Talking like you would talk to grandma

[redclfco]

The phrase used to the etiquette of discussing issues on the campfire forum was best described as speak only things that you would speak to grandma, and in a tone befitting a conversation with grandma.

With all due respect, who's grandma? Because with MY Grandma (s), one would best choose words that certainly were words that lack conclusions and void of controversy, because once started down the road of controversial conversation, feelings were most likely going to be flamed, and the good time we were having was over. Too bad, but at least we could go in the other room and speak in hushed tones, and grandma was none the wiser! We had a room at the forum, but it got taken away. Now the old creeps into the new. Helmet discussion cant be had, yet our ON editor speaks of it freely in this column., and the public finds the subject very timely indeed.

But here at Grnadma's house, we ought not to speak too loud, because the potential to start a personal fight is just too much work, and not worth it. hmmmm, am I the only one that finds this attitude wrong?

What made me think of this is the re-read of the controversial helmet thread. Banned to the Dog house, offensive flames removed, and the flame thrower certainly advised to curtail personal attacks. I agree, the personal attacks killed a thread which I personally saw the thread had tons of merit, was befitting of a motorcycle forum, and as stated a few times in the thread, many were LEARNING the reasoning behind why to wear a helmet, and the reasons many if us full time helmet wearers chose none the less to spurn legislation mandating helmet wearing.

It was a learning thread, it was a thread not new to you lifers in the BMWMOA, but new to those new members we as a group are most certainly trying to attract into our club. To limit in the future membership threads to the nice things in the world, yawwnnn...is boring! I think we must keep up with the news of the day, but do it in a way where the discussion remnains respectful and civil. I for one think it can be done in future conversations that have controversy as a middle name!

With all due respect, if you think I'm wrong, feel free to rip me up here, but please do it with respect!

Do we offer potential new "lurking" members only "grandma conversation" or do we offer them real life issues of interest? Along with the post count increasing and more importantly "view” count shot up like a Coloradoan who’s boot just stepped on a rattle snake! Many people out there were reading the thread with interest, and many were liking what was being written. But from the comments I have heard, the Mods as a group decided it was a subject out of whack; which admittedly was a well thought out consensus decision on the part of the Mods.


A BIG thank you Moderators for all the constant attention to the forum, thank you for your volunteer hours on line keeping those of us who are self modulation challenged individuals in line; we all are glad you are here.

Speaking to the membership at large, if you don't have something to say that is pertinent to the conversation, if your words are said that are personal attacks, please take it elsewhere, and allow the rest of us to discuss subjects slightly above the radar of Grandma.

The helmet thread was killed even though it was a prime area of conversation that day. The thread was a hot topic in November's Editor remarks, and was informational, important, and had merit, but was dealt the death blow by those of us that can't stay away from personal attacks. Please don't do that again!

Thanks for letting me rant here...

Dale

 

[testinglogin]

Do you have a link to the "talk like you're speaking to grandma" reference? I think I missed that post. I'm not sure it has to be nearly that extreme.

We've been over the "helmet thread" thing, but in the interest of beating it into the ground, the TOPIC is acceptable. You can post about it and disagree with each other until you blow out the joints in your fingers typing replies. What is not acceptable are replies that are personal attacks which, again, are what led to the last thread being closed. Let me repeat - it had nothing to do with the topic or the discussion taking place, but with people taking it to a personal level. As you stated, a thread with the same topic discussed in a more civil manner (or, the same way as the last one MINUS the personal attacks) would be great, and from my standpoint, would be more than welcome.

Thanks.

 

[redclfco]

Do you have a link to the "talk like you're speaking to grandma" reference? I think I missed that post. I'm not sure it has to be nearly that extreme.

We've been over the "helmet thread" thing, but in the interest of beating it into the ground, the TOPIC is acceptable. You can post about it and disagree with each other until you blow out the joints in your fingers typing replies. What is not acceptable are replies that are personal attacks which, again, are what led to the last thread being closed. Let me repeat - it had nothing to do with the topic or the discussion taking place, but with people taking it to a personal level. As you stated, a thread with the same topic discussed in a more civil manner (or, the same way as the last one MINUS the personal attacks) would be great, and from my standpoint, would be more than welcome.

Thanks.

Josh, uh...I think that's what I said but thanks for repeating it using less than flattering descriptive.

The Grandma reference was to a remark by Gail Hatch or Vonnie or somebody just as good as to conduct becoming the forum Ladies and Gentlemen- that's all; and just so you know, for the most part, I agree with it whole heartedly! Civility to each other is in part what makes the BMWMOA so special to us all! If you need a citation or perhaps a Google line by line, then I'm not the right guy.

The reason so ?artfully? Described as "blow out your fingers typing replies" seems to me anyway to allude to the fact that many people are still interested in hearing about discussing this issue. your condescending message here "blow out your fingers typing replies" hits below the belt in terms of those of us who try to get across the message that the point the legislation making helmet laws has a big price tag in our society!

