FFA Moderation Thoughts - What Do You Think? (1 Viewer)

[Van Dyman]

eh

Pretty sure Joe just trolled me anyway. He essentially asked what's wrong with this place, I explained, he responded by asking again what's wrong with this place.

Total mind####. I JUST EXPLAINED IT!!!!!!!

"What's the fun of having an ant farm if you aren't going to shake it every once in a while."  -management

 

[T J]

No trap Bob. Just trying to see what people are thinking. 

J

I'm thinking you gave me a 10 day timeout about a month ago and I have no idea why nor would you answer why despite me sending you multiple "contact administrator" messages as well as one to you via pm. I thought that was extremely weak sauce and I still have no clue why the time out and especially relative to other things I see posted.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Sure, I appreciate you've engaged me, so I'll try to earnestly expound on my post. (My original post, was meant to be earnest as well FWIW. I know you don't like whining - I wasn't; I  was responding to your OP).

To be honest, I don't think much needs to be changed with your forums - that was half the point of my post. There are glaring issues that come up here every time we do one of these threads - a News, Current Events and Politics Sub-forum is always the most resounding gripe or response.  FBG FFA is like that old family owned restaurant in your home town that people continue to go to because it's comfortable and you've been going there for years.  Yeah, the french fries are clearly made from frozen, and the baked stuffed haddock recipe hasn't changed in 40 years but that's why you go there. 2 parts nostalgia, 1 part being actually interested in being there. After hitting up your friendly neighborhood restaurant for 40 years, it starts to get overrun with people shouting at each other, calling each other tools, laughing sarcastically at each other. This may be a microcosm of how the world is for all I know. You have the neighborhood yenta Tim who people actually plan not to sit around because they don't want to get sucked into some non ending political debate each week about the same thing over and over (all due respect to Tim, just an example -he and I get along very well) and just enjoy their food.  After a while, the place is so over run with people just being general a-holes to each other that they start to go to Applebees instead just to avoid dealing with that nastiness. Have you been in your political threads here Joe?  The place is a cesspool in those threads. Not just because of Trump, they've gotten progressively worse for years. 

When you, the owner of Maggie's Family Restaurant ask the establishment "what can I do better?" and the overwhelming response is "throw the guys who wanna talk politics in the room near the salad bar" but you ignore it, the driving force of your business eventually gets turned off, or stick to their small booth in the corner.  BTW - the salad bar "room" doesn't have a wall up.  It's just out of ear shot of the people who want to have a few beers, eat some baked stuffed haddock and play trivia with the local wedding DJ once in a while.  We're still all friends. 

I don't think the forums need to be broken down any more than they are now Joe. A News, Views, Politics and Current Events sub forum doesn't expand the forums into some uncontrollable entity.  Again - we have a baseball forum. It's not an obscene request if we're going to cordon off baseball guys to simply give the politics guys a home on the other side of the restaurant as well.  This isn't only me - this is your overwhelming respond to every time you do one of these threads.  I'm just trying to roll it up for you.

Moderation wise, you don't need to change much - I'm not complaining about the moderation here.  Again, your staff does such a great job.  Their job would be easier with a politics subforum.  But in general, we moderate ourselves.  

We don't need 50 sub forums, message boards that have 160 different places where you can post are ridiculous.  But politics, gun control, election, news events, etc etc crap has utterly overrun the community here.  And a LOT of it is nasty. Go into the Donald Trump thread and start on page 50 if you need evidence (that's just a random page BTW) of just not being excellent to each other.  How about the guys with alias accounts in there and in the Bernie threads  ing and admitting they were aliases for months and months and nothing being down.  Isn't that one of your basic tenents?  How about tim coming in here, after being suspended for being a #### and then posting under his alias that we all know exists? Then we all laugh at it like it's so brazen, it's funny.  That's a daily occurence here. It's one big running joke. 

My only opinions on how to sub out the forums are above.  They are pretty benign and in the majority of the feedback you always get here.  You're overall doing a great job, you could make it better and actually give us what we want.  Or it could continue to go downhill.

