Deleting Posts

[Boss-Hog]

It was on-topic, funny, and didn't break any of the rules from the bottom of the page. I don't see any reason why it should have been deleted...

Yeah, that's your opinion, which is far from absolute. Another poster quoted the same post and didn't find it nearly as humorous as you did - he/she found it just as snide and rude as I did.

If the user we're speaking of has questions, he/she can email me. Otherwise, since you are not privy to all the facts regarding that situation, this thread better get constructive in a hurry if it's going to remain open. I'm not going to continue to debate something that's no one's business other than the poster in question.

[*BaseClogger*]

How many posts have been deleted in this thread?

[redsfandan]

That's not even remotely close to the truth. It was deleted because it added nothing to the conversation other than serving to antagonize people.

I'm curious about something that hopefully you, or any of the mods, can answer. As far as I know the only posts that were deleted were one by Baumer and at least one that quoted his post. Like Caveat Emperor pointed out earlier there were a couple posts by another member that included statements that seem to fit the above standard but nothing happened to those posts. So I was just curious why not. Those posts are still up there but I don't understand why the offensive statements in them are still there.

[Boss-Hog]

I'm curious about something that hopefully you, or any of the mods, can answer. As far as I know the only posts that were deleted were one by Baumer and at least one that quoted his post. Like Caveat Emperor pointed out earlier there were a couple posts by another member that included statements that seem to fit the above standard but nothing happened to those posts. So I was just curious why not. Those posts are still up there but I don't understand why the offensive statements in them are still there.

Did you (or anyone else) find them offensive enough to report them to the admins/moderators? The answer to that question is no.

I'm not going to speak for the other admins/moderators, so I'll have to let them chime in, but while I personally found the posts very distasteful, I didn't think they clearly violated any of the rules of the board that we have established, so I did not remove them.

[Boss-Hog]

How many posts have been deleted in this thread?

Zero from users who weren't attempting to evade a previously issued ban.

[Highlifeman21]

If those comments turned the thread into a disaster then the thread should have been closed right then and not 50 posts later. It seems to me the locker room talk took place early on and was much worse than what was posted on the final page(s).

BTW, what's with all these newbies chiming in???

My guess about the newbies is that it is probably a poster, or posters given some time off from RZ that know that they're being characterized incorrectly, or still want their point to be heard but cannot b/c the mods have silenced them due to that time off.

That would be my guess, seeing as it looks like a couple of newbie accounts have been deleted after they've posted in various forums.

[Highlifeman21]

Speaking for only myself as a mod, "interesting discussion" isn't the only reason to keep a thread gonig.

If a thread isn't breaking any of the bylaws, why not keep the discussion open?

No name calling, no bad language, just semi-civil discourse.

[Boss-Hog]

My guess about the newbies is that it is probably a poster, or posters given some time off from RZ that know that they're being characterized incorrectly, or still want their point to be heard but cannot b/c the mods have silenced them due to that time off.

That would be my guess, seeing as it looks like a couple of newbie accounts have been deleted after they've posted in various forums.

That is correct.

[Sea Ray]

My guess about the newbies is that it is probably a poster, or posters given some time off from RZ that know that they're being characterized incorrectly, or still want their point to be heard but cannot b/c the mods have silenced them due to that time off.

That would be my guess, seeing as it looks like a couple of newbie accounts have been deleted after they've posted in various forums.

That was my suspicion as well. Bush league...

[Highlifeman21]

That was my suspicion as well. Bush league...

To play devil's advocate, silencing an opinion or 1 side of the discussion is intellectually irresponsible, and does nothing more than essentially piss off the other side and possibly push them to extremes so they can make sure their voice is heard.

Sometimes it's just easier to hit a proverbial mute button, and not deal with the other side, but IMO it's really a case by case basis, as all sides of an argument should have equal time, initially.

The way I've viewed this entire issue/situation is that some members of the community are looking for an explanation and based on their continued posts, haven't received an explanation. Seems like there's a lot of curiosity abound, and the answers are coming across as "b/c I(we) said so," or "if you don't like it, then leave".

