# Moderators and controversy



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

It is sad but it seems that some moderators hardly post here and when they do...it actually causes more controversy than actual moderating.

To those who have the power, feel free to delete or lock this thread as you deem fit. [V]


----------



## Mikey (May 22, 2007)

Seems to me that some members just can't read and other members (mods and members)can't take criticism.


----------



## penhead (May 22, 2007)

Actually Dario, you make a very good point and I agree with you, at least to a certain point.

Because that 'moderators' hardly post here is a compliment to the membership itself.


----------



## gerryr (May 22, 2007)

I don't understand why the topic about the blank Ron got from Eagle was locked.  The entire discussion was completely civil, until a moderator jumped in and basically accused Ron of trying to stir things up.  I don't believe he even read what had been posted.  Where was a moderator yesterday when Jeff drug the topic about Scott's site off topic.  I tried to get it back on topic, but it didn't work and Scott said it was OK for it go off topic.  It seems that the business of staying on topic is not fairly or evenly applied.

And now, questions are being asked in a locked topic so nobody can reply.


----------



## GaryMGg (May 22, 2007)

John,

If you hadn't jumped in to "cover" Curtis' back (which he didn't need) the thread wouldn't have been locked. It was going well and was a valuable discussion. Heck, it's the EXACT thing many of us want -- the ability to discuss frankly. That blank is a magnificant piece of work way beyond the current level of expertise most are attacking. When you talk about raising the bar, there it is. So don't stifle it! []

Gary


----------



## jeff (May 22, 2007)

Let's hear what you all feel is effective moderation.

I am fine letting topics run if that's what you all want. This place doesn't exist for the personal enjoyment of me and the mods, it's a community. These are small issues largely unrelated to penturning, but they generate a lot of annoyance for everyone. Let's figure out how to stop it. More moderation? Less moderation? No moderation?


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

Moderator's job is not enviable (atleast not by me)...it is a tough job since you can NEVER please everybody.  For that I laude the moderators for taking this "thankless" job.

Jeff asked on the other (locked) thread what is "acceptable moderating"?  I am not in any way qualified but I will try to throw some of my ideas.

1. Rowdy as this group may become...they are actually mature people.  Treat them as such.  Let them play sometimes. []
2. Sometimes venting is actually healthy.
3. Do not act until "blood is actually drawn"...you will be amazed how other people realize and accept responsibility for their mistakes before this is reached.  It is a learning process and sometimes it helps some to go through it.   Others learn by watching too.
4. Threat usually causes more trouble than good.
5. Profiling is a useful tool...but do not over use it and generalize too much.

As I said, you have a difficult task but someone has to do it.  Where to draw the line is a vast gray area...but even with that, it is clear to me when it is drawn too far left or right.

As mentioned by others...I've seen a few threads I thought would be locked but never did and some that were locked that shouldn't.


----------



## gerryr (May 22, 2007)

Jeff,
I don't believe there is a "one size fits all" answer.  Moderation is fine, but it needs to be done fairly and evenly, not selectively.  Curtis's post was, as far as some of us are concerned way off base.  He apologized for it and I think the issue should have been settled at that point.  Why John jumped in there is anyone's guess.  It wasn't necessary, unless his intent was to lock the thread so nobody could discuss Eagle's blank.  The way that topic and the topic about Scott's site came across is that it's OK if some people take a thread off topic but it isn't OK if others do it.  That leads me to the conclusion that there is bias on the part of some moderators toward some people, be they members or not.


----------



## Randy_ (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br />I don't understand why the topic about the blank Ron got from Eagle was locked.....



Apparently you didn't read the whole thread, then.  This had nothing to do with the discussion of eagle's blank and everything to do with a few people who could not control their mouths after being asked and warned to stay on topic.  It was really pretty straight forward.

1.  Ron posted about a blank that was given to him.
2.  A bunch of comments about the blank.
3.  Mod's ill-conceived comments.
4.  Member's criticism of mod's comments.
5.  Mod's apology.....<b>which should have ended it right there!!!</b>
6.  Continued discussion(negative) of mod's comments
7.  Very polite request by second mod to get back on topic..........<b>which, again, should have ended it!!!</b>
8.  Request ignored buy several members.
9.  Thread locked.

If some guys aren't going to respect and honor the reasonable requests of the moderating staff, I would speculate that there will be a lot more threads locked.  Some people just don't when to let go!!!


----------



## cozee (May 22, 2007)

A moderator's job, is at times, making a decision on things which must be judged soley on perceived intent and purpose. If the thread in question was solely based on the discussion of the blank then why wasn't it appropiately named as such? Clearly the title was not intended to draw one in with an intent to discuss the blank. Yes, the topic was named after the one who created the blank and could feasibly be worked into the discussion but since said creator cannot post here to answer questions concerning the construction of the blank, seems there was more than meets the eye behind the intent. 

