About Us

John H.[_4_]

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.

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.

Heck, I suggested to Chuck that he make JimH and Harry co-moderators over
there. Pretty soon there'd only be three posters, but everything would be
all sweetness and light amongst the three.

Chuck deleted my idea. I felt pretty badly. But, I'll survive. Maybe.

HK

John H. 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.

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.

Heck, I suggested to Chuck that he make JimH and Harry co-moderators over
there. Pretty soon there'd only be three posters, but everything would be
all sweetness and light amongst the three.

Chuck deleted my idea. I felt pretty badly. But, I'll survive. Maybe.

I co-moderated a boating discussion group. You and your pack of trashmen
wouldn't have lasted five posts.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
6V Meter on 12V	Floating Mind	Electronics	5	March 16th 07 10:04 PM
Water Meter	b393capt	Electronics	11	July 4th 06 01:10 PM
Fuel Meter?	Bryan	General	3	April 21st 06 01:01 PM
Hour Meter	Joe Blizzard	General	7	August 16th 04 12:57 PM
fuel meter	dcg	Electronics	0	April 16th 04 05:20 PM

Menu

About Us