Forum reset

[Bengalzona]

(11-02-2015, 01:19 AM)bfine32 Wrote: We said we would moderate ourselves here and we have failed. The Mods have rightly taken a more firm stance in this forum. This place has turned into a place where the only reason folks post (me included) is to try to belittle another poster. We did it in the past but lately it has just gotten uglier.

Please reply if you agree or not and add your suggestions (assuming stop starting whinny threads will be #1)
Finally, I ask that Bengalzona become the new PnR Mod. We disagree on most everything, but I’ve never seen him attack anyone.

(11-02-2015, 02:08 AM)CharvelPlaya Wrote: I am in too. And I second Bengalzona. He seems like a fair dude.

(11-02-2015, 02:24 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Finally a point of consensus.  I have a lot of respect for 'Zona.  Sadly, for you, I doubt he'd be on board with your borderline totalitarian view of what should be allowed to be stated or not.  However, I still agree with the sentiment.

(11-02-2015, 06:01 AM)Devils Advocate Wrote: While I believe 'Zona would be a fine moderator, I don't think moderating this forum is the answer. In fact, I believe this forum should go unmoderated, where nearly anything goes and all complaints are ignored. The best way to avoid being offended down here is to avoid the forum altogether. I'm definitely not suggesting anyone do that, as I prefer activity and controversy, but avoidance is the best form of 'self' -- moderating.

(11-02-2015, 12:31 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: As far as a Mod, I've always been for it.
From what I've seen, Zona is a great guy, but is he here that often anymore ?
I don't look to see who's lurking, so I may have the wrong impression of activity.

Side note: I'm not sure how I feel about the Mod/Admin deletions being performed in the forum.

Thank you for putting my name out there. I consider it an honor to be considered.

But, I don't think I would be a good mod because:
1) I don't post as much as I used to. I try to check in daily. But real world responsibilities have kept me pretty tied-up as of late.
2) I've never actually read the CoC. Neither the one for this board or the one for the old board. I just post and hope I don't write something out of line. Any knowledge I have of the CoC comes from hearsay and from other posters who write things like, "Nuh-uh! You can't put that here because the CoC says....!!!". To be perfectly honest, I don't have any intention of ever actually reading the CoC unless someone plans on filing a lawsuit against me (in which case, you can be sure that I will know every single word and period in it).
3) I am innately lazy. I don't think I've ever actually read every post in any thread (well, maybe the one about the "blasting pecks" in the old board) . I almost never click on a link to read it, despite the fact that I have posted links for others to read before. It occurred to me that, if I were a mod, then I would have to start actually reading a lot other posts. This thought made me sad. I attempted to read every post in this thread, but that made me quite discouraged and I had to give up after about 12 posts.
4) I am really sort of a cantankerous old fart at this point in my life. My idea of moderating would be to issue one day suspensions on an almost daily basis to people who start insulting each other in threads. Both parties. Cool off and come back tomorrow... and don't give me any crap about it "not being fair" or "he started it" like you are the Brady Bunch kids stuffed in the back seat of a station wagon. As far as banning, I've always thought the ancient Roman "Caesar model" works best: wait until you see enough people giving the thumbs-down signal, and then give them the axe.

If none of that stuff bothers you guys or the management (which it probably should), then I would consider being a mod if asked.

But, I suspect the current problems with this forum have nothing to do with moderation. I saw nothing wrong with Matt's moderation. He is a smart, even-minded and conscientious person (I'll bet he has even read the CoC!).

I think the very nature of politics and religion are contentious. That is why you are not supposed to bring them up at family get-togethers. But that nature is not necessarily a bad thing. It just means that there is no one answer that will make everyone happy on any of these issues. Moreover, you are almost never going to "convince" someone with an opposing viewpoint that your view is the correct one. And the people who are attracted to posting in this forum are almost exclusively people who already have strong opinions formed. The odds of changing those opinions are the same as the odds of the Browns winning the next three Super Bowls. It ain't gonna happen.

That said, there is still a value in this forum. It is an arena for people to submit their political and religious thought and ideas for scrutiny and to scrutinize other peoples' thoughts and ideas. There is a value in that. If I post something, "I think Communism ain't so bad", then I want to know why other people think it is bad (I don't necessarily think it ain't so bad. It is pretty bad IMO. That was just an example). There is a value in those interactions. In the past, we (as the group who generally post in this forum on a regular or semi-regular basis) have developed some very good, thought-provoking and soul-searching conversations on topics. Even when the original thread topic was something as silly as "I decided to get waterboarded!" (citing the Sloppy thread from the old board). It is those types of discussions that bring out the best in this forum.

But we also have some baggage in here. For the most part, we all know each other. At least as far as our political and religious stances. I'll bet I can pretty accurately gauge how Fred or Matt or Michaelsean, etc. will react to a particular thread or post just from our posting history. And, in that familiarity, we sometimes take liberties. Sometimes, we make jokes or slights or take liberties that someone new to the forum might not get or understand. A case of "outsiders" and "insiders". We didn't necessarily mean for it to develop into a clique, and I think most of us don't want to be exclusive. But things may be perceived in the wrong way sometimes. I think it is something we should be aware of.

Because we are familiar with each other, then why can't we police ourselves? I actually have been following most of the discussion in this thread and I think it is a very good discussion.

On a side note, I heard that St. Lucie got banned. I don't know the circumstances (nor do I want to), but I am sorry to hear this. I exchanged PM's with him on several occasions and found him to be a friendly and reasonable person, even if I didn't always agree with his political leanings.