I have been one who has been banned from this board yet here I am. I have no grievences against any of the actions taken and do applaud those who acted in such a way as to help protect this board. It is clear that no bias was imposed within the decisions which let to my time off. As members, when we registered, we supposedly read and agreed to the terms of the usage of this board. Granted, some get so legalistic as to agrue over a single word or term which they attempt to use ase their loophole. But if one were to see these rules in the spirit for which they were written, then we would all understand when a moderator steps in. I as much as anyone have no problem with a more open sense of government here at IAP but do fully understand the intent behind not allowing things to get out of hand and personal.

To Jeff and the rest of his staff, I say keep up the good work. You cannot nor will never be able to please all the people all the time. I for one am more than willing to comply by your requests so as to help maintain a level of commeraderie which brings enjoyment and enthusiastic participation from every member.


----------



## JimGo (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br /> Curtis's post was, as far as some of us are concerned way off base.  He apologized for it and I think the issue should have been settled at that point.  Why John jumped in there is anyone's guess.



I have to agree with Gerry on this.  With all due respect to John, Curtis appologized for his comments and, althoug a few people were still taking him to task for it (a bit of a dead horse at that point, but...), it seemed like the topic would move on.  I was surprised to see the thread locked when I logged in this morning, and even more surprised when I read it.

That being said, I think the moderators generally do a heck of a job keeping things civil here and my hat is off to Curtis, John, Scoot and especially Jeff (and any other mod's who I may have forgotten - that's a sign that things are going well here - I can't even remember if there ARE any other mods!).  Sure, they screw up every so often - but which of us doesn't?  I like to see the mods contribute - for example, Curtis and John have a lot of good experience and knowledge that they're willing to share.  I'd hate to lose that simply because they have taken on the added responsibility of being moderators, and even if it means that they might do/say something with which I disagree.  As long as there are other mods to help moderate the moderators, and as long as Jeff gives us (the members) the opportunity to voice our opposition to what the moderators do, then we'll continue to have a productive "society" here.


----------



## Randy_ (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Dario_
> <br />Moderator's job is not enviable (at least not by me)...it is a tough job since you can NEVER please everybody.  For that I laude the moderators for taking this "thankless" job.....



It appears that you were one of the "unpleased" this time, Dario.  When I read your opening comment, my first thought was to wonder why Dario was stirring the pot and opening an old wound.  To reopen a subject that has been closed and "laude" the mods in the same breath strikes me as being contradictory??


----------



## alamocdc (May 22, 2007)

Just me thinking out loud again. If you read the description of Casual Conversation as labeled, it reads "Off-topic, general chat". My question then is this; can an off topic post really be taken "off topic"? I mean, it was there to start with. In the few years I've been a member here, a huge number of us have been a party to taking a comment and chasing rabbits (and even poking fun). Only rarely was the original poster unhappy with the playful banter that followed, and the vast majority of these have been good laughs for us. Other OT posts of an instructioanl nature have even been taken in a new direction all together leading to more learning and instruction. We've even seen posts in the other forums go this way. If there is something to be learned, we learn it. If there is a laugh to be had, we have it. If the original poster requests that the thread be brought back to it's origin, we should all respect that. The only thing we should not and cannot tolerate is an outright personal attack. Yes, we've had some of these, unfortunately, but they've been dealt with accordingly. Has the moderaton been perfect? How could it be? Our moderators are people and people make mistakes. This too is a learning experience, and hopefully such mistakes will not be repeated. FWIW


----------



## gerryr (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Randy__
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



I would say this post is off topic.  And yes, I did read the entire topic, I was involved in the discussion.


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

Randy,

So we all have to stay on topic everytime?  When I talk to my friends, one thing usually leads to another...I think that is very healthy.

Did they attack anyone that warrants locking that thread?

The members posted/expressed how they felt about it in a controlled manner anything bad about that?  Moderator or not, we all should know when we are wrong and admit it.

As Jeff said, this is a community...I think we have to evolve beyond "stick to the topic" if we want to grow.

I agree with Gerry...fairness is the key.  There is another penturning site I used to visit, but because I saw some "preferential treatment" towards other members.  Honestly, I wasn't directly affected but I cannot take that so I decided to leave (silently).  I heard through an email that it is "fixed" now but I haven't visited that site back yet...maybe in the future.


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Randy__
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



Randy,

Yes, I am one of the not so pleased people on the current happenings.

Is it wrong for me to laude them for the good job they did?  
Should I concentrate on this last (not so good) experience?  

Maybe it is the way for some...but that is not me.


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

Jeff,

From http://www.penturners.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24461&whichpage=2



> _Originally posted by jeff_
> <br />Just curious...
> 
> Was Scott's site better in some way or just "different" ??  I can understand the appeal of somewhere new and different, but was there some fundamental difference between there and here? jeffj12 said "There was a good exchange of ideas, good company and some great looking pens." and isn't that exactly what we have here?
> ...





