AyupOriginally Posted by Terre Hooks
Banjo and the picker tight tonight
Moderation too severe
Moderation not severe enough
Moderation is right on as applied
Should we keep the Super Moderator
Should we fire the Super Moderator
AyupOriginally Posted by Terre Hooks
Banjo and the picker tight tonight
Bluegrass - Finger Pickin Good!
You and the moderators are why I'm here. I don't have time to play kids games anymore. I like the atmosphere, even when I don't agree. Keep up the good work. Stick around as long as you like, but go fishin' when you feel like it.
By the way, out of the 8,000 members, I've got 4 on my "ignore" list. It seems as though I've missed some of the comments here.
Sawmill Creek is a member supported forum. Click here to donate.
Originally Posted by Terre Hooks
I wouldn't worry about that too much here. It usually gets taken to every other forum where they can make their MARK and let their hair down and look like idiots. The sanctity is preserved.
truer words have never been spoken.
Due to the loser regs at some other Woodworking Forums, I have had the oppurtunity to meet and make friends with many people; professionals, hobbyist, manufacturers and their reps. It is these great contacts that I enjoy hearing "the other side" during these times.
<---- bout forgot.
As a former BP member, I remember many saying that the rules there were too strict. However, it's interesting that when people describe this site and what they like about it, they always speak of the friendly, cordial atmosphere. Why do you think it got that way? Moderation, MAYBE??
Ken, just remember the old saying about "pleasing some of the people some of the time, or all of the people some of the time, or all of the people all of the time" or whatever that old saying was!!
You are doing a great job! Don't let anyone tell you any difference.
Ok. I have to put my foot in my mouth.
Yes, Ken does a good job, as do the other mods. Yes, I believe some actions are overboard. And yes, I believe the TOS *ought* to both reflect current practices if they are going to be, well, practiced, as well to simply be accurate and clear.
However. It is not just Ken or the moderators which make this site what many feel is ideal. It is also the active members choosing to act respectful. All the mods in the world cannot make or keep this place civil. BP and the rec are good examples of polar opposites which can break down either with mods or without. But it may deteriorate from where it is without the mods in active roles.
There is life outside SMC. Sometimes people heap their praises upon SMC to the exclusion of other civil and helpful forums, or sections within them in order to build SMC up. Many here choose not to speak up for this castigation of these other civil sites--I suspect many of them frequent those sites as I do. I have "met" many good people from these other sites.
Well, this thread was in danger of turning into a love fest so I just wanted to say my peace <g>...
Take care, Mike
I have visited a few of those. That is why I am here. They get real nasty, especially when people assume screen names. Really this is a great place to be. Thanks for everything. Regards, BillOriginally Posted by Bob Weisner
Joe, I must say this before I respond. These are just some things to think about. No offense intended. Regards, Bill
Originally Posted by Joe Unni
Youre right this is the BEST forum on the net. Thanks for helping to keep it that way.
If your not in the "in crowd" here, you definitely have to walk on egg shells.Originally Posted by Erik Rudd
So again, I feel I must ask, what is the point of this thread? Is Ken just beating around the bush looking for compliments, or is he really interested in your thoughts on how he moderates? If he is truly interested in your thoughts then why would he state that he will continue to moderate the same as he always has and why hasn't he taken the time to reply to some of your gracious comments.
Not trying to be harsh, just trying to understand the mind set behind the thread.
Fair points Bill. My responses are below. And no offense taken.Originally Posted by Anthony Anderson
Originally Posted by Joe Unni
Please for give me.
The fact that this is even being questioned or discussed seems bizarre to me.
This is a private forum. In what sense do you mean private?
Versus public (i.e. government). They (SMC) can make whatever rules they choose even without a vote. If they decide to ask for input, they do.
The TOS seem pretty clear (though honestly I've not read them). If you have not read them, then how can you say that they are pretty clear?
Fair enough. But I think my next statement quantifies this (albeit no too clearly). I don't know ALL state and federal laws, but not having been arrested tells me that they must be pretty easy to follow.
The fact that I've not had any issues tells me that they are of common sense and civility. I agree with you on this point.