Best

Also JB

Thanks. I can see all of that. 

I've always hated fracturing a community. Inside note - I actually hate that I got talked into the baseball forum years ago and think the forum would be stronger if it was included in with the rest of the FFA like it alway was. I think it was a mistake but not worth dealing with the outcry if we killed it. 

I think in the same way, breaking out the political / news stuff would weaken the community as lots of people know each other from both commenting on news topics as well as talking about wagering. I can also see an endless decision tree of what goes into the political / news forum. Is pokemon craze a news item? Is asking why people need an assault rifle a news item? I don't know.

I personally love the diner restaurant crowd and think it's a good analogy. Because I personally enjoy the whole community. Not dividing off the folks I don't want to hear. In other words, I tend to like the goofy diversity of the crowd.

BUT I fully understand that at some point if the folks you don't want to hear become too much of a negative, you just stop going to the restaurant. And I get that the tipping point for that can be tough to define. So I hear you. But also know that just because we don't jump to implement every suggestion that's made doesn't mean we don't hear you. That's probably the thing that's most frustrating. People interpret not doing their suggestion as being out of touch or not listening. 

I also think there's a lot that goes on behind the scenes that folks never see. It's nobody's fault as there would be no way for you to see it. I get called into the Donald Trump thread 5 times per day to look at something that's reported. Sometimes it's not close to over the line. Sometimes it's right on the line. Sometimes it's way over the line. I get it that our political threads suck. If we suspend people we're board Nazis. If we don't suspend, we're clueless. I also think sometimes we get way more credit than's deserved for knowing everything that goes on. The board software is clunky and hard to use for moderators. We don't see everything. It's why the report function is so helpful to us. We do the best we can with what we have. I don't like aliases. Tim's alias of Winston Churchill was banned when we saw it. But there's no way for you to see that. We used to comment on it but that became more of an attention getting thing that wasn't worth it. What is seen is that the moderators are clueless and hypocritical on aliases. The reality is we're just not that good at a crappy job.

Let me know your thoughts more on exactly what gets in an and what's excluded in a news / political type forum. And how you think the tolerance level should be and what's allowed. I'd specifically like to hear your thoughts on the condescending part and zero tolerance. The general toolishness that I see is a bummer and I'd love to be able to improve that. 

J

 

[tjnc09]

Nailed it. Sometimes it feels the owners treat us like an ATM instead of a community. 

I stopped paying for their content because these forums are so terrible now.  I am so much happier spending less time here.  Maybe if they realize that the lack of moderation of these forums is affecting their business, things will change.

@Joe Bryant

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm thinking you gave me a 10 day timeout about a month ago and I have no idea why nor would you answer why despite me sending you multiple "contact administrator" messages as well as one to you via pm. I thought that was extremely weak sauce and I still have no clue why the time out and especially relative to other things I see posted.

Looks like it was 8 days for directly calling another poster an idiot in the Disney Alligator thread after we asked people specifically to be cool after the child was killed. We often don't get into debates on why a person is suspended. In 16 years, I don't think it's ever been beneficial. And in some cases like with David Shick, it actually was very negative with the poster threatening his work place. It's also pretty rare that the poster doesn't know he went over the line. In the end, it sadly boils down to again, not having the manpower to dedicate to moderating.

J

 

[John Bender]

Thanks. I can see all of that. 

I've always hated fracturing a community. Inside note - I actually hate that I got talked into the baseball forum years ago and think the forum would be stronger if it was included in with the rest of the FFA like it alway was. I think it was a mistake but not worth dealing with the outcry if we killed it. 

I think in the same way, breaking out the political / news stuff would weaken the community as lots of people know each other from both commenting on news topics as well as talking about wagering. I can also see an endless decision tree of what goes into the political / news forum. Is pokemon craze a news item? Is asking why people need an assault rifle a news item? I don't know.

I personally love the diner restaurant crowd and think it's a good analogy. Because I personally enjoy the whole community. Not dividing off the folks I don't want to hear. In other words, I tend to like the goofy diversity of the crowd.

