gosh.... are you silly...... [chuckle]
accepted definition of the word "censor" is? pray tell?
and the passage you are referring to:
are you sure no one is playing with your ....you know what....
The reason for the decline in forum membership - anyone?
- Thread starter Quantum Quack
- Start date
- Status
accepted definition of the word "censor" is? pray tell?
and the passage you are referring to:
are you sure no one is playing with your ....you know what....
so are you going to apologise to the board for your [to use ANs word] "deformation"?:bugeye:
keep digging... but as Homer Simpson said once... "Dig up ...dig up"
nigh nigh... time for bedie bye
Balerion:
Read the site rules! Especially, read the part on inappropriate language.
Also, I repeat: The poster in question was banned for 3 days. I'd call that moderating him, wouldn't you?
Or it that your name wasn't mentioned? Do you feel that you weren't the centre of attention sufficiently?
This is not quite true. Unsupported factual claims are made here all the time. And our threshold on what counts as "meaningless trash" is set very low compared to some other forums I could mention. Unlike those other forums, we generally like to err on the side of allowing free expression, believe it or not. As a result, we get quite a lot of complaints from posters such as yourself who would like to see a "pure" science forum, unsullied by anything you don't believe in.
I'm not sure what experience you have in management. I'm guessing not much. If you're going to delegate responsibility, you have to allow your delegates to act on their own initiative in their own way. If you insist on micromanaging, then you might as well toss the pretense of delegation, fire your employees/subordinates and do the entire job yourself. That will ensure absolute consistency, at the expense of increasing your own workload to an impossibly unmanageable level.
It is impossible on a forum such as this to force all of the moderators to act on the same issue in exactly the same way every time. Why? Because the kinds of decisions the moderators have to make require judgment and discretion. If they did not, then the task could be automated. There's no way to guarantee that two moderators will view the same incident the same way, or even agree on what action to take in a particular instance. We have ways of dealing with disagreements, of course. For instance, the moderators communicate with one another; we even have a separate subforum dedicated to that. There, we can discuss things and disagree and even argue. At the end of the day, though, if mods still disagree we have clearly delineated areas of responsibility, plus a heirarchy.
It's not at all clear to me in what direction you think I should "budge". Again, it's all criticism with you, never anything constructive.
Read the site rules! Especially, read the part on inappropriate language.
Also, I repeat: The poster in question was banned for 3 days. I'd call that moderating him, wouldn't you?
Or it that your name wasn't mentioned? Do you feel that you weren't the centre of attention sufficiently?
This is not quite true. Unsupported factual claims are made here all the time. And our threshold on what counts as "meaningless trash" is set very low compared to some other forums I could mention. Unlike those other forums, we generally like to err on the side of allowing free expression, believe it or not. As a result, we get quite a lot of complaints from posters such as yourself who would like to see a "pure" science forum, unsullied by anything you don't believe in.
I'm not sure what experience you have in management. I'm guessing not much. If you're going to delegate responsibility, you have to allow your delegates to act on their own initiative in their own way. If you insist on micromanaging, then you might as well toss the pretense of delegation, fire your employees/subordinates and do the entire job yourself. That will ensure absolute consistency, at the expense of increasing your own workload to an impossibly unmanageable level.
It is impossible on a forum such as this to force all of the moderators to act on the same issue in exactly the same way every time. Why? Because the kinds of decisions the moderators have to make require judgment and discretion. If they did not, then the task could be automated. There's no way to guarantee that two moderators will view the same incident the same way, or even agree on what action to take in a particular instance. We have ways of dealing with disagreements, of course. For instance, the moderators communicate with one another; we even have a separate subforum dedicated to that. There, we can discuss things and disagree and even argue. At the end of the day, though, if mods still disagree we have clearly delineated areas of responsibility, plus a heirarchy.
It's not at all clear to me in what direction you think I should "budge". Again, it's all criticism with you, never anything constructive.
Sometimes I wonder why I am following this thread at all and then I remind myself that it is a singularly good example of a tempest in a tea pot.