If you don't like it here then simply play somewhere else.
I think as adults that we can accept constructive criticism, that is how we, as individuals, grow and become better. Entities (coporations, governments, and even internet sites) should choose to be no different, as they are ran/directed by people; they can grow, and become better, if they listen to constructive input. To just say "like it or lump it" (indirectly) is kind of a childish and thoughtless way to address an issue, and prevents growth. (I am not addressing this to you, please keep in mind. I am speaking generally.)
Agreed. I think constructive input is the key phrase. I had a boss that used to say, "complaining is just xxxxxxxx unless you do something about it". I guess my point was just this. If you see a problem try to fix it, deal with it, or move on.
If you choose to stay then follow the rules. Not only those of the TOS, but of the basic rules we learn in kindergarten...play nice!! In principle, I agree with this, but hopefully, we are able to think more critically now than when we were in kindergarten. Think of the ignorance if no one questioned anything.
Just a simple way to explain my last response. I tell my six year old when she has a playground issue, that she needs to work though the problem, use her manners and come up with a solution. In other words - play nice.
Last edited by Ken Salisbury; 08-20-2006 at 9:46 AM. Reason: removed profanity
Illegitimi non carborundum
"If you walk, just walk, if you sit, just sit, but whatever you do, don't wobble."
-Zen Master Unmon
To gain additional features, benefits and ad-free access to SMC
CLICK --> http://www.sawmillcreek.org/donate.php
Heh. Well, I understand Ken likes fishing...maybe he's just doing fishing of another kind by starting this thread.Originally Posted by Doug Jones
But I'll give Ken the benefit of the doubt and bank on him genuinely wanting a discussion of moderation here. Which, as I noted earlier, raises a bit of a problem -- we can't really discuss if SMC's moderation is good or bad without first understanding what good moderation is. That is, we have to first establish what yardstick we're using. Otherwise it's just a bunch of guys saying "yup, it's good" or "nope, it isn't," which isn't terribly enlightening.
I had hoped in an earlier post that some of you might share your views on the yardsticks you use in reaching your conclusions. Well, it's Saturday and bound to be over 100 here in Dallas, so I've got time; here's mine, humbly submitted for your comments.
1. Good moderators have a thick skin.
And I mean an actual thick skin -- rolling with the punches. Lots of folks say they have a thick skin, but really don't. It isn't really a thick skin if a mod deletes threads that criticize him or starts polls designed to stroke his ego.
N.B., there are things a moderator shouldn't put up with -- vulgarity, personal insults, that sort of thing. Polite and restrained criticisms of actions taken in his capacity as moderator are one thing; calling him names is quite another.
2. Good moderators reserve thread deletion for narrow, well-defined instances.
Like, f'rinstance, spamming or persistent sock-puppets. Otherwise, thread deletion is just revisionist history, the equivelant of Stalin altering photos to remove Leon Trotsky. Locking a thread is one thing -- it can indeed stop a trainwreck in the making -- and deletion quite another; the latter essentially says "this never happened." But it did.
3. Good moderators give warning before closing a thread.
This is just common courtesy, particularly if a thread has attracted a lot of forum participation -- there are many members who are enjoying the thread (otherwise, why would they be participating?). If a mod thinks a discussion has taken a turn for the worse, he should give the participants a chance to turn the thread around before he cuts off the discussion entirely.
4. Good moderators favor moving off-topic threads rather than thread closure.
If the reason for mod action is that discussion is taking place in the wrong forum, the better answer is to move the thread rather than closing it. This allows the discussion to continue while keeping the thread easy to find.
Closing the thread and suggesting that participants open a new one is problematic because many forum participants won't know to look in the new forum; moving the thread puts a placeholder link in the old forum, so everyone can easily find their way over to the correct location. The placeholder link doesn't get "bumped" to the top of the original forum, so it doesn't clog up the original forum.
Really good moderation goes one step further and bumps the thread to the top of the old forum before moving it -- that way, the placeholder link stays on the front page of the old forum for a little while, making it easier for forum participants to see that it has been moved.
