This place is a joke - Merged with AIRING OUT GRIEVANCES

[The ClayTaurus]

No complaints, just a suggestion.

Is there anyway for some icon to pop up when your own PM box is full? Seems every once in awhile someone has to remind a person, they're trying to contact, to delete a few messages. It can be frustrating when you write a PM, send it, and it can't be delivered.

I concur. Brilliant.

 

[Joz]

I wouldn't go so far as to say brilliant. But I appreciate the sentiments.

 

[dmp]

See that big Red/Amber/Green line in your PM 'list messages' folder??

Keep an eye on that.

 

[Joz]

See that big Red/Amber/Green line in your PM 'list messages' folder??

Keep an eye on that.

I do.

 

[dilloduck]

I wouldn't go so far as to say brilliant. But I appreciate the sentiments.

It's brilliant dammit---accept the compliment and shut up! :teeth:

 

[Bonnie]

No complaints, just a suggestion.

Is there anyway for some icon to pop up when your own PM box is full? Seems every once in awhile someone has to remind a person, they're trying to contact, to delete a few messages. It can be frustrating when you write a PM, send it, and it can't be delivered.

I just deleted Joz..... sorry:tng:

 

[Joz]

I just deleted Joz..... sorry:tng:

I wasn't singling you out.
You just reminded me.

 

[Mr. P]

Doesn't everyone have this on top off the page? *No not with my name*
No brainer ain't it?

Welcome, Mr. P.
57 New Posts since your last visit.
You last visited: 06-20-2006 at 08:44 AM
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 8.
You have no new reputation comments.

 

[Bonnie]

Doesn't everyone have this on top off the page? *No not with my name*
No brainer ain't it?

Welcome, Mr. P.
57 New Posts since your last visit.
You last visited: 06-20-2006 at 08:44 AM
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 8.
You have no new reputation comments.

Hey! I had stuff to do okay....

 

[Mr. P]

Hey! I had stuff to do okay....

Not pickin on you..just commenting. On what shouldn't be a problem, IMO. Brings up a question though. Yer staff, do you have a pm limit?:scratch:

 

[Bonnie]

Not pickin on you..just commenting. On what shouldn't be a problem, IMO. Brings up a question though. Yer staff, do you have a pm limit?:scratch:

I was just teasing ya

 

[no1tovote4]

Jim says that with the new release this will be a feature... Just hold a bit longer and you'll have your warning.

 

[Said1]

I shut it off, but there was an option to notify via e-mail if you received a private message, this was the case if your pm box was full too, onlly the e-mail read "so and so is unable to send you a pm because your box is full" or somthing to that effect. Is that feature still available?

 

[jimnyc]

I've read the input from all of you and appreciate the feedback. I thought it was time to address what I've learned through this. I'll do my best to address the most I can, but if you feel something pertinent has been missed, just say so and I'll address it.

It seems this all started when a new user to the forums 'Yukon' was banned. Why some got upset over the banning of a user with only 4 posts is unclear, I can only assume it was the principle behind everything. There are so many "what if's" what can be discussed but that would only make things worse. Let's just say a judgement call was made on whether to ban a new member that was becoming disruptive and antagonistic from the get go. I am the one who made it clear to the moderators to immediately ban a new member that arrives just to stir up the water. So don't blame them, they were just doing what I've asked of them. We will try harder to be more tolerant of new members and give them the benefit of doubt and chance to change their ways. This may be done in a thread they are disrupting or via PM, but if they don't follow the rules we will have no choice but to ban them. Maybe a 24 hour ban to start to show them the errors of their way and give them a chance to return in good standing.

Censorship. This banning also brought up the subject of censorship, and how it is applied here at the USMB. I still stand by my original statement that little, if any, censorship takes place here. All members are allowed to say whatever they want, whenever they want, so long as they follow the rules. None of the rules censors a members ability to speak their opinions. The only objectionable material is discussing private matters about the board in public. All inquiries & complaints should be directed to an admin via email or PM. This is not so that members get censored but a precautionary method of keeping order within the board.

Ban from threads. This new feature was used a total of 5 times. All of those thread bans have now been removed. I still think this is a great addition to the board and better than long term bans. A user can be removed from a thread first, temporary board bans, and longer if necessary. Of course the gripe is over WHO gets banned and WHY. Again, these are judgement calls and will always be in question and some people will always be upset. The idea is to remove an unruly user who isn't sticking to the topic and making the thread harder for those participating. I'm asking the users to please understand why we've implemented this feature, and the mods to use care when utilizing this tool. I'm hoping any users that get removed will be done so to assist the thread and make the board better as a whole. There is no intent to use it as a tool to 'mess' with users. All efforts will be made to keep things in order before utilizing board tools to control users.

