Discussion on Forum Rules (moved from Evo Section)

[Internetpilot]

Moderator note: the following discussion was moved from here for further discussion.

This is such a dumb statement. The 3D capability negates nothing. It doesn't make the processor any slower, it doesn't lower the resolution of the screen, it doesn't retrofit Sense 1.0, and it doesn't fill up the extra internal memory. It isn't as though if you switch the camera to 2D (which you can do, you know), that you lose everything else that the phone does. To say that the fact that it has an available 3D camera is a deal-breaker is asinine.

The 3D AT WORST, is a gimmicky feature that provides no relevant benefit to the average consumer. Even if that is the case, it doesn't change the fact that the Evo 3D offers a lot of other upgrades over the original Evo.

Explain to me how the establishment of a 3D standard that varies from the Evo 3D renders "that phone worthless in 6 months". There were VERY few people that bought the Evo for the 8mp camera and there will be VERY few that buy the Evo 3D for the 3D camera. Selling point? Sure. Primary function upon which all other uses of the phone rely? Not even close, buddy.

No, what is really dumb is you feeling the pressing need to personally criticize someone's opinion on a 3rd party mobile phone forum. How about post your own opinion on the phone and leave the personal attacks on other people out of it?

For a minute there, I thought I was on the XDA forums by mistake.

Thanks.

 

[EarlyMon]

Ok, point and counterpoint - let's not digress into further bad feelings.

Rules say - attack the message, not the messenger.

Objectively - I can read bvbull200's comments either way, so let's just call it square, do a virtual handshake, and move forward.

Remember everybuddy - posting is like driving a car - never hurts to give the other guy a little room.

 

[bvbull200]

No, what is really dumb is you feeling the pressing need to personally criticize someone's opinion on a 3rd party mobile phone forum. How about post your own opinion on the phone and leave the personal attacks on other people out of it?

For a minute there, I thought I was on the XDA forums by mistake.

Thanks.

If you are going to share an opinion in a public forum, prepare to have it criticized by others. You took a firm stance and I firmly refuted it. I didn't personally attack you in any way. I never said you were dumb, I said that the statement was. There is a big difference.

If it helps you detach your emotions from having your side of the argument face a sound rebuttal, then I will gladly rephrase it to any of the following:

"That statement lacks merit."
"The stance you are taking lacks any sound logic."
"The idea that a 3D option would negate all other benefits of the phone is vacuous."
"Your position does not make sense."

Let me know if any of these will help androidforums.com feel a little more at home for you.

Thanks.


By the way:

How about post your own opinion on the phone...

I already did.

1. I wouldn't buy it for the 3D either, but I didn't buy the Evo for the HD camcorder. If it ONLY had a 3D camera, then it would be a drawback. Having it as a one-click option makes it a plus, in my book. In addition, as someone else stated, you don't need a 3D TV to take advantage of it. How anyone can say that the fact that the phone has a 3D option is a bad thing is beyond me. It is a moot point at worst.

2. I will miss the kickstand as well, but I sure wouldn't let that small, easy to replace feature keep me from other more important goodies like image quality, speed, and upgraded user interface. Different strokes, though, I suppose.

I forget what I voted and what I may have stated at the beginning of this thread, but the more I think of it, the more certain I am that I will be getting the 3D. Plenty of AWESOME things about the phone. I've been thinking it over and the list of "cons" reads as follows:

1. No kickstand
2. $200 (I'm upgrade eligible)

The "pros" side is much more extensive, plenty to overcome the kickstand that I can live without (and remedy for very little $) and, not that I'm a baller, but putting away $200 fits within the gadgets/goodies/entertainment budget that I give myself.

 

[Internetpilot]

If you are going to share an opinion in a public forum, prepare to have it criticized by others. You took a firm stance and I firmly refuted it. I didn't personally attack you in any way. I never said you were dumb, I said that the statement was. There is a big difference.

