Identity, Responsibility and Moderation

(Graphic from Fred Cavazza used by virtue of Creative Commons licence)

We've decided that we needed a seperate identity.

• talkbrockwood

This to use in a social media sphere so it's not Geoff or Peter.
It's talkbrock talking!
So a continuous identity can be presented and individuals are "protected"
We also decided that we would have identities of our own.
So, according to the Councils e-communications policy, we shouldn't,

• Participate in chat rooms or forums unless this is authorised and is explicitly on behalf of the Council.

We got authorisation by emailing our supervisor with details of where and what and asking if it's okay.
How do we use these two identities?
(BTW that is a question - answers/discussion in comments please)

Now with have the dynamic duo being talkbrockwood but we don't know who's responsible for what and when.
Do we need duty rota's, job descriptions... probably.

This post was prompted by an anonymous comment - which is still waiting for moderation.
With 2 of us in charge we could have a discussion and decide to publish or not.
Soon, there may be 4 of us.
Not as easy then.
With the whole unit it would be impracticable/impossible

Finally I've got to moderation.
We must use the e-communications policy/ codes of conduct to decide whats acceptable.
(if you haven't got some sort of acceptable use policy - get one)
That deals with the easy stuff - if the contribution is offensive or illegal.
What about irrelevant or stupid stuff?
Whose irrelevant?
Whose stupid?

(Geoff)