> _Originally posted by LEAP_
> <br />Jeff, Scotts sight was very much like this one, just a little different atmosphere. Kind of like a bunch of good buddies who are also co workers. At work they enjoy themselves have a good time, exchange ideas, swap tall tales etc. You get the picture. After work some of them gather for a few drinks, things loosen up a little jokes flow more freely and conversation tends to take a different direction. Scotts sight was kind of like the IAP after the second scotch. The posters seemed more willing to loosen their neck ties and joke around with the smaller group. I would imagine it was much like the early days of the IAP. Thanks to you both.



I think this is what we need added to make this BEST forum even better.


----------



## Randy_ (May 22, 2007)

If you removed all of the police from the public highways, there would be enough drivers who totally and excessively ignored the speed limits that the roads would be exponentially more dangerous than they are with the "moderating" of the police.  Many human beings are just adverse to following rules if they are not enforced. 

I have seen several unmoderated(or lightly moderated) boards and they are highly unpleasant places to visit.  Typically, it is only a small percentage of the population that has little or no self-control and little or no regard for their fellow members; but that small group can unleash an enormous torrent of unpleasantness that corrupts the entire forum.

As far as I am concerned,if there is any fault to be assigned to the IAP moderating policy or staff, it is the fault of being too lenient with the application of the rules of the board.  I would hazard the  opinion that for every thread that is locked or edited, there are ten that should have been and weren't.

I, for one, am reasonably happy with the way things are run here.  To those who are unhappy, go back and read the rules that <b>"YOU"</b> agreed to when you signed up.  If you don't like the rules, talk to Jeff about it <b>PRIVATELY</b>.  Then, if you can't convince him that a change is necessary, you have a choice to make.......abide by the rules or go elsewhere.  

It's really pretty simple??


----------



## DCBluesman (May 22, 2007)

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!  I just read a response to the now "infamous" and still locked thread simply titled "Eagle".  It seems that some are still privileged and can post to the thread, even questioning another post, and the thread be impossible for others to respond to.  THIS IS EXACTLY THE DAMN PROBLEM!   





> Hi Lou - What would be "non-censoring" moderation, if a simple "keep it on topic" is not acceptable? It seems to me that ANY moderation implies SOME level of censorship.
> 
> Of course, one purpose of moderation is to control behavior, such as personal attacks. We try (and sometimes fail) at that, but beyond being referees, what IS acceptable moderation?





> What exactly is the purpose of this thread except to stir up trouble and muddy the waters???? You guys know that the whole Eagle thing is very controversial here at IAP and that Eagle is no longer a member here due to this controversy. What are your trying to accomplish by this thread?



What are the standards?  I know Curtis has rescinded his unfortunate comments and I can accept and respect that, nonetheless, John and you are indicating that there is something evil in invoking Eagle's name.  In it's own way, that is making a personal attack.  Because you own the site and CAN control it, doesn't mean that you (or your Mods) SHOULD control it.  We are not a bunch of grade schoolers who need to be told who is "in the clique" and who is "out."  Those who choose to reply to a post like Ron's can have any motivation that suits them.  No one took a shot at anyone until the Mod Squad did.

Non-moderation?  Well, let me tell you, Jeff, this kind of moderating makes it a very unappealing site.  I have been a member for quite some time and although you clearly believe that I am part of the problem, I believe that your current solution needn't exist.  Let topics run as long as they do not become direct and personal attacks.  Either that or adopt a "we moderate what we want" position.  Let the membership understand the intent.  We can all make decisions regarding our participation if we know the rules.  And if the rules are clear and evenly enforced, there will be no need for these topics and discussions.

Again, this is my (NEVER HUMBLE) opinion.


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

Randy,

No one ever talked about going unmoderated (except Jeff on a question). If there is then I missed it.

I respect you a lot but I for one am glad you are not running this forum based on your statement.


----------



## its_virgil (May 22, 2007)

I've gone back and read the thread several time...very carefully. I do not read any post as being disrespectful to a moderator. Critical..yes, but  the criticism was not disrespectful. If criticism is disrespectful, then I can complain about several disrespectful posts where one (several) of my pens was criticized. Is questioning the action of a moderator being disrespectful to that person? How can a topic that is already in an "off topic" forum be taken off topic or how can any civil discussion in that forum be deemed not "on topic"? I'm confused. I know, several will agree. We have had very little need for moderator involvement in the past few months...that says something about our members and their behavior. We are getting along quite well. What should the moderator's involvement here be? I can't answer that question. But, we've been doing quite well as of late. Thanks for all of the participation here. It is a great place to hang. I hope it continues to be so.
Do a good turn daily!
Don


----------



## jeff (May 22, 2007)

Lou - I am sorry. I don't mean to be part of the problem. I did not notice that the topic was locked until after I asked for your response. I was not trying to create a problem or make a problem worse. Please accept my apology.

There is nothing evil in invoking Eagle's name. Invoke away. 

I was not under the impression, and maybe that shows that my head is in the sand, that over or under moderation is a widespread problem at this site. I have not had feedback that this is a "very unappealing site" 

You ask that the rules be "clear and evenly enforced". That's a good goal, but as long as humans are in the loop, there will always be subjectivity in the interpretation of rules. One man's "direct and personal attack" is another's joking around. 