BUT I fully understand that at some point if the folks you don't want to hear become too much of a negative, you just stop going to the restaurant. And I get that the tipping point for that can be tough to define. So I hear you. But also know that just because we don't jump to implement every suggestion that's made doesn't mean we don't hear you. That's probably the thing that's most frustrating. People interpret not doing their suggestion as being out of touch or not listening. 

I also think there's a lot that goes on behind the scenes that folks never see. It's nobody's fault as there would be no way for you to see it. I get called into the Donald Trump thread 5 times per day to look at something that's reported. Sometimes it's not close to over the line. Sometimes it's right on the line. Sometimes it's way over the line. I get it that our political threads suck. If we suspend people we're board Nazis. If we don't suspend, we're clueless. I also think sometimes we get way more credit than's deserved for knowing everything that goes on. The board software is clunky and hard to use for moderators. We don't see everything. It's why the report function is so helpful to us. We do the best we can with what we have. I don't like aliases. Tim's alias of Winston Churchill was banned when we saw it. But there's no way for you to see that. We used to comment on it but that became more of an attention getting thing that wasn't worth it. What is seen is that the moderators are clueless and hypocritical on aliases. The reality is we're just not that good at a crappy job.

Let me know your thoughts more on exactly what gets in an and what's excluded in a news / political type forum. And how you think the tolerance level should be and what's allowed. I'd specifically like to hear your thoughts on the condescending part and zero tolerance. The general toolishness that I see is a bummer and I'd love to be able to improve that. 

J

I don't want to have a say in how you would moderate said sub Politics forum Joe.  That's your prerogative as is this FFA. I know you're a good guy, while a bit out of touch with things on the internet circa 20016, you're still a good fella.  There's ALWAYS going to be grey areas and line steppers. I wanted to just give you a collective roll up of what most of the responses are always when you ask how to improve things.  I'd moderate it like you do here.  If it's a shooting thread, the death of a supreme court justice or a post about a trans person being beaten up I'd be tossing anyone even thinking of using a  for all time.  Just grab one of the ubiquitous politic thread posters who everyone respects and ask them to handle the moderation of it and be done with it, so we can be done with it.  Again - as I've said many time, we do a great job of moderating ourselves here.  If somethings awry, you'll know it in short order. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Not publicizing what you do, fine. But at least have a procedure for explaining to the individual what was wrong. Or else what's the point? And there's no attention getting that way, if it's privately explained. 

Yeah, we probably can figure out some way to do that better. But to be real, I'm not going to ask a Clayton Gray to put his name on it and wind up with another Shick situation. Even with a FBG Moderator account, it still is blamed on Aaron and Clayton. So not sure the best answer. It would be great if there were no unstable posters but sadly that's not the world we have. I get it that this is not ideal though. We'll see if something better might be able to happen.

J

 

[Capella]

I don't agree with moderators engaging posters with responses. There's some loons out there. 

 

[T J]

Looks like it was 8 days for directly calling another poster an idiot in the Disney Alligator thread after we asked people specifically to be cool after the child was killed. We often don't get into debates on why a person is suspended. In 16 years, I don't think it's ever been beneficial. And in some cases like with David Shick, it actually was very negative with the poster threatening his work place. It's also pretty rare that the poster doesn't know he went over the line. In the end, it sadly boils down to again, not having the manpower to dedicate to moderating.

J

Did you read the whole thread? Doubt it. You probably gave out multiple timeouts in that one if you did.No idea who David Shick is.

Sometimes you need to take things into context. Did you even read what the comment was I responded to? 8days? And lastly, why could I not get a response? 

Very poor work IMO. I enjoy the boards, but that was ridiculous. 

Since you asked and all......

 

[Joe Bryant]

Did you read the whole thread? Doubt it. You probably gave out multiple timeouts in that one if you did.No idea who David Shick is.

Sometimes you need to take things into context. Did you even read what the comment was I responded to? 8days? And lastly, why could I not get a response? 

Very poor work IMO. I enjoy the boards, but that was ridiculous. 

Since you asked and all......

This is what I'm talking about. It's just reality. I don't blame TJ. But it's how every one of these goes. 

