Was HODAG banned ?

[PacWestGS]

 

[GeoffMiller]

time for rob nye to go away. im voting with my checkbook.

 

[burnszilla]

So who moderates the moderators?

 

[mika]

In the end the voice of the membership of the forum.

 

[Visian]

So who moderates the moderators?

i do, except for the election forum, which rob nye moderates.

please know that i also put a good deal of weight into what M1ka says above. so do all the moderators. so, in that vein, mark and i are working to schedule a phone call to talk about this early next week.

ian

 

[kreinke]

It's a real shame that a member can't ask legitimate questions about the rules of a process. We're all grown adults here. I don't know Mark but his posts have always seemed to be polite, funny, perhaps a little sarcastic at times, but never "doghouse fodder."

At any rate, it's given me pause to think about whether I'm going to re-up my MOA membership when the time comes (in spite of the wonderful improvements made to the ON magazine).

 

[ppaintguy]

Why is it that when something happens, that folks threaten to leave or not re-up their membership...yet they always seem to remain here? What is the purpose of such a threat?

 

[testinglogin]

Why is it that when something happens, that folks threaten to leave or not re-up their membership...yet they always seem to remain here? What is the purpose of such a threat?

I just hope they don't actually leave. I can understand their feelings, though. Sometimes things happen that make you wonder "Is it really worth it?" Eventually, things calm down and you decided that it is indeed worth it... at least until the next thing happens.

In all seriousness, in a way, it's good this happened. It's starting a discussion (that has stayed very civil), and will hopefully lead to better rules and moderation in the future. Which will lead to a better forum, which will help bring in and keep members, which will be good for the MOA. Am I overreaching?

 

[PAULBACH]

A tough balancing act.

The election forum is new to the Association this year. The new threads are not part of the campfire where a wider latitude of exchange is allowed. Different threads require a higher bar.

Recall the posts of last fall when other members cautioned they were ready to vote with their pocketbooks when the bounds of civility seem to be questioned.

Visian has the ball and the process is in motion.

 

[Visian]

Am I overreaching?

no

 

[ppaintguy]

I just hope they don't actually leave. I can understand their feelings, though. Sometimes things happen that make you wonder "Is it really worth it?" Eventually, things calm down and you decided that it is indeed worth it... at least until the next thing happens.

In all seriousness, in a way, it's good this happened. It's starting a discussion (that has stayed very civil), and will hopefully lead to better rules and moderation in the future. Which will lead to a better forum, which will help bring in and keep members, which will be good for the MOA. Am I overreaching?

After all they may vote for you Josh...LOL. Seriously though idle threats are almost as annoying as the controversies themselves and do nothing to solve anything except perhaps making the member feel better and perhaps that is enough. We choose to be here and pay our money and are free to leave at any time too...I just don't see the value in making such threats..just my opinion.

 

[Bud]

Why is it that when something happens, that folks threaten to leave or not re-up their membership...yet they always seem to remain here? What is the purpose of such a threat?

It is a response to the frustration they are feeling about a subject at the time.


Before I was a MOA member, another board had a link to the thread regarding the previous ON editor leaving. There were a lot of upset folks who talked about leaving and never coming back etc.

Now, in retrospect, that decision seems to resulted in even a better ON.

In any organization people leave for various reasons. If, however, half the membership left due to any one issue, there would be reason for alarm. This dust up will be resolved and be forgotten and people will move on.

Don't know much, but at 60 years old I've seen plenty of evidence to know this is true.

 

[mika]

It seems I had a bum address for Mark. However he has been looking in on this discussion and sent me this.


John,
I didn't receive your e-mail, but so your post. What e-mail addy dio you send it to?

anyway the words of my demise are exagereated...
what Ratsnake said is true, I would urge you to ask Mr. Nye to post the pm he sent and my response. Then let you guys decide.

I have been in contact with Ian and also Swider. So far I am shoulderring 100% of the punishment, and am banned until I talk with Ian. I'm leaving this late morning to go riding all weekend and that call won't happen until Monday.

Mark


I urge Rob to seriously consider the request.

