Moderation - what do you want?

sgt hawk · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:43 pm

I'm with you Mudge. These guys can't and won't agree on aircraft restoration paint scemes let alone anything else.

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:02 pm

Mudge wrote:

Gotta' disagree with the "trial" by a jury of their peers.
Maybe if the verdict consisted of no more than a "guilty" or "not guilty" answer, PERIOD, it might work.
If we all were invited to "testify" for or against, the thread could/would go on "ad infinitum" and it would, I'm sure, descend into hostilities itself.

Just my thoughts. :?

Mudge the prudent jurist :hide:

Mudge, ok... I understand. You may be right.
And I know this is really not a democracy... It is Scotts world and we live in it…
I was thinking that a trial or some ability to refute by the accused would be nice to have.
Accusations could be offered, and the accused could say how they are unjust... BLAH BLAH BLAH…Then ban them...
At least there would be a record instead of a he said, she said... and someone's opinion.
Kicking someone out of the community (the scarlet letter…) is hardcore… at least give them the chance to say sorry.. or to tell us all to get bent…
you know…

Then it would be done... over... back to warbirds...
Then the Moderator wouldn't have to keep saying... you know, we already talked about this 99,000 times... and lets move on... so forth... so forth...
back to warbirds...

Just an idea...

**DROPS popcorn on floor…gets more popcorn… sits on sofa **

I still think the 'YOU STEPPED OVER THE LINE' idea is a good one...

Mudge · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:04 pm

Robbie Roberts wrote:

I'd like to see a third option- SOME moderation, allowing for free exchange of ideas, some argument, but also allowing for things to be stopped "before they go too far", with "too far" being decided by those involved, but arbited by the moderator...

A good fist fight among friends can be fun and releasing... But taking it to a death match can present problems.

Nice to see you still in the ring JDK!

Robbie

Robbie...All due respect, of course...BUT...IMHO...if the "offenders" could moderate themselves, they wouldn't have gone past "civil" and "respectful" to begin with.

Mudge the civil and respectful (I hope) :shock:

Liza · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:52 pm

Bluedharma wrote:

...Some people are offended by sarcasm. Cultural differences in terms used can be offensive.
What may be offensive to someone in the Europe is not to someone in the States.
No amount of moderation will ever change that. Moderator should expect to be offended and be above it.
They should not react emotionally (even if the person was rude), but protect those who would react emotionally. (not an easy task)

You are correct, it is not an easy task.

I would think trying to moderate this site is a huge task in itself simply due to the size of it. I find it difficult to keep up with everything posted. If a couple days are missed, it will take a while to go through it all.

retroaviation · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:58 pm

Liza wrote:

... If a couple days are missed, it will take a while to go through it all.

Well then Liza, don't miss any days. WIX must be checked for updates at least daily, if not two or three or twenty times a day. :lol:

Gary

IndyJen · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:14 pm

I've been on various Internet boards since the old Tecnet/USENET days. I know from trolls, and from fools, and from the sort who are a combination of utterly wrong, absolutely certain of their own certitude, and completely tactless. Sometimes all three categories in one single individual.

It takes a lot of work to keep a good board--of which WIX is an example--successful. It takes almost no effort at all to reduce a formerly-good board to worthlessness.

Moderation is necessary. Period. If you don't have moderation, you'll have, in short order, a usenet flame-fest, and nothing worth reading.

I think the moderators have to this point done a fine job; if anything, they've been over-lenient. The rules are clear, and easy to find. If an individual can't figure out how to abide by them, there's the door.

The internet is a big place. If there's insufficient politics here for your taste, or not enough slug-fests, or if you wish for more virtual fisticuffs, domain names are not expensive--start your own board, and enjoy.

Scott's rules really only boil down to "stick to the topic, and have some manners." What is so difficult about that?

Mudge · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:34 pm

IndyJen wrote:

Scott's rules really only boil down to "stick to the topic, and have some manners."

