To those moderators who remain ...

[PureX]

Well, most people are willing to abide by community standards. There's a reason we have them, and the mods expect people to abide by them if they want to continue to be a member. People have several chances to find a way to abide by those rules before a ban is an option. The people who earn themselves bans, earn it by demonstrating to the mods and the community that they believe the rules simply don't apply to them, and they can do whatever they wish.

In fact, they are absolutely correct. "Rules" mean nothing unless the people being "ruled" agree to let them mean something. And this is the lesson the rule makers so often forget. The rulers are the servants, and not the other way round.

I don't blame in any way, any one who comes to this site or any other site and breaks the rules. I hold nothing against them, whatever. Nor do I blame the people who run the sites for banning them, IF this is the will of the on-line community they are serving. If, however, the banning is the result of their own whims, their own egos, and they are in fact serving their own desires and purposes rather than the will of the on-line community they're supposed to be serving, then it's time for the community to move elsewhere. Because they are no longer being served, here.

And that's exactly what will happen. Sometimes it takes a while because people are creatures of habit, and don't take to changes easily, but sooner or later they will all realize that they are no being served, and they will leave.

So when I see someone "misbehave" on a web site like this, all I'm seeing is someone who has stumbled among the wrong community, and hasn't figured it out, yet. Or, I'm seeing a regular participant discover that the site is no longer willing to serve them, as it once did.

When the mods notice that someone is repeatedly violating the same rule, we do our best to precisely point out the behavior in question, and coherently answer why it's not appropriate. We also give people the opportunity to question whether or not the behavior in question is inappropriate.

When someone questions the status quo, the status quo almost always decides that this is unacceptable behavior, no matter how valid that behavior may be. So when there is a discrepancy between a regular member, here, and a "rule", I think it's the rule that ought to be questioned, first. Not the member.

Danisty was a feisty and somewhat irrational member, here, and I really liked her that way. I knew enough not to get into certain debates with her because I didn't agree with her ideas and because I knew she would NEVER see things my way. But I sure liked having her around, and I liked reading her posts. But why on Earth did you all ask her to be a mod??? What did you expect would happen??? Were you blind? Then when she behaved as it is in her nature to behave, you all get bent out of shape and ban her? I think that's really cheap! You brought this on yourselves by asking her to be a mod in the first place and you owe her a deep and sincere apology! It wasn't she who failed the system, it was the system here that failed her.

This is not really a free-for-all where people can do as they please. The mods expect people to change their normal behavior here to fit with the rules, so that the community remains a place to have a civil discussion or debate. I don't think that's a lot to ask. If a person is normally loud and rowdy, do people expect that person to change that behavior in situations like a library, or movie theater? I don't really see this as any different.

I'm not arguing with the intent. And I don't doubt the sincerity if the intent. What I doubt is the system that's been put in place and how effective it can really be at doing what it purports to do. I think the more rules and mods there are, the LESS likely they will be to do what you are suggesting they are intended to do.

I also think Danisty mattered more than any web site rule, or the ego of any moderator. And that's the way the issue should have been approached right from the start. Because if she doesn't matter, here, then neither do I. Or any of the rest of us. All that matters is the "rules" and the egos of the rule-makers.

 

[Random]

The rules here are too strict, and the enforcement of them lends itself to whimsy and abuse by egotistical Moderators. The evidence is there for all to see. I personally do not post much here anymore (though I read frequently) as there is little room for self-expression. I have been given many warnings and accursed "infractions" for posts and/or lines that I meant as humourous or challenging, thinking to enhance a thread and presuming (incorrectly obviously) that the Mods as adults could pick up on them in the spirit they were meant. The rules regarding DIR forums are ridiculous - they should be scrapped altogether. Overall, I had hoped with new owners there would be a newer, better structure to the forum. It now appears that this will not be so.

Nevertheless, RF has occasionally got an interesting thread or two to offer still, though the majority now are less-than challenging due undoubtedly to the atmosphere of reticence the Mods here have engendered. It is a pity, but perhaps it is best to hope there will be meaningful change over time.

 

[Sunstone]

There seems to be perhaps a handful of moderators who are no more.