While I can understand the frustration of Boss and GIK and some of the mods with having to deal with us (b/c we are an unruly and unappreciative bunch), I'd like to give some posters the benefit of the doubt of having the intellectual and cognitive capacity to view things from the POV of the site owners and the mods.

IMO, it seems like there's frustration on both sides right now, and a stalemate's on the horizon.

[jojo]

To play devil's advocate, silencing an opinion or 1 side of the discussion is intellectually irresponsible, and does nothing more than essentially piss off the other side and possibly push them to extremes so they can make sure their voice is heard.

Sometimes it's just easier to hit a proverbial mute button, and not deal with the other side, but IMO it's really a case by case basis, as all sides of an argument should have equal time, initially.

The way I've viewed this entire issue/situation is that some members of the community are looking for an explanation and based on their continued posts, haven't received an explanation. Seems like there's a lot of curiosity abound, and the answers are coming across as "b/c I(we) said so," or "if you don't like it, then leave".

While I can understand the frustration of Boss and GIK and some of the mods with having to deal with us (b/c we are an unruly and unappreciative bunch), I'd like to give some posters the benefit of the doubt of having the intellectual and cognitive capacity to view things from the POV of the site owners and the mods.

IMO, it seems like there's frustration on both sides right now, and a stalemate's on the horizon.

In my view this issue has partly been an attempt to publicly discuss something that should have been addressed via PM and partly it has been more advocacy for a friend than an effort at understanding and partly its been discussion about community standards though this part has been the smallest part.

All of that said, the original post that precipitated this current theme deserved the action the mods took IMHO and this notion has only been reinforced in my mind by the subsequent thumbing of the rules apparently by the moderated individual (though really none of this is our business). I only say this to point out that it's an interesting launching board for a discussion of the perceived flaws in the moderation system here (again IMHO).

Avenues exist for those that receive moderation to communicate with the mods and to make their case. I doubt decisions are overturned very often but my best guess is that's because the mods don't have hair triggers (i.e. actions are usually deserved). Finally, I think the clearest point that has been made in the several threads that have now addressed this issue is that Boss (and several mods now) have indicated the public discussion of specific decisions isn't an acceptable avenue to communicate.

That's my take on things anyway.

[Sea Ray]

To play devil's advocate, silencing an opinion or 1 side of the discussion is intellectually irresponsible, and does nothing more than essentially piss off the other side and possibly push them to extremes so they can make sure their voice is heard.

You make some good points but I still think it's bush league and deceptive to handle it in such a way as to start a new user name and act like you're an innocent bystander. I'd have a lot more respect for the person if they admitted who they were in their post and their reasons for handling it that way. Personally I'd handle it with PMs.

On the other side of the coin, the butt kissing going on in this thread is nauseating. It reminds me of the rep days and the behavior such a system elicited. I'm no "buddy" of some of the folks complaining about the moderation in this thread but I respect their letting it all hang out approach to the teacher's pet stuff.

[*BaseClogger*]

The ironic thing about all of this is that you've raised 10 times the stink about this relative to what the original poster has - perhaps that's because he knew what he did wasn't permissible?

How can this be true if the person in question has made additional accounts and attempted to post in this thread (which have subsequently been deleted)?

[jojo]

You make some good points but I still think it's bush league and deceptive to handle it in such a way as to start a new user name and act like you're an innocent bystander. I'd have a lot more respect for the person if they admitted who they were in their post and their reasons for handling it that way. Personally I'd handle it with PMs.

On the other side of the coin, the butt kissing going on in this thread is nauseating. It reminds me of the rep days and the behavior such a system elicited. I'm no "buddy" of some of the folks complaining about the moderation in this thread but I respect their letting it all hang out approach to the teacher's pet stuff.

From my standpoint, the system isn't broken.

In fact, I think the ORG is actually a little too lax if one adopts a strict interpretation of it's mission. But again, we're given a great deal of latitude in defining just how content aligns with that mission. There is zero butt kissing required to point that out for context.

[Sea Ray]

It's all up to interpretation. What one might call trolling another would call "bringing up a provocative subject". I don't agree with how this board is moderated but I don't agree with moaning about it either. When I do have a gripe I take it up with the moderator through PMs but usually I don't even do that. I just move on.