16-06-2013, 01:50 PM
Andrew, I have opted to answer your post here rather than your email as you have quoted me here. I fully expect some of this post to be redacted but here goes…
I don’t think there is any doubt that this forum is dead compared to the old one. One reason was the naming convention whereby there was an insistence that all posters use their full name and were not even allowed initials. Another is the hyper moderation, I’ve always been a fan of self moderation where in the event a poster crosses the line other posters pull them up for it. The moderators stepping in should be a last resort but on this forum the moderators deleting topics, posts and editing posts is the norm. Something is amiss with that, I do agree that the petty and infantile bickering between the same culprits probably puts people off but it was the same on the old forum and dare I say on any forum.
You point out that you are not trying to direct policy which is fair enough. However, what I will say is that I have seen more and more posts being removed that disagree with a certain poster’s views. The latest one posted by Pat was fair enough and to me asked a fundamental question concerning whether members and non-members should have the same access and rights to post on this forum. I would have thought a more sensible course (if you had to act at all) would have been to move the post to a topic of its own and reminded posters to remain on topic in the Council meeting thread. Deleting posts should not be your default setting!
A little off topic but still relates to the forum. In terms of the non-members vs members question on the forum - from memory I believe Derek posted on a previous thread (apologies if I have got that wrong) that non-members (parents in that case) should be able to view topics and post as the forum is a great resource for information. I believe this was the case with the old forum but the current forum has so few posts and so much moderation I doubt a non member could find any useful information with the exception of the tournament and events sections. In my view, I don’t see why those cannot be public and open to non-members but the rest of the forum be for CS members only. Another reason I believe some of the forum should be members only is that we all post with our real names and sometimes the bile that is spouted from certain quarters can damage people’s names and reputations (including CS’s). Irrespective of how quickly the post is amended or moderated. This is one of the reasons I no longer post as frequently. For me, the naming convention and members(private)/non-members(public) issue is linked - If you want to use real names the forum should be a public/private hybrid and if you want pseudonyms it should be public.
Finally, what I will say is that a certain group of individuals who wish to influence policy seem to be able to have any post removed that they do not agree with. This is concerning, I tend to notice posts and topics disappearing as I check the forum frequently but to the casual poster they probably wouldn’t notice. I recall a post that I complained about which really irked me where someone had insisted my club supported a policy that we did not and it was entirely fictitious but the moderators would not remove it. Then I see a post being removed which wasn’t fictitious had no insult but was not to the liking of a certain poster being removed by the moderators and I begin to question the consistency of moderation and the inference to influencing policy. :\
I don’t think there is any doubt that this forum is dead compared to the old one. One reason was the naming convention whereby there was an insistence that all posters use their full name and were not even allowed initials. Another is the hyper moderation, I’ve always been a fan of self moderation where in the event a poster crosses the line other posters pull them up for it. The moderators stepping in should be a last resort but on this forum the moderators deleting topics, posts and editing posts is the norm. Something is amiss with that, I do agree that the petty and infantile bickering between the same culprits probably puts people off but it was the same on the old forum and dare I say on any forum.
You point out that you are not trying to direct policy which is fair enough. However, what I will say is that I have seen more and more posts being removed that disagree with a certain poster’s views. The latest one posted by Pat was fair enough and to me asked a fundamental question concerning whether members and non-members should have the same access and rights to post on this forum. I would have thought a more sensible course (if you had to act at all) would have been to move the post to a topic of its own and reminded posters to remain on topic in the Council meeting thread. Deleting posts should not be your default setting!
A little off topic but still relates to the forum. In terms of the non-members vs members question on the forum - from memory I believe Derek posted on a previous thread (apologies if I have got that wrong) that non-members (parents in that case) should be able to view topics and post as the forum is a great resource for information. I believe this was the case with the old forum but the current forum has so few posts and so much moderation I doubt a non member could find any useful information with the exception of the tournament and events sections. In my view, I don’t see why those cannot be public and open to non-members but the rest of the forum be for CS members only. Another reason I believe some of the forum should be members only is that we all post with our real names and sometimes the bile that is spouted from certain quarters can damage people’s names and reputations (including CS’s). Irrespective of how quickly the post is amended or moderated. This is one of the reasons I no longer post as frequently. For me, the naming convention and members(private)/non-members(public) issue is linked - If you want to use real names the forum should be a public/private hybrid and if you want pseudonyms it should be public.
Finally, what I will say is that a certain group of individuals who wish to influence policy seem to be able to have any post removed that they do not agree with. This is concerning, I tend to notice posts and topics disappearing as I check the forum frequently but to the casual poster they probably wouldn’t notice. I recall a post that I complained about which really irked me where someone had insisted my club supported a policy that we did not and it was entirely fictitious but the moderators would not remove it. Then I see a post being removed which wasn’t fictitious had no insult but was not to the liking of a certain poster being removed by the moderators and I begin to question the consistency of moderation and the inference to influencing policy. :\
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!