To those who remain: why? Is it that you endorse the new owners or that you covet your position? I know this sounds like a harsh question but I'm sincerely interested in your answer. I'm beginning to view the "Mod" label as a badge of dishonor designating those who've turned their backs on those who have served here for some time. I realize that it is an uninformed reaction and I'm more than willing to hear from those who remain.

Thanks.

One of the mods who has stayed asked me pretty much the same thing: Why should they or I stay on? Here's an except from what I told them and what I believe to be the case:

I have been through four corporate mergers and by-outs in my life. None of them were any different than this one. The first time I went through a corporate by-out, I had never experienced such a thing before, and I was made a sucker and a fool. Not just by the management -- which promised more than it could deliver -- but by people in the company who I trusted to be reasonable and level-headed but who became irrational and short-sighted when the buy-out came down. The next time I went through a corporate merger, I saw exactly the same thing repeated. The management came in and promised more then they could deliver, and many employees who were normally rational people turned against them for that reason and also for some very petty reasons of their own. And the very same pattern repeated itself again the third and the fourth times I went through a corporate buy-out or merger. This is now the fifth time I've been through something like this, and I should tell you: They all go the same way for a while. People go bonkers and do things that are totally out of character for them. They tell lies and believe rumors. They panic and quit listening to each other. They cease to keep an open-mind and make up their minds about things based on who shouts the loudest and longest. The get scared about everything and stubbornly believe rumors and half-truths that at any other time they would wisely discount. And some people even turn into drama queens who try to fuel animosity and inflame hatred for the sheer entertainment value it gives them to do so.

I've never been through a merger or buy-out in which many people haven't quit or been fired. I've never been through one in which people didn't get snapped at by managers, and in which people didn't call managers ******** and worse. I've never been through one in which the pettiest things were not blown out of proportion and in which people's egos didn't get bruised. But I've also never been through one that didn't eventually settle down and everyone who was left got back to working together as a team again. In the end, it all blows over and things return to normal. So far, I have seen nothing in what's happened here at RF to make me to think we are any better or worse than any other of the places I've been, or that things will in the end be any different than at any of the other places I've been.

I think each one of us needs to decide whether he or she will stay on and see this thing through or not. It won't go on like it has been going on forever. But some of us may decide not to wait for that, while others of us may decide to wait. Those who leave now may imagine they will still be able to do something positive to get the kind of forum they want, but if this buy-out goes anything like the other four I've seen, they will instead become increasingly irrelevant. People will start making good things happen again, but those who have quit will not have a voice in it. Their influence will wane and disappear. New people with new ideas will come onboard and do just as well or better than the people who quit did in running things. I've seen it again and again and again and again. I expect that's what will happen here too.

I hope what I've told you will help you make a decision about whether to stay or quit.

Bottom line: If I quit, then there's little or no chance of doing anything positive for the Forum. At least that's how I see it. And no, I frankly don't believe the rumors that the new owner intends to rape the community here. Marka has assured me that's not the case and I believe Marka is an honest person of good will and intentions.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'm still here because I love RF.

 

[BFD_Zayl]

we are all going to die, sooner or later, and everything we have done shall be erased. so, does all of this really matter?

 

[Sonic247]

I don't know about you, but I am noticing a distinct lack of participation by a good number of "regulars". And I'm also seeing mostly "lightweight" subjects being introduced. This is the direct result of both frustration and fear.

Make a note of this and keep it in mind. When you ban ONE person, especially a regular, there is a far greater effect then the loss of that one person.

That's the way life is though, it's not good but sometimes it works for good. If a Jew confessed they believed Jesus was the Christ they would be kicked out of the synagogue, to a Jew back then that meant losing a whole lot but they did it anyway and people saw and knew that they really believed.

 

[Mister_T]

My decision for staying as a Moderator on RF is perhaps the same reason that I agreed to sign on in the first place: I feel a commitment to the community as a whole, and I sincerely desire to help however I can to maintain an air of openness, tolerance, and respect for all faiths and all people. In so doing, I have made a decision to remain neutral, and to simply try to continue doing my job. My decision to remain is one to try to be of service to RF.

