An urgent request to the Moderators

Ditto

I never would have stopped here if i saw this crap. not to sure i want to stay any longer

I agree with Susan!

Bud

YUP! Us too.

Strongly concur

Susan said...
Is it possible to get the agreement of all parties involved...

Ooof. I doubt it. We seem to have a pretty good crop of thick skulls covered by thin skins just now. I stand ready to delete any thread where the original poster and most of the participants ask me to, but candidly, it would be better if they would just ****in' stop it. A day's inactivity on any thread pushes it into page two where most new members won't see it. That is why locking a thread tends to make it go away. Unfortunately they keep opening new threads or continuing their tit-for-tat on threads we open asking them to stop.

I am still hopeful that since all of the moderators have asked people to stop that eventually they will.

And, for those of you who think you are not part of the problem, I will remind you that posting a comment to scold someone for misbehavior keeps the thread going. We have some members who stir up controversy because they enjoy the attention. Deny it to them. If you think someone has been unfairly treated, send him or her an email. Don't post a defense on the thread with the attack you think is unfair. That keeps the flame war going, too.

The problem could forever be resolved by banning any member that is compelled to announce to the forum that they are going to quit the forum because they don't like something about the forum.

Either deal with your problem by email or just stop posting.  People drop out of forums all the time without announcing their departure. I find it extremely manipulative and childish.  Like the child who is going to take his ball and go home if he doesn't get his way. 

This doesn't pertain to Mel's thread.  I think Mel is making the same point I am, but in a more creative manner.

I do not agree with the editing of comments.  If a comment is out of line, a poster should be warned.  If they persist, they should be banned.  The editing just creates confusion about who said what and what happened.  I hate it when there's drama that's been edited out and I missed it.

And i wouldn't otherwise opine on these matters, but since this is a thread telling the moderators how to do their job, I thought I'd chime in.

I have the utmost respect for the moderators.  It's a thankless position and they all do a great job.  Thank you.

Dave

 

Susan,
We're with you all the way. We are reviewing the best way to approach it. Frankly I don't care if anyone thinks we are being heavy handed, I'm not happy with the personal jabs and such.

The best way would be for each to go back to Courtesy 101 classes and fix their own posts. But I'm realistic and know that certain members of the E.G.O. don't feel the need. We moderators are in part responsible as we like to edit as little as possible.

But we're in a different mood right now...

Tony

Dave we will do what we can to preserve the meaning of threads, but we're not going to sit on it anymore. Usually letting it get worked out works for a while, but then it escalates and it becomes necessary to take the active moderation method. I'm with you, editing threads is not popular, but that's to a point. Then we have to treat it like the third grade, and since I can't turn the lights off to settle things down, the edit button will get the point across. Negative posts and their follow up dependancies will be treated equally.

Everybody's already warned.

Tony

Jim,
Ideally Dave's idea isn't a bad one. But we moderators have to submit the "suspensions" then manage them. The moderators don't have control over the user account status, that all has to go to Peter. It's a pain to manage and it's been tried in the past. As stated above everyone knows what's going on. They know our best tool is the edit and lock buttons. I'll also consider permanent status removal but that is heavy handed. Repeat offenders are welcome to exit on their own, but they'll more likely wait for the mods to annoy them enough with edits.

So it is that not everyone will be happy with how and why we do things, but that's not my concern. Stopping this nonsense is my concern.

It's ok to debate. It's not ok to be a repeat offender of our rules...

Tony

Jim,

The suggestion made by Dave7 is, more or less, the official way it's supposed to work but, as Tony said it's a lot of work and would be a lot of bother for Peter the Admin. But that's OK if that's how it needs to be.

The other problem is that this isn't some random troll rampaging through the forum who can be run off. It seems to be a Hatfields and McCoys style feud among long-established members where bystanders have taken sides and there are about as many Capulets as Montegues among the membership.

Once you get a sufficiently divisive flame war going most of the participants will eventually cross some sort of line and become in violation of a forum rule. This gives us, the moderators, a rich field of targets for warning/suspending/banning and we already have a list started.

The problem is that both Capulets and Montegues can claim provocation and it is difficult to decide who started what. What we can do is to try to be even handed and go after the key instigators on both sides. I can pretty much guarantee that, if it comes to that, every last person on this thread will think that in some case or other we are punishing the victims.

I too understand the dilemma.

It is not black and white.

I wish there was a way other than editing, but I don't know what that would be.

Dave

Plus 1 on the ditto. I don't post every day, but I visit here every day. I keep up with my friends and fellow HW folks. I chime in when I have something to add. Hasn't been much to add to all of this lately.

Ditto on all of the suggestions,

Sonny