Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

Thoughts on members having a thread/area to publicly discuss thoughts on mods.......

Discussion in 'Member Casual Chat' started by Oldyoungin, Jun 2, 2015.

Page 3 of 4
  1. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79,044
    Likes Received:
    19,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Who cares, they're paying for it.
    And I'd bet there are those who don't like the mods that would pay to vent their opinions. Probably more so than the other way around. Why would one pay to say nice things?
     
    dairyair, Jun 5, 2015
    #51
  2. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79,044
    Likes Received:
    19,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Respect has to be earned.
     
    dairyair, Jun 5, 2015
    #52
  3. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, but I said nothing about the mentally ill, who are not necessarily on a mission to get people to believe glaring absurdities.

    Of course they shouldn't, seeing such people will inevitably project their own boorishness onto those who are so rude as to point out that a road apple will never pass for a fudge brownie.
     
    yguy, Jun 5, 2015
    #53
  4. Tram Law

    Tram Law Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    9,582
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The hypocrisy in that is often those who say that demand that other people give them respect because they think they're better than everybody else and don't have to earn other people's respect.

    These kinds of people will never earn mine as i will not engage in a one way relationship.
     
    Tram Law, Jun 5, 2015
    #54
  5. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've been on forums like that. Stayed about a week, and then the total chaos caused me to get off of them.

    - - - Updated - - -

    This is a privately run board. If you don't have money in the game, you have no right to criticize.
     
    perdidochas, Jun 5, 2015
    #55
  6. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Those who don't demand appropriate respect will not receive it either.
     
    RPA1, Jun 5, 2015
    #56
  7. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Go ahead and limit the forum to subscribers and see how quickly it dies. The customer in this forum is the general public, the service provided is an exchange of ideas and interaction between contributors. The forum itself only offers a blank platform for people to write on.

    And I wonder, do accommodation laws apply to a forum such as this one?
     
    Battle3, Jun 5, 2015
    #57
  8. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79,044
    Likes Received:
    19,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It takes money to operate. It has to come from somewhere. Right now it's donations. I don't see ads.
     
    dairyair, Jun 5, 2015
    #58
  9. Dark Star

    Dark Star Senior Admin Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Actually, we do sometimes have ads, but we try to keep it to a minimum. Personally, I hate the damned things, and I figure that if I hate them, most other people do as well. We have to run some just to help out the cash flow, but we really try to minimize it because we feel they degrade the forum experience for the users. It's like watching a movie on TV, and they run the commercials in the bottom righthand corner of the screen while you're watching your film. I don't like it.

    Concerning the issue of whether only donors truly have skin in the game, my thinking is pretty close to that of Battle3. The way i see it, every single person who posts here is contributing to the site. Yeah, we can't spend a post, but the content is what makes or breaks a message board. Everyone who starts a thread, or responds to one with something that makes people think about an issue in a different way than they had before, is donating to the site in a very real sense. Yeah, we own the domain, and pay for the software and the server, and we moderate it and stay up all night fixing it when it breaks, and it technically belongs to us - but it's the members who actually make the board, and the way they do that is by posting.

    The way i see it, the job of all staff is to do whatever needs to be done to provide a pleasant, enjoyable, and beneficial experience for the users. Period. In a way, that could be the mission statement for staff members. Every single thing we do (whether it's upgrading the software, answering a member PM, moderating a thread, even giving infractions when a rule is broken) is really done for one purpose, and one purpose only - to make the board as usable as it can possibly be for the maximum number of members. If any action we take is not one that logically meets that criteria, then it's probably something we should not be doing. If the majority of members enjoy using the board, and find value in it, then we're probably doing our job. If they are not, then we probably aren't. Because this really is the members' site; their posts are the bricks from which it is built.

    Sure, we'll gladly and gratefully accept your money if you can afford to kick in a donation (and feel that it's worth it to you), but if you can't afford it or whatever, we're truly grateful just for the posts y'all contribute.
     
