Which would you rather?

Which would you rather?

  • Posts continue to be screened before being posted

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Open forum back up, but start restricting access to rule offenders.

    Votes: 18 90.0%

  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .

deec77

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
17,173
Reaction score
8,420
Points
113
I haven’t voted yet but... I’m leaning in a specific way. First I’m not pointing to any currant member or members, but back when this forum use to be a fun place, we did get heated at times. but was not as confrontational as now by staying on topic and arguing the topic. The constant instigations, which tend to be off topic and/or derogatory, which then result into a free for-all, would end if we stay on topic back your argument up with links to studies, court papers, with data, with facts not barbs.

Written words are sometimes difficult to understand tone, or even subtle
differences in interpretation. Instead of a barb or an insult ask whom ever what do you mean and why, this way the person asking and the person answering can both get a better understanding of where each are coming from.

Thank you UT

~Dee~
 
Last edited:

patswin

WTF
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
12,280
Reaction score
2,865
Points
113
Location
Gelatinous, Mass
I'm less concerned about mod impartiality than I am about the time and effort UT has to be spending approving every post. It does not seem sustainable.
It just seems far more efficient to state what is acceptable and what isn't, and if there's some sort of 3 strikes and your out policy, so be it. Or one strike or 4 or whatever is deemed ok. I got no issue playing by the rules.
 

ParanoidPatriot

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
9,867
Reaction score
1,499
Points
113
Location
in my shed
I'm less concerned about mod impartiality than I am about the time and effort UT has to be spending approving every post. It does not seem sustainable.
It just seems far more efficient to state what is acceptable and what isn't, and if there's some sort of 3 strikes and your out policy, so be it. Or one strike or 4 or whatever is deemed ok. I got no issue playing by the rules.
I agreed with everything you said and your 3 strikes suggestion.
But then you changed it to 1 or 4 and now I'm totally confused.
If it's 4 then it should be balls, right? If it's 1 then it should be something else, right?
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
8,188
Reaction score
2,498
Points
113
Location
Michigan
I haven’t voted yet but... I’m leaning in a specific way. First I’m not pointing to any currant member or members, but back when this forum use to be a fun place, we did get heated at times. but was not as confrontational as now by staying on topic and arguing the topic. The constant instigations which tend to be off topic and/or derogatory which then result into a free for-all would end if we stay on topic back your argument up with links to studies, court papers, with data, with facts not barbs.

Written words are sometimes difficult to understand tone, or even subtle
differences in interpretation. Instead of a barb or an insult ask whom ever what do you mean and why, this way the person asking and the person answering can both get a better understanding of where each are coming from.

Thank you UT

~Dee~
This is the main issue and these posts often get through currently. Why?

Then responses are censored. Reminds me of the NHL when the responding player is penalized rather than the instigator.
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
8,188
Reaction score
2,498
Points
113
Location
Michigan
The Gordie Howe Salute
Living here in the Detroit suburbs...having been a Wings season ticket holder.., after growing up in Lowell...

Bobby was the best. Gordie was close and <gasp> more fun to watch.
 
Last edited:

Inspector_50

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Messages
4,565
Reaction score
851
Points
113
Location
California
I know we disagree on that, and I feel I have a good grasp of the why's.

I don't think there is such a thing as truly impartial. People are people with feelings that affect decisions. I feel I am as impartial as you'll see though. I really don't care all that much about politics.

At the end of the day, with new moderators or without, it's my money paying for this site and taking the risks associated with that. New moderation would need to be aligned with that.

I reiterate. I don't care about anyone's politics. I just want a clean forum aligned with our philosophy. Let me remind everyone what that is.... Posted Jan 1, 2008.



This is the philosophy the board was founded on.

It is time the political forum was in line with it.
I am not sure how you could be more impartial to be honest. I mean its up to the majority, but I can say for the first time in a long time, the personal attacks have stopped. If people want those back, then I guess its up to them. My vote will not count in the minority, but my two cents. Being impartial is not being afraid to piss someone off, that is the truth of the matter. Nobody is going to like everything someone does, its really that simple.
 
