Dgt = Gone

[gregfeeler]

Now I know how to get the MOA to eliminate forum categories on the website - whine, moan and complain until I get my way.

Forgive me, but that sounds a lot like the point of the posts here protesting the removal of DGT.

Overall, that forum irritated a number of our forum user/members. That's not why the 'MOA funds this site. It's also not an unrestricted free-speech area. It is paid for by the 'MOA with membership dollars and run by volunteers, and the folks charged with running the show here have to keep everyone's interests in mind.

I fully understand the "if you don't like it, don't look" school of thought. I'm a big believer myself. I also support accommodating small constituencies if and when possible. DGT there irritated a lot of people on this forum. Something can be not-for-everyone and still have a place - but not if it irritates a large number of other people.

Look at it this way - you're at a rally and having a great (but loud) late night party. Others want to sleep and complain. Ok - you're having a fine time, and they are welcome to join you, but they don't want that. They want to sleep. After some point, they have the right to NOT be disturbed more than you have a right to make noise. Somebody has to make that call - here, that's the Forum Moderation Team, headed by the Forum Liaison which right now is Ian. He 'da man. He represents the membership here because that's his job and he was appointed to it by the Board, who also represents the membership.

It should be remembered that DGT was Ian and the Team's idea in the first place. You will not find a greater champion of openness on this forum than Ian. He has proven that time and time again over the years as an advocate for the membership. So, when he and the Team decide DGT has to go, I thing that deserves some serious consideration and they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

 

[BUBBAZANETTI]

Forgive me, but that sounds a lot like the point of the posts here protesting the removal of DGT.

Overall, that forum irritated a number of our forum user/members. That's not why the 'MOA funds this site. It's also not an unrestricted free-speech area. It is paid for by the 'MOA with membership dollars and run by volunteers, and the folks charged with running the show here have to keep everyone's interests in mind.

I fully understand the "if you don't like it, don't look" school of thought. I'm a big believer myself. I also support accommodating small constituencies if and when possible. DGT there irritated a lot of people on this forum. Something can be not-for-everyone and still have a place - but not if it irritates a large number of other people.

Look at it this way - you're at a rally and having a great (but loud) late night party. Others want to sleep and complain. Ok - you're having a fine time, and they are welcome to join you, but they don't want that. They want to sleep. After some point, they have the right to NOT be disturbed more than you have a right to make noise. Somebody has to make that call - here, that's the Forum Moderation Team, headed by the Forum Liaison which right now is Ian. He 'da man. He represents the membership here because that's his job and he was appointed to it by the Board, who also represents the membership.

It should be remembered that DGT was Ian and the Team's idea in the first place. You will not find a greater champion of openness on this forum than Ian. He has proven that time and time again over the years as an advocate for the membership. So, when he and the Team decide DGT has to go, I thing that deserves some serious consideration and they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

thanks greg, that is my feeling on the subject too.

A simple question:

Does the MOA, as a club, owe you a "Don't Go There" forum?

we instituted it as an experiment, it was noted as such many times. now the experiment is over.

sorry?

it proved to be a very, very time consuming section of the forum to moderate. perhaps something else can be arranged/suggested by those passionate over its loss.

 

[JCABRANES]

Great quote... from 1835.


No one is stopping you from starting your own forum and doing and discussing whatever it is you'd like to do or discuss there.

Makes it no less true that its from 1835. In many ways it is as true as ever. You miss the point entirely... but then that's not much of a surprise.

 

[rkasal]

One thing most of us WHO POSTED on DGT on both sides of the aisle had for each other was respect. It's easy to spinelessly cry and whine behind the scenes or call people names.

I'll miss Doug and Kreiger. They are welcome here anytime for they're not spineless little cowards pretending to be buddy-buddy. I always knew where they stood (even if they were wrong) and that is becoming more rare in America.

 

[Bud]

Don't care either way except when it becomes a drain on the mods who are volunteers and have a right to a life beyond this forum.

DGT did help me personally by allowing me to have some on my ignore list.

Interesting to see how many of those must be objecting to the removal of DGT but, then again, I don't see the content of their posts.

 

[kbasa]

Oh, the drama.

 

[Bud]

Oh, the drama.

Well, we know who is easily amused.

 

[JCABRANES]

Forgive me, but that sounds a lot like the point of the posts here protesting the removal of DGT.

Overall, that forum irritated a number of our forum user/members. That's not why the 'MOA funds this site. It's also not an unrestricted free-speech area. It is paid for by the 'MOA with membership dollars and run by volunteers, and the folks charged with running the show here have to keep everyone's interests in mind.

I fully understand the "if you don't like it, don't look" school of thought. I'm a big believer myself. I also support accommodating small constituencies if and when possible. DGT there irritated a lot of people on this forum. Something can be not-for-everyone and still have a place - but not if it irritates a large number of other people.

Look at it this way - you're at a rally and having a great (but loud) late night party. Others want to sleep and complain. Ok - you're having a fine time, and they are welcome to join you, but they don't want that. They want to sleep. After some point, they have the right to NOT be disturbed more than you have a right to make noise. Somebody has to make that call - here, that's the Forum Moderation Team, headed by the Forum Liaison which right now is Ian. He 'da man. He represents the membership here because that's his job and he was appointed to it by the Board, who also represents the membership.

