Board guidance for HYP Practical and High Yield Shares & Strategies

[Gengulphus]

Could the admins please add something to this guidance clarifying that the HYP Practical board is not for either attacks on or defences of HYP strategies - not even single-word throw-away comments of either kind. It's for practical issues to do with running them, basically from the point of view of those who accept HYP strategies.

That was basically why the word "Practical" was in the TMF board name, and the TMF board guidance actually gave it more prominence than saying what a HYP strategy is. TLF has 'inherited' the name while giving the board guidance that also says what a HYP strategy is, but totally fails to say anything about what the word "Practical" in it is supposed to mean. As a result, various posters are feeling free to launch attacks on HYP strategies on the HYP Practical board, and others to respond there with defences of them - and both have a strong tendency to escalate into major distractions from whatever practical question the thread was originally about (and from the look of things, major moderation headaches as well). And none of those is actually ruled out by the board guidance - the closest it comes is "Discussion of other high yield approaches, including non-ordinary shares and fixed interest securities, is best carried on on the High Yield Share Strategies - General board". But talking about how bad one thinks HYP strategies are or even just using phrases such as "the toxic HYP strategy" is not actually discussing other high yield approaches (or indeed other types of approach) - the most it does is tempt others to do so...

I do realise that TLF is in no way bound by what TMF did, but if one is going to have two (or more) boards covering an area, they need to have significantly different target audiences. The difference identified on TMF was that a substantial number were happy to discuss the pros & cons of HYP strategies virtually ad infinitum, while another substantial number were very unhappy about the distractions that pros & cons discussions produced from their practical issues, and especially the tendency for them to 'hijack' the threads about those practical issues (either by drawing those who might have responded about them into discussing the pros & cons instead, or by causing them to give up on the thread as a waste of time). Yet others (I was among them) were happy to revisit the pros & cons of HYPs from time to time, e.g. for a yearly review of whether a HYP strategy was still suitable for them, but not every week - but still wanted to more-or-less continuously keep an eye on the practical issues such as the latest dividend cut or rights issue. Two boards could cater for all of those - one with restrictions both to HYP strategies and to practical issues (HYP Practical), the other with a much more general remit (High Yield Shares & Strategies).

So basically, I understand why TMF had the two boards, and I believe TLF has them for the same reason - but that belief is only based on the little I've seen of how TLF is run (particularly on how moderation appears to be being done). If I'm right about that, then it's not being communicated very well; if I'm wrong, I'm at a loss to understand what the board distinction is supposed to achieve. Either way, the board guidance could usefully be improved by saying just what the "Practical" part of the board name is supposed to be about!

By the way, I'm not saying that fixing this will solve all of the problems on the board - I'm fully aware that some users pay little or no attention to board guidance or even what board they're on. But equally, some do, and so improved guidance should help to reduce the moderation problems on the board.

Gengulphus

[dspp]

G,

Thank you for your comment. It is now under consideration. There are other issues as well. It may take some time for the wheels to do the required cogitation.

Regards, dspp