RE: moderation interpretation?

RE: moderation interpretation? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Arpig -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 2:36:45 PM)
Puck off!![:D]

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 2:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Puck off!![:D] Make me, make me, make me! Oh wait, that sounded like a personal attack, and a viscous one, too. Now that the back n forth attacks have been going on for several posts and I've grown tired of it, I beg for moderation. That makes sense, right?

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 2:41:37 PM)
I know, I should quit before he brings that pig avatar back.

LaTigresse -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 2:45:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: If only it was that simple. I'm just giving you a spin..I hope it's nothing serious and I hope you feel better. It's all good. I never take our little banter seriously. The rest.......just regular life shit.

FullCircle -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 2:57:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fetters4U quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Also, Fetters4u, if you are interested in making a scientific count of changing rate of newbie retention on the boards, you could count the average number of total posts made by someone who started an introduction thread in the first three months of 2008, and compare it to the same statistic in the first three months of 2011. The difference is clear. The only thing up for discussion us the reason for that difference. Well, what have been the major changes here since that date? Is that what you are getting at? My point exactly. You cannot compare 6 months with almost 4 years. Simple maths on the numbers won't work. A lot of things I might have posted on or asked, I didn't, because I found them in the archives. Did we have such a complete set of archives in 2008? With time, the number of intelligent questions will drop because the answers are already here. That ignores the new perspectives you might get in the future that might change the whole conclusion to the answers given in those threads (that people like to think of as fixed in stone). Attitudes change therefore so does what is seen as the right and wrong answer to a question. Almost as soon as something is written it's out of date, this is what they say. I always get a bit annoyed by the 'we've answered this, look here attitude'. Yes you have but somebody else hasn't. By the same token there are the questions for which the range of answers is rather more limited and so there's no point going over it endlessly. The problem is I don't know who is right to make the judgment between those two types of things. Since we are all here FR: The largest reason I've never really contributed to the BDSM threads (in answer to those that say my ilk has no right to complain) is that they are largely opinions based. There is no problem with an opinions based discussion as long as what you are aiming for is an exchange of ideas rather than a contest of superior spiritual BDSM understanding. Me contributing more wouldn't fix that because the problem is rooted in how everyone interacts and what they see their role as here (I do read these threads I know what goes on). If I'm going to get into a contest I'd rather get involved in one where there is a clear strategy for winning rather than get bogged down in people saying basically 'oh that is my opinion and in my opinion you are wrong'. When I can be bothered to contribute seriously (not much these days in fairness to my poor attitude) the politics section is a better fit for me. This is largely because you can prove people are talking out of their bottoms with published facts (when I can be bothered to fish for them). Where do the BDSMers go for such facts in their contests? To the ministry of BDSM statistics? I get tired of thinking I'm wrong and it's not healthy to think you know the reason why you love something and then be confronted with the attitudes of others regarding why they think you like it or them saying it's only healthy if you like it for this reason. I don't get involved in that, from the very outset I never really have. I don't need it, I ain't going to bother with it but I might read it from time to time, if something stands out. Also nobody is going to learn anything from me. There is nothing I know that someone couldn't learn for themselves. It actually surprises me sometimes as to what people rate as being precious knowledge that others would simply refer to as common knowledge.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 3:26:21 PM)
FR I don't think I've actually responded to this thread, but I don't feel like going back and checking, so if I'm repeating myself, I'm sorry. The idea that a noob can't get a question answered is just not correct. I have started threads and got lots of good answers and view points. On other threads I have asked lots of questions and always get several answers to each one. I'm 100% positive that the questions I ask are not new and that if I did a search I would find the same answers I get now, but nobody has ever slammed me or anything like that. I've been made to feel very welcome here right from the Intro post we made. I don't think there is anything wrong with the site the way it is really, but its the only such site I've been on, so as usual, I'm not talking from any great experience on the topic. The Mods are very fair in my opinion, but again I haven't been on a lot of other forums, so I don't have much to compare them to. I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. <I went back to check the site a week or so ago and they are gone. Shut down! I admit to feeling very satisfied about that [:D]>

popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 3:39:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather FR I don't think I've actually responded to this thread, but I don't feel like going back and checking, so if I'm repeating myself, I'm sorry. The idea that a noob can't get a question answered is just not correct. I have started threads and got lots of good answers and view points. On other threads I have asked lots of questions and always get several answers to each one. I'm 100% positive that the questions I ask are not new and that if I did a search I would find the same answers I get now, but nobody has ever slammed me or anything like that. I've been made to feel very welcome here right from the Intro post we made. I don't think there is anything wrong with the site the way it is really, but its the only such site I've been on, so as usual, I'm not talking from any great experience on the topic. The Mods are very fair in my opinion, but again I haven't been on a lot of other forums, so I don't have much to compare them to. I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. <I went back to check the site a week or so ago and they are gone. Shut down! I admit to feeling very satisfied about that [:D]> I dont believe the thread was initially about 'noobs' getting answers to questions. But about moderation techniques etc in general you will have been accepted and welcomed, you're female/couple I assume? Females (I doubt) would be viewed as looking for WankFodder outright. Males, it would appear, are. This thread is a good example of derailing being okay... we're no longer talking about the initial subject, and the discussion has been varied. (I have to admit to being lost to a large degree, as comments and posting from 'other' threads have also been raised in here.) as for banning: I was... on this site. No explanation, no reply to question... but hey, thats the nature of the beast, we are told. pD

