Get Yer Ya-Yas Out [FR Moderating Gripe Thread]

[I Am Not A Mod]

LM here.

It's been a while since we had a thread along these lines.

I can tell from comments I am seeing in threads, on abuse reports, and in Freepmail that some people are unhappy with various policies and their implementations by the staff here.

I've seen allegations that certain factions are picked on. I've seen allegations that the moderators have killed activism. I've heard rumors that we killed Kenny, and even that we killed the radio star. I see certain personality conflicts acting up, and know that one (or both) sides in it feel that we aren't doing what we should.

So let's open this can of worms.

This thread is for making your grievances heard. If you think something stinks or is wrong, make your case here. Back it up with facts. Let the audience at large weigh in on your evidence.

I'll read the thread. Jim will too in all likelihood. So will the other moderators. Depending upon how well you make your point, and depending on if you can convince Jim, me, the other moderators, and/or the world, maybe you can change things. And if you don't, then it might make you feel better to have vented, so it won't make this thread a total loss.

I'm not going to reply to this thread for quite a while. Rather, I am going to sit back and watch to try and get a feel for the general tenor. I encourage those who are both happy and unhappy with things to particpate in this thread.

Let's rock.

[Lead Moderator]

"I think FR would be a better off debating conservatives that are evaluating possibilities other than GW Bush."

We have plenty of this. However, we also have plenty of Mobywannabes who sign up, and from day one do nothing but bash Bush and Republicans. That isn't going to fly.

"or deriding fellow conservatives that rightfully question Bush's actions serves only to alienate these conservative voters. (Scalia and Thomas agree that the CFR law Bush signed was an abomination.)"

Conversely, those who are critical of the President often deride those who rightfully defend many of the President's actions, and serve only to alienate those conservative voters.

What Jim and the staff here would prefer is for conservatives to not go out of their way to be obnoxious to each other.

Further, criticism is one thing. As an example, I agree that the CFR law was an abomination. Jim has yet to throw my sorry butt out. There is a difference between criticism and spending all of one's FR time attacking other conservatives and trying to ensure the defeat of Republicans so that the Democrats and their socialist moneymen can destroy the country.

"So, banning the likes of OWK"

A while back, one of the staff here who was friendly with OWK got into a discussion with OWK. If I am recalling how the discussion came about, OWK was stating that he had been suspended in the past for no reason. The moderator said that he had a fairly substantial record of making abusive comments. OWK either said no or prove it or something like that. The moderator posted a sample of greatest hits. OWK immediately turned around and started spinning it as a moderator had tried to embarrass or intimidate him in the forum and how bad we were to be keeping records on people. I think that was when he lost his last defender within the staff. OWK could often make challenging arguments, which was good. But too often he would pepper them, or replace them, with insults.

"The basic question is this: Is FR a republican site, or a conservative, anti-corruption in government site?"

It is what Jim says it is. It is a conservative site. It is anti-corruption. And Jim supports Republicans because he knows that when they lose, the Democrats win, and conservatism loses and corruption wins.

Thanks, LM

[foreverfree]

bump

[Amelia]

Or is it that the type of person that was here in the beginning no longer exists, they have evolved?

Most have evolved. Some are still living back in 1998, but complaining that the forum has gone to hell in a handbasket because everyone else has grown up some....of course, most of the complainers have gone over to the Little Place....

[Lead Moderator]

1) Thesummerwind has asked through other surrogates to come back. I have passed along these requests to Jim with my recommendation, which has been not just no but hell no. In less than half a year that poster compiled a record of abuse that people who have been here since 1997 haven't despite being here 10 times as long. "Gee, I wonder why these folks were thrown out of every country in Europe they were ever in. The "chosen people"..........what a joke." No thanks.

2) I do not know exactly what you mean by SPIKED. If you think that something that was moved to chat, shouldn't have been, hit abuse and ask politely for it to be reconsidered, and explain why. We do reconsider decisions at times. If you are talking about things being removed from the sidebars, vanities rarely belong there.

3) See number 2. I am sorry if you think something being in chat is being spiked though. We are not going to abandon that forum or stop moving things that in the views of the staff belong there rather than the main forum.

4) Thanks.

5) I answered that before, and I hope it helped.

6) I am sick of it too. We reign in the use of them, we get hit with complaints of being heavy handed, the use of them goes way down, then a few months later the use of them goes up and we start pulling them again and the cycle continues.

Thanks, LM

[Amelia]

Isn't Free Republic about exactly that? ...Aren't you, right now, talking about what's posted at another site?

Yeah, Saber...I'm probably LOWER than a LePer...

Oh the humanity! I'll go crawl back in my little hole now.....

[Lead Moderator]

Here is what I see on the top of the pulled thread you are using as a case in point (or rather, that you are talking about in the thread linked by you).

137 ABUSE REPORTS on file for this thread.

This thread has been pulled.

Pulled on 03/15/2004 3:05:45 AM EST by Jim Robinson, reason:

pulled

That is a ton of abuse reports for one thread. And it wasn't just one side, and not all of them were invalid complaints. Jim tired of it after the first few dozens of complaints, and moved it to the backroom. Sometimes, if people are bound and determined to flame away, the best thing to do is to give them that vent otherwise it shows up in other threads. The alternative is to start suspensions and bans. We do that, but it is not the preferred alternative.