We TRY, we really do, to be even handed, but just like the posters, we're human. Sometimes we make mistakes. I would like the opportunity for us to correct those mistakes without labeling the entire site "unappealing".


----------



## cozee (May 22, 2007)

Perhhaps those who cry wolf the loudest should be given the opportunity to moderate for a while so they can experience what goes on behind the scenes that most do not see!!!!


----------



## ctwxlvr (May 22, 2007)

Moderation is a necessary evil, if a forum is not moderated it soon dies, or becomes so trashed it is no longer useful for its intended use.

The Moderators here on IAP have a hard job to do, and I do not want that job as I have the same problem at one of my sites, about 10% of the people cause 99.9% of the problems. 

To answer Jeff's Question as to what type of moderation is needed, it needs to be moderate, fair, and equal. 

Simple guide lines I use for moderation:

1. any moderator can lock a thread, after it is locked no one can post to that thread unless it is unlocked by the site admin.

2. moderators will pm the site admin upon locking a thread, the admin will them pm all mods asking their opinion on if the thread should remain locked. replies expected within 24 to 36 hours.

3 site admin will make his decision on evidence, history, and recommendations from mods.

4 if necessary site admin will archive the thread and lock any thread pertaining to archived thread, intended to start up the problem again.


----------



## gerryr (May 22, 2007)

I would still like to know why the topic was locked.  And I don't for a minute believe it was because it was off topic.  Lots of discussions go much further off topic and nothing ever happens.  What made this different?


----------



## DCBluesman (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by jeff_
> Please accept my apology.



Accepted, Jeff, and thank you.


----------



## Dario (May 22, 2007)

I think "very unappealing site" is such a strong statement and I disagree.  This is still my favorite site/forum and like most (or everything)...it still have room for improvement. []


----------



## LEAP (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Dario_
> <br />Jeff,
> 
> From http://www.penturners.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24461&whichpage=2
> ...



Dario I find life always flows smoother after the second Scotch.[]


----------



## PenWorks (May 22, 2007)

I love the smell of napalm in the morning [] Feels good to clear the air every now and then. []
I mean this subject comes up almost as often as How do I apply a CA finish or which mandrel do I use.
We seem to learn nothing from history, just ask George W.

I for one don't think the site is over or under moderated. Seems to be very civil most of the times. We all know this was coming anyways, with the closing of TPWU and just the mear mentioning of Eagle. How many thousands of threads are started vs how many actually get locked? I would have to guess the percentage is under 1%. I for one am not going to debate wether the topic should have been locked or not. Not my call, that is why I would never want the job of a moderator. Goes back to something good ol Abe said about pleasing people most of the time but not all the time. 

I still enjoy IAP ALL the TIME []


----------



## JimGo (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by DCBluesman_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



THIS is one of the best examples of:
1) why I keep coming back here;
2) why I don't feel we're over moderated; and
3) why I have a lot of respect for both of you.


----------



## gketell (May 22, 2007)

oi I don't want to get into the middle of this but...

Jeff,
from a newbie's point of view, if a thread is going to be locked/severely moderated just because of the mention of some person's name with the claim that "that is controversial" then there needs to be a public list of controversial, to-be-avoided topics AND A REASON FOR EACH.  Otherwise you are just laying land mines for those of us who weren't around to have learned it directly.

Having joined after the Eagle fiasco and having no idea what it is about, this all seems pretty ridiculous to me.  Once upon a time I posted a pen and in the post thanked (among others) Eagle for his inspiration.  That was sent to him and he contacted me.  As part of the conversation he told me he had been banned but, like the   gentleman, would not say why.  Personally, just looking at his craftsmanship I think having him on here would be a great asset to the membership.  I know I've learned a lot just looking at his pens and far more in the ONE conversation I've had with him.  I can't imagine how much further along I would be if I actually got to interact with him on a daily/weekly basis.

From these two threads I've surmised/assumed (with all that implies) that the controversy was due to one or more personality conflicts.  To me, this is neither a reason for banning nor for moderating messages from OR ABOUT the person.  If you don't like someone, tough, as long as they are not breaking the written rules you have to deal with them as fairly and equally as you deal with everyone else you do like.

I like this site very much.  It is one of only two pen sites I visit.  This thread, and the "Eagle" thread have knocked it WAY down in my respect.  Personal interaction is what a social forum (and all forums are social forums or it would just be a file full of tutorials) are about.  If people are penalized for being social, that is a bad thing.  On the other hand, penalizing people for being anti-social is appropriate.

Sorry for the rambling thoughts.  It sort of came out as it came into my mindlessness.

