|
Folks, be
forewarned, this is going to be a long
post...
Click
here to skip down to my reply...
… Jeff's
posting:
Inside,
Outside, All Around the
Forum
Posted By: Jeff
Stein
<onthedash@bellsouth.net>
Date: 11/22/05 21:14 GMT
We will likely be issuing
some new Policies / Guidelines for the ChronoCentric
Discussion Forums, but I wanted to post a couple of thoughts
regarding some of the recent messages. I will post them as
my personal opinions; depending on the opinions of other
participants, these thoughts may (or may not) become part of
these new Policies.
Some random
ideas:
- we should not use the
forum to describe our grievances / problems with specific
transactions, with named sellers (or buyers). I mean,
what is the educational purpose? Do people enjoy watching
these fights? In my view, this is not the stuff for this
type of forum. If you want to see it, go to a wrestling
match, watch "Court TV" or chase the ambulances to the
see the really ugly wrecks. But it's not the type of
discussion that we want here.
- under some
circumstances, it might be appropriate and educational to
discuss a grievance on a "no-names" basis. how much
should you be able to deduct if the watch is not as
described? when should you ask for your money back? on a
no-names basis, these discussions can be valuable to our
readers and to those actually involved in a controversy.
- we should not discuss
the reputations or practices of named individuals on this
forum. this subject is just too controversial, and lends
itself to abuse. there are other "good-guys / bad-guys"
websites that exist for this purpose; this is not one of
our purposes.
- if you want
information about the reputation or recent practices of a
particular person, then you should be free to seek this
type of information. responses should be delivered by
private e-mail, rather than through this forum.
- posting under
multiple, fictitous names is wrong and grounds for being
banned from the forum . . . no defenses; no excuses; it's
just plain wrong.
- we should require
civility / courtesy as a condition of participating in
this forum.
It's been a demanding
couple of days, in terms of this website and my work . . . I
have typed this message quickly, and not agonized over the
choices of words . . . I will admit that I am not keen on
the policing / enforcement aspects of this website; that's
not why I collect watches or participate in websites . . . .
Still, it seems that we (a) need to discuss this, one more
time, and (b) publish some Policies / Guidleines / Rules
that will reflect our conclusions.
We are on the verge of
some exciting new projects that will greatly enhance this
forum. Let's take care of this bit of housekeeping before we
make the house even larger.
Thoughts?
Jeff
Hello
Jeff,
In the two years and nine
months since we opened the OTD Heuer Discussion Forum in
February 2003 there have been nearly 11,000 messages
posted, over a thousand of which I personally have
posted.
In that time, over those
posts, I've posted exactly two ADMIN
marked messages,
only one of which was of a disciplinary nature, before
this week. In the last 24 hours I have been tempted
to post one yesterday and again one this
morning.
Perhaps I should have made
my
previous message on this topic
that even more serious in tone by making it an
ADMIN
noted message. Instead, I chose to make my post as
strident as I could without using the admin option
in the spirit of "a moderator should be moderate". Ah
well... Perhaps next time...
Here is the key passages of
my
previous post:
The moment
either of you posts a message pertaining to
this transaction in this forum and I notice it, there
will be repercussions that neither of you will
like.
and
Disregard this
at your own discretion, at your own (& each
other's) peril.
and
I am stating this
topic's discussion in this forum will end here
and now, one way or another.
Well, while I was sleeping
both "combatants" decided to post. Why they didn't
contact me or Jeff directly to ask for clarification, I
do not know. My email address is a click away in every
post I make here, as is Jeff's.
When I woke up and saw the
forum, I took immediate action. Before I go on, let me
detail my thought process.
I had previously laid my
cards on the table. I was not going to let this thread
continue as it was proceeding. Why? Let me paste in a
couple of things from the
forum policies:
“We want to
encourage a community environment. As such, this forum
is open to a moderate level of related topic
discussions.”
My
previous post
was an clear indication that this thread was not
fostering a community environment.
“However,
nothing causes more disruption to a forum than
discussions about Religion, Politics, or other
contentious issues.”
Or a couple of folks who
can't keep their private financial disputes
discrete.
“For Sale,
Want to Buy, etc. Type Posts
The OnTheDash discussion
forum is for exchange of helpful information--not for
your use in selling things you have or for promoting
specific sellers of things. No 'for sale,' 'want to
buy,' advertisements or direct links to dealer sites
are allowed in discussion forum
messages.”
We didn't have a passage in
the guidelines about squabbling over transactions in the
discussion forum.
Well, we're going to have
some new policies now!
In 2 years, 9 months and
roughly 3 days, and 2 previous ADMIN
marked
messages... needing to post 2 more in less than 12 hours
is simply not acceptable
Gentlemen.
It's not that I haven't been
in or seen similar situations in the past, I have... But
this forum is not where
people are going to air their disputes to the detriment
of other participants. Neither of us (Jeff or I) are, or
plan to be, referee's or arbitrators to people's
financial transactions or disputes. We provide this
site/forum/our participation to share our enthusiam for
the topic at hand, not to be draged into other peoples
fights.
I provided you both with a
raft on the sea that is this forum... If you two
cooperated with one another or left each other
alone, you wouldn't get wet... However, if you didn't
you'd both end up in the water. As everyone knows,
cooperation or ignoring one another didn't
happen...
So here is the situation
as it currently stands, just so everyone
knows...
- This morning after seeing
the posts overnight, I took the immediate action of
blocking direct posting privledges by the two
combatants in the forums here.
- When I said discussion
of this topic was going to end, I meant
it.
- They can read the site,
and post, however their messages have to be approved
by a moderator before they will be seen by
anyone, until Jeff and I decide to restore
their privledges,
- IF we decide
to restore their privledges...
- I can't speak for Jeff,
but I check the "Posts awaiting Approval" section
once, maybe twice a week at most...
- So until Jeff or I
decide to let them off of that "Approve first" list
they may or may not see any of their posts make it
to public view...
- At this point,
this thread has dampened my enthusiasm to
approve posts in a timely fashon. Just so you
all know.
- I have not deleted any
messages as I am loathe to delete messages because I like
to have an electronic paper trail of people's
behaviour(s).
- If people behave badly,
why not let everyone see what they did to get in their
situation?
- I've also made PDF
documents for future reference should these two
decide to start up again.
- The combatants can consider
this/these action(s) a "time out"...
- Perhaps after
Thanksgiving or in a couple of weeks Jeff and I might
consider removing their names from the "probationary
posting" list,
- Hopefully, then they
will:
- be a little more
civil towards each other,
- be more
considerate to the other regulars in the forum,
and
- stop making so
bloody much work for Jeff and I.
- If not, we'll
go to Plan B...
- which is
less moderate than Plan A...
This thread has taken an
enjoyable lark that Jeff, Derek and I launched a couple
of years ago and turned it into an incredible waste of
our time that's less than enjoyable or
pleasant.
It is simply not going to be
the norm around here.
Sincerely,
|