This thread we have going is a very important thread. I seriously believe we are responsible for the forum in the end. Members like Visian have taken on the hard tasks of running the place on a day to day basis, but we as members in the end are the moderators by what we do, the posts we make, and the overall tones we set for our community. It is a very amorphous way of developing a community.

What are our experiences with the internet as a tool in this election?
Is it meeting our needs?
Is it structured in the right way?
Does the current Q&A system work?
Is the area defined visually enough to avoid accidental jumping in by people who didnÔÇÖt realize a post was in the election area until after they made one or more posts?
Should it have very separate rules or should it be run like the rest of the forum?

Until Rob posts what Mark has requested or Mark is able to come back and speak for himself we are sitting around a campfire without any beer. The conversation is to important for it to stop.

 

[flash412]

Running Open-Loop

This is a club. We need to ELECT moderators for specific terms.

http://forums.bmwmoa.org/showthread.php?t=17013

 

[braddog]

It's a slice of the real world...

Any time you throw a number of people together, there are going to be conflicts. Sometimes people make posts on internet forums that they would never say to a person in 3-D. It's the nature of the beast, it's impersonal. Anybody can be a keyboard cowboy.

Moderating forums is tightrope walk, IMHO. Neither over-moderation or under-moderation is a good thing for forum growth and participation.

That said, I have a problem with posts being deleted/removed that are not:

- illegal
- immoral
- extremely offensive

While Mark is certainly one to voice his opinion, I find it hard to believe that he would post something that would warrant deletion. If it didn't fit the forum, then it should've been moved, perhaps even to the doghouse, but removing it seems harsh.

But, in all fairness, I haven't been reading the election forum, since I sent my vote via postcard almost as soon as I got my ON, nor have I been following the 1st/2nd Ammendment thread, since I usually know that those can get heated.

 

[rob nye]

Good morning,

I am not under any circumstances going to post any PM's between myself and Mark. If I were I would be taken well out of context unless I were to also post the series of PM's regarding the election forum on March 30th and the series of discussions on April 1.

The election forum quidelines are quite clear and I have done my best to err on the side of letting things wander around a bit and I will continue to try to do so.

We have a policy that any user who is banned must reconcile with the moderator who banned them. I think this is best for both parties as ultimately we do want to get along and prevent further misunderstanding by either the moderator and the user.

All parties involved are human and if you all want to pile on either side it will not speed up a good resolution.

Best,

 

[burnszilla]

Good morning,

I am not under any circumstances going to post any PM's between myself and Mark. If I were I would be taken well out of context unless I were to also post the series of PM's regarding the election forum on March 30th and the series of discussions on April 1.

The election forum quidelines are quite clear and I have done my best to err on the side of letting things wander around a bit and I will continue to try to do so.

We have a policy that any user who is banned must reconcile with the moderator who banned them. I think this is best for both parties as ultimately we do want to get along and prevent further misunderstanding by either the moderator and the user.

All parties involved are human and if you all want to pile on either side it will not speed up a good resolution.

Best,

That's a poor policy. What if the moderator is at fault? Why should the member beg for forgiveness in that case?

 

[RatSnake]

Good morning,

I am not under any circumstances going to post any PM's between myself and Mark. If I were I would be taken well out of context unless I were to also post the series of PM's regarding the election forum on March 30th and the series of discussions on April 1.

The election forum quidelines are quite clear and I have done my best to err on the side of letting things wander around a bit and I will continue to try to do so.

We have a policy that any user who is banned must reconcile with the moderator who banned them. I think this is best for both parties as ultimately we do want to get along and prevent further misunderstanding by either the moderator and the user.

All parties involved are human and if you all want to pile on either side it will not speed up a good resolution.

Best,

By reconcile you apparently mean grovel, and I don't expect we'll see Mark do that anytime soon. I know I wouldn't.

 

[Visian]

This is a club. We need to ELECT moderators for specific terms.

this is an interesting concept, but the pushback is: what do you elect directors to do?

 

[burnszilla]

What ever happened to the policy that directors and the executive are not allowed to moderate the forum? Has that policy gone into effect yet?