GK


----------



## Paul in OKC (May 22, 2007)

Randy,  I agree with both of your post. We all agreed to rules when we signed up. If we can't follow them, or even take a 'nudge' when the mod gives it then.... But we are all human.  Using Eagle's name in a post just saves the time of someone asking, "Where did that come from." Eagle is one of the most talented people I know. 
All that aside, Jeff, you do a great job, and I wouldn't want it for nuthin'. This is the best place to hang out, IMO. []
 (And if every one would let me have the last word for once, this can be over now!![])


----------



## Mudder (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Dario_
> <br />Jeff,
> 
> From http://www.penturners.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24461&whichpage=2
> ...



Dario,

Looking at the site stats, Jeff has over 1800 posting members, I had just over 150. Not a real good comparison.

I would suspect that 600 of these IAP members are ones who post regularly, I on the other hand had probably 35 who posted regularly. I don't think that any valid comparison could be made because I remember the IAP being a much more tight knit community back when I joined in August of 2004 and there was less than 1000 members.

One simple observation that I have made and I have been guilty of this on a few occasions so it's easy to recognize.

What usually happens with threads such as these is that we have some who will let emotion overtake logic, feelings get hurt and grudges are harbored. My main philosophy when I started my site was to let EVERYONE start with a clean slate and hopefully the ill feelings would  be set aside. My signature line said "Check your attitude at the door". Unfortunately, I realized that I was beginning to lose sight of my principle and it was brought to my attention in a painful way that I was harboring grudges from things that happened on other sites. How could I continue? 

There has been more than 67000 posts on this site and the vast majority have been good ones. I may not always agree with the moderators or the admin of the site but I am thankful that they are here.


----------



## gketell (May 22, 2007)

Mudder said:
"I may not always agree with the moderators or the admin of the site but I am thankful that they are here."

100% agree with this!!  Jeff, et al, Thank You.

GK


----------



## airrat (May 22, 2007)

Wow,  I guess it is sad to say just the mentioning of Eagle's name still stirs up emotions/controversy.  I never enjoyed the controversy but I did enjoy seeing his work.  Time to move past seeing the name and just keep going.

I don't always agree with the moderators, but its not an easy job.  

My question is what are we looking for?
Moderation in all threads?
Moderation in moderation only on certain threads?
Complete anarchy in all threads?
Complete anarchy in only certain threads?


----------



## GaryMGg (May 22, 2007)

My $.02:

Jeff Brown and your moderator team:
Thanks. I think y'all do a great job and while I'm rarely disappointed as I was with the locked thread, I respect the job y'all do AND thank you for the great site you provide. I've met and made a lot of new friends here.

A criticism or disagreement with another is not disrespect. It is communication. At times, it may be necessary to disagree in order to find a comfortable, common ground. In fact, there are times when folks must agree to disagree.

I believe Jeff Brown has made it clear in his writing that he desires that the level of moderation guiding this forum be satisfactory to it's members and he has asked for our input. I have nothing specific at this time to add to that. I'm still thinking and if I feel I come up with a useful contribution, I will send it to him. Ultimately, I will abide by any and all rules that he puts forth as I'm in his home.

Gary


----------



## DCBluesman (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by DCBluesman_
> Well, let me tell you, Jeff, this kind of moderating makes it a very unappealing site.



Time to fall on my sword.  The site is not unappealing or I wouldn't still be here nearly 3 years after joining.  While I enjoy the forum and have OFTEN said that it is the best "forum" I have ever experienced on the internet, it is the referenced "moderating" that is unappealing.  I certainly meant no disrespect to the IAP.  Without it, I would not be a pen maker today.


----------



## YoYoSpin (May 22, 2007)

Bravo...


----------



## mick (May 22, 2007)

There was a thread not too long ago asking how it was that so few folks were posting lately. Personally I think it's things like this that deter a lot of people from posting or commenting on something. They don't want the hassle of something they've said being misconstrued or misunderstood. Everyone has an opinion....or a certian way of looking at things. I've figurately bit my tongue...or fingers many times when I'd read something I thought was way out of line or over the top. I think many of the "old regulars" do the same. It's just not worth it. We come here to further our craft. To learn and share. To show off a great pen, or ask why something didn't turn out the way we planned. We log on to ask for thought and prayers, to share small victories and joys of everyday life. We are a community, a neighborhood of mostly like minded individuals here to do all of the things I listed above, not to go through what has happened in this and the other thread. Yes we're gonna have disagreements, no we'll never all see things the same way....even though there's a rumor that Frank is turning "plastics" now. Although this thread has cleared the air, apologies were made and accepted it's still not what we come here for....let's get back to that. Ok I'm done now!


----------



## Jim in Oakville (May 22, 2007)

Moderating a forum is not always an easy thing to do (I moderate on a WW forum, trust me, it's more than what you see on the screen) , some times the obvious is obvious, some times you have to back off to see the trees....I think the people who offer their time and personal reputation do a great job.  

One thing I will say about the IAP community, I have seen other forums flare up and turn into septic tones.  The core here often are very level headed and on the rare occasion where emotion gets one of us, we usually have the common grace to apologize and it's always accepted.  IAP has made me a better pen maker, IAP has introduced me to many good friends.


