View Full Version : Moderation thoughts.......
Jack Tarlin
10-31-2008, 14:29
First off:
This is NOT meant to be a criticism of any particular individual or event, it's merely a general comment.
It seems to me that the level of severity in thread moderation has ratcheted up recently, i.e. the number of deleted posts is up, and the number of locked threads is up as well.
I understand full well the difficulty that moderators have, and I also know that over-seeing and policing threads is time consuming and sometimes, really annoying.
But then again, I also realize that people VOLUNTEER to moderate threads, i.e. if you don't want to spend time over-seeing them, then don't do it.
That being said, it seems to me that instead of locking down (i.e. killing) threads that might have some value, it'd prehaps be better if moderators went after individual posters. I.e. if someone is being a problem on a thread, whether it's making inappropriate comments; violating website policy; obvious trolling; making 100 posts that say the same thing; or most important, ignoring warnings and admonitions from moderators, well it seems to me that the answer is to do something about the individual poster, and not taking out the whole discussion.
In short, if there's someone on a thread that has created a problem or is inhibiting or killing a good discussion, then perhaps the moderator should send a PM to the individual involved, detailing the problem, and strongly advising a change in behavior. If the behavior persists, then a sterner warning is put in place. If that doesn't work, then ban the guy from that thread or give him a time out from the whole website.
But to kill off perfectly good discussions because of a handful of idiots doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. It penalizes the good along with the bad; it rewards trolling and bad behavior; it potentially wipes out valuuable and useful discussions.
Oh, and it also gives credence to the perception that the website's moderation has become excessive, and is leading to some good folks leaving the site for locations that are perceived to be freer......and that would be a great pity.
I'd be very happy to hear other opinions on this.
The Solemates
10-31-2008, 14:36
i agree. i hate it when threads are closed, and I think WB has had way too much moderation in the last several months.
but then again, what are the basic ground rules for what you term "individual posters" and "handful of idiots"?
I know you gave specific examples, but what one person may deem as "a problem", "inappropriate", "violations" etc. may not be what another says is just that. in the end, I guess the moderator has to make that choice.
I personally liked it better though when no threads were getting shut down and no posts were getting deleted.
Jack Tarlin
10-31-2008, 14:41
No, don't get me wrong. There are sometimes threads that badly need to be shut down. And I have no problem whatsoever when this happens.
All I'm saying is that sometimes there's a baby and the bath water issue here, where an entire discussion is suddenly deep sixed, when it's really one person who's creating the problem.
And THAT's where the moderation needs to step in.
"But to kill off perfectly good discussions because of a handful of idiots doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. It penalizes the good along with the bad; it rewards trolling and bad behavior; it potentially wipes out valuuable and useful discussions."
Agreed 100%.
Personally I'm skeptical of the need to have a moderator/censor monitor adults talking to adults. In one thread that was locked down today, no one was cussing, no one was posting porno, no one said anything about someone's momma, no one yapped about politics. Evidently the moderator/censor was the only one bothered -- and he certainly does seem to be bothered by a lot -- and locked the thread because people didn't obey his orders. I was actually enjoying the thread. I bet all but one were, too.
I agree with Solemates. I liked it a lot better with no censors. If I didn't like to read someone's stuff, I put them on block. Easy enough.
the goat
10-31-2008, 14:53
i tend to agree with the sentiments jack posted above.
each mod has their own "moderation style"; i'm a mod here and i strongly prefer the laissez-faire approach.
i have and will continue to urge other moderators in the same direction.
NICKTHEGREEK
10-31-2008, 15:16
You make several good points in your opening post. This site is over moderated, unevenly moderated, and unfairly moderated in the opinion of many. Unfortunately our personal behavior has much to do with ramping this up, and neither of us has a leg to stand on to complain. If we tried pulling the usual stunts on Trailplace we'd be banned quicker than another WB regular was and have to use regular e-mail to disagree. I somehow think Rock will pretty much moderate his site as he sees fit as well. That leaves Backpacker. The politics forum is pretty wild and wooly, but it's a true backpacking site and far from AT-centric. Take your pick.
If I want pulitizer quality writing from my newspaper, I buy a paper with pulitizer winning writers. Boycott this site for some finite period, pitch your tent somewhere else and see if anyone takes their business to the new location. The mountain to what's his name so to speak.
Lone Wolf
10-31-2008, 15:43
Personally I'm skeptical of the need to have a moderator/censor monitor adults talking to adults. In one thread that was locked down today, no one was cussing, no one was posting porno, no one said anything about someone's momma, no one yapped about politics. Evidently the moderator/censor was the only one bothered -- and he certainly does seem to be bothered by a lot -- and locked the thread because people didn't obey his orders. I was actually enjoying the thread. I bet all but one were, too.
you mean the thread about "Cost" where JAK posted 1,000,000 times and moderator HikerRanky deleted a bunch the closed it?
you mean the thread about "Cost" where JAK posted 1,000,000 times and moderator HikerRanky deleted a bunch the closed it?
That's the one. I put JAK on block long ago, so the million posts didn't bother me.
Two Speed
10-31-2008, 15:48
Might want to take it easy, guys. This whole thread is very close to a violation of TOS #3:
Topics that have been closed, deleted, or moved by an Administrator or Moderator have been done for a reason. Users will not open new threads on the same subject or continue to make posts about subjects that have had these actions taken. Failing to comply with this policy can result in being placed into moderated status.
It's a privilege, not a right to be on WB. The mods/owners have the right to run it how they see fit. I see 3 options: people can accept the policies on here, go to another site where there is less moderation, or start your own site.
Just my $0.02 :):D
I think more moderators than posters have said goodbye to the site lately.
The Solemates
10-31-2008, 16:19
Might want to take it easy, guys. This whole thread is very close to a violation of TOS #3:
Topics that have been closed, deleted, or moved by an Administrator or Moderator have been done for a reason. Users will not open new threads on the same subject or continue to make posts about subjects that have had these actions taken. Failing to comply with this policy can result in being placed into moderated status.
this is exactly what we are talking about. bringing junk like this up when there is good discussion going on.
The Solemates
10-31-2008, 16:25
No, don't get me wrong. There are sometimes threads that badly need to be shut down. And I have no problem whatsoever when this happens.
All I'm saying is that sometimes there's a baby and the bath water issue here, where an entire discussion is suddenly deep sixed, when it's really one person who's creating the problem.
And THAT's where the moderation needs to step in.
ok, but who decides who this person is? and on what basis?
personally i dont care bc it made for good reading, but you and wolf were making just as many snide comments as the person you are calling the problem.
Bulldawg
10-31-2008, 16:44
I will say, as a moderator here, that I usually will not close a thread. In fact, I have never closed a thread here. I am one of the lucky one's whose forums don't usually create a lot of discontent. I did have one thread a while back that had a lot of good info, but also had some of the common bickering crude we deal with sometimes. I spent a good portion of an hour cleaning the thread up rather than deleting it, which I could have easily done, because it did have some great info. Just my $.02 anyway.
Might want to take it easy, guys. This whole thread is very close to a violation of TOS #3:
Topics that have been closed, deleted, or moved by an Administrator or Moderator have been done for a reason. Users will not open new threads on the same subject or continue to make posts about subjects that have had these actions taken. Failing to comply with this policy can result in being placed into moderated status.
Does this mean the topic of the closed thread will never be opened again? Seems like a pretty important topic. Be a shame if one very frustating poster stopped such an interesting discussion.
It's Friday, 5 O'Clock, to heck with moderation, I am pouring another. Cheers! :cool:
lonehiker
10-31-2008, 17:14
Take actions against posters not the thread. Having a thread in regards to "cost of a thru-hike" (as an example) is important as it is a major factor on planning a hike on the AT and it very well may be the main reason that many thru-hikers don't complete their hike. Simply locking it isn't effective as someone (soon) will probably start another thread with this very subject. And do you want to guess what the results will be.......?
Lone Wolf
10-31-2008, 17:23
It's Friday, 5 O'Clock, to heck with moderation, I am pouring another. Cheers! :cool:
headin' to Dot's soon myself where i will drink in moderation
It's a privilege, not a right to be on WB. The mods/owners have the right to run it how they see fit. I see 3 options: people can accept the policies on here, go to another site where there is less moderation, or start your own site.
Just my $0.02 :):D
Agreed. And the result here has been a lot more civil than in the past.