I never mind my opinions being criticized, debated, or refuted. Ever. I do mind being insulted, and I expect my fellow forum members to follow proper forum etiquette. I noticed at least one of the moderators here seems to expect the same.

The fact that you're resorting to debating semantics says a lot. The fact that you edited your original response at least three times says even more.

Everyone using these forums should take note of this: You do realize that the first response you post is sent to me via email, right? Then I come to the forum and read something different. Then I come back to the forum later and you've completely edited your post again (this time rewriting it from scratch), even though I quoted the second version of your post in my response.

For the record, when I edit one of my posts, it's either to correct spelling mistakes (darn that Swype dictionary!) or to append the post -- not edit most of the content or re-write the entire post. The best rule of thumb is if you think you're going to have to retract most or all of one of your posts in the future, you probably shouldn't press that Submit Reply button at all.

 

[EarlyMon]

Stop. Now.

 

[Internetpilot]

This is off topic, but they never sold an XBOX 360 with an HD-DVD drive installed. Some stores (ie Best Buy) may have had a package deal, but the only HD-DVD drive for the 360 is the external one. This I know is 100% fact.

If my saying this is out of bounds, apologies. Please delete.

Here's another 100% fact for you -- I never said it was internal.


General forum question: Why are certain forum members here allowed to continue the targeted, badgering responses against another forum member, and yet I get a moderator publicly posting "Stop. Now." after my response(s)?

 

[Evulution]

Its because the Mods are in the pockets of Big Oil Companies.

 

[Internetpilot]

Its because the Mods are in the pockets of Big Oil Companies.

Wherever they are, they're clearly not reading this thread and applying the

Site Rules and Guidelines

Which clearly state:

General Conduct: ....Please treat other members with respect. These forums were put together for Android fans to come together and help each other, collaborate and discuss in a positive way

 

[Evulution]

Wherever they are, they're clearly not reading this thread and applying the

Site Rules and Guidelines

Which clearly state:

I must agree with you.

 

[EarlyMon]

Evulution - your independent point of view has prompted me to explain publicly, rather than privately, as is my custom, and I thank you for that.

bvbull200 and Internetpilot - you've both had private correspondence from me in the past where I've said I valued you and found your contributions positive.

So - I've made clear my going-in position.

Is a mod reading and studying every post in this thread? Yes - me.

Can I do that in real time, all the time? No. While I have a reputation for a staccato pace and lots of board time as a mod, I can't follow even my favorite threads in real time, sometimes. For example, right now, there are 3 mods online for 500 people right this instant, looking over how the posts may impact the 6000 lurkers here as I type this.

It seems to me that everyone on this page has some face-value positions on the issues here - and I'm no exception, so here's mine.

As I stated earlier, by the time I could catch up - I was max attentive to bvbull200's critical post - and I clearly stated above that I could take that one either way - as intending to attack the message or the messenger. My record, public and private, is clear - I advocate the benefit of the doubt when the words are unclear.

And let's talk about my first rule - it falls under mod discretion - no one of has certainty as to how our words come across, even if we think our words are clear.

Forum rules - bvbull200 - I've asked you in the past to temper your enthusiasm when disagreeing with someone, so that was grounds for probation for failure to heed a mod warning.

Forum rules - Internetpilot - I've asked you in our last exchange to engage like this when you feel attacked or offended or that the rules of courtesy are violated to NOT counter publicly and make more work for mods, and to instead simply !Report it - our hotline - so the first mod available, if not me personally, could deal with the issue without the cleanup. You ignored that, so that was grounds for probaion for failure to heed a mod warning.

Therefore - in my first post above, I asked that both parties call it squarsies, and I just let both go as two good guys having a cross-threaded day - everyone's fault, so no one's fault.

I asked for a virtual handshake and to move forward, somehow thinking that my private messages were remembered.

You both continued to respond - that was grounds for failure to heed a mod warning.

