On Jul 3, 9:49*pm, wrote:
On Jul 3, 9:42*pm, "D.Duck" wrote:



wrote in message

....
On Jul 3, 9:19 pm, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:11:24 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:34:08 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 3, 8:17 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:54:31 -0700 (PDT),

wrote:
On Jul 3, 7:25 pm, "Jim" wrote:
It's melting away. Check it out.
Nothing personal, and I admit I don't like this Gould sockpuppet,
but
I knew he couldn't do it. Moderation, is for moderates.
I knew it was going to happen and I even told Chuck so. It's not that
Chuck isn't capable of moderating, but his dream was to have a
lightly
moderated forum in which everybody got along with the occasional spat
that would dissolve quickly. It's a very "New Age" approach to forum
moderating and doesn't work worth a damn because of three members in
particular just couldn't drop what went on here and dragged it over
there.

Secondarily, it was too easy to just drop down to the last fifty
posts
which compacted the latest activity and became the defacto forum
without reference to the various thread categories. I could have told
Chuck that would happen too - been there, done that.

Thirdly (thirdly?), he shouldn't have even gone with an off topic
thread category - told him that too.

Chuck wanted it to go his way and it didn't. He's also stubborn
because this was evident two months ago shortly after he got it up
and
running, but he kept hoping. Instead of banning people or barring
them for a day, three days, week, month, he deleted the posts and
that
never works.

He had the resources if he only asked for some advice before he set
it
up and gotten some advice from former moderators who have been
through
the wars.

Chuck needs to be the last court of appeal for the actions of a
moderator or maybe two moderators who become the bad guys. That way
he
can isolate himself from his group and act as a "El Supremo Grande"
when complaints come flying. He doesn't even have to be personally
involved - he can read through the posts and give instructions to the
moderators if there is something that he doens't like.
I tried to tell him months ago that one forum, and hefty groundings
for anyone who was a jerk would work. Also suggested opening up for
negative as well as positive karma. This allows folks to know right
off the bat if a responder is respected in the group. In other groups
I frequent, if you are a positive poster, with knowledge, you had a
lot of green leaves, if you were useless, you ended up with a huge red
bar...Also offered to help him moderate.. Like you said, he needs a
couple of helpers to do the sifting, and he needs to be the Court of
Appeals.
In other forums, the most effective technique I've seen is when a
thread goes
nasty or too hot headed, the moderator just locks that thread for 3
days. By the
time it gets unlocked, everyone is on to something else, and it rarely
gets any
fresh fuel after that. It's nice because it doesn't point any fingers,
or make
any one person wear a pointy hat that can lead to festering resentment.

I've seen that done - unfortunately, it bleds over to other threads..

Chuck needs to get a moderator for him - the hands off approach isn't
going to work and he probably will end up talking to himself.

But he's got to do it his way - good luck to him.

All that has to happen is for the turd blossoms from here behave. But I
don't think they can control themselves. Hope the chuckster kicks them
off and soon.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are WAFA

===============================

Earlier today you asked me to ignore him.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are right, I had a little fun for a while.. I think the excitement
is over.

So your sole purpose here, as you admitted, was to troll and cause
problems.

Too bad.

"Don White" wrote in message

Weren't you the one who encouraged the Dwarf Army to go over there and
trash the place because Chuck wouldn't punish a couple of us


WHERE is "Over there"?

On Jul 4, 12:21*am, "Rudy" wrote:
"Don White" *wrote in message
Weren't you the one who encouraged the Dwarf Army to go over there and
trash the place because Chuck wouldn't punish a couple of us

WHERE is "Over there"?

http://boatingforum.proboards91.com/

wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 01:14:56 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:11:24 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:34:08 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Jul 3, 8:17 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:54:31 -0700 (PDT),

wrote:
On Jul 3, 7:25 pm, "Jim" wrote:
It's melting away. Check it out.
Nothing personal, and I admit I don't like this Gould sockpuppet, but
I knew he couldn't do it. Moderation, is for moderates.
I knew it was going to happen and I even told Chuck so. It's not that
Chuck isn't capable of moderating, but his dream was to have a lightly
moderated forum in which everybody got along with the occasional spat
that would dissolve quickly. It's a very "New Age" approach to forum
moderating and doesn't work worth a damn because of three members in
particular just couldn't drop what went on here and dragged it over
there.

Secondarily, it was too easy to just drop down to the last fifty posts
which compacted the latest activity and became the defacto forum
without reference to the various thread categories. I could have told
Chuck that would happen too - been there, done that.

Thirdly (thirdly?), he shouldn't have even gone with an off topic
thread category - told him that too.

Chuck wanted it to go his way and it didn't. He's also stubborn
because this was evident two months ago shortly after he got it up and
running, but he kept hoping. Instead of banning people or barring
them for a day, three days, week, month, he deleted the posts and that
never works.

He had the resources if he only asked for some advice before he set it
up and gotten some advice from former moderators who have been through
the wars.