I think it's a pendulum (sp?) that swings from heavily moderated to lightly moderated and back as people learn to moderate themselves, and then get slack, and then relearn to self moderate, and on and on and on.
I feel for the moderators... it seems to me like it would be harder than herding cats.
saimyoji
10-31-2008, 17:27
I think Homer may already be drunk. What's the "cost" of getting drunk in MA these days? Do you bring your own hole with you? :-?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTLwiccIOxI
headin' To Dot's Soon Myself Where I Will Drink In Moderation
Lol
Two Speed
10-31-2008, 17:38
this is exactly what we are talking about. bringing junk like this up when there is good discussion going on.So the TOS is junk?
it seems to me like it would be harder than herding cats.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
Enjoy...:banana
Serial 07
10-31-2008, 17:58
headin' to Dot's soon myself where i will drink in moderation
now this made me laugh harder than i have in a while...hope all is well wolf! :) tell pam i said HI!
NICKTHEGREEK
10-31-2008, 18:19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
Enjoy...:banana
Absolutely a classic, I'd never heard the saying before and it's a favorite now. Shame if this link got moderated by a cat hater.
Serial 07
10-31-2008, 18:41
I think Homer may already be drunk. What's the "cost" of getting drunk in MA these days? Do you bring your own hole with you? :-?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTLwiccIOxI
well played... ;)
I don't think I have been violating the TOS. I wouldn't have written so many posts in that thread if you guys didn't keep breaking TOS#2. I didn't complain about it, until now, I just kept making my point, while some of you just kept attacking the messenger. So I suggest we all just lighten up. We aren't going to agree on everything. You might get me banned eventually by continuing these tactics if you don't like my point of view, as there are many of you and only one of me, but wouldn't it be simpler to just ask the owner of the forum to do so, or to simply accept that there are other perspectives?
We all know if I respond to all of your personal attacks I will get banned. If that's what you all want just get on with it. Be men about it.
A good compromise which a friend suggested was for me to confine myself mostly to the Ultra-Light Hikers forum and the Homemade Gear Forum. I think that makes alot of sense in many ways, all things considered, and might be best for now. Perhaps a frugal hikers forum will open up in the future. ;)
A good compromise which a friend suggested was for me to confine myself mostly to the Ultra-Light Hikers forum and the Homemade Gear Forum. I think that makes alot of sense in many ways, all things considered, and might be best for now. Perhaps a frugal hikers forum will open up in the future. ;)
Your friend should have also told you that fighting on the innernut is a pointless waste of time and energy.
I've enjoyed reading many of your other posts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
Enjoy...:banana
Real, American catboys. Truly a piece of americana. That brought a tear to my eye.
Your friend should have also told you that fighting on the innernut is a pointless waste of time and energy.
I've enjoyed reading many of your other posts.Thanks Wilson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
Enjoy...:banana
I'll see your cats and raise you some ducks...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idNiuIGpasU
I've always wanted to run with the squirrels myself.
Good way to keep the testosterone level up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z2_kKAe9y0
Homer&Marje
11-02-2008, 11:49
I would like to try herding cats, I don't know about the ducks, seems like too much flying poop possible. The Squirrel run is an annual event for us. But for my every day transportation and enjoyment, I ride a bike. I'm going to build this one I think. Now what will they think of me in Providence Mags:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skfnxkixBp4
First off:
This is NOT meant to be a criticism of any particular individual or event, it's merely a general comment.
It seems to me that the level of severity in thread moderation has ratcheted up recently, i.e. the number of deleted posts is up, and the number of locked threads is up as well.
I understand full well the difficulty that moderators have, and I also know that over-seeing and policing threads is time consuming and sometimes, really annoying.
But then again, I also realize that people VOLUNTEER to moderate threads, i.e. if you don't want to spend time over-seeing them, then don't do it.
That being said, it seems to me that instead of locking down (i.e. killing) threads that might have some value, it'd prehaps be better if moderators went after individual posters. I.e. if someone is being a problem on a thread, whether it's making inappropriate comments; violating website policy; obvious trolling; making 100 posts that say the same thing; or most important, ignoring warnings and admonitions from moderators, well it seems to me that the answer is to do something about the individual poster, and not taking out the whole discussion.
