This place is a joke - Merged with AIRING OUT GRIEVANCES

[Mr. P]

gumpy sure seems to have made it about him

Well, he's just a member like all the rest of us, no better no worse.

 

[Said1]

So.. It's OK to close threads, move things around, etc. when there are disruptions, or things veer off course? Who makes that decision? Who determines when things need to be taken back into control?

Spam threads get deleted here too.

 

[jillian]

I agree about the name-calling thing.. I believe Mods/Admin should be held to a higher standard of conduct. (This was also previously discussed, and I named one particular Mod I had a problem with for just that reason).

But.. on the other hand, Mods/Admin are still human, and subject to the same thoughts and emotions the rest of us have.. In order to make sure that they're not part of any "scuffles", you basically have to take away their ability to post their opinion on any subject, and that's just not going to fly either.

All in all, do you seriously have any real, legitimate complaints on how this board is run? If so, then ask Jim to start a "suggestions" thread.. If not, then what's the point in debating all of this?

Absolutely, they're human and fallable.

But I thought airing grievances/making suggestions was the purpose of *this* thread.

The only complaints I have are the same ones that were raised by Grump. I think a couple of them just need to use a lighter touch is all.

And, yes, we're in agreement that mods have to be held to a higher standard, for better or worse.

 

[Shattered]

Absolutely, they're human and fallable.

But I thought airing grievances/making suggestions was the purpose of *this* thread.

The only complaints I have are the same ones that were raised by Grump. I think a couple of them just need to use a lighter touch is all.

And, yes, we're in agreement that mods have to be held to a higher standard, for better or worse.

Any "suggestions" are being cloaked in "complaints", and buried within the thread.. If there are real, legitimate suggestions, they should be confined to a single area, to make sifting through, and considering them easier.

I'll also tell you that you haven't seen "heavy-handed" yet, until one particular Mod comes out of the woodwork, and decides he doesn't like you.

 

[dilloduck]

Any "suggestions" are being cloaked in "complaints", and buried within the thread.. If there are real, legitimate suggestions, they should be confined to a single area, to make sifting through, and considering them easier.

I'll also tell you that you haven't seen "heavy-handed" yet, until one particular Mod comes out of the woodwork, and decides he doesn't like you.

AMEN SISTAH !!:teeth:

 

[Shattered]

AMEN SISTAH !!:teeth:

:halo:

 

[jillian]

I'll also tell you that you haven't seen "heavy-handed" yet, until one particular Mod comes out of the woodwork, and decides he doesn't like you.

Hopefully, I'll never have the "pleasure".

 

[Stephanie]

Hopefully, I'll never have the "pleasure".

Ohoh...:fifty:





:teeth:

 

[Dr Grump]

Any "suggestions" are being cloaked in "complaints", and buried within the thread.. If there are real, legitimate suggestions, they should be confined to a single area, to make sifting through, and considering them easier.

I'll also tell you that you haven't seen "heavy-handed" yet, until one particular Mod comes out of the woodwork, and decides he doesn't like you.

Well, how's this for a legitimate suggestion. If a thread is just rocking along and changes course - and the discussion is civil, how about letting it run its course?

And I thought OCA said he was coming back soon...

 

[Mr. P]

Well, how's this for a legitimate suggestion. If a thread is just rocking along and changes course - and the discussion is civil, how about letting it run its course?

And I thought OCA said he was coming back soon...

And take rep power from mods..Boy I got nasties when I suggested that last!

 

[5stringJeff]

Well, how's this for a legitimate suggestion. If a thread is just rocking along and changes course - and the discussion is civil, how about letting it run its course?

And I thought OCA said he was coming back soon...

OCA owns his own business, so his participation is sporadic. In the past, he's been on daily for weeks at a time.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I will chirp in that it seems rather silly for the board to have mods who are almost never around. They have no sense for the recent moods of the board. IMO, it'd be nice if there was a minimum participation requirement in order to keep your mod position. Not that I don't sympathize with those who don't have the time, but if you don't have the time, you don't have the time.

And while the list of mods is fairly lengthy, the list of mods who actually do anything (maintenance, discipline, etc. etc.) is much shorter. I think the mods who do most of the behind the scenes work just end up getting all the shit directed towards them whether its deserved or not. I think most of these problems would go away if passive mods stepped up a bit more, or perhaps a couple new mods were added to help lighten the load.

It would also seem fairly logical to me if each mod had a domain to mod over. Instead of everyone trying to police everywhere, why not consider giving a bit of jurisdiction?

 

[Mr. P]

I will chirp in that it seems rather silly for the board to have mods who are almost never around. They have no sense for the recent moods of the board. IMO, it'd be nice if there was a minimum participation requirement in order to keep your mod position. Not that I don't sympathize with those who don't have the time, but if you don't have the time, you don't have the time.

And while the list of mods is fairly lengthy, the list of mods who actually do anything (maintenance, discipline, etc. etc.) is much shorter. I think the mods who do most of the behind the scenes work just end up getting all the shit directed towards them whether its deserved or not. I think most of these problems would go away if passive mods stepped up a bit more, or perhaps a couple new mods were added to help lighten the load.

It would also seem fairly logical to me if each mod had a domain to mod over. Instead of everyone trying to police everywhere, why not consider giving a bit of jurisdiction?

Ya know, even though ya don’t know how to wear a hat right, ya gotta lot of common sense.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Ya know, even though ya don’t know how to wear a hat right, ya gotta lot of common sense.

The hat is to keep it all from evaporating... :scratch:

 

[Mr. P]

The hat is to keep it all from evaporating... :scratch:

If ya find something that WORKS for that, let us ole farts know, OK? It's never to late...or so they say.

 

[jillian]

And take rep power from mods..Boy I got nasties when I suggested that last!

Ahhhhh...the rep issue. It can be a bit off-putting when mods can zing you. I was a little surprised that Kathianne negged Grump for a comment telling Roomy to stop drinking, which seemed pretty innocuous and light-hearted under the circumstances. Perhaps she was annoyed at him for his comments on this thread, on which Jim specifically said people can speak freely and not get zapped for it. I hope that isn't the case, though.

Might be something to consider. I can see where some might have gotten a bit snarky about it, though.

I have mixed feelings about the whole rep system though. As Dillo pointed out, those little green lights are very addictive. Personally, I love getting rep, if I were to be honest about it. Like giving it, too. I've only negged two people, though, both of whom I thought were simply trolls, one on the left, one on the right. On the other hand, there have been times I bit my tongue cause I knew I'd get zapped if I spoke my mind. I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing, whether we're talking about mods or just regular posters.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

The rep system is like a grown-up test. How you use it is very indicative as to whether you're acting like a child or an adult.

But getting all in a hussy about it is rediculous. If you don't like being neg repped, then put your grown-up hat on and talk to the person about it in PM.

Lord knows if Pale Rider and I can do it, any of the rest of you can

 

[Mr. P]

Ahhhhh...the rep issue. It can be a bit off-putting when mods can zing you. I was a little surprised that Kathianne negged Grump for a comment telling Roomy to stop drinking, which seemed pretty innocuous and light-hearted under the circumstances. Perhaps she was annoyed at him for his comments on this thread, on which Jim specifically said people can speak freely and not get zapped for it. I hope that isn't the case, though.

Might be something to consider. I can see where some might have gotten a bit snarky about it, though.

I have mixed feelings about the whole rep system though. As Dillo pointed out, those little green lights are very addictive. Personally, I love getting rep, if I were to be honest about it. Like giving it, too. I've only negged two people, though, both of whom I thought were simply trolls, one on the left, one on the right. On the other hand, there have been times I bit my tongue cause I knew I'd get zapped if I spoke my mind. I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing, whether we're talking about mods or just regular posters.

I am only talking of mods..

 

[jillian]

The rep system is like a grown-up test. How you use it is very indicative as to whether you're acting like a child or an adult.

But getting all in a hussy about it is rediculous. If you don't like being neg repped, then put your grown-up hat on and talk to the person about it in PM.

Lord knows if Pale Rider and I can do it, any of the rest of you can

Actually, Pale was the only person ever to neg me for an opinion. And I did pm him about it.

Wouldn't throw a hissy fit about it or anything. Just figured as long as the issue came up that I'd put in my two cents.

I am only talking of mods..

Oh...I know.

 

[Annie]

I am only talking of mods..

gumpy sure seems to have made it about him

Well, he's just a member like all the rest of us, no better no worse.