OP
Undertaker #59*

Undertaker #59*

Car'a'carn
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2002
Messages
25,647
Reaction score
2,908
Points
113
I'm less concerned about mod impartiality than I am about the time and effort UT has to be spending approving every post. It does not seem sustainable.
It just seems far more efficient to state what is acceptable and what isn't, and if there's some sort of 3 strikes and your out policy, so be it. Or one strike or 4 or whatever is deemed ok. I got no issue playing by the rules.
For sure that is a part of it. Most of my board time now is spent on that queue. It's an awful time sink when I could be doing other things for the board and perhaps enjoy it some. And it wasn't something I ever really wanted to do.

I don't know where the poll is at and won't until it closes tomorrow, but I've started to look into the builtin warning system. I feel I've exhausted all other options to encourage problem posters to change their behavior.

It's a point based system with customizable expiration times. If we use it, it will likely be a ladder of increasing restriction.

In other words, something like

3 warnings earns a short time out
6 doubles the time out

And so on. The warnings would expire at some point so someone that starts off bad can change and not forever be penalized for it. People who don't change will effectively restrict themselves.

It's mostly automated. People will still give me flack for being biased or picking on them, and will dislike me, but I suppose that comes with the territory. It's not overly personal for me when I take action and I'd rather not have the need.

But I'm not going to be bullied into giving up and letting the problem posters run wild.
 
OP
Undertaker #59*

Undertaker #59*

Car'a'carn
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2002
Messages
25,647
Reaction score
2,908
Points
113
I would like to know when you need me to pitch in and help financially and how.
Back when I set it up, I looked into PayPal for voluntary donations and then found out how much PayPal sucks.

I may look into something again at some point. I have an account set up for paying the bills having to do with the board (hosting, domain name, software licensing, etc) and any donations would go directly there to help offset. I don't expect the board will ever make a profit. And I'm not going to pollute the board with intrusive advertising. I know I hate that on other sites.

But I need to be careful too. They would be just that - voluntary donations, and not entitle people to anything beyond any other user. It would not be great on either side if someone donated and then were banned for their behavior (as an extreme example)

Thank you for the offer though, it is definitely appreciated.
 
Last edited:

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
12,670
Reaction score
4,437
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
For sure that is a part of it. Most of my board time now is spent on that queue. It's an awful time sink when I could be doing other things for the board and perhaps enjoy it some. And it wasn't something I ever really wanted to do.

I don't know where the poll is at and won't until it closes tomorrow, but I've started to look into the builtin warning system. I feel I've exhausted all other options to encourage problem posters to change their behavior.

It's a point based system with customizable expiration times. If we use it, it will likely be a ladder of increasing restriction.

In other words, something like

3 warnings earns a short time out
6 doubles the time out

And so on. The warnings would expire at some point so someone that starts off bad can change and not forever be penalized for it. People who don't change will effectively restrict themselves.

It's mostly automated. People will still give me flack for being biased or picking on them, and will dislike me, but I suppose that comes with the territory. It's not overly personal for me when I take action and I'd rather not have the need.

But I'm not going to be bullied into giving up and letting the problem posters run wild.

I like this option as it frees you up and like you said it's mostly automated.
 

PatsFanLisa

No filter
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
24,421
Reaction score
4,417
Points
113
Location
Sharon
UT - thank you for your time and effort. Personally, I post little here now because of certain comments that I simply find lack any merit, are offensive, condescending and an affront to everything that I love about America. The insistence of some posters indicating that they are always right and you (not you specifically) are always wrong is obnoxious. But, it is what it is.

I think you should let everything come in to save yourself time and aggravation and, like the old days, when someone gets obnoxious and offensive enough, just relegate them to the AA, if there is still one. Or give them a vacation for a week, and progress upwards from there.

This thread, btw, is a perfect example of how some people always believe they're right, everyone who doesn't have a like mind is wrong, and can't see their own flaws, just everyone else's.

You'll note my attempt to be polite here. :)
 
Top