Mistakes Why setting your online status hidden is a bad idea

It's been a while since I've done a Community Snippet, so today, I want to dive into a topic that I have seen as a bad idea. Especially if you're a staff member. The choice to set your online status to private. While it might seem like a tempting option, especially for staff members, there are some crucial aspects to consider before making that decision.

Building Trust in a Transparent Environment

Trust is the cornerstone of any community, and as staff members, we're entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining a safe, open, and transparent space. When you set your online status to private, it can inadvertently signal a lack of transparency. Members might wonder why you're keeping your activities hidden. This can lead to skepticism, and in some cases, even erode trust.

Accessibility and Approachability

One of the fantastic things about forums is the direct line of communication between staff members and the community. By setting your status to private, you're essentially closing that door. It can make you seem less approachable, which is the exact opposite of what we should be striving for.

Imagine a member needs some help or has a burning question, and they see that you're 'offline' or 'invisible'. This might discourage them from reaching out, even when they really should. We're here to help, and being available and accessible is a big part of that.

Leading by Example

As staff members, we're looked up to as leaders and role models in the community. By keeping your status private, you might inadvertently encourage other members to do the same. This could lead to a trend of less transparency, which isn't a path we want to venture down. Keep in mind, if people see your forum having less online people, they are more tempted to go elsewhere. Which causes you to lose leads and views.

Encouraging Open Discussions

Forums thrive on open discussions and a free flow of ideas. When staff members set their status to private, it can subtly imply that discussions should be kept behind closed doors. This can stifle the growth and creativity of the community as a whole.

Potential for Misunderstandings

Picture this: a member sees a staff member's status as private and jumps to conclusions. They might assume that the staff member is avoiding their queries or is disinterested in engaging with the community. This misunderstanding can lead to unnecessary friction and tension.

In conclusion, while there might be some personal reasons for wanting to keep your online status private, it's essential to consider the broader impact this decision might have on the community and your role within it. Remember, as staff members, we're the face of the community, and our actions set the tone for everyone else.

So, before you hit that 'private' button, take a moment to reflect on the potential consequences. Is it truly worth it?

 

[Ravenfreak]

I've only set my online status to hidden once, and it wasn't on a forum I was staff on. As staff I think you should have your online status set to open, you just never know when a member needs to reach out to you.

 

[DigNap15]

As an admin I do wish that my members would not set their online status to hidden.
On my forum setup I show the members to visit in the last 60 minutes.
As admin I see them all and its quite a long list
As a member you see only half that number so its not so impressive.
As a member you just see the total number of members online

 

[Arantor]

It's funny, I always found the opposite, if I were set to online, it made it more likely people would contact me *because they saw me online* rather than using the (better) features for raising issues if they had any.

 

[Cedric]

It's funny, I always found the opposite, if I were set to online, it made it more likely people would contact me *because they saw me online* rather than using the (better) features for raising issues if they had any.

In case of support on technical matters as you used to provide for SMF, I do agree with that. But anything else, I stay with my statement.

 

[Arantor]

Nope, not even that, just in general. I found that people would go for whoever was online *because they were online*. I see the same behaviours for moderators on Discord, interestingly, and have long since taken to setting my status there to 'away' by default.

 

[Al]

I’m never set to away. I don’t see the point. It just strikes as a little bit deceitful.

It’s like when folks on discord always show as offline and then contact me. I always think, why not just be honest? I don’t get it.

 

[an0nym0us]

The difference is big between being a hidden member and a hidden mod as you have different responsibilities on the forum.

 

[ClicketyKat]

I used to be an admin on a huge forum, and they had separate areas for different age groups. If I ever went into the younger crowd's group, even as a staff member, they got suspicious, so I always put myself invisible when I went to read the posts that got reported. That way they wouldn't be so on edge.

Normally, I don't hide my presence or what I'm doing. Watch me click around a site, I don't care.

 

[Mike30]

I completely understand the point of the article, but thinking from another angle, there are staff members that are requested more than others(aka popular) and can't answer all questions at once. Admins,have many other things to do beside interacting with members.
- As admin, I log in as "invisible" then I resolve the things I have at hand, then I make myself available "visible"
- As a member, I would feel unattended If I see a staff member online, I send a PM and never get an answer back.

And I think the option for invisibility has its own purpose and should not signal a lack of transparency, but responsibility handling the time efficiently while working on the forum. (every case is just different)

Of curse, if you are always "private" is another thing.

That's my humble opinion about this topic. And thank you for pointing this out.

 

[Darth Cognus]

I often use offline mode on discord, sometimes elsewhere because it's generally dishonest when I appear as online even though I simply have a tab open and am otherwise going about my day or am literally far from the keyboard, or in no position to reply on phone unless it's an emergency. People send a message and my response rate is disappointing. I've been burned enough by that to have taken the other approach: offline by default, and I haven't had nearly as many issues over time doing this. Managing exactly when I am truly online, away, busy is a game I've started several times, which swiftly becomes a mess that confuses everyone including me.

Further an issue is that my time online is not created equal. There are times when I post, and times when I read and then wander a bit while I form a useful response, or use other posting to jog me a bit. With my background on roleplaying forums this has resulted in several awkward experiences where I have been nagged for being online despite being in no position to offer an adequate response. I don't do well with that sort of social pressure, my response is done when it's done. Now if it's genuinely been a good bit I don't mind a reminder and this arrangement works naturally when people have a gist of how it works.

I don't do this often on forums and the worst of it was years back but I understand completely why people would be drawn to offline mode - or a hybrid, I've seen forums set up to indicate someone was logged in ie the last 12 hours but doesn't say 'person is online right now!' Generally an offline mode choice comes from a way of doing things resulting in negative experiences, and is a sanity measure. At least from my own case and those I've known. But of course it is ideal for a majority of people, staff and members alike to follow normal online/offline settings. Offline mode is an outlier that should not be used lightly, especially by staff. But I think the grey zone is larger here than some give credit for.