Thanks, LM

[Lead Moderator]

I should have specified earlier that I am not really intending to 'answer' software modification requests. I don't have the ability to change the software, and that wasn't the purpose of this thread. Sorry, LM

[Lead Moderator]

I did something similar not too long ago with pulled threads. I stopped because it was a bit of work for me to set up and because I think that the point was made after a few days. I might do it again every once in a while just to give people a glimpse behind the curtain, so to speak.

The banned or suspended posters list is a whole different ball of wax. First, in general the actions we take with a user are between that user and us, or between that user and Jim. Second, Jim's experience in the past has been that such things just invite rounds of second guessing, and we'd end up having to repost all of the stuff we removed that led to the action. Third, there are always the litigation concerns.

So I do not think we are going to go that route. Sorry, LM

[Lakeside]

Gosh, is this thread *still* going? I went to bed after reading it last night and,behold, it is still going strong.

No complaints as to the website----it's great.
But if I may air my pet peeve. It's all those who disparage "newbies". I know some are hit-and-run trolls that need to be dealt with.

However, the ones advocating that all newbies contribute, wait a certain length of time before they start a thread, or even wait a certain number of days before they can post anything. It all smacks of...ahem...snobbish elitism.(Is this when I duck and run?)

I've been lurking since Jan.1998 and just recently signed up so technically look like a newbie,but am really not.

I came out of hiding because of a topic I had special interest in/knowledge of. If I'd had to wait a certain number of days,contribute,etc. the moment would have been gone to respond to some erroneous information.

Other than that I've loved Jim, Free Republic, and all those who make this wonderful site possible.Thanks to you all. FR just keeps getting better and better. And I can say that 'cause I've been following it for years!

Lakeside, the newbie

[Lead Moderator]

Before I left around dinnertime last night, I posted asking you which thread you were referring to. About a half hour later it hit me which one it must have been.

But on to your post.

"From FR's Posting Guidelines...

Does this rule still apply?"

That guideline still applies. A guideline is not a rule. If guidelines should be rules is a question which can be debated and we'll consider the forum's feel as a whole. Enforcement of guidelines varies so that we don't have pulled comments everywhere and banned and suspended posters everywhere and so on. We have a guideline against profanity, and Jim lets a little BS go every once in a while and so do we.

"Because it wasn't enforced in the instance I linked to, does that mean that I can also post excerpts from the same pulled thread, without fear of: a) having my comments pulled, b) the thread I post them on being pulled, and/or c)being banned for breaking the posting rule that was not enforced in the instance I linked to?"

Whenever someone goes outside of the guidelines, the post may get removed at the discretion of Jim or the moderators.

I think it would be instructive to consider the intent behind the guideline. It is to stop flamewars and to keep a thread on topic. I look at the thread you linked, and the first post I see that takes the thread off topic and starts the insults is this one, posted by you. It is completely not surprising to me that things spiralled down after that.

"Another question... ...as the comments (that broke the posting guidelines) on the thread I linked to were cross-posted from a now-nuked thread, why not put the now-nuked thread back up in its entirety on FR - so that FReepers can see, and judge for themselves, the vanity thread that I posted, and the comments - in context - that were crossposted (breaking the FR posting guidelines) by the two offending posters?

I'm perfectly willing to take the heat for every word I typed in that now-nuked thread. I do not regret one word of my comments there. "

Suit yourself. I think that is a mistake, but go ahead.

I'll now take this moment to address some of your recent comments.

The staff here is not here for you to smear as not loving the military or their families because you are upset over certain forum decisions. Please stop.

The crux of why you are po'ed recently, if I am reading things correctly, is that you don't like how activism threads are kept in the activism sidebar and the activism threads favored by the DC Chapter are not put into the breaking news sidebar. The Robinsons had the software modified a while back, based upon the feedback they had gotten, to allow activism to be made its own sidebar. This lets the breaking news be highlighted by itself, and activism to be highlighted by itself. Activism was added as a sidebar to people's accounts. For this change, you have asserted that we have killed activism. That discussion can now continue.

[Lead Moderator]

nopardons, stop insulting people when you reply.

[Lead Moderator]

It is my impression as well.

I hadn't thought of a 'good job' thread, probably out of a fear of jinxing things.

One probably wouldn't hurt.

Thanks, LM

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Thanks, Amelia.

Interesting that the thread is still going. Has everyone gotten the flamewars out of their system?

[Rightly Biased]

Yes I needed that thanks again for setting me straight.
I realized the error of my ways though I changed my mind about the banning(like I had any power anyway;^) at first I was holding a grudge and wanted you gone but my convictions got the better of me and I decided She was here before me who the heck am I.

Regards, nopardons
RB

[Lead Moderator]

lol!!!!

[Lead Moderator]

Can we get Catherine Crier to be the judge?

[Fierce Allegiance]

i have figured out through the moderators help that the server running our network will not allow url's with "chat" in them.

I understand that the way articles are categorized should not be based on the desires of an individual, however, I would appreciate news articles, and commentary thereon, being posted in news and not be relegated to chat.

Have a nice day!

[Lead Moderator]

If you got the rope, why do you need the rope?

[Lead Moderator]

Threads are moved to the backroom when they are flamewars. If people want them to not be in the backroom, they should avoid turning them into flamewars which get them moved.

[Rightly Biased]

It was my fault they'll never put it back.

I need to learn to let things go.