Food Forum Moderation: Emoji-only posts being treated as spam

Rebecca Edwards87 said:Dear moderators—and please, take this in the spirit of respect intended—I really feel like you might be being a bit too heavy-handed in certain areas. There are much more pressing issues to tackle than scrubbing every single little post that consists of nothing but a few emojis or a quick quote followed by a smiley face. Look, if an emoji is purely spam, then sure, wipe it out. But sometimes, those little icons are just someone’s way of saying, "Hey, I totally agree with what was said above," or "I'm backing this quoted point." By deleting them, we actually lose a sense of the conversation's pulse; we can't even see how many people are actually on one side of an argument or supporting a specific viewpoint.

A post that’s just an emoji meaning "I agree" is hard to argue against—it really isn't much more than that. It's the exact same logic as when someone posts "👎" to signal they disagree; it’s just as unconstructive. If someone genuinely agrees with a point being made, they should probably take a moment to briefly explain why or add their own little spin to it, just like those who are pushing back should do.

northerncyclist2 said:Look, reading the rules is obviously important, but this isn't North Korea. You shouldn't just mow down every newbie with a machine gun because they made a harmless mistake. It would be more decent if the mods actually warned people and pointed them toward the guidelines instead of just coldly handing out bans. It’s about people relations, you know? This isn't the NYPD where they can flex their authority whenever they feel like it; it's a site that survives on (new) users. Even the local cops usually give you a warning for a first offense rather than just slapping you with a ticket 😁
.

Usually, that's how it goes—you get a warning, a DM, or a polite nudge explaining what happened along with a link to the rules. I haven't really noticed anyone picking on the newcomers; we tend to show some understanding and go easy on them.

Matthew Anderson said:It would be quite reasonable if an occasional 'I agree' didn't arrive accompanied by a massive wall of quoted text. Or, better yet, if one wouldn't quote the entire page just to include 🙂.

The regulations here on this forum are remarkably straightforward; when someone chooses to disregard them, it suggests to me that the individual either lacks respect for the community standards or simply hasn't taken the time to actually read them. I don't see any reason why we shouldn't issue a warning—honestly, people often end up sending private messages asking why they were flagged, which only proves they hadn't bothered to read the rules in the first place. However, in most instances, we simply delete the offending content.

I find myself in complete agreement. 🤣

As far as my own conduct is concerned, I tend to issue warnings most frequently because that is precisely what the rulebook dictates. It isn't out of some sort of pedantic desire to be a stickler for detail, but rather due to three very practical considerations:

a) Users ought to make the effort to read the guidelines. It takes perhaps two minutes to digest a text that is exceptionally clear and simple, having been summarized by our colleagues into a high-quality format that even a child could easily grasp.

b) Once you issue a warning to someone for posting nothing but a single smiley face—especially after they have quoted an entire page of text and cluttered the entire thread—they usually experience that moment of realization where they understand that such behavior is prohibited, and they simply cease doing it moving forward.

This makes the moderators' lives significantly easier because, frankly, if you can prevent situations where you have to spend your entire day acting like Mr. Muscle constantly scrubbing away messes, it is much better to minimize those occurrences from the start. 😁

c) One should put in a modicum of effort. It is entirely possible to write more than just a smiley or a "signed" to express one's unique perspective on a topic.

That being said, if someone writes something truly epic and ten different people chime in to agree and hit the like button, then fine. Let it slide. Those are special moments in time.

Which is why that idea regarding a "likes" system actually sounds quite pleasant.

To make a long story short, losing 10 points isn't going to kill anyone, and if you aren't reading the rules, at least that serves as a signal that you need to change your approach.

It really doesn't seem like a major issue.

rustydrifter10 said:Just posting a smiley face basically just means "I agree," and I guess it's hard to see it as anything more than that. It’s kind of like how an "👎" post just means "I disagree," which feels just as unhelpful. If someone actually agrees with what's being said, maybe they could briefly explain why or add their own little thought, just like people who disagree usually do.

If we go down that road, implementing a proper "like" script would be super helpful, I think. A user could get a notification when someone likes their post, there could be a count of total likes on every profile, you'd see exactly which forum members liked a specific post right underneath it, and maybe even some global stats showing the top givers and receivers of likes. Of course, we don't have to include all of that...

