naked, but no, you don't see anything explicit), and make out in lingerie with Professir X. Does that sound innocent to you?
Solution 3:
Surprisingly enough, Professor X is a major contributor to xAble. He keeps a blog that catalogs relevant issues with his disability, offers encouragement to other users, and promotes advocacy for the disabled. The majority of his content is not explicit, and he can be seen as a valuable community member. The course of action, therefore, should not be to terminate his account.
I suggest the site offer an outlet for this type of video that allows members to view the content but is not explicitly on the video page. For example, YouTube makes use of the "18 and above" rating system. Users over 18 must register with the site to be able to view a video with explicit content. I suggest that xAble also make use of this format for videos, since members 13 and above are able to view all material. If the video section continues to grow, this may become more and more of an issue. Also, Professir X finds real value in the material he produces. It may be beneficial to redesign the profile page to allow explicit videos to be viewed only from his profile and not in the main video library. This is a means of appeasing the user while also protecting the rules of the network. As Gazan (2007) stated, "Rouge users in online communities can be viewed not simply as destructive miscreants but as individuals with emotional needs that information systems might be better designed to address" (7). Designing the system differently would promote interaction, appease users, and address violations.
Lesser Rule Breaking
As a side note, I skimmed over the forums, and found no infringements of any sort. It seemed that the text representation of members was absolutely clean. If fact, one user commented on the fact that he did not want to break the rules in order to post an article that had an expletive in the link. xAble does not allow profanity of any kind, and the user considered membership more valuable than throwing it away to post a link (See Figure 4).
It was somewhat surprising to note the strict abidance of the law within the forum. When I searched through other formats, there was many more instances of violations. Although the actual account of the termination could not be accounted for, one user blogged about his experience with violating the laws. Professir X felt that he was unjustly banned from the site after promoting his new CD. The music professed his account of living with a disability. He felt that the network offered an outlet for his CD to be supported, but the network saw this as unlawful advertisement (See Figure 5).
Overall, it seems that the rules on the site are generally effective. It was difficult to find infractions of any kind. It would be helpful, however, to have an additional resource that explained the types of acceptable posts and what is expected of the user. I would like to see more of an outline of the community itself. I appreciate the quote offered by Madison (2006) concerning the significance of the law: "the role of the law, then, is to judge the extent to which it should allow [content] to happen" (189). I can't imagine a network functioning without a set of rules, or for that matter, a set of users functioning without deciding to make up rules.
Posts
Regarding your example 1 and solution, I think the problem with the spam accounts is that their creation is largely automated, so I don't think ignoring them will work, since it's automated anyway with no one "looking for attention". Thus I think your suggestion of simple deletion of the account is the correct way to go. The account has no real person directly behind, and the spam has absolutely no value to the community.
ReplyDeleteI tried joining the site to see if the account creation process relied on some sort of captcha (which supposedly have be largely broken) to try to keep the automated spam bots from joining. Unfortunately, for the information I was putting in (which wasn't my real information: I didn't intend to join, just to see what the account creation was like) the system didn't like it and gave me a screen full of php crash/debug information, so I couldn't verify what anti-automation procedures were in place.
Regarding your third example and solution, I saw the following bulleted item in the Terms of Use: "Displays sexually explicit material of any kind in an area that is not categorized for Mature Content". However, from your example it sounds like such an area doesn't exist? I wonder if they just used some "boilerplate" ToU, perhaps whatever the default for the forum software was or maybe they're planning on implementing the area/feature in the future?
I found it very interesting that you found the site very well behaved (with very few infractions). What would you say the underlying cause of this was? Is it diligent work by the mods/admins? Or is it the community itself playing nicely? My guess it's more the former than then latter because if sign up is virtually cost-free, which does seem to be the case here, there will always be someone who will "grief" other users who try to take things seriously as the Dibbell article wrote about. The only way I see this not being the case is if the community itself is rather small and still "under the radar" from these griefers.
I think it's so interesting that people are so well-behaved on the site. The example of the user who didn't want to post a link that would have an expletive was amazing to me. It seems like people value this forum so much that they don't want to jeopardize their membership in it. I would echo Dave K's questions about what the underlying cause of this is. His various theories could each be plausible but it would probably take some digging to find the root reason why.
ReplyDeleteI agree with David regarding the issue on spam. Users creating spam have no vested interest in establishing long term presence. The goal for the site is probably implement automated preventive measures and rely less on the community or moderators to filter out spam.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Professor X, was he removed due to the explicit content or was the primary reason for promoting a CD which legitimately violates the terms and conditions? Do you think he was removed for the right reason if it was the latter? Maybe the intent doesn't align with how the TAC is being applied.
I agree that spam material should be removed by site administrators because it creates clutter on the site making it less aesthetically appealing. Appealing aesthetics create interest and comfort for consumers when trying to sell a product, in this case the site. Also, accounts which exist only to spam should be terminated. They only create hassle for true users.
ReplyDeleteI couldn’t help but be amused by your second example of profanity because I wonder if you are violating rules of this site by posting those images here. Just a little chuckle about breaking rules by completing an assignment… and apparently I’m easily amused.
While I see the sensibility of your third solution, I’m not sure that it would work. That’s because the only “enforcement” I’ve seen of age restrictions is something like: “by clicking here you are stating that you are 18 or over…” Early teen can click that button as easily as I created all of my accounts for this class saying that I’m over 50. I like your idea but once again enforcement of online rules is very difficult.