A few posters are definately quite selfish and unwilling to accomodate the wishes and needs of others, and instead persistently require others to accomodate there wants and opinions.

I agree that there are a bunch of posters who would LIKE to require others to accomodate their wants and opinions, but they are only successful some of the time -- when they want what enough other people want.

I understand the desire for concrete examples, but let's keep the convresation about tone? Please?

The thing is, I couldn't tell what Rafmun was getting at. Was he speaking in broad-brush tones about how it should be done, or was he insisting that it's gotten a bit too nasty sometimes? Especially when he got to "Beer Bad" level.

ETA: Ah, the joys of crossposting...

I'll tell you something that bothered me, and I'll be specific.

Steph complained that she didn't like having post counts in Press go up so that she had to go see what was up, and then found it was "only" Deathmatch notices. Since she doesn't participate in the deathmatches, they're of no interest--to her. And she didn't want them there.

Several people, including me, mentioned that we saw no problem with them, that we liked being notified of a new match, and that if they were a problem for Steph she could just scroll past--as many of us do for OC rehashes, discussions of slash, other subjects which hold no interest for us, but are of considerable interest for many people on this board. It's no hardship for us to scroll, but apparently it was for Steph.

Plei added her support to Steph, and at that point the outcome became pretty much a foregone conclusion. Elena offered several times to hear alterative methods of posting deathmatch notices. As far as I could tell, the subject was pretty much dismissed, not because it isn't a popular thing with many posters, but because a few high-profile and vocal posters had no interest in it.

Finally, Elena stopped trying to find a satisfactory solution, and simply withdrew. Politeness lost, vocality and a higher profile won.

I'm not discussing whether this outcome was right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out that because some people aren't bred, or trained, or adapted by personality or character to battle, that arguing isn't meat and bread to them, that they don't get an adrenaline rush when they "win" a point, but rather argument drains them, is difficult and stressful and hard, that it's more sanity-saving for these people to accede and accomodate to the rule of the vocal--whether or not they in fact are a minority.

It doesn't make tham amy less worthy members of the board, or their concerns any less valuable, just because they're not brawlers. I'm one of them. And I'm shaking all over and trying to decide whether or not to hit "post." I do not want to stir a shitstorm, and I don't want to alienate anyone. But I can't help what I feel.

Good on you, Beverly, for having the courage to speak your mind.

The discussion stopped on the Deathmatch posts because Elena withdrew them. After that it was moot, no? There was no decision to stop them or to change Press or Beep Me. It wasn't taken to a vote, and Elena could start posting back there again if she wanted. There's no rule against it, and the general consensus was that people were fine with the way Press and Beep Me were being used.

Here's how I saw the deathmatch posts in Press issue: I liked them. Because I'm really really fucking lazy. I'm subscribed to Press, but not to Quotable, so I liked having a handy-dandy link in my face when a vote was going on. However, it is not a hardship to either subscribe to Quotable, or just check out the front page of b.org every once in a while. If there are new posts in Quotable, there's probably a deathmatch on. If not, no big -- I've already committed to wasting time deathmatching, so I don't mind seeing some non-deathmatch discussion. Either way, it's really not a huge deal to me. I thought the anti-post-in-Press people were overreacting, frankly, but I myself did not care enough to advocate either way.

Well, a lot of the time it's more a matter of "why would I go there if it's not fun anymore?". It's a loss of appeal rather than a single act.

Though, I feel safe in saying Jen K, who'd been here long and lovingly, left after a nasty exchange. True, her life had gotten very busy at that time-- but had this place been a haven rather than a burden we wouldn't have lost her.

Boards change. Just like societies change. Whether for good or bad depends on an individual's point of view. It's ridiculous to suggest that this board can remain static and still please everyone.

We'll lose good people due to other issues--real life issues, time-suck, etc.

And I don't see "denial" in any of these exchanges. I do, however, feel like I'm being McCarthied with a statement like this:

"Or perhaps it is because a few very prolific and increasingly agressive posters have succeeded in marginalizing some very long-term members..."

Especially without verification by the disaffected posters.

Honestly, I got the impression that if it had been taken to a vote, that there was enough popular support for deathmatch notices to continue in Press.

However, I'm glad it didn't go to a vote because I don't like micromanaging the board's functions.

Thanks for bringing that up, Beverly. I wasn't thrilled with the outcome of that conversation either.

</dead-horse beating.>