Locking threads isn’t the solution.

[Charlie_Eleanor]

Originally Posted by Selorian

I give respect where respect is due. Members who disregard multiple requests from staff aren't being respectful, so, yes, I will cease being diplomatic.

Ah, well I will give respect where respect is due, and from what I have seen I do NOT respect you, and while deleting comments/posts is your right, it is my right to say what I want (as long as it is in the guidelines, of course). You have not earned my respect, and I have tried to earn the respect of everyone on this forum(i.e. I have tried to regard requests from staff.) In my opinion, moderators who disregard a reoccuring theme of irritation among the members of the forum and do not look at themselves to see if they can improve, well, they are disregarding their responsability.

I would not have said this if the above blanket statement wasn't thrown out. "I give respect where respect is due..." Hmmmm. It lets me know where I stand. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

PS-Thanks rcallaci. Selorian, perhaps you should take note. That is how to reply without sounding like an ass hole.

[SeanFields]

I totally and whole heartedly agree with Charlie.

Censoring the word Voodoo didn't work to solve anything. It had no effect and the people who were banned for saying it were done wrongly. Keep in mind once again if there are no members your guidelines dont mean anything.

[pervarakapadiaatwforum]

well guess things go out of hand and just seem to not end.

[rcallaci]

Originally Posted by pervarakapadiaatwforum

well guess things go out of hand and just seem to not end.

My sentiments exactly, but here I am keeping it alive in my quest to douse the fire

Originally Posted by Charlie_Eleanor

Ah, well I will give respect where respect is due, and from what I have seen I do NOT respect you, and while deleting comments/posts is your right, it is my right to say what I want (as long as it is in the guidelines, of course). You have not earned my respect, and I have tried to earn the respect of everyone on this forum(i.e. I have tried to regard requests from staff.) In my opinion, moderators who disregard a reoccuring theme of irritation among the members of the forum and do not look at themselves to see if they can improve, well, they are disregarding their responsability.

I would not have said this if the above blanket statement wasn't thrown out. "I give respect where respect is due..." Hmmmm. It lets me know where I stand. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

PS-Thanks rcallaci. Selorian, perhaps you should take note. That is how to reply without sounding like an ass hole.

You have every right to speak your mind and disagree with the way moderating is done and to be even angry at the way Selorian worded his remarks but to insinuate that he is a As*ho*le is uncalled for. His job is to moderate the site, not make friends and have everyone love and respect him. He may not be the most diplomatic but he is one of the most dedicated and hard working members of this staff. He has contributed a huge amount of his time and effort on this site to make it user friendly. You don't have to like him but there is no need for name calling. That's how wars are started.

Originally Posted by SeanFields

I totally and whole heartedly agree with Charlie.

Censoring the word Voodoo didn't work to solve anything. It had no effect and the people who were banned for saying it were done wrongly. Keep in mind once again if there are no members your guidelines dont mean anything.

The fact of the matter is that there are 18,0000 members on this site, around 4000 active and still going strong. You seem to forget that this is not a democracy. Decisions are based on the interruptions of the rules and guidelines and on various expertise and gut intuition that members of the staff may have to make decisions concerning this site.

Any banning is not done lightly and is heatingly discussed among staff. Some of the decisions may seem unjust or unfair to you but if we put it to a vote amongst all members on each and every decision we make this site would freeze and shut down.
If we have to explain our actions constantly on every decision we make be it popular or unpopular then we would have no time to moderate and again this site would be a chaotic jungle.
Again I understand where you're coming from but it is not your decision on how we choose to moderate this site. That is up to the owner.

my warmest
bob

[SeanFields]

Bob,

Let's be honest. The owner has admitted to putting off problems on all his forums until they build up before he takes action therefore I would bet he very rarely looks in to see the issues of any of his forums until it has become big enough to somehow get his attention.
My comment about the word was about the bannings of people who said the word not about the person banned whose name was the word.
Fact is although there may be 4000 active members there is rarely 100 online at any given time and probably only a third of those making posts. There has to be an element of chaos to make any atmosphere fun. History in the real world shows that without conflict not much gets accomplished nor is a community built without having been bound together by some event or events.
What you forget, while trying to flex the staff muscle, is that no business can survive without customers therefore there is an element of democracy here. Therefore the staff should ,in all actuality, respect the customers (users) first and foremost. It's a basic business model so don't imply that our (the users) opinions do not matter because once again if we jump ship you will be left with nothing.
I guarantee there is some profit made here by the owner, he owns more than one forum site and without making a profit it is not worth his time, what little he does spend.

[Johnna]

I just want to add that I am in agreement with Sean. Moderation around here just doesn't seem up to par to me, and banning a name is senseless censorship. The person in question will be back anyway, so I don't understand why we have to pretend he doesn't exist until then. Just doesn't make sense to me.

[Ilasir Maroa]

No offense Sean, but I doubt that more than a very optimistic maximum of 1% of users on a site this big are gonna quit because of a few bans. You might think you know everything that's going on, but in my experience, the mods are generally right in the decisions they make, and they adress all the information in a very organized and fair way. You might actually achieve something with this thread on a smaller board, where even a few members make a big difference(personally, I have done something along those lines in a case where I felt unfairly treated; but after looking back, even though trhe mod and I rarely got along, I realize that he made the right choice, and I haven't had any trouble with mods since.), but this is sort of a democracy, and therefore, a one percent minority is not going to wield much clout.