----------



## Blind_Squirrel (May 22, 2007)

> _Originally posted by jeff_
> <br />Let's hear what you all feel is effective moderation.



My suggestion:  One moderator for any given thread.  If a moderator is posting for the reason of moderation in a thread the other moderators should respect the decision(s) of that moderator.

Another suggestion that would help the moderators do their job:

If a comment was not directed at you (a member) then keep quite about it!  Let the person that the comment was directed at handle the comment in the way they see fit.  If you just _can't_ let the comment go by, report it _via PM_ to a moderator or Jeff.


----------



## clement (May 23, 2007)

Hi all,
I've read all the posts in this topic and in Ron's topic about his blank, I will not post about this because I wil stay neutral ( as you know in Belgium we have two different communities and we are familiar with compromises [B)])
But I like to tell you something ;
This site is a great site ! When I take my membership I don't no if I should stay long on this place, but now every morning when I go to my computer I log in and read the new posts.
If I had no membership here, probably I should never have turning one pen. It's thanks to what I read here that I'm now able to do that. I'm not a great penturner, my turnings are more bowls, vases and other turned pieces. But what I can do in penturning I learned it here.
I had also the opportunity to meet nice people, ready to share their skills with others, I've made a couple of friends too.
I wish we could have in Belgium a forum like this, but our country is too small. That's the reason why I'm member in other forums around the world. There are good ones, like here, but there are others where it's not funny. Here is a lot of activity, every day new posts, while on some other forums you have a post from time to time.
We are all of us just men with our opinions and statements, let us just stay what we are here, WOODTURNERS []
Have nice turnings,
clem


----------



## MesquiteMan (May 23, 2007)

OK Guys, there is an exchange over in the Eagle thread that shows how difficult it is to moderate a forum.  Here it is.  I have removed teh names so no one thinks I am picking on anyone.  Obviously you can go to that thread and see who it is.



> _Originally posted by ****_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



My first reaction as a moderator is to remove the first person's post as being potentially inflamatory.  However, for those who do not believe anything should be removed unless it is a direct personal attack, what would you do?  

The first person relaying his experience.  Is this a direct personal attack?  Should a moderator such as myself delete it or let it stay?  Please overlook the names of the players and look only at the meat of the message.


----------



## Dario (May 23, 2007)

Curtis,

As far as I see it...it is still just an exchange of information/views.  Nothing there constitute an attack (yet).  I know it is closing a potential flare up but as I said...most of the time people actually know to back off before it reaches that point.  Shows my faith to this group which maybe misplaced [}] lol.

I think what we need is an aggressive campaign to educate members what acts are not acceptable...then implement the punishment (ban if needed) for violations.  As Jeff said...it takes 2 to tango...hit all that participates.  I don't think too many will take the risk...we love this place too much []

Just make sure that the punishment is equitable AND implemented fairly to everyone.

BTW, this can also solve the Critique forum question...let it open for everyone, just let them know the rules and consequences for violating the rules.

If this works, you will hardly have to do much moderating...we will self police...the way it should be to begin with.


----------



## jeff (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Dario_
> <br />... I think what we need is an aggressive campaign to educate members what acts are not acceptable...then implement the punishment (ban if needed) for violations.  As Jeff said...it takes 2 to tango...hit all that participates.  I don't think too many will take the risk...we love this place too much []


Dario - nice idea, but someone will ALWAYS be unhappy with the interpretation of the rules or the punishment, and it is absolutely, positively impossible to take out the personal relationship component of that. Once that happens, the "friends of the punished" or the "friends of the victim" band together, email me and the mods or pile on in the forum.  

We have a bunch of rules, but a lot of them boil down into one thing: No personal attacks. DEFINE THAT! It's impossible because everyone has a different idea of what it is. Until you can break that down into absolutes, including what words you can string together in what particular order, you will always have people who disagree with the rules or the interpretation. 

I've gotten several emails in the last few hours from people who say they read personal attacks in some of these recent topics. Do you see them? I don't, but others do. So, right this minute, several people are unhappy that I'm not banning this or that person or sending emails warning them to leave someone alone. You guys have no idea how much time this takes and how frustrating it is.


----------



## Blind_Squirrel (May 23, 2007)

It may not be an attack, but unless person two ("This IS the type of post that's NOT NEEDED") is a moderator I would say they are over stepping.  Let the moderators moderate.


----------



## GaryMGg (May 23, 2007)

FWIW, Cozee and I will discuss this as adults because we can control our tempers and emotions and maintain respect for one another even if it turns out we end up disagreeing.
We may or may not agree, but if we disagree, we will do it amicably.
I sent Jeff a PM <b>AND</b> I posted part of my rationale because I wanted to discuss it openly with Greg. This community needs to make a decision as to whether we will stick to the craft OR discuss the crafter. I say the crafter is off-limits because NO ONE has thick enough skin to deal with it.

How many of you guys have witnessed fights on other forums because two guys who were friends were giving each other sh*t and a stranger jumped in to defend one of 'em?!?