In short, if there's someone on a thread that has created a problem or is inhibiting or killing a good discussion, then perhaps the moderator should send a PM to the individual involved, detailing the problem, and strongly advising a change in behavior. If the behavior persists, then a sterner warning is put in place. If that doesn't work, then ban the guy from that thread or give him a time out from the whole website.
But to kill off perfectly good discussions because of a handful of idiots doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. It penalizes the good along with the bad; it rewards trolling and bad behavior; it potentially wipes out valuuable and useful discussions.
Oh, and it also gives credence to the perception that the website's moderation has become excessive, and is leading to some good folks leaving the site for locations that are perceived to be freer......and that would be a great pity.
I'd be very happy to hear other opinions on this.I would agree with this. Some threads are very useful and informative and to lockdown an entire thread because of a few bad posts doesn't seem the best way to go.:-?
berkshirebirder
09-01-2010, 23:05
Oh, I don't know...I think the moderators have a pretty good idea when a thread is on the road to hell. And by the 37th post, most of the original and interesting comments have been made. Really.
Blue Jay
09-02-2010, 18:58
And by the 37th post, most of the original and interesting comments have been made. Really.
When you make a REALLY bad joke please use the :banana
Zombie thread! :D
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/5488/threadnecromancyjk7.jpg
berkshirebirder
09-02-2010, 20:05
I rest my case.
Lone Wolf
09-02-2010, 21:19
it is what it is. you don't like this site, move on. i'm a tamed wolf. 90% of the posts here are BS. start your own site and allow politics and such. no website is needed for walkin a trail. this is for non-hikers
"But to kill off perfectly good discussions because of a handful of idiots doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. It penalizes the good along with the bad; it rewards trolling and bad behavior; it potentially wipes out valuuable and useful discussions."
Agreed 100%.
Personally I'm skeptical of the need to have a moderator/censor monitor adults talking to adults. In one thread that was locked down today, no one was cussing, no one was posting porno, no one said anything about someone's momma, no one yapped about politics. Evidently the moderator/censor was the only one bothered -- and he certainly does seem to be bothered by a lot -- and locked the thread because people didn't obey his orders. I was actually enjoying the thread. I bet all but one were, too.
I agree with Solemates. I liked it a lot better with no censors. If I didn't like to read someone's stuff, I put them on block. Easy enough.
I am very new here so take my opinion for what it is worth.
While I am tolerant of "bad behavior" I don't think going with no moderation at all is the solution. I post on several boards that are almost completely uncensored (only thing removed is PI of posters that don't want it on the board) and it is a nightmare. Now, they are hacker boards and you have to expect that (which is why I tend to be very tolerant) but, that kind of stuff kills boards. I think Jack's suggestions for some moderation are good, and more importantly, realistic.
Wise Old Owl
09-02-2010, 22:41
Wow why did we dig this all up again?
Ron Haven
09-03-2010, 03:02
the owner of this site and moderators on this site are all friends of mine I hope and I want to keep it that way. I have respect for their moderation wishes.
I was on here several times daily in the past but things changed. I might look at this site once every 2 or 3 weeks now. I realize it was changed to a total hiker forum now. I hope you folks have the same respect too.
I sometimes like to BS and if you want,use my site. I don't moderate it at all. appalachiantrailservices.com (http://www.appalachiantrailservices.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
This way WB can be used for a hiker forum. You want to let off a little steam, go for it.
:dance
Gray Blazer
09-03-2010, 07:35
I sometimes like to BS and if you want,use my site. I don't moderate it at all. appalachiantrailservices.com (http://www.appalachiantrailservices.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
:dance
I am your newest member. Waiting for a confirmation.
berkshirebirder
09-03-2010, 08:25
A website with over 28,000 members...over 54,000 threads...over a million posts must be doing something right.
Every day, someone says how useful Whiteblaze has been in learning about the Appalachian or other Trails in preparation for a hike; about parks, forests, towns and services along these trails; about hiking gear; about other hikers and life along the trails; about wildlife and plants and a host of other things.
You have to sort out all this good information and the way Whiteblaze furthers interest in hiking from the nitty-gritty of message boards: the weenies who feel empowered by arguing, the lazy who resent anyone who does anything, the disenchanted with axes to grind. An unmoderated message board is taken over by these ne'er-do-wells and soon becomes an unpleasant place of no interest to normal people.