Moderation. Some users just don't like moderation at all. They feel it unneccesary and bordering on censorship. Some feel it's a much needed tool to help keeping boards run smoothly and within the confines of rules. Some feel it's a way of having complete control and use the power with ridiculous abandonment. You won't find the 'no reason at all' moderation here that you'll find in such places as DU. You also won't find a lack of moderation here as with Yahoo's boards. I like to have people around that believe in the board, and are willing to help to make it a better place for them and everyone else. The main function of a mod is to keep the board spam free, ensure posts are made in proper forums, remove any extremely offensive and/or illegal content, help with user assistance, help with disagreements & put an end to problems if necessary with the tools alotted to them. I've rarely been to a board where you have a mod that enforces the rules that is liked by all. Sort of like the police - some will like and others will despise, it just comes with the territory and the perceptions. I've never shyed away from communicating with users who had problems with moderation and I'll continue to keep an open mind when looking into issues. Mods are human too as I've stated many times before. All in all, I think our team is outstanding and I don't see any open issues that need further addressing at this point.

Liberal Moderator. The most recent was Isaac Brock. For unknown reasons he really never returned so unfortunately he was made back to a regular user. There are a few others, that will remain unnamed, that turned down the offer to become a moderator. My decision to ask someone to moderate has nothing to do with political leaning. In fact, there are a few libs I know of right now that I would have no problem whatsoever with on the mod team. I'm unsure of picking up any moderators soon, but if I do they will be included.

Darin. I've received a lot of complaints about him since I made him admin of the board. 99% of the gripes didn't really have any merit, more of a disagreement with too much personal involvement. You guys have to understand, Darin has done a tremendous job of keeping the board in check and remaining involved in so many aspects. When you put so much of yourself out there it only stands to reason that you receive the majority of the heat. Been there, done that. I went through the same thing when I was gung-ho in the political section and monitoring every aspect of moderating. It's a hard job and zero rewards! Can he be sarcastic at times? Absolutely! Why? Because he's human! Go back in history and watch the way I handled users that pissed me off and you'll see that Darin is more machine like than I and tends to follow the rules outlined for the mods in handling board issues. I think anytime you mix personal involvement on a board that you must moderate will be difficult. I think Darin has done this admirably. It's hard to try and be friendly with so many, participate in conversations, make jokes & create laughs and then have to turn around and be the bad guy when an issue arises. Nonetheless, my 'door' remains open should anyone feel it necessary to go around him.

Closing threads. Users feel threads that 'have run their course' shouldn't necessarily be closed. The ban from thread option is supposed to enable just this desire. I also ask the mods to understand when a thread goes in a different direction, so long as all participants are cool with the direction.

Current moderators. jimnyc, dmp, -cp, 5stringjeff, Avatar4321, Kathianne, MtnBiker, Bonnie, Merlin1047, OCA
I believe the longer a moderating team is together the more cohesive they become. We do a decent amount of communicating on the back end and generally work on things for the board and come to a general agreement. The only mod on the list that 'rarely' comes to the board is Merlin1047 who is since deceased. He will remain a moderator and part of the board logo so long as I own the board. OCA hasn't posted as much of late but still rears his ugly head in now and again and makes himself known to the other mods and myself. The mods are sometimes here at different times of the day, another reason that helps in my decisions, to make sure the bases are usually covered. Some don't moderate as much as others, and that's good! Less problems to moderate the better. I prefer to have a board where mods have their rights extended throughout the forums as opposed to specific areas, this way they can all assist one another when they need to. Obviously some forums need more moderation than others and some don't need any at all.

 

[jimnyc]

I would like to add a few words about Kathianne. She as well has taken a lot of heat since she is so involved in the board. She has dedicated a lot of her time to this board and I have a huge amount of respect towards her. She shares great stories that she finds (and a lot from smaller blogs we would miss), gets involved in debates, interacts with users & watches over the board. She's the first to ask me things before acting, and always keeps me updated with things I may have missed. As with Darin, she has taken a lot of the heat because she sometimes has to make difficult decisions. Her decision making process is always in line with what I have asked of the moderators.

Let me add also that I feel strongly about all of the moderators, it's just that a few were called on so I thought I would address a few things individually. I find this group to be very loyal to the board and myself, and I refuse to be anything but the same in return unless given a real good reason not to be.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Can I ask what your thoughts are on giving moderators jurisdictions so as to cut down/focus their work loads?

 

[Shattered]

Can I ask what your thoughts are on giving moderators jurisdictions so as to cut down/focus their work loads?

Not to me, I know..but..from past experience.. If you give mods specific jurisdictions, there's going to be one section of the board policed constantly, and the rest of them left to the masses, because it's out of the currently logged in mods "jurisdiction"..

Incidently, the mods do have specific areas..Like.. I think CP is the Moderator of the Cooking forum...Darin's probably the Moderator of the Pics forum, Evil used to be the Moderator of the music forum (dunno who is now), etc.

So, I think they each have their sections, but still need to "moderate" all sections...