Internetpilot - why did I say "Stop. Now." just to you.

I didn't.

I was in a hospital for the last 6 hours with a loved one in trouble and had two minutes to check to see that all was well and you were happy and communicating positively with bvbull200 after my first message. Instead, I found more flames and off-topic to the 3D chatter. I posted simply what I had time for in those two minutes - Stop. Now.

Please see the simple truth - my explanation of "Stop. Now." could not have possibly matched your assumption - as you've demonstrated. Therefore - any assumption of what a message means is open to question, and just feeling certain you knew what I meant didn't mean your certainty was justified.

It was a mod directive: Stop. Now. It wasn't followed - so, there's some more self-canceling probations - or a temp ban.

Next - we get the veiled discussions about Xbox HD-DVD stuff - veiling some twisted points about who's going to be right on what using facts, and trying to skirt my request and my directive by adhering to the letter of the law without adhering to the spirit of it.

~~~~~

Our rules are simple, and yes, I know them well - but good rules are about right and wrong and that's always simple.

I'll sum them up even better than the quoted material - and these words are fully subscribed and used by all mod staff:

1. Attack issues and not each other.
2. Stay mostly on-topic. See rule one - too much interpersonal chatter is off-topic.

Here is my boss' Prime Directive for posting: Please be polite.

Many of our 6000 lurkers are trying to check out what the cool posters have to say about the Evo 3D. Being off-topic and over-discussing each other - it's not polite to them, or to the regular posters subscribing to keep up on this issue.

Attacking each other is not polite.

Defending yourself - never really happens. It always becomes a counter-attack - always. Counter-attacks are not polite.

Expecting mods to read in real time and share your personal passions and not see the other guy's point of view - not polite.

Now - there's my accounting of myself and my actions. You're free to respond to me on this - publicly and right here is way ok - I only ask that whomever responds, discuss with me and not further with each other.

Anyone who is unhappy with my position or explanations now, during or after the process, freely PM my boss Phases to request management review of my actions.

I think that's fair - and polite.

Floor's open.

 

[lordofthereef]

Early,
I didn't get a PM from you (or anyone for that matter), but would like to publicly admit that I am guilty of the XBOX 360 tangent. I am the first to admit that it is hard, when someone goes on a tangent, and I have an opinion on the tangent topic, to simply ignore it. I think most of us are guilty of this in some form, as is evidence of plenty of the EVO 3D threads.

I would also like to publicly apologise to anyone that may have felt attacked by me. In my mind, I "attack" the statement (if it warrants it) and not the person. I also invite you to please shoot me a PM if you feel I am out of bounds.

I also ask that posters step back and view a disagreement to their topic and/or statement as just that, and nothing more. All too often (and not just in this thread, or with these individuals) I see people getting personal because someone disagrees with their views. In a forum, there will be disagreement. That is sort of the point, to have a discussion.

Lastly, there is the option to ignore a person. If I am not mistaken, this keeps said person from viewing your posts as well? I probably would have done that with other posters (again, nobody who has posted here, just to clear the air), however I am not quite sure how that works on this particular forum - if I can be directed as to how to do that, it would be great for future reference (and perhaps for others as well)!

 

[EarlyMon]

Ignore is found under the User CP link (top of every page), and then in the left column.

Here's a copy of that link for convenience - Edit Ignore List

So long as a thread isn't getting hijacked, going on tangents is kinda ok - per #2 above - please stay _kinda_ on topic. I wouldn't want to wear a straight-jacket around here any more than you would - and we find it ok to allow adults to color outside the lines some.

That said - when a tangent turns into a different subject, and the subject is still lively or side-related, we'll tend to spin those posts off into their own thread. Some people object to that, and also object when threads are merged - and we sympathize and understand - but we try to do that in interest of the greater good.

When the tangent is part of a discussion involving any bickering - whether part of the actual bickering or not - those posts get deleted as off-topic.

I also ask that posters step back and view a disagreement to their topic and/or statement as just that, and nothing more.