Scott, I see your point yet I don't know if I can agree because I agree with Dario that we as a community should help keep things right. The moderators and Jeff can tell me if I'm over the line and I will abide by the rules.

Regards,
Gary


----------



## dfurlano (May 23, 2007)

Community Standards.  That is what defines the boundaries.  

Unfortunately the desire to not offend anyone (or not to feel offended) leads to very restrictive acceptable behavior. To the point that even if you do not realize you were insensitive towards someone that lack of knowledge does not diminish your fault.

Maybe we need sensitivity training?


----------



## ed4copies (May 23, 2007)

As a small business owner and salesman, I receive "sensitivity training" every day.  If I SAY the right things, people BUY from me, if not, they don't.  So, if I like eating and sleeping under a roof, it's best to learn "sensitivity".

I received an e-mail last night referring to sensitivity training, as large business/government requires apparently.  Believe me, the statements made by the e-mailer over time would NOT entice me to think he holds ME in very high regard.  

I'm not sure I have said this publicly, but I believe that you can SAY anything you want to about me.  While I may resent it, I have the option of IGNORING it.  It takes TWO to make an argument.  And, as I have said to numerous people, YOU can't throw a rock and HIT me!!!  So, my physical well-being is intact!

Jimmie Kimmel had an interesting quote the other night.  A "nastygram" had been sent to him, stating he was uneducated and stupid (or words to that effect).  He read the piece publicly, then showed it.  There were misspellings!  He simply countered with, "When accusing someone of being uneducated, it is best to spell the words correctly, or your meaning can get lost!" (paraphrased, my memory is not that good).

As we used to say, "Consider the source!"[:0][:0]  No rocks will hit me, let people SAY whatever they wish.


----------



## JimGo (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by jeff_
> [brI've gotten several emails in the last few hours from people who say they read personal attacks in some of these recent topics. Do you see them? I don't, but others do. So, right this minute, several people are unhappy that I'm not banning this or that person or sending emails warning them to leave someone alone. You guys have no idea how much time this takes and how frustrating it is.



I'm glad I don't have your job!


----------



## PenWorks (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by JimGo_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



Agreed. []

What I have a hard time understanding and maybe because I am a little old school is, when I grew up in my house, I knew the rules, it was pops rules or the door. Being the youngest, I learned a lot easier after seeing my brother get knocked out by pops! My kids grew up under the same rules, My rules, the door or the back yard and we settle this. 

We are losing sight of whose house this is. Who are we to question the owner and how he runs his business. We visit this site and enjoy it for what it is. You don't like, you know where the door is.


----------



## ed4copies (May 23, 2007)

Anthony,

Jeff TRIES to accomodate the "majority".  I applaud his efforts.  But, the "Rules", like all rules, are subject to interpretation.

That's what keeps the court system in business - INTERPRETING the "perfectly clear" legislation that made the RULE.

Jeff tries to be legislature and court system all in one - it ain't easy!

And, Jeff, while we sometimes disagree - I respect your efforts.


----------



## Dario (May 23, 2007)

Jeff,

What if you create a "jury" panel from the members?  Maybe you make an initial pool and then randomly select from that pool for each case.

You and the moderators bring the case to the "jury" who in turn will basically decide whether the alledged offender is guilty or not and decide on the appropriate punishment (by majority vote say).  You implement after (the executioner []).

I think if the group knows that a good jury is formed, there will be less forming of a rouge "pack" later whatever the outcome is.

Just a suggestion.


----------



## gerryr (May 23, 2007)

Dario,

What's a "rouge" pack?  Is that a pack of something women used to put on their faces?[]

Sorry, the debil made me do it.[}]


----------



## Dario (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br />Dario,
> 
> What's a "rouge" pack?  Is that a pack of something women used to put on their faces?[]
> ...



I think you got that right [:I]...you "rogue"! [}]


----------



## chitswood (May 23, 2007)

The answer to all the problems here is very obvious, and it deeply suprises me to know that none of you thought of it before I, but I suppose my heightened inteliganse cannot be helped.

You see, we must kill Eagle, and burn all his pens, all his projects, and his ideas. Only then will we reach the perfection that we all seek so selflessy and fairly.

It's a brilliant solution! However, none of you have the foresight and leadership to realize the wonders that can be shared by an electric chair. 
C'mon, admit it, after seeing his mixture of imagination, craftsmanship, and dedication, you're all worried that Eagle might be able to worm himself out of the, erm, solution and come back at you with a vengance.
Isn't that right, Dario? I know why you've never suggested Eagle's demise, don't tell me you never thought of throwing him into a pool of angry sharks.

To be honest, I think much of the blame can be put on one of our most deceptive members and leaders, jeff for example, who's always trying to uphold the peace. *sigh* What is the internet coming to? Equality? Justice? Moderation? What the heaven would we accomplish with that kind of thinking?
It was Jeff's fault that this Eagle controversy stuff started anyways. If he'd just thrown Eagle into a black hole like I suggested way back then, all of this could've been avoided...

