SInce I know it will be commented on, I just want to point out that the board does not have Moderators.
Spike ,'Conversations with Dead People'
Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
The center could stand to keep the wishes of the edges in mind. We're intelligent people and, historically, compassionate ones.
Maybe moderators don't even realize it's happening -goodness knows they're busy enough.
We don't HAVE moderators. We're self-modding. My feet, they stomp, but generally only spoilers or broken HTML.
(content doblerized)
Maybe moderators don't even realize it's happening -goodness knows they're busy enough.
We don't have moderators.
And I think Consuela's questions are the right ones, and what Steph said about people who feel like the answer to #s 1 and 2 is yes.
I would've spoken up, even though I'm also very persnickety
no, you're pernickety (waits for the laughter of Literary posters)
Anyhoo, I think some good points have been made. I think that it's important to note (as I believe David touched on) that when you criticize someone/thing, you have to have some cred to do so. This is why the "newbie" post is not getting as much weight as it might. A suggestion or comment on something else may have been treated differently.
There are people on the board that tend to get a little high handed, or even post things that could be considered rude or offensive. When that happens, I snarl "asshole" at the screen and move on, possibly bitch in my LJ. It's not always possible to like everyone at the party, even though you want to be there.
I snarl "asshole" at the screen and move on
Hell, I sometimes do that to my own posts.
The center could stand to keep the wishes of the edges in mind. We're intelligent people and, historically, compassionate ones.
That can only happen if (1) the peeps at the edges make their wishes known, and (2) accept that sometimes those wishes aren't going to be granted. Stating that it isn't fair that the majority doesn't agree with you is understandable, but probably won't change the opinions of the majority.
I think that it's important to note (as I believe David touched on) that when you criticize someone/thing, you have to have some cred to do so.
Okay, I guess I can't let things die. But when I posted essentially the same thing -- though in a much more aggressive tone -- people stepped up and said "Nope; everyone gets a say." How is what I said so different?
Okay. Need to let it go. Not important. I know the lurkers support me (but via fax, surprisingly).
Consuela's questions
sometimes
maybe
t /not helpful
I would offer that stories of happyland and a board filled with all goodwill are really just not accurate. It seems that everyone feels that way about the board when they first became active, and the gradually and sometimes not so gradually they see faults and then we all eventually enter the realm of cycles of cranky and grumpy.
The center could stand to keep the wishes of the edges in mind. We're intelligent people and, historically, compassionate ones.
But making the people at one edge happy makes people in the middle moderately unhappy, and people at the other edge REALLY unhappy. Ideally, a decision made in the center only makes the edges moderately unhappy. If you know you're on the edge of popular opinion, you have to know that most things won't go your way most of the time.