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't want to have a say in how you would moderate said sub Politics forum Joe.  That's your prerogative as is this FFA. I know you're a good guy, while a bit out of touch with things on the internet circa 20016, you're still a good fella.  There's ALWAYS going to be grey areas and line steppers. I wanted to just give you a collective roll up of what most of the responses are always when you ask how to improve things.  I'd moderate it like you do here.  If it's a shooting thread, the death of a supreme court justice or a post about a trans person being beaten up I'd be tossing anyone even thinking of using a  for all time.  Just grab one of the ubiquitous politic thread posters who everyone respects and ask them to handle the moderation of it and be done with it, so we can be done with it.  Again - as I've said many time, we do a great job of moderating ourselves here.  If somethings awry, you'll know it in short order. 

But that's not really the case about self moderating. I wish it were but that doesn't work in tons of the threads. Not just the political threads. The giant things get called out. But tons of the general toolishness just slide as it slides downhill. 

What did you mean about the reddit threads and the no tolerance?

J

 

[John Bender]

But that's not really the case about self moderating. I wish it were but that doesn't work in tons of the threads. Not just the political threads. The giant things get called out. But tons of the general toolishness just slide as it slides downhill. 

What did you mean about the reddit threads and the no tolerance?

J

The opposite of what goes down in every News, Current Events and Politics thread here.

hence why everyone always tells you we need a News, Current Events and Politics forum here.

 

[bagger]

I don't know if the board software can institute a downvote feature that buries posts but that may save some of your headaches as well.  Gives the community the ability to quasi police itself if someone is being obnoxious. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

The opposite of what goes down in every News, Current Events and Politics thread here.

hence why everyone always tells you we need a News, Current Events and Politics forum here.

How do they moderate even condescending replies Just super heavy handed?

J

 

[T J]

This is what I'm talking about. It's just reality. I don't blame TJ. But it's how every one of these goes. 

J

Some common decency of an explanation is all I wanted. Because in that thread, there were certainly some other things timeout worthy if mine was. I got silence after repeated requests for an explanation which I thought was weak.

Not looking to debates the "why" of the timeout. I disagree with it still, but It's in the past. 

 

[Eminence]

But that's not really the case about self moderating. I wish it were but that doesn't work in tons of the threads. Not just the political threads. The giant things get called out. But tons of the general toolishness just slide as it slides downhill. 

What did you mean about the reddit threads and the no tolerance?

J

Joe, I'm 90% sure this is simply because we're in the middle of a general election.

Turn on the TV and you see politicians going at it, violent protests, etc. Our community is going to reflect society at large.

If I am on the left and I'm going to insult someone on the right, no matter if you put it in a sub-forum or not there will be mudslinging. These are hot button topics for a reason!

People need to learn to agree to disagree like they do in real life or maybe they don't and that's why they spend so much time online.

I don't think there's a solution, I think you contain the problem as best as you can and breathe a sigh of relief after November when things go back to normal and we're deep into the NFL season.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't know if the board software can institute a downvote feature that buries posts but that may save some of your headaches as well.  Gives the community the ability to quasi police itself if someone is being obnoxious. 

I like that but I'm not sure of the capabilities of the software. We run into weird stuff as the size of the forum limits us on some things that are cool. 

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

The opposite of what goes down in every News, Current Events and Politics thread here.

hence why everyone always tells you we need a News, Current Events and Politics forum here.

If I'm hearing you right, are you saying basically just get the political forum threads away so you don't have to deal with it and let them do whatever they want? 

J

 

[John Bender]

If I'm hearing you right, are you saying basically just get the political forum threads away so you don't have to deal with it and let them do whatever they want? 

J

I'm beyond basically saying that.

Have you read this thread? Or the last one you started on the same subject? I feel like you haven't.

 

[John Bender]

This thread is pointless. You're just going to keep randomly popping in every few weeks or months, having no rapport or sense of history of who the posters are or what they contribute here, slash away with the ban machete, one week, one month, three months, these completely arbitrary timeframes based on your own whims. The poll is a waste of time. It's not a question if this place should be "more" or "less" moderated, as that's completely subjective. The question is who should be moderating, and the answer is: sane, rational staff who you already have, who are already regular posters in the FFA, and thus have a handle on who the regulars are, who's genuinely nasty, who's just satirical and comically absurd all the time, etc.