Case in point: Appalachian Trail Clubs seem to be a lightning rod for arguments among certain posters. Raging against the ATC or one of its chapters on a public message board is shooting yourself in the foot. I could be wrong, but I assume the moderators realize this and step in when they feel it's warranted.
A locked thread is still readable and actually provides a lesson in the dynamics of conversation.
Thank you, moderators, for all your efforts to keep Whiteblaze enjoyable as well as useful.
Blue Jay
09-03-2010, 10:02
the weenies who feel empowered by arguing, the lazy who resent anyone who does anything, the disenchanted with axes to grind. An unmoderated message board is taken over by these ne'er-do-wells and soon becomes an unpleasant place of no interest to normal people.
From you very first post on WB you make these statements that stur up as much trouble as anyone else on here. If you claim to not like it, why do you do it?
Ron Haven
09-03-2010, 10:03
I am your newest member. Waiting for a confirmation.Blazer,you and a lot more have been accepted and are ready for posting.Go for it.:banana
Wow why did we dig this all up again?
Thru hiking season is winding down?
it is what it is. you don't like this site, move on. i'm a tamed wolf. 90% of the posts here are BS. start your own site and allow politics and such. no website is needed for walkin a trail. this is for non-hikers
Dang! I knew you were halter broke, but tamed?
Oh, I don't know...I think the moderators have a pretty good idea when a thread is on the road to hell. And by the 37th post, most of the original and interesting comments have been made. Really.Then why are you still posting:o? Obviousely your statements are a lesson in hypocrisy for everyone here:sun I have been interested in threads that continue on into the hundreds of posts, and still glean valuable information into the subject being discussed, as well as finding the discussion enjoyable, right until the last post is made:welcomeFor you to state when a thread has "run it's course" and that all the posts proceeding your so called "end point" are useless does a disservice to every single member here on Whiteblaze:mad:
From you very first post on WB you make these statements that stur up as much trouble as anyone else on here. If you claim to not like it, why do you do it?Agree with you 100% Blue Jay:sun Obviousely someone who wants to cause problems by "rocking the boat".
From you very first post on WB you make these statements that stur up as much trouble as anyone else on here. If you claim to not like it, why do you do it?
I'm a birder and wildflower enthusiast and hope to explore some sections of the Trail in New England this spring, starting in western MA--would welcome any advice on easy-to-moderate sections.
A friend and I met a number of friendly folks on short hikes on the Trail last year, including another birder--so that's inspired us to get back out there this year.
Yeah, pretty inflamatory stuff. :rolleyes:
Dang! I knew you were halter broke, but tamed?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm................Lone Wolf in a HALTER????? - Someone with experience photo shopping has to jump on THAT idea :D:eek:
Btw: Congrats on your "promotion?" to moderator, LW.:)
I know it's volunteer, but that demands an even greater "congrats".
Question, though - WHY?? :-?
Have fun. :rolleyes:
4eyedbuzzard
09-03-2010, 11:41
Btw: Congrats on your "promotion?" to moderator, LW.:)
I know it's volunteer, but that demands an even greater "congrats".
Question, though - WHY?? :-?
Have fun. :rolleyes:
No good deed ever goes unpunished.
For those who criticize mods for their actions, I can only say they should try it for a while. It isn't easy trying to keep the members playing nicely in the room sometimes. Most members don't start trouble, but things can go downhill quickly as sometimes groupthink mentality takes over or threads degrade into personal attacks. There are also sensitive issues that sometimes are better left alone or that WB admin simply doesn't want discussed (their website - end of discussion). Mods do sometimes make mistakes and over-react as well, but remember that they're human too. No need to get upset over what is allowed or not allowed on an internet discussion board.
No need to get upset over what is allowed or not allowed on an internet discussion board.
Bingo. It's not real life.
Go outside. Play. Enjoy Life.
Take a bunch of photos from Grand Teton and not have time to work on them and before you know it, it is Labor Day Weekend (applies to me only... ;) )
I think Lone Wolf has always played a moderating role of sorts.
Now its official.
Moderation in all things. including moderation. ;)
4eyedbuzzard
09-03-2010, 11:50
I think Lone Wolf has always played a moderating role of sorts.
Now its official.
