⭐NEW⭐ Updated Community Code of Conduct
We have recently updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please take a moment to review it. Our Code of Conduct is designed to promote a positive experience in our community and be sure it is a safe space for all.
I understand the frustration that happens within some of the FamilySearch products and processes. Please know that we value your feedback, even when it is negative but that doesn't justify poor behavior. Complaints can still be made in a kind way. We are striving for a positive atmosphere where everyone feels safe to share and learn together and we ask that you comply with our Code of Conduct.
Thanks to all of you for being here!
Samantha Sulser - FamilySearch Community Manager
https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/community-code-of-conduct
Answers
-
"These behaviors are unacceptable and not allowed
9. Thread bumping—posting the same comments in multiple discussions, or repetitive comments."
Did you just violate #9 or is posting to multiple categories (General Questions & Family Tree etc) acceptable?
6 -
The Code of Conduct page would be much more useful if it included links to guidance about what community members can do about violations, especially violations by repeat offenders. Also, what to do about offenders who carry over from Family Tree and vice versa.
2 -
shouldnt number 9 be split into multiple line numbers
9 - Thread bumping—posting the same comments in multiple discussions, or repetitive comments.
rather
9 - Thread bumping (along with an explanation of what thread bumping is)
and then a separate
10 - posting the same comments in multiple discussions, or repetitive comments.
(thread bumping has no relation (in my mind) to "posting same message to multiple categories"
and many people dont even know what Thread Bumping is . . . so they get confused by linking these together and in my mind there are some legitimate reasons for what technically is a thread bump - the main difference is not the "bump" - but the intention of the "bump"
3 -
@Chas Howell Well, if you want to get technical, I didn't. 😉 I posted announcements which aren't the same as discussions or comments. But I did post this announcement in several places. Should I report myself? 😂😂 Funny aside...there would be very few cases that the same post would be needed across categories. In this case, I posted an announcement as the community manager that pertained to all members. I did it in several places so it would reach the most members. I didn't want to count on everyone checking the announcements. They aren't looked at much. So I would say, if someone felt like they had a reason to do multiple posts across categories, message me and we can discuss the reasoning. Sam
6 -
@dontiknowyou That's a great suggestion. As I would have to jump through a few hoops to get it published again, I won't be able to make that kind of change for a while. But I will add it to my working doc for when we make changes again. I can't find an article on this, so I will request one be created.
I realize that you know this but for the benefit of others... The best way to report a post that is in violation of the Code of Conduct is to click the little flag at the bottom of a post and select Report. Then add a reason for reporting and send report. These are reviewed several times a day. Sam ☺️
4 -
@Dennis J Yancey I love this suggestion. Thanks for sharing your idea. I will put this in my working doc so the next time it gets updated this is added. Guess I should have had you review it before we published it! 🤣
2 -
both #9 and #10 have some limited legit exceptions
I think the point is when we have someone repeatedly and unnecessarily doing this that is what [I think] we would consider a violation . . .also - just to be fair
in my mind - there should at least be a few bullets as it relates to what we as users can expect from moderators - and how we should go about getting moderators attention.
I also think we often need to remind ourselves (users and moderators) that this is a global system and we have people using the system from different religions, different countries, different cultures, different languages, different customs etc etc and though we clearly need a common set of values/rules - that we should do our best to make people feel united/included and not generate divisiveness in our comments etc,
(an example - comments that seem to make people believe that the poster assumes most/all users are LDS)
7 -
@Dennis J Yancey I think you captured the 'spirit' of #9. I like your wording!
I love your comment about reminding ourselves that we from different walks of life! We are all different and I really want our community to be a place where all can come and learn together.
The best way to get a moderator's attention is to flag a post and report it. I see every one of these. I'll see if I can get this info somewhere it is useful to the community members.
On your suggestion - yes, I had another user point that out. I like that suggestion too and am adding it to my list. I may have to update this sooner that I wanted to. Translation may freak out just a little bit - jk 😂
1 -
The whole "flagging and reporting" subject has evolved over time - and has had areas of success and areas of failure. With time I know we can count on you and others to help improve that area and others.
THANKS for all you do and will be doing for the betterment of the community!
0 -
The best way to report a post that is in violation of the Code of Conduct is to click the little flag at the bottom of a post and select Report. Then add a reason for reporting and send report.
Experience has taught me that, to be effective, a report must be specific and short. I know many people don't know that, or do know but don't know what "specific and short" looks like. It seems to boil down to: quote a minimal phrase in the Code of Conduct and minimum content that violates it.
Mods who see many reports likely have a better sense than I do––as a contributor––of what makes a report effective, but to me what seems to matter above all else is that the flag is the first line of defense not the last resort. Use it early and often, and do not engage an offender in any way.
3 -
Great thoughts @dontiknowyou! Short and sweet is best. If the report gets long and too detailed, we have to spend precious time wading through it to get the gist of the issue. Most of the time, we don't need much to understand why a post was flagged/reported. Just a few words of explanation or the specific code of conduct violation works well.