If you disagree, and have closed your mind to the argument, then I am sure the "blow out your fingers typing replies” seems to be be fitting. I and many others here feel this discussion has merit, and worthy further discussion with those who read and reply; it reads to me, anyway that we all had to waste your time reading replies you think are worthless!

Now maybe I'm reading too much into your "blow out your fingers..." comment, and if so, just let it go, Josh. I detect a little anger here, and am sorry for that, and that was not the intention of the thread.

 

[testinglogin]

There is no anger and it was simply a "tongue in cheek" reply. I'm saying you are free to talk and debate all you want, as much as you want. I encourage it, and I'm not at all being facetious. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread and go for it! Just keep in mind, if it falls to the level of personal attacks, it will have to be closed (and infractions issued for the offending parties). I don't think there is any argument to be had about the issue, at least not from me.

 

[redclfco]

Now to the heart of the issue

There is no anger and it was simply a "tongue in cheek" reply. I'm saying you are free to talk and debate all you want, as much as you want. I encourage it, and I'm not at all being facetious. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread and go for it! Just keep in mind, if it falls to the level of personal attacks, it will have to be closed (and infractions issued for the offending parties). I don't think there is any argument to be had about the issue, at least not from me.

When offense has taken place in terms of attacks, is it the Mods policy to immediately close the thread OR have both parties pull thier particular comment, and abide by the rules and continue?

I only ask because I've seen it go both ways. (sigh... no citation here either, Josh)

What warrants the dog house, and what warrants keeping a thread of good merit and hearty discussion alive in some cases, and other cases, it's goodnight lucille?

 

[testinglogin]

When offense has taken place in terms of attacks, is it the Mods policy to immediately close the thread OR have both parties pull thier particular comment, and abide by the rules and continue?

I only ask because I've seen it go both ways. (sigh... no citation here either, Josh)

No citation necessary. We have the posting guidelines to follow when it comes to what is not acceptable and general procedures for issuing infractions and removing posts. If there is a blatant personal attack, the mods remove the post and , issue a warning or infraction.

What warrants the dog house, and what warrants keeping a thread of good merit and hearty discussion alive in some cases, and other cases, it's goodnight lucille?

Once people resort to attacking the messenger and not the message, the thread is done. That doesn't mean one person can be the poison pill and end a thread (they'll receive the infraction and have their post removed, though), but if the overall tone goes downhill like that, the thread ends. So, VERY good things to keep in mind:

- If you see a personal attack, click the "report post" button

- Do not feel it's acceptable to reply in-kind to said personal attacks. That's the worst thing that can happen and will kill a thread the fastest, as well as earning an infraction for all parties

- Try to ignore the personal attacks. Report them and then move on replying to other posts so the mods can take care of them and the discussion can stay on-track. Once they get replied to they stir up more trouble and are harder to make disappear.

Keep in mind, if a specific topic consistently causes a problem, it's going to gain extra scrutiny. That doesn't mean it gets closed right away at the slightest problem. In the end it comes down to the forum users playing nice (and that doesn't mean tea time with the queen, but maybe somewhere between that and "bar-room brawl" is a happy medium).

 

[darrylri]

The decision of what to do is a judgment call that depends on the particular instance.

If there's only one attacking posting, then deleting it may well allow the thread to continue on. If it seems like several people are, or are about to, join the fray, then closing the thread may be a better course.

Timing can have an affect on it as well: if nobody reported a flame and the mods didn't pick up on it while the thread was ongoing, it may well be best to leave sleeping dogs lie. If the mods only become aware of a problem when the slugfest is already going on, it's time to break it up and kill it off.

But if the mods see the first spark on the fuse, perhaps they can direct the conversation away from the explosion. That only works if everyone on the thread takes the hint.

 

[36654]

The phrase used to the etiquette of discussing issues on the campfire forum was best described as speak only things that you would speak to grandma, and in a tone befitting a conversation with grandma.

While I wouldn't suggest that we limit topics of discussion, conducting ourselves in a manner befitting a conversation with grandma, or any other elder, is typically a good practice in any conversation.

Ranting and venting is fine, but you better know your audience. If you don't care who your audience is, then you're probably headed for trouble.

 

[sheridesabeemer]

don't be attributing it to me. I don't have a grandma...nor would I be so patronizing as to assume I should speak to her in a certain politically correct way.

Civility...you know it when you see it.

 

[From MARS]

Thanks, Dale, for livening up the forum. Its posts like yours that keep me coming back.

Tom

 

[mika]

Snipped with comment(the topics are limited on the forum)

Ranting and venting is fine, but you better know your audience. If you don't care who your audience is, then you're probably headed for trouble.

Who the audience is, there in lies the rub.

Who is the audience of the forum of a national organization? Is it static or evolve over time? If it does change with time how does it evolve to meet the needs of a membership that shares a marque affinity? Are we a homogeneous melting pot puree or a diverse stew?