How many ways can the same ground be covered, the same arguments made, yet nothing of value (to my limited perspective) come forth? :shrug:
As a member of four science forums, I observe that there has been a decline in membership and activity on several of them over the last three years and in part I credit the fact that our species, in large part, has the attention span of a gnat and we are ever in search of new and more interesting things.
With much of the new mobile phone technology and applications, I wonder if perhaps forums are just naturally running their course? As I understand, it is not as easy to post to a forum from a phone as it is from a computer. (I even found my Playbook very slow and limiting in options compared to my laptop.)
How many ways can the same ground be covered, the same arguments made, yet nothing of value (to my limited perspective) come forth? :shrug:
As a member of four science forums, I observe that there has been a decline in membership and activity on several of them over the last three years and in part I credit the fact that our species, in large part, has the attention span of a gnat and we are ever in search of new and more interesting things.
With much of the new mobile phone technology and applications, I wonder if perhaps forums are just naturally running their course? As I understand, it is not as easy to post to a forum from a phone as it is from a computer. (I even found my Playbook very slow and limiting in options compared to my laptop.)
scheherazade,
That's an insightful post, which I tend to agree with.
I think that forums such as this have probably all seen some decline in active members over recent years due to the rise of Twitter, Facebook and other kinds of social media. And the independent forums such as this one have more competition from forums run by large media outlets such as newspapers, television networks and the like, who were slow to get started.
As it happens, our household has just got its first iPad. While it is possible to use sciforums on the iPad, the experience is currently much better on a desktop or laptop computer. And I imagine that posting here from a phone would be a bit of a nightmare. I think if the site owners are serious about keeping our membership up, they are going to have to seriously consider a separate (perhaps cut-down) interface more suited to mobile devices.
That's an insightful post, which I tend to agree with.
I think that forums such as this have probably all seen some decline in active members over recent years due to the rise of Twitter, Facebook and other kinds of social media. And the independent forums such as this one have more competition from forums run by large media outlets such as newspapers, television networks and the like, who were slow to get started.
As it happens, our household has just got its first iPad. While it is possible to use sciforums on the iPad, the experience is currently much better on a desktop or laptop computer. And I imagine that posting here from a phone would be a bit of a nightmare. I think if the site owners are serious about keeping our membership up, they are going to have to seriously consider a separate (perhaps cut-down) interface more suited to mobile devices.
Just wanted to mention that I like your avatar, nice picture.
(This thread is infintely boring).You don't find "fuck off" to be an inappropriate use of profanity? You don't find it to be flaming? If I told you to fuck off right now, would I also be pardoned?
How many times do I have to tell you why I have a problem with it? It has nothing to do with me, it has to do with the language he used.
Ugh, you are worse than some posters here with this crap. You know full well I'm not interested in banning people for disagreeing with me, or a "pure science" forum. I sure as hell wouldn't be included in such a place.
I've been in management longer than I've been a member of this site, and I know plenty about delegating authority. I also know that the folks you're delegating that authority to aren't going to be successful without guidance.
So you have ways of working out the inconsistency, more or less. Well, why haven't we seen it worked out?
I've given you constructive criticism. I told you what I think needs to be moderated. You've decided that these things are not against the rules. I was under the impression that they were (and so are some of your moderators, while we're at it). But since the object of the rules are to set a level of acceptable discourse, why are you leaving out something so basic as having to support factual claims? I mean, in practice, it isn't being left out, as I've already stated and can link to the post in question if needed, so it's not really an issue outside of your unwillingness to act.
Balerion: If your issue is truly about the content authored by the poster,
- Why do you repeat the specific content? Linking would be a less hypocritical way to demonstrate offensive content.
- Why is the site action of banning the user from posting for the stated reason associated with post content not specific enough? Did you want the moderator to quote the magically offensive words so everyone could be 100% sure about what exact segment of what exact post precipitated the banning? If these words are so magically offensive, how could the staff here quote them in a way to rob them of the potential for offense?