Yes, please use the FLAG. It is there for all members to report issues with posts. It also might make some feel better knowing that the person whose post is being reported, doesn't see that it was reported. It is anonymous. And you can be confident that each report is reviewed. Sometimes we determine that no action is required while other times we might edit a reported post, message the member about their post, or take another action.
And yes, don't engage the offender. Let us work with them. 😊
2 -
I also like sweet and simple - and in general agree with the use of the flag option
but there are alot of people out there who have no clue what "flag" really means - nor who gets notified nor whether there will be a public record of who flagged what. and why - there are many people very wary of clicking that link - or others who think its like a bookmark option and click it with the wrong intent.
obviously education/training on that is great
BUT something as simple as a little BLURB when you "mouse over" the flag link - would really be great
or some other simple means by which people can intuitively educate themselves on how the FLAG option works once you click it. (such as a little blurb in the code of conduct)
5 -
@Dennis J Yancey I couldn't agree more. As I interact more with you guys, you're helping me learn things we can do better and how to do them. This is definitely one of those educational things I will do.
Sam 🤔
0 -
Things to know about the "Flag" option:
It is totally invisible to mere mortal users: you cannot tell whether anyone -- including yourself! -- has flagged a post.
It'll increment your Discussions counter, but again, invisibly: there will be absolutely no evidence anywhere of why the number has gone up, and you will never be able to track down why your count is so much higher than what the system is willing to show you of actual discussions.
0 -
My only suggestion that I've had work in other groups that I moderate is that if you come across a violation to inform the user of what the violation is, but approaching it in a matter such as hey we don't want you to get hit with a violation so we wanted to give you the opportunity to edit your post or comment fist. It helps people learn what is acceptable and not, plus lets them engage in feedback loops. In my experience it has lead to far fewer repeat violations and has really fostered the communities quite a bit. :) Keep up the awesome work! Love the community!
@Dennis J Yancey That is a great point about the flags! One thing I personally have seen happening in some other places is that they've replaced the word flag with report so that any confusion is immediately taken out. But that also can deter people from tapping it too possibly. I really like that idea of a mouse over! Good thinking!
0 -
One comment I wish to make is that I believe there needs to be more clarification about discussions about Latter Day Saint ordinances. Point 10 of the list of unacceptable behaviours specifically mentions religion as an irrelevant topic. I accept discussions about administrative aspects of ordinances will frequently occur and are relevant, but the line between relevant and irrelevant is often blurred.
Not long along this thread was posted: https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/125358/everlasting-ties-eternal-connections
It pertains solely to Latter Day Saint doctrine about adopted people and includes a link to a page on their website that is mostly, except for one paragraph, about doctrinal issues. In my opinion, this is not relevant and the Code of Conduct should be explicit that purely doctrinal discussions about ordinances are not "relevant to family history". At the very least, such a thread should have gone into a Group specializing in LDS issues, rather than the ADOPTION AND UNKNOWN FAMILY RESEARCH group.
Had the thread instead been about how to properly enter adopted people in the Family Tree for the purposes of ordinances, in my opinion it would have been clearly relevant.
0 -
A van Helsdingen I agree that sometimes discussion about religion is important. I have ancestors who came to the USA from Europe in the 1800s because they converted to LDS. Their journey is well documented. I heard from family stories that they were members of the Reformed Church of Latter Day Saints, but that comment never conveyed that they had left the church. I'm not sure any of my family knew that. All of their children DEFINITELY left the church and there are no LDS - reformed or otherwise - descendants.
So I went poking around asking if proper church ordnances, etc. had been performed for them because I knew no family members had done that. Someone had to inform me they were not Mormon and nothing was done! They pointed me to some history of the Reformed church. LOL. Family history and religion is very intertwined and in that context should be tolerated.
1 -
@Dennis J Yancey I agree with your comment about 'Thread Bumping.' I had to Google it as I had no idea what it meant. So a concise description would be a great help. Thank you.
1 -
@A van Helsdingen As we rewrote the code of conduct, the idea wasn't to say that we couldn't mention religion but rather that we don't engage in debate or have discussions about it that aren't relevant to a family history discussion. Religion is super important to family history! Where would we all be without those amazing church records from so many different churches? Let's just stay away from doctrinal discussions about any church.
Oh, and the post you shared is a great example of a discussion belonging in another place. We try to catch those and make sure they are in the right place. If you notice posts that need to be moved, you can let us know by flagging it and letting us know.
Sam 😃
2 -
I'm going to (I think) flirt with a violation of "Unacceptable #6" even by talking about "Unacceptable #6."
I don't think it reflects well upon FS to have a rule which says, in effect "we don't care about your feedback, nor is it welcome."
I absolutely have feedback to provide about FS' opacity with regard to defect reporting and status. I would advocate for a CRM type of implementation where the status and prioritization of a given issue is clear for any/all to see. ANYTHING other than the complete black hole that defect reporting currently is.
