DC...how about this...the moderators nominate you and Plaw to select the top ten most awful postings every month. Then you put them up for a vote. The "winner" of the worst post then has to have an avatar depicting a horse's ass for a month.

With all due respect to veterans and newbies and anyone else applying for becoming a mod, I think JG and SC are doing a great job. I can't imagine any other member add more to the quality of GD board by deleting or modifying other member's posts by their own standards. If anyone wants perfect, that never exist. Unless you lock yourself into your own room.

That's how it's always worked, or at least is supposed to work. When people don't then we may not see it. At least I probably won't since I usually stand clear of such threads usually. And for good reason!

Because not everyone is mature, respectible and decent.

It's not likely I'll create a separate "debating" forum. I think things have been working pretty well as it has been; if people reported posts more often, there wouldn't be such a "problem". If I ever feel the need, then perhaps I'd just add another mod or two to Gen Disc....

OK, I've got it now...co-moderating (for some) is THREAD specific!!!

THAT explains plaw's inquiry as to the your role in the General Discussion forum.

Well then, I guess I STILL say JG, SC, and Don C are doing just fine as moderators, whatever the thread!!

Apple

I didn't know school was back in yet, Mr. DMC. I think it's a stupid idea. What if someone says they ignored a post because they took it as an insult, but it wasn't? All posts are taken differently. You might find something funny that I find insulting and I might something funny that you find insulting.

In that case, Apple, I demand to be included.

You may not know it, but I too am a Moderator of the Sports Forum.

And just for the record, some of my notable and more important responsibilities and achievements include the following:

1) Adding a "sticky" to the thread whenever someone starts a new fantasy league, so that the thread stays at the top of the forum, giving everyone a chance to see it.

2) Since I am an early riser, I update the "un-official" fantasy baseball scores posted by JG the night beofre, since there are often differences of a point or two.

3) Helping members who wish to use the "code" feature of UBB (which many are unfamiliar with) by re-formatting their post when they wish to post charts comparing the statistics of various players, etc.

4) Then there was the time that DMC posted a picture that was so large that it made the words in his post run off the screen, so I re-formatted his wording so it all fit without everyone having to use the little "slider" thing at the bottom of their screen.

I believe that I co-moderate the Sports Forum with calm, fairness, honesty, equality, equitability, objectivity, and open-mindedness, and without bias, prejudice, or partiality.

Believe me when I tell you that it can be a very difficult job at times, but I think I manage it as well as any other co-moderator here, and would be highly insulted if you did not make up for your omission with an immediate apology.

Plaw, in all sincerity, you do a great job, no question. Although I don't post much in the sports thread, I do go into it quite often, and I see that you really do a good job maintaining that thread.


Don Cardi

See Apple, even the guy who's running against me knows.

I am sure you do, as I rarely venture into the Sports Forum it's for others to determine.

But sports and politics are two very different topics of conversation. And until it gets its own forum, politics remains one of the options in General Discussion.

Go ahead and be highly insulted.

Apple :p

Apple, Apple, Apple.....What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully?

Sorry about all of that. Getting back on a serious track here....

The name-calling has got to go. That's what usually starts the thread rolling downhill.

And while, as has been pointed out, it's all well and good to report the post, I think the problem is that no one wants to appear so thin-skinned that the second Member A calls Member B a name, they are running to a moderator to report it.

Also, the snide comments.

Case in point: Patrick's post in this very thread

He makes a perfectly valid point or two, which is totally obscured by the fact that he calls the idea "stupid" (it would have served his purpose just as well to say "I don't think it's a good idea"), and the sarcasm in the "I didn't know school was back in yet, Mr. DMC", which is totally unnecessary and does nothing to help make the valid points which the post does contain.

In another thread that could surely have the potential to send things spiralling downward, but who's gonna be the one to bother to report that post?

I don't think I'm gonna bother to.

Oops...so sorry!! I forgot to add in my sticking tounge out graemlin to indicate I was just messing around this time.

Of course, I have to worry now who I use that on so some don't go crying to JGeoff or SC that I was being MEAN to them!!!!




Apple

So what you are really saying is that no one wants to be a Sammy Gravano.