 

[jimnyc]

Can I ask what your thoughts are on giving moderators jurisdictions so as to cut down/focus their work loads?

That sounds good in theory but leads to sections un-monitored when said moderator is not online. With a minimal amount of moderators, it's easier to allow access throughout the board, this way any mod can handle a particular issue when it arises.

 

[Annie]

I would like to add a few words about Kathianne. She as well has taken a lot of heat since she is so involved in the board. She has dedicated a lot of her time to this board and I have a huge amount of respect towards her. She shares great stories that she finds (and a lot from smaller blogs we would miss), gets involved in debates, interacts with users & watches over the board. She's the first to ask me things before acting, and always keeps me updated with things I may have missed. As with Darin, she has taken a lot of the heat because she sometimes has to make difficult decisions. Her decision making process is always in line with what I have asked of the moderators.

Let me add also that I feel strongly about all of the moderators, it's just that a few were called on so I thought I would address a few things individually. I find this group to be very loyal to the board and myself, and I refuse to be anything but the same in return unless given a real good reason not to be.

Jim, thank you, the respect is returned to the nth degree. I love sharing what I come across, you've given us the forum to do so. That is what make USMB unique and great. We get to share. Whether it be my multi articles, or RWA's conspiracies of the day, or even, G*d forbid, Roomy's searches for attention, we able to voice our say.

As for moderating, I've come under what I consider an unfair amount of attack, yet I can understand it somewhat, as I'm pretty hard to nail down. I'm Catholic and Christian, though not rabidly so in the way of some. I believe we should state the way to salvation, but more importantly live it, demonstrate it. Others think a 2 X 4 is more appropriate, with links of course. I disagree. I am pro-Israel, I was married to a Jew, but my support for Israel started before that and continues in spite of his being an idiot.

I've said from my initial joining, I view myself as a GOP'er, with a serious libertarian bent. I'm not sure who here has more bonafides than myself as working for the GOP, locally or on the national level. I still think GW has sold us out on immigration and with the prescription health addendum. I think he should have anticipated the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, at least by 2005, I could understand the initial problems. I think they wasted the people's good will by not explaining the successes, when the media was focused on the failures.

The only reason I spelled out the above, is to put in perspective why some have a natural antipathy towards myself. Couple that with my being a non-male, with a tendency not to explain myself at length, well there you go. I tend to post, with commentary, links that made me think and I hope will others.

As for moderating, I am all in favor of free speech. I will let the weirdest go on and on, Matts, yet when it devolves into namecalling, parentage, etc., well I get bored. Psycho and others are more than open to having their say. It's rare that a thread by Psycho, Bully, or another lib gets shut down. Check it out. Most of the shut down theads were started by conservatives, then segued into something that was no longer of topic, much less interesting.

Thanks Jim, for the words of support. I'm fortunate to have a job that let's me be here when many are unable, but it's also brought me into the line of fire, well I guess my style might have something to do with it, not too mention my gender.

 

[dilloduck]

Jim, thank you, the respect is returned to the nth degree. I love sharing what I come across, you've given us the forum to do so. That is what make USMB unique and great. We get to share. Whether it be my multi articles, or RWA's conspiracies of the day, or even, G*d forbid, Roomy's searches for attention, we able to voice our say.

As for moderating, I've come under what I consider an unfair amount of attack, yet I can understand it somewhat, as I'm pretty hard to nail down. I'm Catholic and Christian, though not rabidly so in the way of some. I believe we should state the way to salvation, but more importantly live it, demonstrate it. Others think a 2 X 4 is more appropriate, with links of course. I disagree. I am pro-Israel, I was married to a Jew, but my support for Israel started before that and continues in spite of his being an idiot.

I've said from my initial joining, I view myself as a GOP'er, with a serious libertarian bent. I'm not sure who here has more bonafides than myself as working for the GOP, locally or on the national level. I still think GW has sold us out on immigration and with the prescription health addendum. I think he should have anticipated the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, at least by 2005, I could understand the initial problems. I think they wasted the people's good will by not explaining the successes, when the media was focused on the failures.

The only reason I spelled out the above, is to put in perspective why some have a natural antipathy towards myself. Couple that with my being a non-male, with a tendency not to explain myself at length, well there you go. I tend to post, with commentary, links that made me think and I hope will others.

As for moderating, I am all in favor of free speech. I will let the weirdest go on and on, Matts, yet when it devolves into namecalling, parentage, etc., well I get bored. Psycho and others are more than open to having their say. It's rare that a thread by Psycho, Bully, or another lib gets shut down. Check it out. Most of the shut down theads were started by conservatives, then segued into something that was no longer of topic, much less interesting.

Thanks Jim, for the words of support. I'm fortunate to have a job that let's me be here when many are unable, but it's also brought me into the line of fire, well I guess my style might have something to do with it, not too mention my gender.

What do you consider to be a fair amount of attack?