I really couldn't have put it any better than Heather has.

It never was about "picking a side." I'm sad to see that members are viewing this as drawing lines in the sand.

I love this place, and I feel that I can help make a positive difference to RF and work through the issues. Like Heather, I also choose to remain neutral to the conflict. I was terribly heartbroken to see all my comrades resign and they know I respect their decisions and I hold nothing against them.....they, in turn, feel the same about my decision to remain a staff member. My comrades and I are still friends, that has not changed.

 

[Gentoo]

There seems to be perhaps a handful of moderators who are no more.

To those who remain: why?

I stay because I feel that I can still do some good, I want to do some good. Trouble is finding out if I'm actually doing it or if it's all in vain.

 

[Comprehend]

Also, please keep in mind that though you see someone banned, odds are you did not see the mess they left that got them in that position.

I remember before I joined the mod team someone was banned and I wondered why. And then when I joined the mod team it was...rather obvious.

I know that many people here would like more transparency about issues like this, but the question to ask yourself is: Would you like your dirty laundry hanging out there for everyone to comment on?

Absolutely.

I have heard someone ask this question before and having thought about it, I think it would be FAR better having mod actions made public.

It would create a record that can be ostensibly fair and we can all see it is applied fairly. For example, lets say I make a post that the mods deem deserving of a warning. The warning would go into the warning thread like this:

Warning Issued - Comprehend post # 38 in thread _____________
Reason - violation of rule # ______

Two things would happen. Other posters would be able to see what kind of things are over the line and which are not, and they would also be able to see that the mods were applying the rules fairly to everyone.

This behind the curtain stuff only leads to favoritism and abuse.

There should be a public record.

 

[Booko]

It never was about "picking a side." I'm sad to see that members are viewing this as drawing lines in the sand.

I'd really love to echo your thought here, Mr. T.

I don't even get that there are "sides" here. Individuals made individual choices based on their individual circumstances. Yeah, it happened all clustered around a very short time span. But there is no "us and them." There's just "us."

I was unable to remain on the staff for my own reasons. If I thought this was some kind of virtual war, well, I wouldn't bother to be here as a user.

they, in turn, feel the same about my decision to remain a staff member. My comrades and I are still friends, that has not changed.

:hug:

 

[angellous_evangellous]

we are all going to die, sooner or later, and everything we have done shall be erased. so, does all of this really matter?

I dunno.... with this attitude, why do anything at all?

Maybe interaction with other people helps to enrich our lives.

 

[Sonic247]

I actually think there is some wisdom in what he said, it almost sounds like Ecclesiastes.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I didn't feel there was any real reason to leave.

I think the issues in hand can be worked through and a compromise reached.

Thank you. I found that helpful.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The rules here are too strict, and the enforcement of them lends itself to whimsy and abuse by egotistical Moderators. ...

To be honest, were the forums characterized by "whimsy and abuse by egotistical Moderators" I would have been invited to leave long ago.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Marka has assured me that's not the case and I believe Marka is an honest person of good will and intentions.

That was helpful as well.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

we are all going to die, sooner or later, and everything we have done shall be erased. so, does all of this really matter?

It is worth noting that you are a moderator operating on the premise that what you do and/or condone doesn't matter.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It never was about "picking a side." I'm sad to see that members are viewing this as drawing lines in the sand.

If, in some other context, you were to list the many historical figures you find worthy of respect, how many would owe their presence on that list to their willingness to pick a side?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If, in some other context, you were to list the many historical figures you find worthy of respect, how many would owe their presence on that list to their willingness to pick a side?

Great point, Jay.

I'm sure also that these historical figures also ignored certain fights or causes that were unworthy of their attention, choosing sides only where needed and not addressing every piddly dispute.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Great point, Jay.

I'm sure also that these historical figures also ignored certain fights or causes that were unworthy of their attention, choosing sides only where needed and not addressing every piddly dispute.

Agreed.

 

[Buttercup]

I dunno.... with this attitude, why do anything at all?

Maybe interaction with other people helps to enrich our lives.

I could be wrong but I'm thinking BFD might mean all this drama currently on RF doesn't really matter at all in the long run.