|
|
Post by Trolls on Oct 25, 2019 16:38:04 GMT -5
Trolls are relentless and real information is getting lost or buried and constantly being questioned. They've already destroyed one forum, now they want to destroy this one.
Recommendation to mods:
1. Mandatory sign-ins to post or share information. This will reduce the number of troll posts because it won't be so easy for someone as to just type something and hit Enter. Logins can require .edu email addresses. The only 'downside' of this is a reduced number of posts, but right now there is excessive posting/ trolling.
2. At the very least, keep an eye on who is posting troll-posts. Have some kind of policy around blocking IPs associated with trolls. Revise the terms and conditions so that trolling is unacceptable and trolls will be banned.
If you don't take any action, this is going to go the way of the other site.
|
|
|
|
Post by Archivist on Oct 28, 2019 13:00:29 GMT -5
I appreciate the frustrations that you are experiencing. The job market is quite opaque, and even attempts to make things more transparent (such as this site) don't really help that much. I was a user of these boards for a few years as a job market candidate, and I've been moderating it for quite a while now. Here's some basic trends about the information coming from the user base: - Most of the people visiting this site are job market candidates, not insiders.
- The "reader to poster" ratio is quite high: most users of this board are reading a small number of posts contributed by others.
- The most reliable information comes before short-list activity, but most of that is in the "lack of evidence" category (e.g. "I haven't been contacted.") Hence, most who come here are reading posts that confirm their own experience and affirm their limited knowledge about what's going on.
- Following short-list activity, very few individuals viewing these boards have relevant information to offer, because the pool of interested parties is down to a handful of candidates and (maybe) an insider. However, most of the remaining candidates at that point stay better informed from the institution and have less need for these boards.
I've noticed some patterns regarding disinformation campaigns, both perceived and real: - Most of the information shared here is valid. There isn't much incentive to lie, and most of the user-base here is truly supportive of the other candidates who are going through the same thing and suffering from the same lack of information.
- Most of the valid information shared here, however, isn't very useful because (1) it is generally supplied by candidates who are similarly shut out of the inner workings of a search, and (2) it is inconclusive in the sense that nobody has been contacted yet. Lots of reading of the tea leaves takes place here, and the main benefit seems to be in learning that others are similarly in the dark about what's going on.
- There is a strong inclination to cry "foul" when the information isn't positive for your own candidacy. That's natural. (And on a personal level, I did that once myself when I was sure I would make a shortlist but it didn't turn out the way I was expecting.) (And in the end, I ended up with a much better position and career by not getting that position I was hoping for, but that's a completely different story.)
- There are times when even an insider doesn't know the full story, or circumstances change internally at an institution after information has been shared.
- When a user repeatedly bumps a thread and asks for insider information, the likelihood for a subsequent troll post increases. Insiders don't generally wait to be asked before sharing something, although sometimes the nudge does help. Insiders are not, however, obsessively checking these boards in the same way that candidates are.
I've tried to guess the motivations (from a job market candidate's perspective) for starting a disinformation campaign. One reason might be to dissuade other candidates from waiting to hear from an institution that they really want, possibly encouraging them to take a less-desired position that has been offered and thus remove themselves from future pools. That seems like an unlikely outcome, but it is possible. But really, I can't think of a good strategic reason for engaging in this behavior. Perhaps it just derives from sadistic tendencies. After all, the truth will come out eventually. It is possible (from a moderator's perspective) to identify some obvious trolls. We are monitoring these boards on a regular basis, and we do occasionally delete posts and ban IPs associated with them. (I won't explain how I identify "obvious" trolls because I don't want to encourage them to cover their tracks better.) For the less obvious trolls, we err on the side of letting the user evaluate the veracity of the claims. And I don't have the energy, time, or inclination to do a forensic investigation of every suspicious post. If you want to visit this site to get information or post what you know here, you're welcome to do so, but I would encourage you do two things: (1) take everything you see here with a grain a salt; (2) don't obsess about what you're reading here. One mantra that used to be repeated quite a bit in earlier years still applies: "You won't get any good information from the rumor mills." The only good information comes to you directly from the search committees. Nobody is going to invite you for a campus interview by posting the invitation here. Unfortunately, requiring registration will simply kill the sharing of information. Most candidates won't bother to register. However, I do have this one suggestion for true "insiders" who want to help make our job market process a less brutal experience: |
|
|
|
Post by Archivist on Oct 28, 2019 13:34:24 GMT -5
One more note along these lines. I often see a post that goes something like this:
If information from some other website seems suspect, please don't repeat it here. If it isn't correct, then you are simply introducing misinformation here. And if was posted there by trolls, you are openly inviting them to come over here to repeat their deceptions.
Either trust the information from other sources or don't, but please avoid infecting this site with what often appears to be random noise.
|
|