I don't understand why I'm skirting with violation of a "Community Standard" to provide that feedback. [?]
I think U6 would be enhanced by an established and documented mechanism to interact with the FS team on those topics.
0 -
@Brad Felmey Let me address your 'flirting' around "Unacceptable #6" or U6 - 😄 You aren't flirting or skirting with this part of the Code of Conduct at all.
Here is the wording of U6 for other's reference: Posting conjecture, gossip, or debate about priorities, motives, processes, policies, or competence of FamilySearch or its personnel.
I think you may be misunderstanding what U6 is all about. We care very much about your feedback and want to hear about the things you love AND the things you don't. We need to know what is broken or isn't working well, where we can improve, and suggestions you may have. The main message of our Code of Conduct is that you can totally share feedback, just do it with kindness and respect.
U6 is addressing engaging in debate, conjecture, or gossip of FamilySearch's internal workings. These things aren't helpful and don't add anything to a conversation. It is also highly disrespectful to call our employees or volunteers names or question their competence. That's just mean.
Your suggestion to have a "defect reporting and status" process and "an established and documented mechanism to interact with the FS team" are SUPER excellent! They're definitely on my radar. I want to see FamilySearch have a much bigger presence in our community. I also want to work toward a way to report back to the community on issues. I am working on both of these things. I hope that clarifies that better.
Sam 😊
5 -
I understand the essence of U6 to be Keep it factual. Refrain from hearsay, opinion, speculation, theory, conclusion, castigation, denigration, insult, vulgarity, ad hominem, defamation.
In courts of law, the only witnesses who may state opinions are those witnesses previously recognized by the court as subject matter experts.
@Brad Felmey I take it your tenure here is not more than 16 months, because before then FS had a CRM system that was visible to all contributors.
As I saw for myself, that CRM system was nearly useless because most contributors to it were unable to make a factual statement of a system problem and refrain from hearsay, opinion, speculation, theory, conclusion, castigation, denigration, insult, vulgarity, ad hominem, defamation. Also, many of the cases were people asking for basic genealogy research help, and doing it in non helpful ways: "I can't find my grandmother here. **** is wrong with you people?! FamilySearch is garbage!! Shame on you!!!!!!!" I am not making this up. It was ugly. And being able to see the ugly appeared to have the effect of inspiring more ugly. Monkey see, monkey do.
So now we have this Community thing right here as front-line triage, and incivility is not being tolerated.
The CRM system went away very suddenly. A FamilySearch CRM case manager called me to tell me it was being discontinued by the vendor with only 2 days' notice and personally apologize for jettisoning all my open software bug reports and feature requests, as there was not time to migrate anything. It was the case manager who told me this Community exists and would be a pro tem clumsy substitute for the CRM.
"Under construction. Please bear with us."
0 -
My tenure is a good deal more than 16 months. I never knew about the CRM system, but surely there's a happy middle between what you describe and complete obfuscation. It's very frustrating to not have ANY visibility into whether the work I put into reporting something that is repeatable and clear is even seen or remains in the backlog.
0 -
I agree with you, @Brad Felmey. My team is working on getting more visibility from FamilySearch and better communication between the community and our teams. Keep reporting! Your feedback is not only needed, but desired. Sam 😊
0 -
Wow! You guys really know a lot more than I! As a part-time FamilySearch Senior Support Missionary I am fully supportive of the Code of Conduct and find its' provisions / content absolutely reasonable and indicative of "best practise". I find it almost incongruous that some of our patrons / guests should feel it is desirable, or even necessary, to "kick against the pricks" and introduce contention into the process of discovering, gathering, and connecting their families together. FamilySearch is a great resource and, to have a safe and friendly environment to receive help with your FH queries, is something I am only now beginning to appreciate. Thank you.
Kind Regards,
John L. Kennedy.
0 -
Estimada hermana Sam Sulser, podría indicarme donde leer el código de conducta completo?.
muchas gracias.
Fabricio Pulido
0 -
Could someone please find me the relevant part of the Code of Conduct where it prohibits mentioning that autostandardization corrections have a serious backlog, that autostandardization often picks a place from the wrong continent, or that Columbia and Peru are neighboring countries?
(I ask because these things were removed from my response to a question, and I cannot fathom why. The edit was of course not done by me, and carefully timed to be past the four-hour limit, preventing me from restoring what I had said.)
1 -
Estimada @Julia Szent-Györgyi, gracias por recurrir a comunidad, me encantaría poder ayudarte, si nos comunicamos por privado, y veo tu respuesta donde dices que ocurrió la corrección o el error, me comprometo a investigar tu caso personalmente, pero para eso escríbeme en forma privada y lo buscamos juntos. Te parece?.
espero tu respuesta!!
Fabricio Pulido.
0 -
@Fabricio Pulido, are you connected with FS in some way? (And I'm sorry, I know about two and three-quarters languages, but Spanish is not a contributor to that total.)
1