sunshinemiss -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 3:50:02 PM)
ORIGINAL: BonesFromAsh I wanted to jump in here and take a moment to comment on the above quote. When I joined CM back in '08 (under a different screen name) it was because people like John Warren were posting advice, ideas and topics that addressed actual bdsm-d/s-m/s issues...thought-provoking posts. Now, when I want to read that sort of thing, I admit I do head over to Fet. CM, while still a very cool site, and CollarChat, while still a fair amount of fun, is just that...fun. While I don't expect everyone to agree and get along with each other, I also don't care for the stroke-fest/bitch-fest that many threads turn into here. Not to say this doesn't happen elsewhere, but it does seem to be the norm here. In my opinion, of course. As for the moderation on CM, I agree that personal attacks have been allowed to slide just like attacks on various kinks. I admit I have my moments of falling into this type of attack mode...and I'm not at all proud of it. I guess I'm learning to moderate myself. Just my 2 cents...take it for what its worth to ya. ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I do not believe I have ever read a thread about a topic that you generated. I used to generate questions all of the time. I ran out of them. Therein lies the rub, if you are not generating content as a user, can you blame anybody but yourself that there is no content? Julia, Bones has started quite a few threads - always thought provoking, intelligent threads. They (intelligent, thought provoking threads) tend to die within 3 pages. You don't see them because they don't get the zing and oomph the emotional, attacking threads receive) There are very few real lifestyle threads started in the general discussion area. There are plenty of experts (and i am not counting myself in their ranks) reading the site, but they are not posting. Why aren't they posting? I think many are tired of posting, how many different conversations on this stuff can one have? Sometimes a new slant is posted, and people contribute, but often it is the same debates over and over and over again. There aren't a lot of "experts" out there, so how do we keep those who are interested in this site? How do we attract a smaller and smaller pool of experts to post here? Pay them? What? It's true. I get BORED with the threads that are in my area of expertise. I often stop myself from posting because I know that it is a real and tough issue for the one involved, and I will make light of it, and that is disrespectful and not the least bit helpful. I think there are experts. We just don't let ourselves be known for the thing we are an expert in. Privacy and such. And frankly, the threads are BORING... how many times can you say.... read the guidelines, have you looked at the suggestions that are linked at the top of the page for how to make a decent profile?, communication is the key, no you don't have to accept X if it is not right for you... Anyway, best wishes, sunshine

FullCircle -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 3:53:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popularDemand This thread is a good example of derailing being okay... we're no longer talking about the initial subject, and the discussion has been varied. (I have to admit to being lost to a large degree, as comments and posting from 'other' threads have also been raised in here.) Yeah but isn't talking about moderation boring? Nobody is saying anything they haven't said before in numerous other threads about moderation. Someone will always think they are being treated unfairly and others will always think certain people get a free ride. Paranoia and misunderstanding is part of all relationships, especially ones where one side is a mystery. For me it's about right and it was about right before it changed. I didn't have any complaints I always knew I'd done something wrong when I got the Willy Wonker mail and I tried to change accordingly.

popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 3:55:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FullCircle quote: ORIGINAL: popularDemand This thread is a good example of derailing being okay... we're no longer talking about the initial subject, and the discussion has been varied. (I have to admit to being lost to a large degree, as comments and posting from 'other' threads have also been raised in here.) Yeah but isn't talking about moderation boring? Nobody is saying anything they haven't said before in numerous other threads about moderation. Someone will always think they are being treated unfairly and others will always think certain people get a free ride. Paranoia and misunderstanding is part of all relationships, especially ones where one side is a mystery. For me it's about right and it was about right before it changed. I didn't have any complaints I always knew I'd done something wrong when I got the Willy Wonker mail and I tried to change accordingly. Don't get me wrong FC, I wasn't complaining. pD

needlesandpins -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:00:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FullCircle quote: ORIGINAL: popularDemand This thread is a good example of derailing being okay... we're no longer talking about the initial subject, and the discussion has been varied. (I have to admit to being lost to a large degree, as comments and posting from 'other' threads have also been raised in here.) Yeah but isn't talking about moderation boring? Nobody is saying anything they haven't said before in numerous other threads about moderation. Someone will always think they are being treated unfairly and others will always think certain people get a free ride. Paranoia and misunderstanding is part of all relationships, especially ones where one side is a mystery. For me it's about right and it was about right before it changed. I didn't have any complaints I always knew I'd done something wrong when I got the Willy Wonker mail and I tried to change accordingly. actually FC this thread has stayed on topic for a large amount of it. it's gone off topic as the subject has pretty much been exhausted. i started the thread and have found it very informative both on opinions from others and from the powers that be. therefore the thread has done its job as far as i'm concerned. valid points have been made and i'm glad i started it. if anyone else hasn't liked the thread, found it boring or anything else, well they knew where the back button was enough to leave. off topic sideways or otherwise is all cool. needles