This.

"So wait you're saying political threads should go in their own sub forum?" Huh?  What?  This is exactly what everyone says everytime you do this thread. 

We'll see you in another 2 years to have the same discussion I guess. 

 

[Eminence]

Our country is more divided than ever and it's no surprise that it's bringing out the worst in people 6 months before we get a new President.

There will be less controversy, less political threads, and less "unexcellent" behavior 6 months from now.

Don't go to New Orleans during Mardi Gras and complain about the noise. Any talk of increased moderation or software modification is pointless.

Our country is experiencing a paradigm shift and people are going nuts.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm beyond basically saying that.

Have you read this thread? Or the last one you started on the same subject? I feel like you haven't.

Of course I've read this thread. I'm just trying to make sure I understand your point. For the idea of just creating a throwaway cesspool type forum for the political threads, do you see that while it may make it better for you, for me how that doesn't really solve my overall problem with the site? I have to be responsible for the whole site. Sweeping that part under the rug isn't as good an option for me from the overall picture. But I see why it's better for you. 

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

This.

"So wait you're saying political threads should go in their own sub forum?" Huh?  What?  This is exactly what everyone says everytime you do this thread. 

We'll see you in another 2 years to have the same discussion I guess. 

Trying to seriously make sure I understand exactly what you're saying means "see you in another couple of years"? 

J

 

[Van Dyman]

Our country is more divided than ever and it's no surprise that it's bringing out the worst in people 6 months before we get a new President.

There will be less controversy, less political threads, and less "unexcellent" behavior 6 months from now.

Don't go to New Orleans during Mardi Gras and complain about the noise. Any talk of increased moderation or software modification is pointless.

Our country is experiencing a paradigm shift and people are going nuts.

Please take this to the News, Current Events, and Politics Forum.  TIA.

 

[John Bender]

Of course I've read this thread. I'm just trying to make sure I understand your point. For the idea of just creating a throwaway cesspool type forum for the political threads, do you see that while it may make it better for you, for me how that doesn't really solve my overall problem with the site? I have to be responsible for the whole site. Sweeping that part under the rug isn't as good an option for me from the overall picture. But I see why it's better for you. 

J

Exactly. You're the one who runs this message board and the site and makes a good living off of it. I'm trying to tell you what we feel. You're smart enough to figure it out from here. If you want to bring me on as a consultant behind this, I'm happy to quote you on my fee and provide my resume in this arena. I can promise you, you don't need to pay me to re-invent your antiquated outlook on the industry, message boards, and your very own business, but I can say that I feel more tapped into it than you are. You're smart enough to just read this thread (and the same one you had here 2 years ago on a similar referendum) to figure it out.

 

[mr. furley]

i've had my fair of timeouts and never once wondered why

really not that hard to figure this all out, fellas

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I don't agree with moderators engaging posters with responses. There's some loons out there. 

Responses are mostly positive but there are a lot of people who use that as an opening to debate the merits of the suspension. Also people really hold grudges. Sometimes it's a no-win situation to engage people who are really fired up about something or feel they've been treated unfairly. 

Most common reaction of someone who gets suspended is to report everybody else they don't like in hopes that person gets suspended as well. It's not an encouraging sign. 

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I have no complaints but I have to say that given what is about to happen politics wise a sub forum might not be a bad idea.   This election is going to be ugly and no matter who wins it won't get better.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

If I'm hearing you right, are you saying basically just get the political forum threads away so you don't have to deal with it and let them do whatever they want? 

Make a political subforum and have it moderated by a couple of the regular level headed posters (not many too choose from but Ivan K for example). Not staff, just sub forum mods. It won't be a cesspool if it's modded properly and it should stop the same clowns from posting their nonsense in every damn thread in the FFA.

 

[matuski]

I am about to do the unthinkable and agree in general with Eminence.