But in all seriousness, if someone curses someone, makes fun of another in a malicious way, or makes a personal attack on another member, then by all means that person should be reported. This should help keep the debates somewhat respectable.

OK Plaw, let's go, time to debate an issue! :p


Don Cardi

If it happens in General,I won't report you APPLE, .

But if it happens in The Sports Thread, then I'll turn you over to Plaw.


Don Cardi

You're right, DC, in the extreme cases.

But how about Pat's post that I cited above?

It's borderline, but it can certainly be the start of the ruination of a thread.

You gonna bother to report it, though? Like I said, I'm not.

--------------------
...who gave the go ahead? I know I didn't...

I don't really see how adding a seperate political forum is going to solve any of the immaturity. If anything, it will just serve as a gigantic bullseye to those looking to stir the pot. As far as sarcasm is concerned, that is pretty difficult to control or detect over a computer. There are always obvious instances where the poster isn't trying to hide his or her sarcasm, but a lot of the so-called "sarcasm" is merely just read the wrong way. I'm guilty of it myself, I read something that seems like a smartass remark, then go back and re-read it only to interpret the remark in a completely non-threatening way. Sarcasm is mostly communicated through voice inflection and facial expression. That is nearly impossible to detect with a keyboard and monitor.

If JG and SC don't visit GD often enough to monitor inappropriate posts(who can blame them), then the best solution would be to have Plaw and DC both serve as moderators, assuming both are willing. I know from Sports that Plaw is dedicated enough. 99% of the time, they will agree and it will easy to pick out the posts that should or should not be deleted. In the instances in which their policital differences prevent them from reaching an agreement, then JG or SC can step in and make the call. I highly doubt that would happen very often anyways. I'm sure they would work very well together and do an excellent job.

You know something, when I read his post I thought the same thing. But I also decided against reporting it. Borderline. Yes, it can start a flame, no question, but then again, if it's ignored and no one replies to it, the fire dies out!

Funnt thing about PAT is that WHEN he WANTS to, he can debate just as intelligently as others here. When he wants to.


Don Cardi

True, but the right move would be to nip it in the bud, so there isn't a second, third, or fourth time, which does eventually degenerate into a sandbox session.

And what do you do if someone does reply in kind?

Now you're venturing into subjectivity and censorship.

And if Pat had put one of these :p , or these after the "I didn't know school was back in yet, Mr. DMC" part of his post, then what?

DC to Plaw :


Plaw to DC :

SC and Geoff To Plaw and DC :


Apple and DonT :


Don Cardi

DC to Plaw :


Plaw to DC :

SC and Geoff To Plaw and DC :


Apple and DonT :


Don Cardi [/b][/quote]Now how can anyone be hostile toward one another after a post like that?

DC, just save that reply on your computer somewhere and anytime the tension builds, just copy and paste it. That was great!

[Well, I just typed a long reply and used too many smilies and it was gone when I tried to go back. :rolleyes: That sucks. Guess you'll just have to pretend I said something important here for now. ]

Well, that shouldn't be that much different from usual. :p

Did I just make a sardonic comment? I'm sorry.

Anyways, I think this whole thing is getting way too caught up in more/less moderation, new forums, bannings/unbannings, etc. etc. etc.

We've been through cycles like this as long as I can remember, and it happens on every message board. It's not necessarily politics; it can be other things, such as unfair moderator actions, or personal flaming.

But again, I've found that it really comes down to whether it's worth it to get into a huge, lengthy discussion with someone when it's just going to turn into insults. Arguing with people like Plaw (excluding when he defends Pat, of course), Saladbar, and TIS are a pleasure because they, for the most part, are willing to listen to reason. However, when it coms to the rest of the bunch (on both sides of the spectrum), it's a mixed bag.

In all honesty, the good debates will resume as soon as people stop being a bunch of homers, and actually debate. The people who don't contribute anything meaningful eventually get weeded out. Joe Bonnano, MMM, and others have all gone in the past.

In conclusion, I agree with what Geoff has said above:

What we've got here is simply a phase, and it'll work itself out. And even if it doesn't, these problems can be taken care of with some moderator action, when warranted.

