Disappointed in behavior here.

[Eagle732]

A fellow firefighter, he can take the heat for sure.

And I'm sure you're use to some lively political discussions around the kitchen table at the station!

[CalicoPenn]

Gee, I don't know - seems folks have been polite enough not to mention that all you've been doing is lurking and not participating and now you expect your opinion on behavior in this room to be taken seriously. To me, that's like not voting then complaining about what the politicians are doing.

 

I'm really not trying to minimize what you're saying - there's no doubt most of us think the same as well, but I can't help but think that we're being lectured to by someone who hasn't given us a chance to evaluate whether his own behavior would actually match what he's preaching. It's one thing to be holier than thou when your past and present actions support being holier than thou. It's quite another to be holier than thou when no one knows you.

 

 

In other words, welcome to the forum, jump in and be part of the fun and remember the bar you've set for yourself when we start discussing something that you're really passionate about.

[Stosh]

One has to also remember that there are times (me included) where I have written something I thought was well within the boundaries of civility only to have it interpreted in a way it was never intended to be. One then goes back and re-reads the post in the way they interpreted and the only conclusion one can draw is they're right, I am a jerk.

 

I try (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) give the writer the benefit of the doubt the first or couple of times they try and explain something. Then if it is a bit harsh, I just move on to another topic, there's plenty out there that are interesting.

 

Stosh

[Eagle732]

Well I think the OP has a point, even if he's a newbie. I don't blame him for lurking considering the way some people have been treated here.

 

As an example I remember one time a scout mom on her first post asked about where certain patches were suppose to go on her son's uniform. A few here gave her a pretty hard time including telling her in a very impolite manner to just go look it up herself! She pretty much told everyone off and never posted again as far as I know.

 

I know for the last year or so I've reread what I am about to post deleting some statements due to my concerns over, not how I mean them, but how they might be construed by others. I promised myself that I will never make a negative personal comment towards anyone. Others can do what they want.

[acco40]

I'm with Eamonn here. As a fellow moderator I tread very lightly in the Issues & Politics threads. It is kind of a "buyer beware" area.

 

Also, since my time on the forum goes in spurts - I'll be active for a few days then be absent for weeks or more - I don't continually monitor the posts. That said, don't ever hesitate to "Send Private Message" to me if you feel a post goes out of bounds or for that matter "Ignore this user" if you feel my posts do the same.

 

Welcome and in this case, lurking still falls under the Scout Oath and Law.

[JoeBob]

Lurking = Reconnaisance.

Recon = Being Prepared.

No Problem!

[packsaddle]

Does anyone else think that 'lurking' sounds just a little creepy? I'd say that 'observing quietly' as in making observations in primate social behavior sounds better even if it is the same thing. I guess the chimps may have thought that Jane was creepy for that matter, lol, at least at first, before she wormed her way into their social structure.

Anyway, I've been deleting dozens of posts, some without even reading them carefully. They are mostly the same identical spam ad. Yesterday I deleted a few which had been posted in triplicate by accident. For the most part I take the approach that Eamonn takes and I sympathize with Acco40, I don't even think about being a 'moderator' unless something really catches my attention. There have been a couple of times where I thought a couple of guys who I know are thoughtful good people seemed ready to unload on each other. So I sent them a message to let them know how it looked to me.

I'm still not adept at applying Godwin's rule: that one I leave to OGE. The problem with the Issues and Politics forum is that it is a place where an individual can cultivate hard feelings which can be carried elsewhere in the forums. I think I've observed this on a few occasions.

But compared to discussions I've read in other forums (not necessarily scout-related), these forums are on the tame end of the spectrum.

I think the gentlest one I've participated in is one that is purely for the purpose of sharing personal religious thoughts. The roughest has to do with firearms (I'm amazed at the emotion that can arise from one person's opinion of their favorite killing device when others have different opinions on their favorite killing devices).

[Eagle732]

We have moderators???

[packsaddle]

Yes. I assume your question asked for more than that.

As I see it, the question is: how much 'moderation' do you really want and what 'rules' do you want applied? The current practice seems to be a fairly open approach which allows a broad acceptance of words.

What would be better and how would you propose to achieve that goal?

[perdidochas]

Pack,

 

As you've said, this is on the mild side for internet discussion forums. I've been at a few that were less contentious, but all in all, this one is pretty peaceful (as long as you stay away from the 3 Gs, then who knows) and respectful. For the small amount of active moderation, this place is a paragon of peacefulness. (most sites need a lot of moderation to be kept this civil). I wouldn't change a thing about the way this site is run (except possibly an update in software for security purposes).

[shortridge]

I've certainly been involved in some rather lively discussions on the I&P threads. I've been known to leave them (the monster thread of the moment, for example) when I can't keep up. But those are specifically noted as no-holds-barred areas.

 

In the program threads, I've rarely noted anything but good old-fashioned questions, answers, civil disagreement and mild teasing. Those threads that have gone over the top have generally been those where someone posts a problem out of the blue, giving less than a smidgen of information, because -- as it inevitably later comes out - he/she is a [ parent of a child / committee member / Roundtable chair / den leader / ASM ] who has been unjustly WRONGED and wants to PROVE that the EVIL MR. SCOUTCHAIRMANMASTERLEADERPERSON committed a SCOUT CRIME and know how they can SUE in the NATIONAL COURT OF SCOUTING ...

 

you've seen the type of thing.

 

Trust me, compared to other Internet discussion boards, on the whole we're extremely civil when it comes to people like that.

[Eagle732]

Who are the moderators?

 

On another forum I belong to the moderators names are in red so they are easily identified.

 

The reason I asked "We have moderators?" is because I have not noticed any moderation. That's a good thing.

[packsaddle]

Actually there is a small distinction: the moderators have an asterisk (*) after their designation as type of forum membership. All of the moderators have the designation:

"Senior Forum Member*"

It's unobtrusive and I agree, that is good.

[OldGreyEagle]

Ah, the old asterisk besides the name convention, well,it almost worked for MLB a very long time ago

 

I am one of the first Moderators, originally it was myself and hop_scout. Then we added a few select more. I have to say my standards have shifted over the years to what bothers enough to delete or edit a post. Obviously Spam or posts that are ads get deleted.

 

I don't spend much time on other forums, so I don't know what passes as good or bad behavior. I used to think it my role to call people out who were acting in what I would term a 'Butthead" fashion until I thought thats just me. Threads are like Forest Gump's feather, they drift to wherever they go and thats the way it probably should be as long as language is not an issue. Some of the most damning action we as moderators can do is not change or alter a post, and just leave it, allowing others to jusge for themselves the merits of the postor.

 

If you want fun, try looking up the posts of WHEELER, the guy who prompted the site for having moderators in the first place. He thought World War I was caused by the assasination of Prince Ferdinand in Serbia. Which is about all you need to know about him and that he was very prolific. Some of my more uncomfortable moments in Scouting have come from private messages due to my status as a moderator but I have tried to use them as an educational opportunity even if its to prove there is no pleasing some people

[Stosh]

I have been a moderator on a lot of other forums over the years. It's pretty much a thankless job and one gets heat over the most trivial issues.

 

With that being said, this forum is by far the most civil of any I have been involved with, even the politic section.

 

I was a moderator on a Civil War forum once. You can be assured the war is not over for some people.

 

I'll let everyone in on my nickname Stosh. It was given to me by someone on a forum who later became quite a friend over the years. It is the name of a donkey from a book entitled "My Royal Polish Ass". Like most nicknames, it is one of my favorites and it is used exclusively on the forums.

 

Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)