This ugliness happens every election cycle... the racism leading up to Obama's first election was why I took a break for a good year back then.

 

[T J]

i've had my fair of timeouts and never once wondered why

really not that hard to figure this all out, fellas

If you say so.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's not sweeping it under the rug. It signals that those who wish to participate in those discussions have a dedicated place to do so, albeit with clearer defined rules and stricter adherence to keeping it civil. That way those who don't wish to participate can have the more social "free for all" where sarcasm and wittiness are allowed. 

Thanks. I can see that. 

J

 

[Slapdash]

i've had my fair of timeouts and never once wondered why

really not that hard to figure this all out, fellas

Yeah.  I've deserved every timeout I've gotten; just like the people I was insulting deserved it

 

[bueno]

Of course I've read this thread. I'm just trying to make sure I understand your point. For the idea of just creating a throwaway cesspool type forum for the political threads, do you see that while it may make it better for you, for me how that doesn't really solve my overall problem with the site? I have to be responsible for the whole site. Sweeping that part under the rug isn't as good an option for me from the overall picture. But I see why it's better for you. 

J

Part of the problem Joe, is that you sometimes come in with no sense of history and when an argument crosses threads, sometimes you react without that knowledge. And then because of that, sometimes the punishment doesn't fit the crime. For example, jon_mx was involved in several discussion about what Obama's role or responsibility was in recent shootings of cops. It was based on earlier comments Obama made that were unfavorable toward the cops which, upon more details becoming available shouldn't have been made. Knowing the context, you may bot have reacted as you did. Personally , if you feel that kind of responsibility, a little research into a person's previous posts is in order.

The other thing you can't get out of the written word is tone. You can't tell a lot of time when someone is being funny or snarky. You are always interpreting. Nobody is that good at interpretation.

 

[tjnc09]

In the end, it sadly boils down to again, not having the manpower to dedicate to moderating.

J

If you own a restaurant with phenomenal food and service, but people complain about the rat ####, do you just shrug your shoulders and tell customers you don't have the manpower to clean it up?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have no complaints but I have to say that given what is about to happen politics wise a sub forum might not be a bad idea.   This election is going to be ugly and no matter who wins it won't get better.

I don't disagree with that Yankee. It's something we've obviously heard before and that's why I'm asking about it. I'm not sure why trying to talk more about the details had some people seemingly unhappy about it. 

J

 

[Capella]

Hey so how about those embedded pics heh heh heh

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I am about to do the unthinkable and agree in general with Eminence.

This ugliness happens every election cycle... the racism leading up to Obama's first election was why I took a break for a good year back then.

This is the truth. Happens every four years, then everything calms down. New political forum is a bad idea. So many downsides to it with minimal upside IMO. 

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Is it that hard to try it? If it doesn't work, shut it down

 

[John Bender]

Hey Joe

We need a Politics, News and Current Events sub forum. Moderate it however you see fit - you're smart enough to figure it out.

Signed

90% of your regulars in the FFA. 

Let's not do this again in 2 years. Just make it happen. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Part of the problem Joe, is that you sometimes come in with no sense of history and when an argument crosses threads, sometimes you react without that knowledge. And then because of that, sometimes the punishment doesn't fit the crime. For example, jon_mx was involved in several discussion about what Obama's role or responsibility was in recent shootings of cops. It was based on earlier comments Obama made that were unfavorable toward the cops which, upon more details becoming available shouldn't have been made. Knowing the context, you may bot have reacted as you did. Personally , if you feel that kind of responsibility, a little research into a person's previous posts is in order.

The other thing you can't get out of the written word is tone. You can't tell a lot of time when someone is being funny or snarky. You are always interpreting. Nobody is that good at interpretation.

Fair point, Bueno. It's why I try to let the guys who have more history do the bulk of the moderating. 

J

 

[Slapdash]

Much easier to carve off a different subforum for separate sports than trying to separate out politics.

I think the beisbol forum has been a great success.  Beisbol is boring and I don't want to read about it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

If you own a restaurant with phenomenal food and service, but people complain about the rat ####, do you just shrug your shoulders and tell customers you don't have the manpower to clean it up?