Antagonizing the mods so much over a single little banning is silly(and there was some major mod-hating going on, and I think the mods were perfectly fair in their handling of the Voodoo case, and I have little doubt that they are being perfectly fair now. The rules clearly state that the mods have the right to close/lock threads and do all sorts of other things to keep order here, and if you can't handle that("censorship"?... I mean honestly, that's going way too far), maybe it's you who need to try and change.

Of course, that just my opinion, and I doubt you give it much weight.

[SeanFields]

No I very much take into account you opinion and your advice. This really has nothing to do with the banning in question but more of the attitude that the users have no say in anything. I'm not trying to ruffle feathers or cause some big mass leaving. I like it here for the most part. I did not like the way Selorian responded to a member of this forum in regards to a concern that person had and other posts that Selorian has made. Bob has been more than willing to discuss these issues even though we do not see eye to eye.

Also if you look back people were baned for even saying his name. People on here make friends and to censor them by threatening to ban people is ridiculous.

And for future note the correct way would have been to warn the two offenders and delete the posts in question if you wanted them to end. They can still be read which means the drama continues.

[rcallaci]

Sean

Not to seem glib but to be a customer in the business model that you speak of, doesn't that customer usually need to pay for said services.

This is a free writing site(money wise) where the price of admission is to follow the guidelines and rules of the site.
In those stated rules the moderators (admins, mods, mentors) are the ones who implement and interpret those said guidelines and rules. The owner of the site is responsible for the fees to run the sites on the server and for updates, overhauls and any major technical problems that may arise. He/she has a right to do as they choose with the site but usually leave it to staff (admin, mods, mentors) to run the day to day operations. The members responsibility's are to write, critique, and discuss issues that pertain to writing and adhere to the rules and guidelines.

Seems simple enough.

If we didn't respect the members on this site there would be no threads like this in the site.

If we didn't respect members of this site then we would not allow any forms of open debate on how this site should be run.

The Staff does not get paid or reimbursed with gifts, tokens or any such nuggets to moderate this site. We do it for the love of the site. So we view our members as fellow members,not customers, and as fellow members what we require is mutual respect for each of our respective roles.

Again your role is as a member-we do Liston and respect our members but to not have to explain or ask your permission to moderate. The banning of those three members for three days was a moderation decision that was agreed upon by staff and warrants no explanation other than we did what we thought was best for the overall health of the site.

This is all I have to say on this matter - We are what we are ...

my warmest
bob

[SeanFields]

"The members responsibility's are to write, critique."

That is our payment. Without it the owner would not make a profit (which I know he or she does.)

However Bob, I apreciate the time spent moderating actual issues and this thread in and of itself only got out of hand when a member of the staff basically told another member (of the forums) that they had no right to discuss issues that were important to them. I think that violates a basic principle.

I too will give up this subject as I have writing to do but I want to leave by saying this....

You have to give respect to earn respect. I respect you however I do not respect Selorian as it stands now. That can be taken for all its worth.

[Charlie_Eleanor]

I'd like to appologize for calling Selorian an Asshole. It was uncalled for.

I agree that I will drop this subject, but I also agree with what Sean said:

You have to give respect to earn respect.

[Hodge]

Thanks, guys. This has been another boring afternoon at work... Until now.

You beasts are pretty rare, but it seems there are two Rebels Without a Clue trying to work together to form one Rebel Leader in this thread.

Too bad it doesn't work like that.

But my afternoon still has 4 hours left in it. Charlie, Selorian totally PMed me to say you were a poopie-head... You better take care of this right now.

[SeanFields]

Originally Posted by Hodge

Thanks, guys. This has been another boring afternoon at work... Until now.

You beasts are pretty rare, but it seems there are two Rebels Without a Clue trying to work together to form one Rebel Leader in this thread.

Too bad it doesn't work like that.

But my afternoon still has 4 hours left in it. Charlie, Selorian totally PMed me to say you were a poopie-head... You better take care of this right now.

I love you Hodge, lets cuddle.... OMG SCANDAL

[lin]

Moderation around here just doesn't seem up to par to me,

I would strenuously disagree with that. Try comparing to the the nazis on absolute write, as only one example. There are forums in which deletions and moderator interjection happen daily.

The moderation on this forum is generally speaking the ideal optimum between control and license. Nothing too really awful happens and you don't see spam for Chinese bug sprayers. They prefer, obviously, to err on the side of letting things spin out, rather than jumping in and stomping.

These lockings are part of something they're doing. I've run forums (that made this one look like a daycare in paradise by comparison) and can see somewhat what they are trying to do...which is come to grips with larger problems without interferring too much with people's expression.

Which, if you'll lay down all the righteous indignation of people particpating in something that is FREE, that SOMEBODY ELSE has to maintain and pay for the drive space, is pretty wide open.

Income from the site is none of your damn business, or mine. I can tell from here it ain't that much. This is not a money mill by any means. There are few ads and they are interest to writers and come from banner exchanges that pay very little. But like I said...what's it to you? If they're going broke and selling their children into prostitution to afford to keep the site up, does that make it more right for them to violate your inalienable rights to do whatever you want in somebody else's facility?
If they are making huge bucks, does that make it wronger or righter?
Or just none of your fucking business.

I am by NO MEANS a kisser of moderator ass. To say the least. I've been kicked off so many forums I lose track (fortunately, so do they :=) But I have to say this one works out really, really well. People can learn, pontificate. have some fun, call each other names. Call the admiinstrator an asshole without getting banned, let me point out.

Here's a thought...don't get involved in the politics of something you don't understand. Just use it and enjoy it.

[SeanFields]

Good post. Glad you contributed to the discussion.

Up until you began cursing.