- Why don't you fund your own forum to demonstrate the superior nature of your principles and strategies? It's obvious you have strong opinions, but much less clear from what empirical basis these opinions are derived.
I use a BlackBerry smart phone. I would not change now to a "phone interface". I say its a little slower an I have a problem or two. But I like what I see. An I am fine using my phone. I also don't have facebook or myspace. I have gown to accept the upgrade changes even as hard as that was. Phone is fine but you may need the right one. I have used a lybrary computer a couple times. But mainly just my phone.
Seconded (or is that thirded?)
There are some that have survived by becoming more specialized, and more strictly moderated. The BAUT forum and the Unmanned Space Exploration forum are two good examples of this.
Excellent forum!
I also agree with Scheherazade's post, in that the use of online forums is evolving very quickly. It appears that the outlet for those wishing to simply chat and banter or entertain them selves other wise is shifting to "short speak" context of social networking etc. As with all change it is in the transition that the pain is most often felt.
I personally believe that there is and always will be a need for long text posting. Where posters can take their interests to a greater detail than what short text forums can or will allow.
I currenty use forums for customer service and support ticketing systems as a way to improve effective client management. It works quite well in that regard even if training someone to use the forum software can be a pain.
I guess what I am saying is the managing change is not easy.
In fact the specialised field of Change Management re: human resources, is only in it's infancy IMO.
The development of mobile device applications is also in it's infancy and significant limitations are obvious. "Responsive web design", programming is also in it's infancy. Developing software that is muti device applicable is at the moment incrediby difficult as standards vary to much.
I personally believe that there is and always will be a need for long text posting. Where posters can take their interests to a greater detail than what short text forums can or will allow.
I currenty use forums for customer service and support ticketing systems as a way to improve effective client management. It works quite well in that regard even if training someone to use the forum software can be a pain.
I guess what I am saying is the managing change is not easy.
In fact the specialised field of Change Management re: human resources, is only in it's infancy IMO.
The development of mobile device applications is also in it's infancy and significant limitations are obvious. "Responsive web design", programming is also in it's infancy. Developing software that is muti device applicable is at the moment incrediby difficult as standards vary to much.
Last edited:
- The language itself isn't offensive, it's the context. In other words, there is a difference between "It's cold as fuck outside," and "Go fuck yourself." I don't care that he swore, I care that he told me to go fuck myself. But as I said James, this should have already been clear to you.
- Straw man. I never said anything about it not being specific enough. I said he wasn't banned for the right reasons. Yes, fine, sexual content is a bannable offense, but if telling someone to go fuck themselves is not, then he will be free to do it again upon his return.
- Ah yes, the old "Love it or leave it" routine. Heaven forbid someone actually tries to get the rules enforced, or have them changed for the better. "Constitutional amendments? Why don't you go start your own country if you don't like it the way it is?"
But you quoted that whole context, so what you really mean is that he told you to fuck yourself. That's why quoting it doesn't bother you, since your use of the second person pronouns doesn't offend you, but his use does. Got it. It still seems hypocritical.
So what specific aspect bothered you? Did you injure yourself while attempting the feat or do you just take offense at people telling you what you should do? The latter is a bit of a double standard.
*roll eyes* So your specific sense of outrage trumps administration judgement even when the outcome is the same. Should they decide to permanently ban this user (one common trajectory of the habitually disruptive poster) will you insist that they be reinstated so that their perma-ban may "properly" be associated with all the slights against you?
Either the user has a fair intention of understanding the forum rules or they cannot by lack of will or lack of ability. Banning is not so much a punishment but a wake-up call to change. Some people can and will benefit from a time-out. It is not intended to leave you (a third party to the moderator-user interaction) personally fulfilled.
When did I say "leave it?" -- I said that your opinions on forum moderation were not rooted in a basis of reality. You seem to have a large sense of personal entitlement but no sense of the judicial and economic realities of moderator judgement and action. What life experience have you ever had to substitute your judgement for that of the moderators?
Mr. A has a point.
- Status