    Dark Star, Jun 6, 2015
    #59
  10. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The moderation scheme here can be likened to gun control in the sense that it's a top-down method of enforcing civility. The problem in both cases is that it undermines the sense of responsibility of the individual for his or her self-defense; and given all the passive-aggressive flamebaiting that goes on around here, rules 2 and 3 tend to empower the malevolently inclined just as much as gun control laws empower criminals.
     
    yguy, Jun 6, 2015
    #60
  11. Dark Star

    Dark Star Senior Admin Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Only to the extent that other posters grant them that power. Nobody's depriving anyone of the "responsibility for their self-defense"; the rules simply require that you do it without insulting one another. The vast majority of members here have absolutely no trouble getting by without ever having to insult someone else, no matter how heated the discussion may become. We have people who've posted here for a decade, and not once have they ever even been warned for violating a rule. If someone says something that antagonizes another poster, and the only way that poster knows how to respond is to double down and insult them, then perhaps this isn't the right forum for them.

    We have rules against insulting or personally attacking other members, just as we have rules against baiting or provoking other members. If someone provokes another member, and that member responds with an insult, the original provocation does not invalidate the rule against insulting them back. "Well, he made me mad" means nothing. Flamebaiting is something we take very seriously here, so if someone tries to provoke you, report it and move on. If their posts meet the standard of flamebaiting, then we infract them, and they get the 10 points and you get the last laugh. If you respond with an insult, then you both get infractions. It's really pretty simple.

    Think about it for a minute. When we tightened up the rules and made them more uniformly applied, several things happened. A number of people were very slow to figure it out, and kept on posting the same way they always had. By the time they did figure it out, it was too late - they'd already been banned. Others, however, were a little more shrewd, and if you only pay attention to one sentence in this entire post, please make it this one, because it's very important - what those posters figured out that if there was someone they didn't like, instead of insulting them, all they had to do was provoke that member into insulting them - and then the member they'd provoked got infracted.

    What this means is that many of the posters who post flamebait are probably trying to provoke people they don't like into breaking the rules and getting themselves into trouble. And every time someone responds by attacking them, they are falling right into the trap. So no, it's not the rules that empower the flamebaiters - it's the members who aren't smart enough to figure that out, or can't control their emotions, who give them that power. If people would just figure this out, and stop escalating these disputes by "fighting back," what would happen is that eventually the infraction system would weed out the flamebaiters, and all we'd be left with would be mature, rational posters who debate issues rather than trade insults.

    If a poster insults someone because they were provoked, of course we understand that. And we're often sympathetic. But it doesn't matter, because it's still against the rules, and the rule on personal attacks is very clear - just don't do it. It doesn't say, "don't attack other posters unless they made you really mad" - it says, "don't attack other posters." Comparing it to gun laws is an extreme stretch - I seriously doubt anyone's life is endangered by someone saying something mean to them on the internet. It's just a discussion - there is no threat to your personal safety; all you have to do is report the post and walk away. Anyone who is unable to do that has nobody to blame but themselves, because 99 out of 100 members are able to do exactly that every single day.
     
    Dark Star, Jun 7, 2015
    #61
  12. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually, my point was not for the forum itself, but for those who want to complain about moderators. I don't complain about the moderators. I don't pay for that privilege.
     
    perdidochas, Jun 8, 2015
    #62
  13. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now I'm going to use the classic "progressive" argument -

    the government spent some money to help develop the internet, we all paid for the internet, we all pay for the infrastructure that runs the internet. Through our tax dollars and government expenditures, we all pay for this forum and have the right to inject ourselves into its operation. And the forum must listen and respond, it must accommodate every persons perspective.

    So says Elizebeth Warren, obama, and all the Christian hating gay activists.
     
    Battle3, Jun 8, 2015
    #63
  14. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Rather than bothering to plow through this condescending lecture point by point, I'll just summarize my view as follows: if Christ and the devil were posters here and debated under your rules, it would look to most readers as if both their positions were valid, and PF staffers would be congratulating themselves on their even-handedness.
     
    yguy, Jun 8, 2015
    #64
  15. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The government doesn't pay for the server it runs on......
     
    perdidochas, Jun 8, 2015
    #65
  16. Dark Star

    Dark Star Senior Admin Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sounds absolutely ideal to me. Why do you think it would be a bad thing? You'd have two people (well, pardon me, two parties) with two completely contradictory points of view, each making the strongest and clearest possible argument for their position in civil, respectful terms, without insulting each other, and allowing the readers to decide which of them was the most persuasive. And the moderators would not have had any involvement in the thread, so nobody would have any reason to feel that we had influenced the outcome. So there could be no suspicion of staff bias. Have I got that all correct?