It should be remembered that DGT was Ian and the Team's idea in the first place. You will not find a greater champion of openness on this forum than Ian. He has proven that time and time again over the years as an advocate for the membership. So, when he and the Team decide DGT has to go, I thing that deserves some serious consideration and they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

I give you props for an honest response though I do not agree with your reasoning. Basically, I read this as the mods having caved in to a few thin skinned, perpetually offended people. Hey, you guys run the board and you make the rules you don't have to explain squat to people. All you have to say is it sucked and its gone and that's that. And that is exactly what you did. I don't see anything wrong with expressing my displeasure, so I am.

 

[kbasa]

I give you props for an honest response though I do not agree with your reasoning. Basically, I read this as the mods having caved in to a few thin skinned, perpetually offended people. Hey, you guys run the board and you make the rules you don't have to explain squat to people. All you have to say is it sucked and its gone and that's that. And that is exactly what you did. I don't see anything wrong with expressing my displeasure, so I am.

You've missed the part about moderation load on the mod team. That's a major contributing factor.

 

[visian]

All you have to say is it sucked and its gone and that's that. And that is exactly what you did. I don't see anything wrong with expressing my displeasure, so I am.

what's wrong with your displeasure? it' written in the very first sentence of the very first post (the sticky) at the top of the DGT forum:

Welcome to “Don’t Go There”, the forum where you post things you’ve been asked not to post. This is an experiment, and if it sucks we will kill it.

you must have missed that, too.

ian

 

[HODAG]

as far as mod time constraint can someone point me to the thread asking for another volunteer to help out??

did anyone ask??

 

[Threeteas]

I do believe a sledge hammer has been used, when a skillfully applied scalpel would have proven to be a far more elegant, if somewhat braver, approach.

I hope that Campfire doesn't suffer as a consequence, although I fear it might.

 

[visian]

as far as mod time constraint can someone point me to the thread asking for another volunteer to help out??

did anyone ask??

http://forums.bmwmoa.org/showpost.php?p=279785&postcount=71

hey, i am heading to the hills and actually going to ride my motorcycle.

y'all have a nice weekend.

ian

 

[MOTOR31]

Don't go there?

I don't see it on the list for the forum. Has it been removed? I was under the imnpression from the thread dealing with it that it was going to remain, what happened?

 

[HODAG]

http://forums.bmwmoa.org/showpost.php?p=279785&postcount=71

hey, i am heading to the hills and actually going to ride my motorcycle.

y'all have a nice weekend.

ian

I stand corrected,
I apologize.

I'm going home and shovelling
sum-more

 

[BUBBAZANETTI]

I don't see it on the list for the forum. Has it been removed? I was under the imnpression from the thread dealing with it that it was going to remain, what happened?

http://forums.bmwmoa.org/showthread.php?t=23586

it's all explained here. gonna merge the "what happened to DGT threads" with the above

 

[rkasal]

And just what is the "Bad Apples" forum?

 

[testinglogin]

a few more cents...

I thought about this issue on my commute home, today.

I don't think there is ever going to be consensus on this issue. Some people are always going to want DGT back, and some people are always going to want it to never be back. I don't think there was any way to avert making some people unhappy. Announcing the plans to close DGT before getting rid of it would have led to this same discussion; possibly more heated - even if it was announced to give people a chance to "get their threads in order". So instead, it disappears with a brief "it sucked" announcement.

I remember the discussion in the past stating it would go away if "it sucked". Some probably didn't based on reaction to this thread. I guess the announcement could have been more "PC" (isn't that what people are saying they don't want?) - something like "Due to excessive complaints/more complaints than supporters and excessive amounts to moderator time being spent on it, DGT is being removed...". Note that I'm not faulting Ian for his announcement style; I wasn't offended by it. He's taken a whole lot of heat in his VOLUNTEER time as forum liaison. Just giving some hopefully impartial thoughts.

In the end, all the whining in the world on this forum isn't going to bring it back. If there is a group who really wants it back, the suggestion has already been made; take it to your board members.

Above all, this is a representative government. You vote for your representative, or vote against those you don't agree with. They are here to view the whole picture. If more people say "no DGT" than say "yes, DGT", then they take it away. Just because "yes" can complain louder doesn't make it more important. You can't always get what YOU want...

 

[tessler]

Makes it no less true that its from 1835. In many ways it is as true as ever. You miss the point entirely... but then that's not much of a surprise.

Woa, what reparte?®. That the best you can do, Duke?

 

[rocketman]

I did initially miss an important point.

It is my understanding the moderators receive a report tag when some little self-appointed censor views what they consider inappropriate. Why, then, since the moderators would not have to read every post is this a drain on resources? I do not believe the moderators would receive a report tag for every single post in every single thread.

Since the usage of DGT was greater (in a shorter time) than some of the established forums, 2/3rds of the members polled (although unscientific) thought DGT did not suck, and since the moderators needn't have been reading each thread, I have indeed missed an important point. Just why was DGT actually cancelled?

And by the way, the big leagues are baiting terrorists and turning them in.

Not sure where you get your data but the last poll showed that 23 thought it sucked, 22 thought it did not and 21 were "shades of gray" so to imply that 2/3 were in favor is just playing with numbers. Furthermore, compared to the other areas of the off topic you are again mistaken in stating it had a high level of views, at least from the level of viewers as seen from the main menu, as a mod for the photography forum I monitored the off-topic area quite closely and at any one time the number of viewers for DGT was anywhere from 0 to 8 or maybe 9 with 6-7 being the mean, compared to several other areas there that were at twice that number or campfire which often ran 4-6 times as many as any other area.
You can play with the numbers all you want but sliding the 1/3 unsure into the "for" category doesn't really wash. Its like what they say about statistics....

RM