|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 3, 2002, 3:26 PM
Post #76 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Look at it this way, guy.
You could either work really hard to try to maintain your sense of balance, what with you knowing what sense you mean wieldly and/or unwieldly in. You could trust people to maintain that balance and make sure that no topic is being discussed in (omfg, tell me it ain't so!) 2 places at ONCE. You could TELL PEOPLE who haven't AGED with RC.com the proper etiquette for posting to topics that have been discussed before. You could MODERATE their asses when they don't do what YOU think they shoudl do. You can get ANGRY that not enough moderation or too much moderation has taken place when your views of equilibrium differ from those of the moderator. And you can deal with the little mini-powertrip that some moderators go through...
Or you could just leave the forum alone and topics that people don't want to discuss will slide down the index into oblivion.
That's my point: your way is well and good and Trevor is well within his right as a site owner to maintain the first system... but then you have threads like this and people like rrrAdam speaking out in defense of moderator priviledge.
The other way is just EASY.
Yeah, sure, 1 topic gets discussed in 2 places at once. So what ?
A boldering thread might survive in the general forum. So effin what ?
Suffice it to say you and I have different opinions on forum moderation... and only one of us wants to actively PUSH our beliefs on other people...
And no, I don't want that tract you're passing out either.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 3, 2002, 4:05 PM
Post #77 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
". Jody replied saying something like "another post from xxx..." He should have moved it to community instead.
I would have but I am not a moderator newengland.
jt512...good posts but if you would break those loooooong posts up into several smaller posts it would pad your post count better!
I have been on the site over a year and that makes me smarter than all of you!
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Nov 3, 2002, 4:12 PM
Post #78 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
headcrack, while i think you post has some cool philosophical points, i'm with jds100 all the way on this. it's annoying as s--- to sift through bs when i want climbing info.
and i would beg to differ on your point that you're not pushing your views off on everyone else. you're spamming the crap out of the site to get at adam, without considering the amount of frustration that it causes the other 9716 other registered users.
personally, it gets on my nerves, and until i see more positive climbing-related contributions from one of your id's (which is where you would be contributing if you really gave a crap about the site), i'll fully support any and all of your id's getting banned.
dont get me wrong, i'm probably among the most stupidly people-loving people on this site, but i'm really tired of your little regime complaining about being treated like a group of punks when that's what you're acting like. if you dont like the way you're being treated, then quit acting like a group of little assholes, and the admins/mods will quit mod'g you as such ..
and shut up about the facist bs. if you truly feel oppressed on this site, then why dont you try living under truly oppressive conditions for a while. from what i've seen, you've only gotten what you deserve, and there's a huge difference in getting your just desserts and being unfairly censored. personally, i vote for the censorship of pricks and assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 3, 2002, 4:21 PM
Post #79 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Go Amber!
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 4, 2002, 12:45 AM
Post #80 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
I am NOT complaining about fascist government of the site.
I am merely expousing a different look at moderation, since THIS METHOD obviously PEEVES PEOPLE.
I didn't start this thread, but I disagree with it. I am participating in whatever topics I choose to, and when climbing is the topic, I either give helpful info or my opinion or whatever. When the topic is "Moderators, Wake up," I discuss that.
I am not here to bug Adam, but I will take an oppotunity to tell him he's an idiot.
Because he is.
He portrays himself as "the authority figure of rc.com" and deigns to know what is best "for everyone." He repeatedly holds his $350 donation over the heads of everyone... and he uses a holier-than-thou tone when he does it. Fake authority. People who disagree with him are labelled "detractors" and either insulted (as I have been) or disrespected (as I have been by him revealing sensitive information which he knows I would appreciate left private). He abuses his ability to look up sensitive information of the users to the point of breaking the law. SUre, it can be "justified" when it's in order to ban a disruptive user more effectively, but when it is only to reveal information which should be kept private... that's a dickhead maneuver.
And it only doesn't suck until it's YOUR account which it happens to.
Especially when I am participating in the manner I SHOULD...
As I have said before and will say again for the benefit of you judgemental folks who dislike me and can't seem to READ what I friggin' WRITE:
I support the multiforum system. I recognize the need for rc.com to police itself more than a smaller site.
But I think that topics (in the correct forum) should be allowed to be started in more than one place without being locked. I think that new people should be able to discuss an old subject in a new thread without being pointed to archived threads.
I don't hold or express those opinions just because I'm out to get Adam.
I don't have to prove my motive for being here to you, but I can tell you your crappy assumptions are INCORRECT.
And jmlangford, STFU...
|
|
|
|
|
boltakrak
Nov 4, 2002, 1:24 AM
Post #81 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2002
Posts: 40
|
those lameos' have gots to knock it off, what a bunch of dinks
|
|
|
|
|
lilred
Nov 4, 2002, 9:07 PM
Post #82 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2002
Posts: 1100
|
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 4, 2002, 10:08 PM
Post #83 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
re: Interacting with users...
There are several threads that get repeated on a timely basis. Once 30 users have given their opinion, but then the same question comes up again, do you suggest that the users who replied to the original reply again and again, ad infinatum(sp?) ???
I don't think anyone is talking about locking and linking to old Archived (means locked here) threads.