OK - I need to remind all that I prefer others not be addressed in this issue. Whether in anger or with best intentions - when one bud tells another how to read or post, the budship usually stops.

I'm not upset in this case that you did that, because I missed that point earlier and you caught it.

We do encourage people to agree to disagree when minds can't meet. It's polite, it's fun, and the guy you think isn't getting it today is liable to be the same guy you think is a genius tomorrow.

See what I did there? It's all case by case.

We don't play favorites and we don't make moderating personal - but it's not all black & white. If it were, someone would invent the moderation autobot. And because mods are human too - therefore same error potential as we all have as posters here - we have a simple system of mods looking over each others shoulders and when we have any confusion or doubt whatsoever, we discuss our actions with other mods in a private venue before any mod action proceeds - and our boss monitors that as well as the threads themselves. That way we can try to keep the site-wide modding consistent, even though we have personal differences and ideas as mods.

Make sense?

 

[lordofthereef]

On my quoted point, perhaps I didn't say what I meant, or perhaps it didn't come across as what I meant it to come across as (I think I confused myself a little there). Basically, I asked simply that people don't take topic disagrements personally. Nobody REALLY likes to be wrong, so being told you are wrong can easily be taken personally. I can only speak for myself, but when I say a statement is wrong, it is never because of who said it, but rather because I simply feel it is wrong. Hopefully I am ok to say that?

EDIT: Oh, and thanks for the ingore list instructions. Was fiddling with user cp before and couldn't find it.

 

[EarlyMon]

Basically, I asked simply that people don't take topic disagrements personally.

For me, that was crystal clear the first time.

 

[bvbull200]

Don't worry, Early, I don't take the internet very seriously, so I assure you that my androidforums.com experience has not been tarnished. I received your PM and will reply with what I think should remain private. That said, I think there is some value to what you aired out in public and I deem a certain public reply from myself appropriate as well.

I can't promise that I will lose my "enthusiasm" when I disagree with someone, but I'm comfortable in my assertion that I went after the argument, not the poster. From there, it depends on how easily one gets butt-hurt when they meet some resistance and whether or not they let some faceless schmuck from Texas ruin their day.

And here goes the part of the post that is relevant to the thread:

The recent banter is certainly on-topic (aside from the HD-DVD "analogy", that HAD to be addressed ). The problem that the Evo 3D is going to have, is that there will be so much focus on the 3D aspect, that the performance of that single feature will be over-valued. If you've met anyone that says they wouldn't get an Evo 4G solely because they don't have 4G coverage, you could see how absurd that is. Personally, so long as they deserve it, I want HTC to be very successful with this phone as it encourages more goodies down the line. It will be a damn shame if it flops because people are worried that the camera won't fit the 3D standard 2 years from now. It's crazy to think that someone might say, "I would have bought that phone, but I'm not sure about that optional camera function...."

 

[Internetpilot]

Forum rules - Internetpilot - I've asked you in our last exchange to engage like this when you feel attacked or offended or that the rules of courtesy are violated to NOT counter publicly and make more work for mods, and to instead simply !Report it - our hotline - so the first mod available, if not me personally, could deal with the issue without the cleanup. You ignored that, so that was grounds for probaion for failure to heed a mod warning.

Therefore - in my first post above, I asked that both parties call it squarsies, and I just let both go as two good guys having a cross-threaded day - everyone's fault, so no one's fault.

I asked for a virtual handshake and to move forward, somehow thinking that my private messages were remembered.

You both continued to respond - that was grounds for failure to heed a mod warning.

....

Now - there's my accounting of myself and my actions. You're free to respond to me on this - publicly and right here is way ok - I only ask that whomever responds, discuss with me and not further with each other.

....

Floor's open.

For the record, at no time have I ever received such a warning message or even a request from you or any other moderator, either publicly or via private message, about defending myself from attack by another forum member.