Regards,
Double-J

[Sarcasm on] That's alright. We're used to having to "pretend" that you actually said something important. :p [Sarcasm off]

While I agree that the flaming/insulting can occur in any thread, I think it is 99 percent in the political thread, or a thread where political policies can be discussed. It's been that way since before the last Presidential election. I really think our nation is truly divided and on "edge" right now and it's showing even here, on both sides of the coin.

Look, we can't even agree in a thread about what to do about all the problems in the political discussions.

Sorry you lost your post Geoff, because I'd be interested to hear what you had to say, however, I have had that happen and don't blame you for not wanting to type it again.

Perhaps you might want to just lay it on the line and chew us all out, before this thread too becomes a battlefield.

TIS

Newbies :rolleyes:

It's not going to become a battlefield TIS. You need to declare war before you can fight on a battlefield.

I agree with you that the insults, etc. that take place 99% of the time in a thread that is political. Some of the reasons that you stated are correct. But to add to that, the reason that we rarely see insults and attacks over in the other threads is because in the other threads, like GF Trilogy for instance, if there is an insult or a flame starting, it is nipped in the bud right away, and immedeatly put to a stop. That is because there is no reason for anyone to accuse the moderator of "taking sides" because in those threads there are no political disagreements where one could possibly take the side of the person's political view that they agree with. It's more of an interpretation Thread and discussion, so a flame starter, which is a rarity, is stopped in his tracks.

What started all this now is the fact that I posted a NEWS story about the floods and landslides that took so many lives in India. And in that post I asked if our fellow memebers from that region were ok.

Somone decided to start a debate about the news item that I posted, and it just began to spin way out of control with insults and attacks. Why this had to happen in a non controversial post about a natural disaster is beyond me. But as you know and saw, it happened. So rather than allowing the flame to get bigger and risk the chance that someone would get booted from here, I decided that since I was the one who started the original post, I would be the one to put an end to the fighting and arguing and just delete the post. It no longer seved it's original purpose which was to make others here aware of what was happening in that region of the world and to reach out to our fellow members from that region by making that post. But it unfortunately turned political.

Don Cardi

Seeing as this entire thread was created on my behalf and my said course of actions, (don't deny it, I'm not happy about it being made either), I think I should have a say.

Pat said it perfectly. DMC has a bad idea here. Censorship, for one, is rediculous. And what I say, though it may seem "snide", "rude" , uncouth or any other choice bubblegum words, is how I truthfully feel. Plaw reiterated a good idea, (as he was referring to me), if someone, (DonFerro), says something rude, then dismiss it and consider them immature. Take this idea and run with it.

Though I think this concept is null and void and that it is rediculous by nature to judge a personality on the basis of, what I feel, to be a truthful and honest post. If it works for the people who can't handle the truth, then fine.

I'm already so sick of political debate and I have not even started up again yet. Ugh.

Having my doubts,
The Doc

But weren't you a major part of that?
It was clear to me that you helped heat it up a couple of notches.

(This is not meant to be a flame, just a point being made.)


IMHO- Let the board be. Stop trying to control what was as good as a open board could be.

First of all, it's ridiculous, that mispell has been bothering me the whole time I was reading your post.

And secondly, I sincerely doubt that this thread is about your actions, which I can't even think of. I have to say that threads dedicated to specific members are either regarding congrats or bereavements. Don't think you are so important.

In the GangsterBB senate, the leader of the Evil Empire would like to vote "nay" on all these newfangled moderations and forums, and vote "yea" on the forum remaining as it is.

This isn't directed at you, Ferro - but just running with one of your words. And this is partly what I was typing before that disappeared into the ether.

The problem is, what's considered the "truth" for one person may be utterly ridiculous to someone else. That's why it's better to use opinions -- stated as such -- than to proclaim that one's spouting "The Absolute Truth" (which he isn't, most of the time, unless talking about statistics and such).

It's better to say, for example, "I think that Bush/Kerry/whomever is an idiot because last week he..." rather than "Bush/Kerry/whomever is a fucking idiot!" Even though the word "idiot" is used, in the first example it's a stated opinion, and it's being backed up with (hopefully) facts. The latter example is just idiotic in itself, and doesn't present any useful information or serve any point but to stir the pot.

(Now, using "idiot" (etc) in regards to public figures is one thing -- but not something that is acceptible here. I was posting an example of opinion w/ useful facts vs useless posts that make one look idiotic themselves.)