Last evening I posted a reply in this thread: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=45559 When I checked it this morning I found that Goofy had been forced to edit it rather extensively. I have never seen the stuff that was edited out, but I had a good feeling about the strict moderation. Without the editing I am sure it would have been another closed thread, or one destined for the cesspool. It seems to be becoming a trend; the 'hobby' of trying to detroy threads. I also saw two threads being closed in Science and society that didn't needed to be closed if they had been moderated from the beginning. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=16319 and http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=44230 I think that this is part of the current problematic state of sciforums. Too many threads that could be interesting are torpedo'ed by members. Some threads could be gems of knowledge or insight if more closely moderated. What is your stance on this?
I think that it was overmoderated. I had two (actually three posts. I later commented on the editing.) posts completely deleted. While I did level an insult or two at our friend Truthseeker, my entire post wasn't insulting. It had several points that were relevant and pertinent to the topic. He could have deleted a single line, maybe two, from my post and it would have been without flaw. Also. Whitewolf had a line deleted that was definitely not worthy of deletion. I don't really think that this is the problem with the forums. The two examples you gave were hotbeds of dissension and it should be no surprise that they eventually were locked. One dealt with race and the other dealt with gender. Both issues that draw very passionate arguments. And. I must say that I take offense to this seeming accusation that I was trying to destroy any thread. I made a rude comment but the rest of my post was entirely on topic. And. Might I add that I've seen you taking part in this 'hobby' as you call it? And, by the way, extensive editing was an overstatement. He deleted two posts. Edited a line by Whitewolf. And had to fuck with the single response that quoted whitewolf's line.
Ehhh... It came out as more of an insult than I wanted. I meant only to tease. Heh, I have bad days with wording what I mean; today is one of them.
I don't think that it read as insulting at all. You merely stated a fact. That Truthseeker is not liked by many around here. This is not insulting. You even used it in a non-insulting manner. It was all about the feeling of fitting in. And, I'll admit that my question to him about his ability or inability to not show his weakness was insulting, but as I said I think the rest was all relevant to this idea of being welcomed. That nobody feels welcome. Immigrants and natives alike. I mean, I can understand some moderation. I have no problem with it. And I was even thinking when I posted that it would probably be edited. But not deleted. I suppose I should stop and think that if it's going to be edited then don't post it. But towards such an end lies... political correctness and ineffectuality.
Well, for one thing, the edits regarding TruthSeeker: I can understand that. It lately looks like we have ganged up on him, and no wonder he will get some special moderator attention, not to say protection.
So in truth, you knowingly insulted another member and should have been temporarily banned, I guess. The mods are not here to act as a parent for you and clean up your mess. You knew something was wrong and did it anyway, why should we expend the effort to sort it out? Again, the problem is one of time. We aren't here 24/7 and we certainly can't read every post on the forums. It often happens that by the time we become aware of a problem, it has become page after page after page of inanity and insult. At that point, closing it or flushing it become the options. The last time I tried a bit heavier moderation and temporarily banned members for insulting each other, I took quite a bit of heat. Things did settle down for a while but I agree, Spurious, that it has become an issue again. Everyone here knows that there are and always will be a few members who get their kicks from disrupting things for everyone else. The question is how do the members want it handled. keeping in mind that stricter enforcement is applicable to everyone? :m: Peace.
Yes. But only because he paints himself with a target so efficiently. Kidding. Look. Yes it was insulting. Somewhat. But it was also truthful and one can only hope that evetually he will understand what is wrong with his wacky viewpoints. It was insulting somewhat, enlightening somewhat, and teasing somewhat. As far as the moderation not being here to clean up our messes, what are they here for then? Not meaning to be a smartass or anything here, but that is what the moderaters are here for. Like it or not. Sure, it can be a pain in the ass sometimes, but that's the way it is. Anyway. Let's look at the post in question. I don't have it in front of me anymore, unfortunately, but I do remember the general gist of it. First, I called his attitude, his argument, weak. Saying that nobody feels welcome and that it's weak to feel that you're owed this 'welcome' by anybody. Is this an insult? I didn't insult Truthseeker directly. I insulted his stance. The problem, and this I'll agree with deletion, came at the end where I couldn't help myself from asking the question if it was possible for him to make a post without showing said weakness. This was insulting. But also teasing. Fuck. HOw often do I bitch about my posts being deleted or edited? FOr one, it doesn't happen often. For two, when it does I'm generally pretty understanding. But this one was excessive. Is it really so much more difficult to delete a single line than to delete two posts? The second post was entirely about the weakness of the argument and was not personally insulting in the least. Must we play nicey nicey and not even be able to disparage another's argument now? I think that you are overstating the case. There are threads that invite such treatment at times, yes. And perhaps sometimes the boundary between a so-so thread and a dumb-ass thread is blurred and mistakes can be made. (Which, by the way, I don't think that the thread in question was. I wasn't trying to harpoon it. I will continue to assert that my points were on topic and pertinent. They were deleted and now the thread can go its own way. I don't give a shit anymore.) I have the feeling that I know a name or two that you would place on this list of members who 'get kicks out of disrupting things for everyone' and I think you're wrong. I don't think that people really want to disrupt things. Except for the few trolls that appear every so often. I think that most of the members that are present at this time are rather serious minded. Even the kiddies seem to have died down... somewhat. No. They're not these purposeful troublemakers that you would lable them. Just rambunctious at times. Certainly not deserving any strict punishment. With intellect comes certain foibles of character. We get up to dickens sometimes. No harm intended. And, speaking of "stricter enforcement is applicable to everyone", are you really prepared to do that if it should be the common desire? Are you prepared to ban mods? You know as well as I do that there are a couple of mods that would fit into this category that you have in mind of those who like to disrupt things. I think we all know that if one of them had taken the initiative to start lambasting the boy in his thread then no moderation would have taken place and it would have been a free-for-all destined for the cesspool instead. Right? Anyway. I, for one, will try to lay off the boy. He's just so damned.... tempting. It becomes too easy to point out his faults as they present themselves. I sure as hell don't mean to be 'disruptive' as you'd term me. If anything, I want only the best for these forums. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I love this place. I love the day I stumbled across it and I dread to think of a day that I might be forced to leave it. I don't want to hurt it and would do everything in my power to keep it from harm. Hell, I should be a moderator if you ask me. I should be even higher on the ladder than James and the Fish...
With added consideration, this statement is ridiculous. Shouldn't the proper course of action be a warning or two before you break out the bannings?
While there are always some troublemakers in each social group, there is something else that I find characteristic for the present situation and the "need to disrupt things". Complaints keep coming about how this site has become boring and uninteresting. In such a situation, the "need to disrupt things" arises spontaneously. Some disruption certainly comes from those who just feel like disrupting. But a portion of disruption is due to non-satisfaction with the forum. I don't think it is an effective and creative way to approach the problem -- but it certainly indicates that the problem is here.