Have I defended myself publicly on these forums when personally attacked by other members? Absolutely. I have read and re-read the posted forum rules, and (although I'm willing to stand corrected) I do not see any mention of it being a violation to defend yourself publicly from another member's personal attacks. What I did see in the posted forum rules was that this forum has a "Zero Tolerance Policy" for rude/disrespectful behavior, personal attacks, bullying by Senior Members, etc., along with a promise to enforce this policy.

The following moderator intervention does not seem to enforce this Zero Tolerance Policy:

Ok, point and counterpoint - let's not digress into further bad feelings.

Rules say - attack the message, not the messenger.

Objectively - I can read bvbull200's comments either way, so let's just call it square, do a virtual handshake, and move forward.

Remember everybuddy - posting is like driving a car - never hurts to give the other guy a little room.

I don't see any other way to read the sentence "This is such a dumb statement" other than as a personal insult, and I would not call discounting it or seemingly condoning it as being "objective" either. There is very little room for translation of the words, "Zero Tolerance Policy," and selective enforcement of a Zero Tolerance Policy is an oxymoron, and will always lead to suspicion of favoritism and good ol' boy clubs within the forum, which is why I accused it of being such.

This has happened to me at least twice now during my rather short membership on this forum -- each time it was always a Senior Member doing the attacking/abuse, this same "objective" inaction from you as the moderator, and me being forced to defend myself because of this lack of enforcement of the Zero Tolerance Policy.

I do not have this problem on any other forum, some of which I have been an active member for a decade. In fact, most members and moderators of these other forums would be very surprised to find me so neck-deep in this ridiculous issue here. I am actually a moderator, myself, on two other forums, as well as numerous forums in the past, so I speak on this matter with experience, even experience from your perspective.

This is not why I come to this or any other forum, but clearly, this is exactly the reason why some members do come here -- to pick fights, insult/bully other members, vent their frustrations from the real world, and generally ruin the place for other members who have better intentions. This should not be tolerated by anyone, but especially not the moderators, and definitely not at the expense of other forum members.

I apologize for raising this issue again when the thread has moved on to being more on-topic. I had not planned on responding at all until I noticed my username specifically mentioned in your post, and...once again...I find myself coming to my own defense on the AndroidForums.

 

[EarlyMon]

Basically, you're setting terms as to how anyone is allowed to disagree with you.

I refer to -

I don't see any other way to read the sentence "This is such a dumb statement" other than as a personal insult, and I would not call discounting it or seemingly condoning it as being "objective" either.

You have a problem that others do not. You can not see the difference between someone calling you dumb and someone calling one of your ideas dumb.

And - you keep trying to play moderator, and I'm not having it.

You are correct - in our exchanges of March 28th, I did not specifically say to !Report things instead of argue in public.

I have erroneously assumed that you were getting the message in part from my other public posts - and you haven't been.

When I said that bvbull200's original statement could be read two different ways - it wasn't an indictment on his writing alone - it was an indictment on your insistence that only your view is the right one.

And however they do things on your other forums - great. We do things our way here.

And over here, people are allowed to screw up and have dumb ideas - and that doesn't make them dumb - and that doesn't make anyone attacking the idea the same as attacking you.

I suggest you change your posting habits, report me to Phases for mod removal, change forums, or expect infractions the next time you decide to "defend" yourself - because this IS your formal warning: it's our job to defend you when necessary, and your counter-attacks will no longer be tolerated, especially when you weren't attacked other than in your own opinion.

End of options.

 

[Internetpilot]

Evulution - your independent point of view has prompted me to explain publicly, rather than privately, as is my custom, and I thank you for that.

Evulution is the only one who has offered a truly independent point of view regarding the controversial side of this original thread, and strangely enough, he agreed with my assessment that the rules were not being properly enforced

Wherever they are, they're clearly not reading this thread and applying the

Site Rules and Guidelines

Which clearly state:

I must agree with you.