Moderation in all things. including moderation. ;)
He should be even better now that he's a tamed lap dog. :D
The Old Fhart
09-03-2010, 13:50
Lone Wolf-"...90% of the posts here are BS...."So it would logically follow that if a certain poster has over 24,000 posts, over 21,000 of those posts would be BS?;)
berkshirebirder
09-03-2010, 14:39
I don't connect someone who posts IN FAVOR of a moderated board with rabble-rousing. DapperD resurrected this thread to say he doesn't like it when threads are locked. Which poster is stirring up trouble? Both? Neither?
Someone suggested I add a dancing banana to my comment about limiting threads to 35 posts, but at the time the statement seemed so outrageous I didn't think a dancing banana would be necessary.
Should I go back and add the dancing banana? Nah. I hate those things.
I don't connect someone who posts IN FAVOR of a moderated board with rabble-rousing. DapperD resurrected this thread to say he doesn't like it when threads are locked. Which poster is stirring up trouble? Both? Neither?
Someone suggested I add a dancing banana to my comment about limiting threads to 35 posts, but at the time the statement seemed so outrageous I didn't think a dancing banana would be necessary.
Should I go back and add the dancing banana? Nah. I hate those things.
Last time I checked, this was still the USA, and we still had free speech. One of the problems with our educational system is that it doesn't equip us to communicate clearly, so those goofy icons are necessary so we don't misunderstand each other.
Folks stirring up trouble sometimes bring attention to the subject at hand, sometimes to themselves.
It is up to the rest of ourselves to weed out who is genuinely interested in the subject matter and who is there to make a spectacle of themselves.
Moderators are necessary when two parties become unnecessarily emotional in their attack or defense of the other person's views, and, rather than let it roll off their back, let their thin skin (and, possibly, poor self esteem) get the better of them, resulting in personal attacks.
Mods. are not there to supress the beliefs of others, just their conduct in public - in the world of the internet, and, while they don't (ideally) enforce their own opinions, they do (or should) mirror the tenets of the website that they are moderating.
Zombie thread! :D
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/5488/threadnecromancyjk7.jpgI did not understand that older threads here at Whiteblaze were not supposed to be brought back to the board. I did a search and found a post by Attroll in which he basically states this, unless the older thread has some type of current need to be brought back, some type of relevance to a new discussion, as an example. I will try to remember this. I guess it would be OK to provide a link to the older thread in a new thread to use as a reference, but not to bring back the entire thread.
Lone Wolf
09-03-2010, 15:57
So it would logically follow that if a certain poster has over 24,000 posts, over 21,000 of those posts would be BS?;)
yes. you are correct
I don't connect someone who posts IN FAVOR of a moderated board with rabble-rousing. DapperD resurrected this thread to say he doesn't like it when threads are locked. Which poster is stirring up trouble? Both? Neither?
Someone suggested I add a dancing banana to my comment about limiting threads to 35 posts, but at the time the statement seemed so outrageous I didn't think a dancing banana would be necessary.
Should I go back and add the dancing banana? Nah. I hate those things.And just so you understand, I am not saying that I do not agree with threads being locked. There are threads that without a doubt will serve no purpose, are inflammatory, unexceptable, not thought through before posted, etc... If you had read Jack Tarlin's original post, I was agreeing with him that not every thread needs to be locked down due to certain individuals posting inflammatory or disparaging remarks and/or redirection of the threads original discussion. There are other alternatives and modes of action that could be chosen, such as a "weeding" of the posts that are offending/offensive. There were, as Jack Tarlin stated, some threads that were closed that I was enjoying that for whatever reason were locked down, and it was a major disappointment when one is following a thread and it is abruptly extinguished. Cheers:sun
yes. you are correct
Not quite - They might be WS ;).
The past, however, is past, and things (and people) can and do change (and even improve!).
I like to think that we mellow with age, but sometimes I realize that, for some, aging means that it takes a few more punches before you knock the other guy out :D.
Pedaling Fool
09-03-2010, 16:26
...some threads that were closed that I was enjoying that for whatever reason were locked down, and it was a major disappointment when one is following a thread and it is abruptly extinguished. Cheers:sun
I hear you, I was extremely disappointed when the 9,000 Ph.Ds (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38604&highlight=9%2C000+ph.ds) thread was killed. Ever since then I haven't been the same:)
Been trying to get excited about other thread, but a no-go so far.
berkshirebirder
09-03-2010, 16:59
OMG...59 pages! No moderator in their right mind would wade through all that. Are there valuable kernels of insight in that thread???