Chuck needs to be the last court of appeal for the actions of a
moderator or maybe two moderators who become the bad guys. That way he
can isolate himself from his group and act as a "El Supremo Grande"
when complaints come flying. He doesn't even have to be personally
involved - he can read through the posts and give instructions to the
moderators if there is something that he doens't like.
I tried to tell him months ago that one forum, and hefty groundings
for anyone who was a jerk would work. Also suggested opening up for
negative as well as positive karma. This allows folks to know right
off the bat if a responder is respected in the group. In other groups
I frequent, if you are a positive poster, with knowledge, you had a
lot of green leaves, if you were useless, you ended up with a huge red
bar...Also offered to help him moderate.. Like you said, he needs a
couple of helpers to do the sifting, and he needs to be the Court of
Appeals.
In other forums, the most effective technique I've seen is when a thread goes
nasty or too hot headed, the moderator just locks that thread for 3 days. By the
time it gets unlocked, everyone is on to something else, and it rarely gets any
fresh fuel after that. It's nice because it doesn't point any fingers, or make
any one person wear a pointy hat that can lead to festering resentment.
I've seen that done - unfortunately, it bleds over to other threads.


It's very effective, and when the quarrel occasionally (very occasionally) gets
carried over to another thread, it has lost most of it's steam. If not, the
moderator can temporarily pause that thread as well. I've never seen that become
necessary. A three day cool out on a thread WORKS. One big advantage of this
technique is it allows EVERYONE to carry on, including the ones who caused the
thread to overheat, without leaving any residuual noses out of joint. The
nastiness is quelled and the victims are satisfied that "something" was done to
stop it. If you have one person that continually goes nuts, you privately warn
them once, and if they continue after the warning, you privately dis-member
them. None of it is ever done publically, which only serves to keep the
controversy alive, and breed lasting rancor. By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.




Well, Chuckster wiped the slate...and we'll see what happens next. I for
one am hoping his scimitar is sharp...and that he uses it without
hesitation.

On Jul 3, 9:41*pm, JimH wrote:
On Jul 3, 9:32*pm, wrote:





On Jul 3, 9:27*pm, JimH wrote:

On Jul 3, 9:06*pm, "Jim" wrote:

Look in your PM box over there. Chuck left a note as to what his intentions
are. Krause has to be put on a very short leash if he's allowed to post at
Chuck's place at all. I won't cut him a bit of slack. He doesn't deserve it.

"John H." wrote in message

.. .

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:25:54 -0400, "Jim" wrote:

It's melting away. Check it out.

I tried to make some meaningful, nice, boater friendly responses to some
of
the messages, but all the threads are gone. Like ... disappeared.
Ethereal.

Once upon a time three guys went into a bar. They already had somewhat of
a
bad reputation, but they attempted to close the bar by starting fights and
making slurs. They didn't get it closed, so they tried harder. Just one of
them would make 50+ slurs in a single day, almost every one supported by
the other two (or sometimes three).

They would then go into a different bar, owned by a different guy, and
find
the same people there. In this bar, the three guys and the owner expected
to find sweetness, gentleness, honey and roses from the same people who
had
put up with their slurs in the first place.

Strangely, some of the ill will went into the new bar also.

Hard to understand.

But, there you go.

What A Friendly Angel!

For someone who has been banned from posting at Chucks place because
of your nasty behavior you remain obsessed with his board.

Get help before you...............http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073486/-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You will hereby be dubbed * * *HAFA2 *

Whatever.

You are nothing more than white trash and a child abuser.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



This is the second time you have called me white trash, now you call
me a child abuser. We see you can not man up even when given a chance.

I don't address you much but the last time I was wrong about you I
posted that fact within minutes to both forums where our peers could
see it. I see you are not a man at all, just another yappy dog,
barking from under the table.. Keep hiding dude, it's the only way you
can stay on these boards..

wrote:



This is the second time you have called me white trash, now you call
me a child abuser.


There are many forms of child abuse, depending on where you live and who
you are.

*I* would consider allowing small children to "race" motorcycles child
abuse.

http://rowdymouseracing.com/media/080702MX_14.mov

Rowdy Mouse Racing.... Sponsors needed



It just hit me.. The first book I ever read on my own as a kid (more
than10 pages) was a book titled "The Mouse and The Motorcycle". It was
probably the book that sparked "Stewart Smalley".

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. :-)

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:45:19 -0400, HK wrote:

Well, Chuckster wiped the slate...and we'll see what happens next. I for
one am hoping his scimitar is sharp...and that he uses it without
hesitation.

Be careful what you ask for.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:45:19 -0400, HK wrote:

Well, Chuckster wiped the slate...and we'll see what happens next. I for
one am hoping his scimitar is sharp...and that he uses it without
hesitation.

Be careful what you ask for.


Why? Why would I care if any or all of the Seven Dwarfs feel the steel?

BTW, my wife loves that swimming pig photo. I made her a print of it. I
think she has it displayed on her desk. Thanks.