Hillwilliam -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:09:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather FR I don't think I've actually responded to this thread, but I don't feel like going back and checking, so if I'm repeating myself, I'm sorry. The idea that a noob can't get a question answered is just not correct. I have started threads and got lots of good answers and view points. On other threads I have asked lots of questions and always get several answers to each one. I'm 100% positive that the questions I ask are not new and that if I did a search I would find the same answers I get now, but nobody has ever slammed me or anything like that. I've been made to feel very welcome here right from the Intro post we made. I don't think there is anything wrong with the site the way it is really, but its the only such site I've been on, so as usual, I'm not talking from any great experience on the topic. The Mods are very fair in my opinion, but again I haven't been on a lot of other forums, so I don't have much to compare them to. I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. <I went back to check the site a week or so ago and they are gone. Shut down! I admit to feeling very satisfied about that [:D]> Post that poetry here?

HannahLynHeather -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:13:33 PM)
quote: I feel pretty sure whatever the reason is, it isn't hannah. Her outrageo... er.. interesting posts in "As the Collar Turns" were what pulled me into the boards in the first place. fuckin a! fetters is sensible and reasonable sounding, and it was me that fucking drew him here. im fucking good for the site! mary and joseph in the hayloft! i'm a motherfucking asset!! you know what this means don't you? my money's on the leafs to win the fucking cup next year!!

sunshinemiss -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:14:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather FR I don't think I've actually responded to this thread, but I don't feel like going back and checking, so if I'm repeating myself, I'm sorry. The idea that a noob can't get a question answered is just not correct. I have started threads and got lots of good answers and view points. On other threads I have asked lots of questions and always get several answers to each one. I'm 100% positive that the questions I ask are not new and that if I did a search I would find the same answers I get now, but nobody has ever slammed me or anything like that. I've been made to feel very welcome here right from the Intro post we made. I don't think there is anything wrong with the site the way it is really, but its the only such site I've been on, so as usual, I'm not talking from any great experience on the topic. The Mods are very fair in my opinion, but again I haven't been on a lot of other forums, so I don't have much to compare them to. I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. <I went back to check the site a week or so ago and they are gone. Shut down! I admit to feeling very satisfied about that [:D]> Post that poetry here? Nope. She's gonna post it to a poetry contest. Right heather? Right?

FullCircle -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:16:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins actually FC this thread has stayed on topic for a large amount of it. it's gone off topic as the subject has pretty much been exhausted. i started the thread and have found it very informative both on opinions from others and from the powers that be. therefore the thread has done its job as far as i'm concerned. valid points have been made and i'm glad i started it. if anyone else hasn't liked the thread, found it boring or anything else, well they knew where the back button was enough to leave. off topic sideways or otherwise is all cool. needles I'm glad you found it imformative, yes people are free to ignore both threads and individual posts.

HannahLynHeather -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 4:20:32 PM)
quote: Post that poetry here? yeah she did http://www.collarchat.com/m_3640635/tm.htm http://www.collarchat.com/m_3664703/tm.htm

juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 5:04:29 PM)
quote: Julia, Bones has started quite a few threads - always thought provoking, intelligent threads. They (intelligent, thought provoking threads) tend to die within 3 pages. You don't see them because they don't get the zing and oomph the emotional, attacking threads receive) I do not think that is why I haven't seen them 1. I take months off the site, and I may have missed some of her contributions 2. I spend much of my time arguing and name calling and trolling in P&R[:D] 3. From what I gather she posts many things in the mistress section, which I rarely read. I look for threads I can relate to, not threads that are "exciting" because of their train wreckedness

gungadin09 -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 5:19:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather FR I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. Now i'm dying to read the poems you got banned for. Would you consider posting them in the writing section? Ah, never mind. i just read the subsequent post. What kind of lame-ass site banned you for that? pam

Hillwilliam -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 5:21:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather FR I do have one example of a badly moderated site. It was a poetry site, and I joined and posted my two poems. I went back the next day to see if there were any comments, and I was banned. I checked my email and there were no explanations, no warnings, no nothing. Just banned. That's bad, heavy-handed Moderation. Now i'm dying to read the poems you got banned for. Would you consider posting them in the writing section? Ah, never mind. i just read the subsequent post. pam Check out the 2 links on post 296. They're there.

Icarys -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/19/2011 5:32:27 PM)
Nice job on your poetry, Heather.

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875