    Sounds to me as though that would be exactly what we want every thread on PF to be. What is it that you don't like about it? Are you saying you would want the staff to be biased in some way, or that you would want the rules to favor one side or the other? I'm sorry, but I'm having difficulty figuring out what you're trying to say here.
     
    Dark Star, Jun 8, 2015
    #66
  17. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to the "progressive" argument,

    "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

    By "progressive" reasoning, because the government touches something - even if its in a small way - then we all own a piece of that "something". This forum did not get invented on its own. The internet - the "highway" the forum runs on - was partially funded by government money. The forum uses infrastructure built and paid for by tax dollars - easements to run cables, bandwidth to transmit to & from satellites and antennae, etc.

    By "progressive" logic, the owners and founders of a business - or this forum - do not own it.
     
    Battle3, Jun 8, 2015
    #67
  18. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well ain'tchoo somethin'. :)

    No, you've got all of it dead wrong. First off I invite you to review John 8:44 and tell me how it stacks up against rules 2 and 3. As for the devil, while he would surely present as seamless a facade of respect and civility as you ever clapped an eye to, he and/or his partisans here would be contriving rule violations in every one of Jesus' posts and flooding the report queue; and the staff, being dazzled with such devilishly brilliant BS, would end up banning guess Who.

    Do you have a problem with a rule set that favors truth over lies?
     
    yguy, Jun 8, 2015
    #68
  19. Dark Star

    Dark Star Senior Admin Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,617
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Perhaps you're right. I guess if they ever show up, we'll find out. But if Satan thinks for one minute that we're going to let him get away with flooding us with frivolous reports, I'll tell you right now we'll cast him out just as we would anyone else.
     
    Dark Star, Jun 8, 2015
    #69
  20. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79,044
    Likes Received:
    19,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Unless you're now a progressive, you are being hypocritical. Damning most of the things gov't encouraged along the way, but thinking an internet forum should be a free for all because the gov't gave it a start. And you admitted it. So, either gov't promotes and should be allowed to continue or it shouldn't and only let private entities do things.
     
    dairyair, Jun 8, 2015
    #70
  21. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79,044
    Likes Received:
    19,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Your truth are lies to many. See it's subjective.
     
    dairyair, Jun 8, 2015
    #71
  22. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    From what I've seen of the actual performance of PF staff, I'd expect you to find those reports worthy of serious consideration, not frivolous.
     
    yguy, Jun 9, 2015
    #72
  23. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm playing Devils Advocate, I'm just applying the usual "progressive" argument to this particular case.

    "progressives" as well as the Christian hating gay supporters, think because the government (taxpayers) in some way provide a benefit that a private company uses, then the government and taxpayers have a say in the way that business is run. The standard example is the government builds a road that a business uses to transport its product, therefore the government gets a say in how that business is run. That's Elizabeth Warrens argument.

    The other argument is that if an entity provides a service to the "public" then it must accommodate all of the public in spite of the business owners wishes. I've heard that argument dozens of times on this forum but applied to Christian bakers, florists, photographers, wedding planners.

    In the case of a forum, the government helped provide the internet "highway" the forum runs on. And the forum is open to the general public so it must accommodate all views - for example it should not be allowed to withdraw its product from an individual because an individual has a viewpoint contrary to the forum operator, ie it cannot ban someone. In the same manner the Christian baker refused to put a pro-gay message on a wedding cake but was forced to do so, the forum cannot censor viewpoints on the forum "cake".

    "progressives" want it both ways. The hypocrisy is starting to overtake them.
     
    Battle3, Jun 9, 2015
    #73
  24. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe we want moderation jobs to be outsourced to India. We are sneaky like that.
     
    Deckel, Jun 9, 2015
    #74
    Dark Star and (deleted member) like this.
  25. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not a progressive, so that logic doesn't sway me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    You do realize that the moderators are volunteers........
     
    perdidochas, Jun 9, 2015
    #75
Page 3 of 4

Share This Page