So newer members seem to feel like the rules are not being enforced. Senior members and at least one moderator apparently view the rules as loose guidelines to be followed or not at one's own discretion. That's a violation of the very definition of the word, rules.

Now - there's my accounting of myself and my actions. You're free to respond to me on this - publicly and right here is way ok - I only ask that whomever responds, discuss with me and not further with each other.

Anyone who is unhappy with my position or explanations now, during or after the process, freely PM my boss Phases to request management review of my actions.

I think that's fair - and polite.

Floor's open.

Is that floor open? Truly? Because after reading your latest response (especially the end) it does not really seem like it.

You have a problem that others do not. You can not see the difference between someone calling you dumb and someone calling one of your ideas dumb.

No, the problem is not that I don't see it -- it's that there is no difference. There are plenty of forum members participating in the thread who disagreed with my statements/stance. The reason why I only had a problem with one individual is because that one individual was the only one who derogatorily referred to my ideas as dumb. My ideas are part of my person -- there's no way to separate the two. Insulting and criticizing someone's ideas with rude, abusive language is the same thing as insulting their person. This is what you are not seeing in your loose interpretation of the forum rules.

The root problem here is that a Zero Tolerance Policy is being advertised, but not enforced. Criticizing or attacking someone's ideas is rude and disrespectful, both of which are violations of the posted forum rules, and should fall under immediate action under the Zero Tolerance Policy. Under this policy is specifically states:

We have entrusted our mods to use their judgement with a "ban now and ask questions later" policy. It has gotten to the point where giving infractions have become moot.

Guess what? Giving infractions still seems to be moot, because the same Senior Members are still not following your posted rules, and new members still seem to be the common targets.

And - you keep trying to play moderator, and I'm not having it.

I would love it if I could come to this forum as a simple member, post my thoughts or ideas without being attacked, and not be forced to defend myself and/or "play moderator". Like I said, discussions like this is not why I come to this forum, and I do not want to be a moderator here.

You are correct - in our exchanges of March 28th, I did not specifically say to !Report things instead of argue in public.

I have erroneously assumed that you were getting the message in part from my other public posts - and you haven't been.

I corrected you on that statement because it simply never happened, and you were using it to publicly chastise me for not following an official moderator directive/request that you never actually made. Now it's still my fault because I did not comprehend an implied meaning from one of your other posts...?

Wouldn't it be easier to just enforce the rules of the forum, including the Zero Tolerance Policy? Your loose interpretation of what rules to enforce based on the who did the offending and who was the target is exactly what is causing the continued escalation of this issue. A Zero Tolerance Policy is black and white -- there is no room for interpretation or it's simply not zero tolerance. I've never actually been to a forum that advertised a "Discretionary Tolerance Policy", but I can guarantee you that I would not be an active member of that forum.

And however they do things on your other forums - great. We do things our way here.

And over here, people are allowed to screw up and have dumb ideas - and that doesn't make them dumb - and that doesn't make anyone attacking the idea the same as attacking you.

Then you really should change your Rules to reflect that, and you definitely need to withdraw the Zero Tolerance Policy, because that is not what either one states at this moment. In fact, if the rules and policies of this forum are open to the interpretation by anyone (both for enforcement and for adherence) then they're completely worthless serve no purpose.

I suggest you change your posting habits, report me to Phases for mod removal, change forums, or expect infractions the next time you decide to "defend" yourself - because this IS your formal warning: it's our job to defend you when necessary, and your counter-attacks will no longer be tolerated, especially when you weren't attacked other than in your own opinion.

End of options.

Formal warning is noted.

Since in your own words you identified defending me when necessary as your job in this forum, then you should expect to be held to that. As long as this forum advertises a Zero Tolerance Policy on abusive behavior, I will hold all moderators of this forum to that policy, and expect action when offending posts are reported by me.