I can point to times when I would have made a different decision if I were king of the world but I have yet to find real fault with the decisions they have made. I don’t think that is where the problem is. At least for me.

 

[From MARS]

Who the audience is, there in lies the rub.

Who is the audience of the forum of a national organization? Is it static or evolve over time? If it does change with time how does it evolve to meet the needs of a membership that shares a marque affinity? Are we a homogeneous melting pot puree or a diverse stew?

I can point to times when I would have made a different decision if I were king of the world but I have yet to find real fault with the decisions they have made. I donÔÇÖt think that is where the problem is. At least for me.

Reminds me of the "chicken or the egg" question. Will the club demographics change before or after the forum does?

 

[mika]

Reminds me of the "chicken or the egg" question. Will the club demographics change before or after the forum does?

While I can understand coming to the conclusion itÔÇÖs a ÔÇÿchicken or an eggÔÇÖ argument I donÔÇÖt agree. Think more along the lines of ven diagrams appearing and dissolving as time and conversation progresses.

Both can change independently, and I would argue they do, of each other.

 

[35634]

Moderation here reminds me of the kid with the baseball. Play by his rules or go home. If it was my baseball, grandma might get PO'ed and someone may get bruised,
but it would be entertaining. Alas, it's not my ball, so I'll politely restrain myself and wonder what kind of biker could be offended by some of the threads that get doghoused

 

[From MARS]

While I can understand coming to the conclusion itÔÇÖs a ÔÇÿchicken or an eggÔÇÖ argument I donÔÇÖt agree. Think more along the lines of ven diagrams appearing and dissolving as time and conversation progresses.

Both can change independently, and I would argue they do, of each other.

Let me see if I've got this: We have three sets; current users, future users, and forum rules. For the overlapping subset to change, an new factor has to be entered into one of the sets. Right?

 

[From MARS]

Moderation here reminds me of the kid with the baseball. Play by his rules or go home. If it was my baseball, grandma might get PO'ed and someone may get bruised,
but it would be entertaining. Alas, it's not my ball, so I'll politely restrain myself and wonder what kind of biker could be offended by some of the threads that get doghoused

Didn't you read your Dec. ON? We're not bikers! We're BMW riders and are easily offended by loud people, pipes, and pornography!

 

[Voni]

And MY Grandmother taught me to always spell a person's name correctly.

Voni

 

[mika]

Let me see if I've got this: We have three sets; current users, future users, and forum rules. For the overlapping subset to change, an new factor has to be entered into one of the sets. Right?

You are headed in the right direction but need a more dynamic model than yours seems to imply.
- ÔÇÿCurrent usersÔÇÖ to my eye implies a homogeneous group. I do not believe we are.
Your model does not include past users. There is much to be learned from them, what happened to them and the lasting impact that some had on the fourm.

 

[Semper_Fi]

Didn't you read your Dec. ON? We're not bikers! We're BMW riders and are easily offended by loud people, pipes, and pornography!

Jusy got mine - where is that - want to check it out

 

[oldhway]

Reminds me of the "chicken or the egg" question. Will the club demographics change before or after the forum does?

That is a great question. The issue the Mod team has to face is when change is appropriate and what that change should be. Unfortunately the crystal ball get's a little fuzzy there. Change is welcome and neccessary for anything to survive and grow. The over riding criteria we have used is how a change will effect the overall tone of the Forum.

Since the helmet issue was shut down (at my suggestian originally by the way), Josh and I have been talking about just what Dale has brought up here. How do you keep things civil yet lively when folks disagree? Darryl mentioned that if we catch it early enough, the mods can get in and post and try to guide things back on track. If one member get's out of line, we can also address that fairly easily as well. The problem arrives when the tone of the whole thread goes down the tubes. One solution we have tried before and will use more in the future is to temporarily close a thread for 24 hours and give everyone a chance to catch there breath. The Mod teams recent discussions about the Helmet thread we are talking about is what caused us to once again think about starting to use the thread time out idea. Looking back we could have used that on the helmet thread. But it is a fairly new idea and we will try in in the future.

2 last points.

In PM's after the Helmet thread closed, I encouraged a couple of folks to restart the discussion in a new thread because it was a good topic. I will repeat that now. And I will add that if it starts getting off track, the members participating can help get it back on track by either how they post or reporting posts that are causing trouble. A handful of moderators, no matter how good (and the mod team is a great group), can never catch everything. We need the help and co-operation of the membership. We don't want to be forum cops. We just want to make the forum work for everyone.

Second point. It may feel like the Forum doesn't change to those of us who are here regularly. But we regularly here from folks who have been gone for a while and come back that is has changed quite a bit, mostly for the good. Posters like Redclfco and from MARS and others have helped to promote those changes, often with discussions like this. So let's keep discussing and working together to make this place a good place for everyone. And maybe even Grandma would approve.