That's a poor analogy.  Given how many posters are here and how many mods there are(n't), can you imagine how much time it would take to look up the posting history of every poster who has a post reported, to get the proper context? It would take forever. I am not saying they should say, screw it, let's just suspend people for anything, but there is simply no way the mods can be all over everything.  It is impossible. 

 

[Eminence]

If you own a restaurant with phenomenal food and service, but people complain about the rat ####, do you just shrug your shoulders and tell customers you don't have the manpower to clean it up?

That's not fair, Joe makes no money off these boards and has to pay for the bandwidth of people who don't subscribe to his website.

If everyone paid $5 a month to post here, I'm sure he'd be more forthcoming with these suggestions. I don't think anyone is getting paid to strictly moderate and honestly, they shouldn't be.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Hey Joe

We need a Politics, News and Current Events sub forum. Moderate it however you see fit - you're smart enough to figure it out.

Signed

90% of your regulars in the FFA. 

Let's not do this again in 2 years. Just make it happen. 

Those poll numbers are fake. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

And how you think the tolerance level should be and what's allowed. I'd specifically like to hear your thoughts on the condescending part and zero tolerance. The general toolishness that I see is a bummer and I'd love to be able to improve that. 

J

Honestly, this part is challenging.  The only other board that I'm an active poster on is Neogaf.  That one is extremely heavily moderated, but people there get banned all the time for seemingly random stuff.  Those mods have a hair trigger that really isn't evenly-applied, or even rationally-applied.  

I think FGILC was exactly right in what he had to say about LHUCKS.  That guy was a tool who added nothing to the board and was clearly a net negative to this place.  Everybody knew it for years.  But it was one of those "we know it when we see it" situations, not a "breaking the letter of the law" situation.  So the guy hung around and hung around until finally you got rid of him (a good thing).  It seems to me that a good team of high-quality moderators would be able to differentiate between the tools -- I'm not interested in calling out anybody here besides LHUCKS -- and the well-meaning but occasionally irritating guys like tim.  This is just my two cents, but I don't think tim did anything to deserve a TO.  I've had all sorts of critical things to say about tim over the years, but he's not a bad fellow.  That's sort of what I'm getting at.  Most of us know this, even if it's challenging to explain why.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Hey Joe

We need a Politics, News and Current Events sub forum. Moderate it however you see fit - you're smart enough to figure it out.

Signed

90% of your regulars in the FFA. 

Let's not do this again in 2 years. Just make it happen. 

Thanks. I really don't get the defensiveness though. I get it that you want this and we haven't thought it was the best thing in the past. But does trying to engage you with it and have a discussion really warrant the "you can pay me my consulting fee" angle? I'm sorry, I just didn't see how trying to have a discussion was out of line there.

J

 

[John Bender]

Thanks. I really don't get the defensiveness though. I get it that you want this and we haven't thought it was the best thing in the past. But does trying to engage you with it and have a discussion really warrant the "you can pay me my consulting fee" angle? I'm sorry, I just didn't see how trying to have a discussion was out of line there.

J

You were just asking me the same question over and over and over. Read the threads you've started on the feedback Joe. You don't need me to reiterate it.  I made an impassioned plea for you to see the light, but many in the past have done the same.  You can figure out how we moderate it. 

 

[HellToupee]

Hey Joe

We need a Politics, News and Current Events sub forum. Moderate it however you see fit - you're smart enough to figure it out.

Signed

90% of your regulars in the FFA. 

Let's not do this again in 2 years. Just make it happen. 

Might as well have a tim sub forum as well 

 

[John Bender]

That's not fair, Joe makes no money off these boards and has to pay for the bandwidth of people who don't subscribe to his website.

If everyone paid $5 a month to post here, I'm sure he'd be more forthcoming with these suggestions. I don't think anyone is getting paid to strictly moderate and honestly, they shouldn't be.

Alright bud, we go your vantage point. Dually noted. Lay it on a bit thicker and Joe might finally stop ignoring you.