I abide by the posted rules of this forum, as do most other members here in my relatively brief experience on this forum. However, if these rules are subject to interpretation or optionally enforced by the moderators, you need to post that as part of the rules so that members like me who are abiding by those rules to the letter can realize what to expect from this forum and make more informed decisions on whether or not it is worth it to invest any time here. I know what your stance is on this -- you already suggested in your "floor's open" discussion above that I should go to another forum. That is definitely an option. How many more people have to do the same or, at best, remain lurkers fearing to post before the moderators here simply enforce the posted rules and policies of this forum? I realize I'm just a drop in the bucket, but eventually that bucket will get full.

 

[Kelmar]

Realistically, the Forum Rules are more guidelines to follow. They cannot cover every possible scenario that will show itself. The general thoughts, in reference to this thread, are to be respectful of other users. General, I feel that this happens.

As EarlyMon said, and the Forum Rules indicate, discussion and debating the different sides of a topic are completely allowed. The discussion spilling over into personal attacks and mudslinging is obviously not ok.

As I'm sure you know, the Moderators cannot physically see every single post and every single thread (not to mention following the conversations and mannerisms in those posts/threads). We rely VERY HEAVILY on the users to let us know when they have an issue with a post/thread. As an example that is relevant to this thread, there may be times when a comment may read fine to a staff member who sees it but not to the user who it was in response to. When these situations occur, click the "!report" button and tell us why you find it offensive. We'll clean it and let the offending user know why their post was edited.

The problem, as I'm sure all can tell from this thread, is that when ANY user (note: this isn't directed at any one individual) feels the need to "resolve" the matter on their own it nearly ALWAYS turns sour. People get upset, tempers flare, name calling begins, feelins get hurt, members leave and MOST of the time all of the users involved get warnings/infractions/banned.

Simply put, users can feel to discuss their thoughts on a matter but when it gets the the point when users feel the need to defend THEMSELVES (NOT their thoughts on a matter) they need to take a few moments to report the post and WALK AWAY.

Yes, this is an internet forum.... Yes, we allow users to "police" themselves to an extent.... At the end of the day, the site is individually owned and operated within the guidelines that the owner and Admin dictate.

 

[Kelmar]

The irony of this is if we crack the whip at ever little thing, no matter the size, people get upset and threaten to leave. If we try to be lenient and let people discuss and police themselves, people get upset and threaten to leave.


Forum moderator is by far the least appreciative volunteer position around. Everyone things we are out to get them and thinks we should do things exactly how they thing we should and see every post the moment it's made!

People will come. People will go. People will be happy. People will be upset. Cant please everyone... oh well.

 

[Internetpilot]

Excellent explanation and summary of the situation, and specifically this is what I've been waiting to see:

When these situations occur, click the "!report" button and tell us why you find it offensive. We'll clean it and let the offending user know why their post was edited.

In this specific thread, I took issue to being told, "This is such a dumb statement". Is this the worst I've been abused on a forum? Hardly. But there's just simply no reason to phrase it that way. This is a perfect situation for moderating with the above method -- no ban or even warning necessary. It's just not nice and needs to be rephrased. Some user have the ability to edit or censor themselves -- others don't and could use the help from the moderators in order to avoid hooplahs like this one.

Simply put, users can feel to discuss their thoughts on a matter but when it gets the the point when users feel the need to defend THEMSELVES (NOT their thoughts on a matter) they need to take a few moments to report the post and WALK AWAY.

I realize that I didn't help matters much by responding myself, but after three or four times of having my concerns just flatly discounted and/or disregarded as me being too sensitive or interpreting it the wrong way, I didn't really see a point in going through formal channels.

In the future, I will simply report it.

The irony of this is if we crack the whip at ever little thing, no matter the size, people get upset and threaten to leave. If we try to be lenient and let people discuss and police themselves, people get upset and threaten to leave.

Very true, but I think it's better to err on the side of caution. I think it would be better for this forum to be notoriously strict than notoriously abusive.

Forum moderator is by far the least appreciative volunteer position around. Everyone things we are out to get them and thinks we should do things exactly how they thing we should and see every post the moment it's made!

I hear you. I was not exaggerating in my previous post -- I am a moderator on two other forums, and quite a few more in the past.

I actually started a very successful RV/Camping forum that was bought out by a major RV retailer. That is not something I care to repeat in my lifetime -- it was rough. 90% of my membership were retirees over the age of 55, typically computer/internet illiterate, and couldn't seem to comprehend that what they posted wasn't direct email and was visible by everyone viewing the forum. There were actually two incidents that I had to lock the thread, screen capture the posts, and send copies to the posters' local law enforcement agency because I was seriously worried that these old people were going to meet up and literally kill each other. People were actually prosecuted!

So I know what you're going through -- that can be a benefit and a curse for me. When I see something being handled on a forum in a way that I know from experience will typically not yield the best or desired results, I probably poke my nose too far into the issue, verging on (if not going into) the "principle" of it. I regularly visit few forums, and the ones I do I really don't want to see go bad due to unmoderated bullies. One of the reasons I like this forum is that it has a Zero Tolerance Policy -- that usually makes for a much more friendly forum.

All that being said, I still stand on what I said, and I hope that the moderators here will actually respond with a simple edit to a reported offending post, and prevent things like this from getting this out of hand.

Thanks again for the response.

 

[EarlyMon]

So - your idea was called dumb.

You claim to moderate elsewhere where I presume courtesy is followed - yet how did you respond?

No, what is really dumb...

And right there - pot calling kettle black, you were 100% equally guilty.

It is that simple.

How did I handle it?

I let you both off the hook, and asked for some politeness.

I received no consideration whatsoever from you - you decided it's time for the flame war.

You have yet to recognize that you have a problem - and it's clearly there.

You understand nothing of what we're trying to get through to you.

 

[Kelmar]

Like I said, in the future, report them and explain why you find it offensive. We may not see it that way when we read it (assuming we catch it or even actually read it). Let us handle thinks that need attention.

FWIW, had I stumbled across this before EarlyMon (see his example above, once again without trying or meaning to direct this at any one person), I'm sure the conversation would be very different right now. That being said, he handled the situation completely within the guidelines that we, as staff, have laid out for us by our superiors (i.e. a balance of an iron fist and a limp fish). Each moderator has a different style and views things differently but 100% within the rules that WE as staff follow.


Remember, discussion and debate of ideas and opinions are allowed. As long as we remember that we'll be ok!


Now, as far as the fiasco that brought all this on... It's pretty clear to me that this is a giant misunderstanding and that no harm or ill-intent was meant or implied.

Water under the bridge... Time to move along to bigger and brighter tomorrows.

 

[Internetpilot]

So - your idea was called dumb.

You claim to moderate elsewhere where I presume courtesy is followed - yet how did you respond?

And right there - pot calling kettle black, you were 100% equally guilty.

It is that simple.

How did I handle it?

I let you both off the hook, and asked for some politeness.

I received no consideration whatsoever from you - you decided it's time for the flame war.

EarlyMon, you really need to take your own advice and simply move forward.

You have yet to recognize that you have a problem - and it's clearly there.

My problem is with your moderation methods -- that is where my only current problem begins and ends.

You understand nothing of what we're trying to get through to you.

Right back at you -- clearly, you understand nothing of what I'm trying to get through to you.

Like I said, in the future, report them and explain why you find it offensive. We may not see it that way when we read it (assuming we catch it or even actually read it). Let us handle thinks that need attention.

Great....here's comes the big grey area of interpretation creeping back into the black/white issue of enforcing a Zero Tolerance Policy.

And just when things were beginning to look better. Oh, well.

 

[EarlyMon]

My problem is with your moderation methods -- that is where my only current problem begins and ends.

Yep.