Perhaps we (collectively as subscribers) need to consider whether to block/eliminate problem posters as opposed to locking forum topics from further discussion.
It seems well-intentioned forum topics get caught in back and forth “discussions” which are capable of turning “ugly”. Isn’t that why we have a “warning system” for posters who tread too close to the “line”?
Heated and spirited discussions don’t necessarily generate into discussions unsuitable for the site. In the most recent one that was locked down - I don’t recall warnings, or reminders not to go too far astray from discussions - and while I’m not privilege to the discussions that were modified or changed by the moderator, it would seem some sort of reminder to the poster - as well as finding out the direction the topic takes would seem to be in order.
We all get wrapped pretty tight when responding to topics close to our heart, and frustration is easy to set in - leading to sarcastic comments, or beyond. I’m just wondering if we are pulling the trigger a bit too quickly, and aren’t using the warning system that was built into the board by the owner? Just a thought - as I understand the efforts to keep the board and it’s topics from going astray, but I also recognize the disappointment when a topic is locked when an opposing view is presented that might seem a bit “hostile”.
- We have a system of warnings that are moderated.
- We have a method to edit offensive posts - or remove words that can lead to flames.
- We have this part of the board (Protest Room) to meet and further discuss why we are going astray, and how it can be fixed.
- We have methods to suspend or block posters.
- It just seems that locking a topic is really skirting all of the earlier ways to settle us all down, and is like using a baseball bat to bring us into line.
Just my thoughts. I am capable of being warned without taking offense. Hopefully others are as well.
Dick Lemke
Dick,
The warning system was used, for the thread in question. A user was given a total of 2 warning points (the post had two issues that deserved a warning point.) The problematic post was edited to remove the questionable content.
Currently how the system works, is that you have to have a total of 10 warning points to earn a temporary ban, that last 8 days. Currently when I give warning points they will expire 30 days after they are given. Both the number of points necessary, and length of ban are changeable, I currently use the default.
With regard to locking the thread, this was done, because history has proven that an ?I don?t care what you say, I?m going to post whatever I want? attitude prevails on the forum. Based on the offender?s history I think it was well warranted in this case.
I personally think the following would help deal with problem posters.
- warning points last for 60 days
- Only 4 points are needed for a temp ban
- temp Bans last for 14 days
I would concur. Thanks for your explanation and view.
BTW - Never, EVER, consider me imune from warnings. I, like others sometimes take on the feeling you describe. I tend to “go off” when the same issue repeats itself, especially when it is words, not actions. I’m all for discussing new ideas and theories, as well as concepts that may not be practical. It has been four years since Ernst stomped on Doug and me for our fialure to promote (sell) his product. If I knew he had boats avialable and ready to ship within a week or two, I would have a different view. At the same time, those not knowing past history could go down the path Doug and I did (and Mark Baldachinno, and Bill Hojnacki, and Hannu Jarvela) and wind up going through the same issues - sending money but no product shipped.
I would even agree to let him make one informational post that he is “in business” on the forum, and then remainder followups, descriptions and prices in the classified area.
Regardless, my thanks for your efforts to keep the forum “clean”… and apologies if I make that job harder. Will try to remember in the future.
Best regards, Dick
Ernst will no longer be posting on this forum. He was banned this morning after sending some outrageously unacceptable pms.
Too bad - for him. This is an example of where he can’t differentiate “personal” feelings and views from “non personal” ones … same with Doug - I didn’t mind arguing with him from completely opposite points of view, but he too, let personality take control - saying some downright mean things - as well as lies. If he felt he was losing an arguement - he had to resort to personal insults.
Again, sorry to see him go as he could be a great contributor, but for the betterment of the forum, after the warnings, it’s time to act.
Dansherman- I would go along with the changes to the warning system. Just make a note when we change it so all users have the oppertunity to know where the limit is at.
Dick- I feel bad that everytime the Multi- discussions start they become sided…
If you would like I would be willing to allow you and another moderate the Multi-hull area. The footys have two moderators getting started in just moderating and getting the class going. I have left it more up to their discreation on how far to let things go. With guidence and oversight from the main moderators and admins of course.
Just let me know if you would be interested in this.