Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 68

Thread: Moderation on moderation

  1. #1
    Senior Member RS6405's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    SRB
    Posts
    386
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)

    Moderation on moderation

    It appears that far too many threads are being closed/ locked.

    I understand shutting down the threads that that have caused heated debates. However, a heated debate has not happen in months. I wonder if the recent moderation has caused a chilling effect that is de facto censorship?

    Another thing that is explicit censorship is shutting down threads that make the mods uncomfortable, I.E. Otis's thread about Tak. Granted you may not like the topic, but the discussions on that thread and on others were civil.

    Yes Garrett is a private company, but that private business is based on journalism and the military. Two notions that invoke freedom of speech: one that protects it and one that relies on it.

    So I challenge the mods to avoid the censorship ..... De facto and explicit!

  2. #2
    Senior Member Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    548
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    I'm with her, I detest censorship.

  3. #3
    Senior Member TJMAC77SP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,156
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    I am wondering why heated debates are even considered for censorship. I have seen a lot of trolls come and go on this forum. Until recently not one left due to any act by any moderator or admin. They finally go tired of being called on their constant and inane bullshit.

    I am with Greg on this topic. Censorship above all else is to be disdained. Eliminating personal attack is fine.....until you lose track of what is and is not a personal attack and eliminate valid ideas along the way. The fact that we can't dicsuss the moderation efforts is a perfect case in point.

    “Free societies...are societies in motion, and with motion comes tension, dissent, friction. Free people strike sparks, and those sparks are the best evidence of freedom's existence.”
    ___________________
    Read carefully, think, then write thoughtfully……………………………..

    I don’t have any quotes……you can pick one for yourself

  4. #4
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,953
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    I have only edited a few posts that had personal attacks.

    I know a few threads were closed by one moderator or another, I have said to someone recently that we are still in the process of figuring out thread moderation.

    EDIT: I have moved quite a few that were not in the right thread based on the subject matter. EDIT

    Personally, I like the heated/spirited debate. I would offer that just because you disagree however, you don't have to be disagreeable. I once had a pretty good back and forth with someone on a forum. We totally disagreed, but never attacked each other.

    I have been in the military way to long to get offended by almost anything someone may say, someone is much more likely to violate the community guidelines before offending me.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Robert F. Dorr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Oakton, Virginia
    Posts
    894
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    For a couple of years, this place had no moderation at all. It worked fairly well but things out of hand and some supervision was needed.

    Now, this place has too much moderation but no one in charge who is known to participants. It is no longer functioning at all. There is no longer any useful debate going on.

    In the past, the deal was that if something was of interest to people in the Air Force (i.e., an airman expressing an opinion about Trayvon Martin) it belonged on the Air Force forum. That worked perfectly and didn't need to be changed. But it's a minor point.

    I joined in October 2011 with a very specific understanding with senior leadership at Gannett Government Media. The purpose was to enable me to inter-act with those who'd created threads about me. The latest version of that thread was shut down (but not deleted) because I expressed my opinion that forum participants are entitled to know the name of the Gannett Government Media employee who moderates these forums. I decided to leave the forums over this issue and have done so but cannot go away without expressing agreement with the very reasoned and sensible comments made by RS6405, above. The recent changes may have wrought some improvements (together with a significant drop in page view; no matter what the mods say, the numbers are there for everyone to see) but many users and former users believe they're entitled to a better understanding of what the rules are and who is enforcing them. I was invited to participate in these forums because they were in small part about me and because I bring a different point of view and have something to offer. It will be a loss for everyone if I have to stay away. I'm not "soliciting peoples' names" as charged in another post. I'm asking for one name. My purpose in posting my contact information is simply this: I want anyone who wishes to reach me to know how to do so. I've made many friends here and will gladly continue those friendships with those who want to.

    Robert F. Dorr
    3411 Valewood Drive
    Oakton VA 22124
    robert.f.dorr@cox.net
    (703) 264-8950

  6. #6
    Senior Member Stalwart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    1,055
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert F. Dorr View Post
    Now, this place has too much moderation but no one in charge who is known to participants.
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert F. Dorr View Post
    I'm not "soliciting peoples' names" as charged in another post. I'm asking for one name.
    You have their screen name though. I guess I also don't understand why you want (not need) to have their real name? What would that do for you that a screen name does not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert F. Dorr View Post
    In the past, the deal was that if something was of interest to people in the Air Force (i.e., an airman expressing an opinion about Trayvon Martin) it belonged on the Air Force forum. That worked perfectly and didn't need to be changed. But it's a minor point.
    I see your point, but think it also creates duplicative effort as opposed to if someone had an opinion about Trayvon Martin having to look in the In the News, Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps forums (Coast Guard too I guess.)

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    196
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert F. Dorr View Post
    It will be a loss for everyone if I have to stay away.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    699
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert F. Dorr View Post
    For a couple of years, this place had no moderation at all. It worked fairly well but things out of hand and some supervision was needed.
    "out of hand" is putting it mildly.

    It is no longer functioning at all. There is no longer any useful debate going on.
    Your opinion. Of course, you seem to think "useful debate" includes whether or not people use too many spaces after punctuation, so I'll take your opinion with a grain of salt.



    I joined in October 2011 with a very specific understanding with senior leadership at Gannett Government Media.
    Great, let's see the written agreement that exempts you from the terms of service, community guidelines, etc.

    The purpose was to enable me to inter-act with those who'd created threads about me.
    Your stated purpose was to bury a thread about your opinion columns that you didn't like. Oops, did you forget to delete those posts?

    I decided to leave the forums over this issue
    You keep saying that. "i do not think it means what you think it means"...


    I was invited to participate in these forums because they were in small part about me and because I bring a different point of view and have something to offer.
    You were invited? As I recall you just showed up. Everyone has a point of view and has something to offer, Bob. But most of those voices were being silenced by the "sith lord" gang, of which you are a member. So again, grains of salt.

    My purpose in posting my contact information is...
    ...Self promotion. There, fixed it for you.

    Seriously, Bob. Do you not realize that there are people here that watched during the whole thing? Feel free to spin a new reality however you want, but don't expect people to believe it.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    548
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    I could not care less if the moderators shared names, or brought personality to the board while overseeing the members. And if they did? I'm for that also.

    There was quite a bit of butt hurt during the rep-wars, and it continued with the religious threads. Be careful what you ask for, you might get it.

    Everything is cyclical.

  10. #10
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)

    Re: Moderation on moderation

    I don't care if they share names. I would like to know who their alts are...we all know they are using other names when conversing on normal topics while having an alt (not allowed) mod account.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •