Status check and poll on recent crack down

[Chameleon Company]

Wendy Wendy !

Here was my post to Lucille:

Lucille asks
So tell me, is courtesy so much to ask?

I reply:
The answer is "no". Is it too much to expect? No. So, what do we do when its not offered? I think we have 80-90 posts on that now.

Here is your reply Wendy:

What do we do when common courtosy is not offered to us?

I for one think we rise above the snide remarks and show that we are the better person.

And there goes that being sarcastic to another member in a post, where are 80-90 post on common courtesty in this thread since we are only on post #96 as I type this?

I highlighted the comment about "sarcasm" Wendy. Going back to my post, the first two questions were asked by Lucille. She had complained that her questions had not been answered. The answers "no" were not sarcastic, were they? The last question was mine, not Lucille's, and was posed as the rhetorical issue of this thread, as demonstrated by my answer. It was not quoted as being Lucille's. I was answering myself. If I was sarcastic to myself, then so be it. Hadn't done that before.

 

[WebSlave]

Rich, not all opinions which are contrary to yours are necessarily an attack on this board or your handling of it. Some of us are contributing to the discussion with what we believe are the best interests of this forum at heart. Why - because we believe it has value, and that if your turn-around is successful, will continue to grow in value.

Sure Tom, I fully understand that. Why it would be like if I went to your house someday and you asked me what I thought of it. So I said I thought your choice of furniture sucked or asked you if a blind man painted your house. If you said you thought your kids were little angels and I disagreed saying that they were unruly monsters, hey it's just an opinion. No harm done. It's not an attack on you, right? Those are only decisions you made and doesn't reflect on you at all...... Certainly you couldn't get offended about those opinions of mine, now could you?

And if I came back every day to tell you those same things, well heck, maybe, just maybe, do you think I might wear my welcome a little teeny bit thin after a while? Just enough that aren't smiling as much when we exchange those opinions once again?

Just a thought..........

 

[WebSlave]

As Sammy said long ago ...... "my sympathies". I do not know where you find the time. I don't know where I do either.

I don't "find" the time. I "make" the time to address things I think are important. Everything I do takes away from something else I should be doing.

I'm sure a lot of people consider me rude in the way I post. That's likely because I try to take the shortest path between two points. Even though the response may SEEM long, I try to pack as much MEANING as I can into as few words as I can. That leaves little room for ego-soothing embellishments. It's a fault I have, I know, but there is little I can do about it.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Rich, I like Simon Cowell. I believe I have been accused of some rudeness here also.

I also just read your post to Tom, #102. I don't know if your analogy about his comments in the thread applies to how some of mine were received as well, but if I were a betting man, and looking at my # of posts, I would bet in the affirmative. Speaking for myself, but believing that I echo Tom as well, I don' think that we ever intended to be disrespectful or rude. Maybe direct at times, as you acknowledge that you are as well, but not in the same character as you pose in your hypothetical, with the visit to the house. If our criticism, and mine in particular, ever sank to the level of the example you made, then there's been an unfortunate, if not horrible, misunderstanding. And all the while, I thought we had done a pretty good job of respectful disagreement. Maybe I am seeing your reply all wrong, but if not, then its back to the drawing board. Wishing you well.

 

[WebSlave]

What my tongue in cheek post was intended to point out is that you cannot criticise the works of a person without criticizing the person.

Providing an opportunity to give opinions is not an invitation to bash away at will or belabor points that have been addressed earlier. I can take a lot, but not infinitely so. I am not asking anyone to be respectfull at all, but asking everyone to not be disrespectfull, and have the good sense and grasp of the situation to know when the horse you are beating is very well dead.

Jim, I'm sorry but your reference to Simon Cowell went right over my head.......

 

[dragonflyreptiles]

Ya know what, HELL is a valid forum, if you Jim are not a member then maybe you do not see the point of it, but its not what I think you think it is.

Yes we can scream yell and cuss but we do it to get things off our chest. Just as you aer doing here, but you are doing it without the screaming, yelling and cussing being so evident. I think most can see your screams and cussing, between the lines, but in HELL you say what you think how you think it when you think it with no points.

Anyone can call anyone anything in HELL, you want to call someone a liar, do it, please, but do it in the correct forum -- HELL

And you were sarcastic, not to yourself but to the reader, ME, and if none else took it that way, I guess its just back to the true thought and emotion cannot be viewed on plastic.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Wendy,

Ya know what, HELL is a valid forum, if you Jim are not a member then maybe you do not see the point of it, but its not what I think you think it is.

Well, maybe its not what you think that I think that you think that I think etc. Wendy, I am comfortable in my opinions about it, and you in yours. I can live with you having your opinions. Can you manage with me having mine? As I stated earlier, I think it detracts from Fauna. If it were gone tomorrow, I would not be crying over its grave. But I will not castigate Rich if its here for eternity. I also have no care to debate it.

Rich ! I am LOL here ! I made an assumption that you watch American Idol, and confess to being one of those who does. Simon is the British judge who is as blunt as they get, and professes to actually be doing all contestents a favor by being brutally direct. He has an immense fan club, and I confess to enjoying him as a breath of fresh air. It was a compliment.

 

[dragonflyreptiles]

lol JIm whatever you say, I have never downed your views or opinions, I junst think you need to step back a bit and think before you pick these battles.

HELL, heck if it was gone tomorrow Id not cry either, I doubt I even have 20 post there, maybe I do, who knows or cares.

Point being, the rules are the rules, PERIOD!

Like em... who cares
Abide by them.... one really should
Sliding by the mods.. a gift that finds the members lacking in the ability to report abuse

All in all, what are you posting for? A less strict system as I can see it.

Pick your battles, those you know you cannot win, drop it, those you think you can win, think twice before speaking, those you know you can win, think 3 times before speaking.

All in all this entire topic is and always was a dead horse.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Paul,
I want you to know that I appreciate our earlier exchanges in this thread. But I have one of those "hypotheticals" for you that, while it may not have you agreeing with me, may at least let you better understand our views (mine, Tom's others). You made earlier posts drawing distinctions between the derogatory nature of being called a "liar" vs. a "nimrod", etc., with "liar" being more of a factual label, and "nimrod" of lesser and derogatory value. You now have Rich's explanation, which I echoed as well. Without the benefit of Rich's opinion and explanation about "liar" here, is it possible that you could have been in a BOI thread and used the term "liar" as you saw appropriate, but in a way that would have been contrary to the rules? Would you have been "surprised" at the suspension and resulting $10 fine, if one had been levied? Might it have caused you some angst? We can be thankful that that little bit of gray is more black and white now, eh?

 

[WebSlave]

Well, maybe its not what you think that I think that you think that I think etc. Wendy, I am comfortable in my opinions about it, and you in yours. I can live with you having your opinions. Can you manage with me having mine? As I stated earlier, I think it detracts from Fauna. If it were gone tomorrow, I would not be crying over its grave. But I will not castigate Rich if its here for eternity. I also have no care to debate it.

Actually my original plan had been to axe the HELL forum completely. But I believe it was Nicolai who suggested that instead of doing that simply charge $10 as an admission fee. Well, heck, what did I have to lose at that point? I thought for certain NO one would pay to go there, but at least I could say I tried that suggestion.........

Jim, no one can even READ the threads within the Hell forum unless they specifically pay to do so or are an Endowment level member. And the only reason I enabled it for the Endowment members is because a couple of them specifically asked for me to do so. So unless someone makes a conscious effort to go to that forum by paying for that privilege, it does not even exist as far as they are concerned. So how can it be a detriment under those circumstances? Even if someone pays that $10 and finds it unpleasant, there is not a person on this planet who will twist their arm to make them go there.

Sure maybe there is a bit of "curiosity killed the cat" involved. But who's fault is that besides the cat's?

 

[Chameleon Company]

OK Wendy ...

As you state:

Point being, the rules are the rules, PERIOD!

Would you like to tackle the situation that I put to Paul, as he clearly saw the rules differently until Rich explained them better? Go back and read Paul's case for the differentiation between "liar" and other terms. Then read Rich's. I guess its just not as clear to some of us.

Thanks for the battle advice.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Rich, thanks for the comments on HELL.

Its your site, and I do not mind exchanging thoughts on it with you, as you are the "horse's mouth", and not the ......

Let me lift your question:

So how can it be a detriment under those circumstances?

Please note that I am only engaging in this as an exercise, and do not have any deep concern or worry. Again, and to the disdain of some, as the proverbial "devil's advocate".

We obviously had similar thoughts about it, as you considered axing it. As for comparing it to the rest of the site, I am basing all on the premise that the only difference between it and the BOI, in terms of viewing or participation, is that it can only be viewed if you pay $10, whereas the BOI can be viewed, yet not participated in, for free. I agree that no one is there by accident. But with $10, its there for all. You cleaned up the BOI because you took a lot of heat. You have said so many times. Whether it be because of the flame wars and the way they hijacked threads, the cursing, or just general childishness of it, you wanted to clean it up and make it more functional in accordance with what you believed was its purpose. If that description was incomplete, feel free to enlighten me, as I value your opinion and insight there enormously. Its a unique perspective.

I would submit that HELL still embodies what you wanted out of the rest of Fauna, but chose to keep in that corner. Maybe not all of your expectations, as the goals of HELL are not the same as the BOI. But for a paltry $10, any kid with a PayPal is there. And then one day, Mom looks over his shoulder, as she has helped pay for the bearded dragon in his room, and maybe even fed it while Jr was at a sleep-over. You have already envisioned and accepted this. I also know that I was a recent subject of personal attacks there, which if one were to see without reading of me elsewhere, does not help my commercial enterprise. Call it what you will, but that thread also had an almost unprecedented "mea culpa" at the end of it, which was no easy bit of maneuvering on my part to influence. It also was pasted into a parallel BOI thread by the author. I defer to her character in no small way for doing it, but without it, its not where Ii would send someone for a character reference, although some spoke well of me. But HELL also has its "downsides" which are now somewat unique to it. I know of two highly respected members of Fauna, who brought credibility to the BOI, but who have now sworn it off because of what they saw in HELL. Whether specific disillusion with certain once-respected folks be the cause, or just overall sickness to the stomach by the other, they told me in PM's and emails that they were outta here. So far, they are too. Can't say they won't come back, but I know it will be in a reduced manner, if at all.
And lastly, my "prostitute" analogy. HELL is the one part of the Fauna society where unethical behavior which is prohibited elsewhere is allowed ...... for a fee. Its the Fauna "red-light" district. As a libertarian leaning person, I happen to have views of prostitution that say its OK if its what you want. I would hope that its just a little bit outside of town though ...... as I don't want to see it, smell it, hear it, etc. That's my answer.

 

[PaulSage]

Paul,
I want you to know that I appreciate our earlier exchanges in this thread. But I have one of those "hypotheticals" for you that, while it may not have you agreeing with me, may at least let you better understand our views (mine, Tom's others). You made earlier posts drawing distinctions between the derogatory nature of being called a "liar" vs. a "nimrod", etc., with "liar" being more of a factual label, and "nimrod" of lesser and derogatory value. You now have Rich's explanation, which I echoed as well. Without the benefit of Rich's opinion and explanation about "liar" here, is it possible that you could have been in a BOI thread and used the term "liar" as you saw appropriate, but in a way that would have been contrary to the rules? Would you have been "surprised" at the suspension and resulting $10 fine, if one had been levied? Might it have caused you some angst? We can be thankful that that little bit of gray is more black and white now, eh?

Jim,
I read and understand Rich's view on the use of the term "liar". I don't believe I've ever called someone a liar. My post (which I now regret even making) was my interpretation of how any name-calling is handled by the moderators based on the warnings that I've seen assessed. Maybe I'm weird that way, but I frequently check people's warning points to see what they got them for. I don't believe I've ever seen someone get points for calling someone a "liar" on the BOI (or anywhere else), but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Wait, I take that back. I did call one person a liar on the BOI. BUT, it was in a thread where I was personally involved, and I was the one lied to. No, that doesn't excuse it, but I felt it was warranted. If it earned me points, I would have felt like a dolt about it for a few days, paid my 10 bucks, learned from it, and then moved on. No big deal.

Now that I know Rich's interpretation of using the word, "liar", I won't use it again.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Paul, I thank you for taking the time. In my own views, I believe that I called someone both a liar and a thief in a thread in 2004. Like you, I had been the target of their actions. I don't believe that I have used it since, but will not swear to it. Like you, I thought it was more accepted here, not because I thought it should be, but just because it seemed to avoid penalties. I made it very clear to Rich when I was fined for referring to someone as a "fool and clown", that they had already been referred to as a "thief and liar", and that I thought I was pulling my punches with my comments. I paid my fine, and got over it. But having been surprised by it, I also took the opportunity to address it here when Rich put up his poll. He solicited it in my view, as he put the questions into the poll. Maybe you would have gotten over it, and maybe you might have voted on our side of the fence ....... its all just speculation.

 

[TomO]

Sure Tom, I fully understand that. Why it would be like if I went to your house someday and you asked me what I thought of it. So I said I thought your choice of furniture sucked or asked you if a blind man painted your house. If you said you thought your kids were little angels and I disagreed saying that they were unruly monsters, hey it's just an opinion. No harm done. It's not an attack on you, right? Those are only decisions you made and doesn't reflect on you at all...... Certainly you couldn't get offended about those opinions of mine, now could you?

And if I came back every day to tell you those same things, well heck, maybe, just maybe, do you think I might wear my welcome a little teeny bit thin after a while? Just enough that aren't smiling as much when we exchange those opinions once again?

Just a thought..........

Another thought.... Your post seems to indicate that you are taking this at a personal level.

Here's another thought...... If I asked you to pay to come into my house, sit on my furniture and be in the same area in which my children played; and then asked your opinion on it all, how could I justifiably take offense at your opnion?

You referred to the quoted post as tongue in cheek a little later, but that does not change the fact that you are asking paying members for their opinions.

I think I am through posting on this one. I support the basic premise of this site, I think it has value, I am OK with the paid membership levels. Despite all this that we have in common Rich, apparently I am standing on a position that offends you. I don't think it necessary to to play on the nuances of how people write to support my point.

 

[WebSlave]

I would submit that HELL still embodies what you wanted out of the rest of Fauna, but chose to keep in that corner. Maybe not all of your expectations, as the goals of HELL are not the same as the BOI. But for a paltry $10, any kid with a PayPal is there. And then one day, Mom looks over his shoulder, as she has helped pay for the bearded dragon in his room, and maybe even fed it while Jr was at a sleep-over. You have already envisioned and accepted this. I also know that I was a recent subject of personal attacks there, which if one were to see without reading of me elsewhere, does not help my commercial enterprise. Call it what you will, but that thread also had an almost unprecedented "mea culpa" at the end of it, which was no easy bit of maneuvering on my part to influence. It also was pasted into a parallel BOI thread by the author. I defer to her character in no small way for doing it, but without it, its not where Ii would send someone for a character reference, although some spoke well of me. But HELL also has its "downsides" which are now somewat unique to it. I know of two highly respected members of Fauna, who brought credibility to the BOI, but who have now sworn it off because of what they saw in HELL. Whether specific disillusion with certain once-respected folks be the cause, or just overall sickness to the stomach by the other, they told me in PM's and emails that they were outta here. So far, they are too. Can't say they won't come back, but I know it will be in a reduced manner, if at all.

Originally HELL was to be a dumping ground for those threads that were on the BOI but got TOO hot from the flame wars going on and no longer felt acceptable to remain in the BOI. I actually thought of HELL as being a punishment for unacceptable behavior and that people would be embarrassed at being thrown there or having a thread thrown there because of their behavior. And it changed over time to become something different several times. But at any time, if someone had predicted that it would be a forum that people would PAY to access, I would have had an aneurism in my brain from laughing at such a foolish thought.

So when I initiated the crackdown on rule violations, HELL no longer became necessary nor needed here. And, as I mentioned earlier, my intention was to just delete it, but with some trepidation, because there were some older BOI threads that had been banished to HELL, that I would have to figure out what to do with before deleting much of the clutter that is in there. And I knew darn right well that no matter what I did with that forum, I was going to catch flak from someone about it. So when I opened it up as a paid access forum, as had been suggested, I thought that it would be up for only a year longer when the one or two (max) people who paid up and joined in would get bored of being there all alone and not renew on the anniversary date. Then I would have been free to cut it loose.

As for people leaving because of it, oh well. People will leave for any reason you can think of. Just as people will come here and stay for the oddest of reasons. If a couple of people leave, so what? If 100 people leave, well, it may take a month to regain that number from new registrations. If 1000 people leave, well maybe something is going on that I need to do something about.............

As long as there are enough paying members to keep this site worth it to me to keep running, then that's all I can really ask for. But quite honestly, after the eye opening lesson with the HELL forum, if this site were to die a slow lingering death because the high ideals I have set for this site are just not compatible with a sustaining number of paid memberships, then I might just throw in the towel and make the entire site one big HELL site. With an optional contribution, of course, No rules, no moderators, no "hands on" from me at all. Matter of fact, I would disable the ability for anyone to even contact me at all about this site. Just cast it adrift and I'll keep paying the server bills as long as there is enough money in the PayPal account to cover it. From what I have seen, apparently some people would prefer this site to be that way anyway.

So, let's just see what happens, shall we? Maybe I am right about what I am doing, and maybe I am not. I'll let you know just as soon as hind sight becomes clear.

 

[WebSlave]

Another thought.... Your post seems to indicate that you are taking this at a personal level.

Here's another thought...... If I asked you to pay to come into my house, sit on my furniture and be in the same area in which my children played; and then asked your opinion on it all, how could I justifiably take offense at your opnion?

You referred to the quoted post as tongue in cheek a little later, but that does not change the fact that you are asking paying members for their opinions.

I think I am through posting on this one. I support the basic premise of this site, I think it has value, I am OK with the paid membership levels. Despite all this that we have in common Rich, apparently I am standing on a position that offends you. I don't think it necessary to to play on the nuances of how people write to support my point.

The "paying" part of what you say about asking opinions is irrelevant. This thread and poll is open to all members, paying and non paying alike, because it affects everyone. But from your analogy, yes, paid or not, you would still be offended personally by my criticism of your decisions. Your decisions reflect on YOU, and you would most certainly take that personally. You may hide it to keep the slight from being publicly seen, but it would be there, nonetheless.

And no, I am not offended at your position at all Tom. Simply pointing out that your premise is flawed. I really don't understand how anyone can be surprised that I would take something I have built and be bombarded by the constant criticism of the way I run it and NOT take it personally. Did someone pass around the nasty rumor that I am some kind of completely detached saint or something? How can I NOT take it personally when people criticise the decisions I have made here?

 

[TomO]

The "paying" part of what you say about asking opinions is irrelevant. ..........
Simply pointing out that your premise is flawed. I really don't understand how anyone can be surprised that I would take something I have built and be bombarded by the constant criticism of the way I run it and NOT take it personally. .......... How can I NOT take it personally when people criticise the decisions I have made here?

The "paying" part is only as irrelevant as the number of paying members participating in this. Unless you were asking for the opinions of only the non-paying members. Any time a person pays for a service or access, there is an implied level of professionalism expected, devoid of any personal agenda.

I could argue that for you to dismiss my premise as flawed shows that you are not separating your personal sensitivities from your business life, and as a result, lose some of the objectivity your position as a moderator requires. What would be the point though? - who gets the last word? Have at it.

Is this board an extension of your business or an extension of your personality? May I respectfully suggest you choose one or the other - for the sake of your own sanity.

You provide a great service. You asked for opinions.

 

[WebSlave]

The "paying" part is only as irrelevant as the number of paying members participating in this. Unless you were asking for the opinions of only the non-paying members. Any time a person pays for a service or access, there is an implied level of professionalism expected, devoid of any personal agenda.

Sorry, but that just does not compute. ALL members here, paying or non-paying, are subject to the rules and the penalties for violating them. There is NO distinction made in how the rules are enforced. So the question being asked by the poll is completely irrelevant as to applying in particular to paying members OR non paid members. It applies to both, equally.

I could argue that for you to dismiss my premise as flawed shows that you are not separating your personal sensitivities from your business life, and as a result, lose some of the objectivity your position as a moderator requires. What would be the point though? - who gets the last word? Have at it.

Which proves my point. This was not started as a business and is not being run as one either. Everything that happens here IS subjective to me. I only list it as a business because the IRS requires me to do so and for legal reasons. But my involvement, participation, and presence here is on a personal level. And objectivity devoid of personal perspective is certainly no requirement for moderation. Matter of fact, I would have to claim that it is a benefit as it humanizes the enforcement of the rules. It only appears to be objective because in most cases, I really don't have a dog in the fight for the threads I am asked to moderate. But when I read a possible infraction of the rules, I subjectively apply the enforcement based on what I personally feel is being said.

As for the last word, well it depends on who decides to not post a reply, I guess.

Is this board an extension of your business or an extension of your personality? May I respectfully suggest you choose one or the other - for the sake of your own sanity.

No one with a small business can separate their personality from it. You are involved in everything on a day to day basis. You ARE that business, for all intents and purposes. Maybe that is changing to a more impersonal role for businesses, but I would suspect that would not be for the best when it comes to just plain GOOD business. Are things different in your area? When I go to the local auto repair place, I speak to the owner. He treats me like I am a neighbor and a friend. He makes me feel I can trust what he does because he is personally interested in my well being. That's why I go there. Now if you are talking about a WalMart, well yes, you are probably right. And certainly they make a lot of money, which is probably good for them, but I wouldn't particularly call that "good" business ethics.

As for my own sanity, a pretty strong case could be made that no one sane would put up with everything I have done and still do for this site. So perhaps you are correct.

You provide a great service. You asked for opinions.

Yes, and yes. I am trying on the former and think I am making a string of mistakes on the later......... But is my asking for further opinions really just the opening of the door for the criticism? Or is that a door that is best closed and locked?

 

[PaulSage]

As for my own sanity, a pretty strong case could be made that no one sane would put up with everything I have done and still do for this site.

Shoot, I'm not even sane and I know I wouldn't be able to put up with everything you have. It never ceases to amaze me. You're either a glutton for punishment or you have excellent time management skills!