How many times has a user been supplied with a link only to reply with "oops, guess I should have looked". The Mods have enough "experience" within their Forums to know what has been discussed before and link that topic to the redundant thread. It would seem to me, that if a user asked a question, and a Mod provided a link to a thread discussing that topic with 50+ replies, that user got quite a bit of info for just one reply.
But then again, we need to do this with kid gloves.
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 4, 2002, 10:19 PM
Post #84 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
The "oops, I should have looked" response is standard, because the mod is chastising the poor user who didn't think or know to search back to the last time _________ was discussed.
I mean... what else is that person going to say ?
What I am saying is exemplified in this thread:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=19049&forum=23&8
Surely, winter climbing in Arizona has been discussed SOMEWHERE BEFORE.
So, because the mods have seen it before, under your paradigm Adum, this thread should be moved to regional and the AZ mod should link to previous winter in AZ threads.
Instead, there is a lively discussion going on, the guy is getting good info (from TROLLS !!!!!111) and people are offering to go climbing with him.
Why can the "more experienced" users just AVOID threads which they have discussed before and let newer users have the same experience as they got ?
Better yet, why not point the new user to the old thread AND LEAVE THE NEW ONE OPEN, so the new circumstance can be discussed ?
OMG !!!111
This would let everyone participate at whatever level they prefer, without enforcing the "redundant" judgement ?
Like I say, these are not hard and fast rules, and 2 topics about the same thing at the same time could be pruned... but at least you wouldn't be SHUTTING NEWBIES DOWN becuase YOU LIKE, ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT, LIKE, LAST MONTH... you know.. before they joined the site
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Nov 4, 2002, 10:22 PM
Post #85 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
I think someone said to make the "search" button at the top larger. I think that is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 4, 2002, 10:23 PM
Post #86 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Hehe... was that already posted ?
Can I get a mod in here to clean up the REDUNDANT POSTS ?!?!?
(I know what comes next... you don't have to say it.)
|
|
|
|
|
climbchick
Nov 4, 2002, 10:44 PM
Post #87 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 808
|
The first time an issue is raised, the people who have something useful to contribute often respond with long, careful, intelligent posts. Sometimes thoughtful debates ensue, links are provided to facts & research, and the thread as a whole becomes a valuable source of information. The third, fourth, fifth time the subject comes up, the original posters are not going to bother repeating themselves yet again. In a case like that, it's a shame to have the original thread buried in the index where no-one will ever see it, so why not link to it if someone brings the topic up again? If a new person has something to say on the subject, why shouldn't they add it to the original thread and make it even more valuable? It's also a shame to have annoying trollers come along and insert their worthless comments into serious threads because all that does is distract people from the subject and destroy the conversation. I don't see any problem with just deleting crap like that from the serious threads.
When it comes to Sharma's drug-use or the seventy-fifth thread on Fear of Heights, I don't think it's necessary to lock & link. People who have been around for a while are just going to ignore the thread but there will always be new people who have something to say and since there is nothing of great value in threads like those, there's not much reason to point to the old ones.
I enjoy casual interaction and for that reason spend a lot of my time here in the Community Forum. But when I do have a serious question, I appreciate being able to post it in a serious forum and get serious responses. If RC deteriorated into a meaningless, haphazard jumble of lame topics, flames, and smartass one-liners like b.com, I would stop coming here. The serious forums should be strictly moderated and people who want to kid around, flame, and talk about non-climbing stuff should click on the Community forum.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 4, 2002, 10:46 PM
Post #88 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Good thread 'headcrak'...
I agree that it should be left open, but I think it should be moved to Regional Discussions. If he is looking for a partner, it would be best in the correct Partners Forum.
There are several other topics that are much more defined and technical that may be a month old with a lotgreat BETA in them. If a user is new, and does not see that topic, and asks the same question, I think that it should be locked with a link to the original Forum, a PM is also sent to author, and these do not lambaste the newbie. This way he gets to "interact" with the old and new users. It's never too late to reply to an old topic.
Pros...
New user gets great BETA for his new post.
He can reply to discuss further.
He can get opinion already there along with those of the newer users.
Users won't have to answer the same question, especially usefull if reply is long and technical.
Keeps Forums free from redundant threads.
Cons...
I can't see any, so help me here 'headcrak'.
I've said numerous times that patience and discression needs to be used when Moderating Forums.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 4, 2002, 10:52 PM
Post #89 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
OK... Yvette said that better than I did.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Nov 5, 2002, 4:25 AM
Post #90 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
of course she did .. she's the climbchick
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2002, 11:58 AM
Post #91 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
I'm at a disadvantage, as 4 "climb chicks" are better than 1 rrrADAM.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Nov 5, 2002, 2:43 PM
Post #92 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
.. and cody said that you were dumb ..
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 5, 2002, 6:29 PM
Post #93 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Headcrak is correct...
Unintelligently belligerent.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 5, 2002, 6:55 PM
Post #94 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:jt512...good posts...
Thanks, Jody.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 5, 2002, 6:55 PM
Post #95 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Quote:
...but if you would break those loooooong posts up into several smaller posts it would pad your post count better!
I'm new here, and just getting the hang of post count padding.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 5, 2002, 6:56 PM
Post #96 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Thanks again.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 5, 2002, 7:13 PM
Post #97 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
You
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 5, 2002, 7:13 PM
Post #98 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
are
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 5, 2002, 7:14 PM
Post #99 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
very
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Nov 5, 2002, 7:14 PM
Post #100 of 145
(6320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