Well...I gotta' say... "Stick to the topic" would be a unique experience. (Not a complaint. Just an observation. :twisted:

)

Mudge the topical

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:02 pm

Knowing that we've grown tremendously has both individuals and has a collective group in the past few days.
I suggest we start another Bill G. Spitfire thread and see where it goes. :shock:

Mudge · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:05 pm

Jack Cook wrote:

I suggest we start another Bill G. Spitfire thread and see where it goes. :shock:

Now that there's funny...I don't care who ya' are! :lol:

Mudge the amused

(But see how easy it is to spot the troublemakers and wrongdoers?)

J. Armstrong · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:22 pm

Bluedharma wrote:

I am currently a moderator on another site.
The best way (IMHO) is to create a new section called “YOU STEPPED OVER THE LINE”.
“Questionable violations” could be moved there without moderator comment.
People could avoid… or argue forever… All content can still be found with a search.
If that gets out of hand… then posts could be moved there.. and the person who caused the problem could be banned from all areas except the YOU STEPPED OVER THE LINE area.

**gets more popcorn… sits on sofa **

I belong to a firearms site where a similar procedure works fairly well, at least within limits. Some folks will always try and test the boundaries on anything, so such a forum still requires some oversight.

Said site can turn into a real firefight, but once you learn to thicken your skin and discipline yourself to ignore what really tweaks your sensibilities, it actually can lead to very stimulating discourse. Not sure if it would work as well here as this is a more narrowly defined site.

Based upon my experiences there, I initially felt this site was unnecessarily over-moderated, but realized that "one size doesn't fit all" one can and must learn to enjoy a site within its operating parameters.

I have to add that I agree that James' moderating techniques always seemed fair, well written, and constructively stated. The latter trait is very rare in moderation and I really admired his ability to do it even when I may not have agreed.

I always viewed the "popcorn" response as a response intended to be amusing, as in "uh, oh, the fun is starting......."

PinecastleAAF · **Joined:** Fri May 25, 2007 4:50 pm **Posts:** 1028

Quote:

I suggest we start another Bill G. Spitfire thread and see where it goes.

All things in moderation. I'd rather see a new Water Skiing T-6 thread myself.

airnutz · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:29 pm

Bluedharma wrote:

Example: http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... 972#284972
*gets popcorn, sits on sofa* ??? Is that a slam?

No slam Blue, the poster knew the Colorado Spitfire reference meant another Greenwood thread was
probably about to get launched along with the predictable catfight. :wink:

DaveM2 · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:58 pm

IndyJen wrote:

I've been on various Internet boards since the old Tecnet/USENET days. I know from trolls, and from fools, and from the sort who are a combination of utterly wrong, absolutely certain of their own certitude, and completely tactless. Sometimes all three categories in one single individual.

It takes a lot of work to keep a good board--of which WIX is an example--successful. It takes almost no effort at all to reduce a formerly-good board to worthlessness.

Moderation is necessary. Period. If you don't have moderation, you'll have, in short order, a usenet flame-fest, and nothing worth reading.

I think the moderators have to this point done a fine job; if anything, they've been over-lenient. The rules are clear, and easy to find. If an individual can't figure out how to abide by them, there's the door.

The internet is a big place. If there's insufficient politics here for your taste, or not enough slug-fests, or if you wish for more virtual fisticuffs, domain names are not expensive--start your own board, and enjoy.

Scott's rules really only boil down to "stick to the topic, and have some manners." What is so difficult about that?

What she said :supz:

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:04 pm

airnutz wrote:

Bluedharma wrote:

Example: http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... 972#284972
*gets popcorn, sits on sofa* ??? Is that a slam?

No slam Blue, the poster knew the Colorado Spitfire reference meant another Greenwood thread was
probably about to get launched along with the predictable catfight. :wink:

OK. When he said it, I pictured this.

Now really... I don't have holes in my socks!

airnutz · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:20 pm

YOUR James Gandolfini..your slippin' man..the Sopranos shutdown must be rough! :cry:

Warbird Information Exchange

Moderation - what do you want?

Who is online