Rebecca Edwards87 said:Sure, the OP technically broke the rules by not adding something like "I agree" or whatever, but looking at last night's comments, most people don't see much difference between 👍 and simply saying "I agree 👍." It's basically the same thing...

Both fall under the same category. It's all spam. Some moderators just delete posts, while others hand out harsher penalties. On the Foodie forums, we just delete them. Anything left behind wasn't a choice—it was just an oversight...

I understand there were reasons for the deep clean, but it would have been better if you had kept the parts of the posts that didn't violate the rules...

We don't edit posts just to strip out the rule violations and leave the clean parts behind. That’s against our policy...

Michelle Evans said:It’s all treated the same way—both are just spam. Some PDFs get wiped clean, while others face much harsher sanctions. Over at Food Network, they just delete them. If something stays up, it isn't because they chose to let it slide; it's because they missed it.

We don't edit posts just to strip out the rule-breaking parts and leave the clean stuff behind. We can't do that.

Hmm. 🤔 I don't see why it should be banned—provided there’s some kind of disclaimer explaining what it is and why it was even done in the first place. It wasn't like this was unheard of before; people used to do it all the time without anyone batting an eye.

Nah, I wouldn't dream of sticking my nose into that mess. You guys know what needs to be done.

I’m still going to stand my ground on this one—there has to be a way to actually distinguish between actual spam and just... well, different kinds of spam. Is that really too much to ask?

Rebecca Edwards87 said:Hmm... 🤔 Honestly, I don't see why anyone would say it's off-limits, especially if you just make it clear what you're doing and exactly why you're doing it in the first place. It’s not like we haven't done things this way before—back in the day, this was a perfectly standard way to operate and it worked just fine.

We try our best to avoid over-editing posts whenever possible, mostly because we don't have a version history or a log that shows us exactly what a post looked like before someone jumped in to change it. If we do step in, we generally stick to minor aesthetic tweaks to keep things looking clean—we really only go in and strip out specific sections as a last resort.

Rebecca Edwards87 said:I’m going to stick to my guns on this one and say it again: we absolutely have to be able to tell the difference between actual spam and just... well, different kinds of spam. There really needs to be a way to distinguish between them if we want this to work.

I’m totally on board with this. Honestly, if someone just jumps into a thread to say "I agree," drops an emoji, or hits us with a "same here" without actually adding anything substantial to the conversation, it’s just clutter. It's straight-up spam, plain and simple. I don't care if it's just a single smiley face or a one-word "signed" post—it doesn't add value. Looking at how different communities handle this, some online forums have rules that wipe out those empty posts entirely, while others only target the emoji-only stuff. Some even go as far as handing out sanctions for it. That said, I do think there’s usually a bit more grace extended to the newcomers who haven't quite picked up on the local netiquette yet, but once you know better, you know better!

Thanks for all the kind replies 😍

Anyway—since we're already talking about emojis—would any of the moderators be so kind as to moderate post 101? (Which, by the way, is also a quote)

Much appreciated!

Why? 😕

The post’s only three sentences long. It actually makes sense, too—doesn't feel even remotely like those mindless "I agree" or "👍" type posts 🤣

@Rebecca Edwards87/">@@Rebecca Edwards87, could you clarify what exactly you think needs moderating? I don't see anything problematic in post #101 or the one quoting it...

I assume you're referring to the post... #100 Who’s using those 'rigo' emojis and what’s their quote in the post... #101?

Honestly, it’s always better to just drop a direct link to the post instead of trying to describe which one you're talking about. Makes things way easier.🙂

Elizabeth Davis said:It’s always smarter to just drop a direct link to the post instead of trying to describe which one you mean... smart move:🙂

Exactly. You either use a direct link or just hit the report button. Both take you right to the source.
The problem is that in the window between when a comment is made and when the mods actually see it, some overachiever might decide to tidy up the thread. If posts get deleted, the numbering shifts automatically, so post #101 suddenly becomes post #98... it gets messy.

My bad 🙈, I hadn't even considered that. So, let's go with the edits in both posts as mentioned—thanks.