5. Good moderators distinguish betwen vigorous discussion and trainwrecks when closing threads.
This means, in part, actually reading the thread. Passionate discussions are a good thing. They only become a problem when people start insulting one another, rather than trying to reason together.
A good moderator will ask himself "are there personal attacks in this thread," and perhaps try to identify such attacks, before deciding to close a thread. If only one or two posters are doing the attacking, and everyone else is swimming along nicely, he might even consider simply admonishing the individuals involved rather than closing the thread outright.
Nobody wants this place to be another "Wreck Wood." Most folks, myself included, like this place because it's friendly, and good, firm moderation is a large part of that. But a place can be friendly without also being sterile. No one wants feel like they have to constantly walk on eggshells.
6. Good moderators distinguish between criticisms of their actions as moderators and personal attacks.
This is a corollary to #1, I suppose. Just because a poster thinks a mod dropped the ball in one instance doesn't mean that poster thinks the mod is a terrible moderator, and it certainly doesn't mean those criticims should be taken as a personal attack. You can tell a person "you could've done a lot better" without it being an attack on their character.
7. Good moderators respond to reasonable requests about what the TOS means.
And if they can't give a definitive answer, they ask a higher-up. I'd still like to know if "politics" encompasses "government regulation of woodworking devices or the woodworking industry" or if -- as many here think, myself included -- that it is only meant to encompass topics of a typically partisan nature (Iraq, abortion, the Bush admin, etc.).
Well, that's what I've come up with this morning at least. And yes, those items are a reflection of the threads that lead to this one. However, as always, let me reiterate: I think Ken is a good moderator, I respect the work he does here, and just because I think he dropped the ball (multiple times) in his handling of the SawStop threads does NOT mean I think he shouldn't be a moderator here.
As long as I'm making lists, let me make one containing principles for good forum members.
1. Good forum members aren't jerks.
Not really a problem here at SMC, but I think it's the basic standard for good forum members. I admit, this could be refined -- it's a more than a little subjective as written -- but I think it captures things nicely.
2. Good forum members don't constantly suck up to moderators.
Expressing appreciation now and again is one thing; thankless efforts should not always go unthanked. But there's a point where it gets annoying. Here's a guide: if you sound like a 12-year-old girl gushing about the latest boy band, you need to dial it back a bit.
3. Good forum members don't constantly root for the forum.
"WOOOO, THIS FORUM IS THE GREATEST PLACE ON THE INTARWEB!!! THERE'S NO PLACE BETTER!!!! I LOVE THIS FORUM MORE THAN I LOVE MY WIFE!!!!!"
Good heavens, dial it back. First of all, you're preaching to the choir; people wouldn't hang out here if they didn't like it. Second, this isn't a high school pep rally. Third, unless you've literally visited every site on the internet, your statement is uninformed. Fourth, for God's sake, using a bunch of exclamation marks makes you look silly.
4. Good forum members don't make long lists about what is good or bad.
I mean, really, what kind of pretentious wanker would do such a thing?
Last edited by Damien Falgoust; 08-19-2006 at 11:10 AM.
It could also be that Ken has nothing better to do than stir the pot by starting such a trivial thread. Then sit back and watch it unfold and cause even more division or controversy. Because no matter how much you discuss the moderating on this forum and how you think a moderator such moderate, nothing will come from it.Originally Posted by Damien Falgoust
Please don't take this as an anti Ken post, on the contrary, I like Ken, he is quick witted and an excellent woodworker. Sometimes I just don't understand his logic.
Last edited by Doug Jones; 08-19-2006 at 11:28 AM.
KEN IS A DOUBLE AGENT!Originally Posted by Doug Jones
I claim the movie rights.
Doug, I hate comments like that.Originally Posted by Doug Jones
Define “in crowd”. I have been a member of SMC from day one; I think I was the 17th to join. I don’t consider myself a member of any “in crowd”. I try to be civil and sensitive to others feelings when I post and don’t find that too difficult – I worked in machine shops for close to 30 years, I can rant & cuss with the best of them! Sure there are some posts and even some questions that irritate the crap out of me, but if I choose to respond, I am able to respond civilly.
82.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. -- Steven Wright
Please help support the Creek.