OMG...59 pages! No moderator in their right mind would wade through all that. Are there valuable kernels of insight in that thread???
No thread reaches 59 pages without having some valuable insights. What sometimes happens is that someone starts a lame joke, and others try to top it, ending discussion.
I did not understand that older threads here at Whiteblaze were not supposed to be brought back to the board
Oh..it's not forbidden. It is just a factor of Internet life. Threads than been dormant for nearly 2 yrs (as in this case) are brought back to life. They are called "Zombie Threads". Sometimes they re-spark an interesting discussion. Sometimes they revive that proverbial dead horse. :)
I'm just being a smart ass with a mildly funny photo. :)
Sierra Echo
09-03-2010, 19:15
Oh..it's not forbidden. It is just a factor of Internet life. Threads than been dormant for nearly 2 yrs (as in this case) are brought back to life. They are called "Zombie Threads". Sometimes they re-spark an interesting discussion. Sometimes they revive that proverbial dead horse. :)
I'm just being a smart ass with a mildly funny photo. :)
But, if someone posts a question that has already been answered those many 2 yrs ago, someone always makes sure too post in a nasty manner about how there has already been a thread on that, and why arent they posting under that thread as opposed to bothering everyone with a new one!
4eyedbuzzard
09-03-2010, 19:25
But, if someone posts a question that has already been answered those many 2 yrs ago, someone always makes sure too post in a nasty manner about how there has already been a thread on that, and why arent they posting under that thread as opposed to bothering everyone with a new one!
It's likely that damn near every question asked has been answered before, unless it's about some new piece of gear, and even then . . .
What can anyone tell anyone else that is truly unique about hiking that hasn't been beaten to death at some point in a past thread? Buy all the cool stuff made of titanium, aluminum, wool, down, and nylon you like, then go to Springer Mt. in April and place one foot in front of the other, repeat 5 million times.
There's nothing wrong with people posting the "normal questions". Gives all the addicts here something to talk about. Those who reply in a nasty manner simply need to find other subjects to discuss, or not reply.
berkshirebirder
09-03-2010, 19:31
You're right, Weary. I see the "9000 PhDs" thread was about global warming. In a quick scan of the first 10 pages and then a scan of every tenth page after that, it seemed to stay pretty much on topic. But let's face it, if the thread hadn't been closed, a few of those posters still would be going back and forth. At some point, it's time to move on.
So that's a "Zombie Thread"? Now I get the photo, MAGS. LOL.
The Old Fhart
09-03-2010, 19:42
............
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/102/threadnecromancyns1nf0.jpg
Blue Jay
09-04-2010, 20:37
You're right, Weary. I see the "9000 PhDs" thread was about global warming. In a quick scan of the first 10 pages and then a scan of every tenth page after that, it seemed to stay pretty much on topic. But let's face it, if the thread hadn't been closed, a few of those posters still would be going back and forth. At some point, it's time to move on.
It's really quite simple, that's the point when the "closers" (not an insult just a discriptor) need to move on. Why do you want a thread closed just because it does not interest you? Seriously, why? I'd love it if the constant pole advertizements stopped, but I would NEVER advocate stopping the clear enjoyment it give pole worshipers. Again why do you wish to stop others enjoyment of harmless fun?:banana:banana:banana
berkshirebirder
09-04-2010, 21:46
Blue Jay,
This thread was started 2 years ago. I don't know the history of WB or the threads that prompted Jack's comments.
I believe a moderated message board brings more enjoyment to more people than an unmoderated message board brings to a handful of people talking among themselves and another handful of lurkers who enjoy that kind of interaction.
I'm not a moderator. I respect their judgment--often, they know a lot about what goes on behind the scenes. They know what topics have caused problems, what posters have caused problems. It doesn't bother me if a thread is closed--I can still read it. I don't think it's fair to expect a moderator to read every word of every post in order to decide who said what, and what they meant by it.
Some posters want an unmoderated board, and others want some degree of moderation. It's a difference of opinion, and isn't that what makes a board interesting to begin with?