The Mods...
You know, always on their feet, ready for a problem or argument that will start up, always waisting their time...
If they'd simply let the problem explode, then we the decent members of IAP could ban together and kill the obvious controversial members.

But NOOOOOOOOOOOOO, we gotta have mods that worry about the feelings and dignity of others, weak mods that apologize just when a beautiful storm has been triggered. 

Really, I thought this was the IAP, I'm terribly dissapointed in many members whom I would purposfully name simply to generate bad feelings, but it's become obvious that the mods have gone soft and might shut me down. 

Terribly dissapointed... 

I'm gonna get you, Eagle, and your pretty pens too!


----------



## ed4copies (May 23, 2007)

This comment courtesy of "the young and the restless!"[:0][:0][:0]


----------



## RogerGarrett (May 23, 2007)

Can someone point me to the original thread which was locked?????  I am fascinated by this discussion - but I can't find the thread that started it all.  I need to be well-informed!

Thanks.

Best wishes,
Roger Garrett


----------



## Dario (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by RogerGarrett_
> <br />Can someone point me to the original thread which was locked?????  I am fascinated by this discussion - but I can't find the thread that started it all.  I need to be well-informed!
> 
> Thanks.
> ...



Roger,

It is unlocked now.

http://www.penturners.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24549


----------



## RogerGarrett (May 23, 2007)

Thanks Dario,

I read all five pages.

Fascinating really.  Just fascinating.

I was a member of a listserv that was moderated only to the extent that if someone said or did something that could be determined illegal - or they just kept spamming, then they were booted.  There was no such thing as a locked thread.

I rather like this format better.  

But regarding the particular thread - no opinion.  They've all been given, and mine wouldn't mean anything to anyone.

That really was a cool pen blank.

BTW - can someone point me to the original thread regarding Eagle and his departure?  Is it in the archives?  I didn't even know he left.  But maybe I should have - since I haven't seen a post from him in a long time.

Darn - he was always nice to me!

*sigh*

Best wishes,
Roger Garrett


----------



## jeff (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Dario_
> <br />Jeff,
> 
> What if you create a "jury" panel from the members?  Maybe you make an initial pool and then randomly select from that pool for each case.
> ...


I've thought about that approach. In fact I've had a rough outline of how it would work sitting here on my desktop for a while.

One thing I notice is the rapid pace here at which (1) things go wrong, (2) people expect action. It takes time to work through the jury process. I guess the solution would be to post a note in a topic when it's locked indicating that it's being looked at. I'm sure even THAT would annoy some people. 

Regardless, that's probably the direction we should head. It would give us a little more structure, which could provide a little more legitimacy to the process of discipline, and take the load of me [8D]


----------



## chitswood (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by ed4copies_
> <br />This comment courtesy of "the brilliant and the intellectually gifted!"[:0][:0][:0]



Jeff runs a great site, and while things do get nit picky and uncomfortable, (%99 of the time caused by a button called "enter" being hit too soon) as Curtis showed, he is ready to apologize for a simple overreaction.

The mods hit it a bit too quickly THIS time, and besides the apology, it's no big deal anyways. 

There's no reason for you mere mortals to make the mods look like the bad guys, there are plenty of us exceptionally smart and very good looking people here to do that. 


BTW, that's a nice churchhill on the homepage, Roger.[]


----------



## RogerGarrett (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by chitswood_
> BTW, that's a nice churchhill on the homepage, Roger.[]



Son of a gun - didn't even notice they featured it on today's homepage.  Thanks for the heads up Derek!

Regarding moderators - I kind of like Dario's idea regarding a jury.  The membership could vote on the "jury" membership after nominations are made once every 6 months - with no opportunity to continue after one term (6 months or a year) - until another term has gone by - and then be voted back on.  But this is a moderator's headache to oversee.  Trust me - I serve on both university wide and department wide committees - elected and appointed - at my university.  What a political quagmire! [xx(]

Whatever is decided - it might take some time to set up.  But - I agree with the majority on one thing - this is an issue that should probably be addressed.  However - one very cool thing about this website is that the moderators are asking the questions and open to suggestions - and the membership is responding openly, honestly, and eagerly.  This is a sign of a VERY healthy membership - and that only comes from good moderators and good members.  Pat yourselves on the back folks!

Best wishes,
Roger Garrett


----------



## RogerGarrett (May 23, 2007)

Wow - I tried to edit my last reply - because of an error in my suggestion - to clean it up a bit - and I receive a message that I may not edit my post in this forum.

What the hell is THAT all about???

Best,
Roger Garrett


----------



## ericw95 (May 23, 2007)

It is a timing thing.  I think you have a minute or two to edit a post within a topic.  If you are the thread owner, then you can always edit the original post.


----------



## jeff (May 23, 2007)

Forum time limits have been in place for almost a year. This is very typical on many forums. It helps preserve the integrity of the flow of conversation by not allowing people to go back and change the intent of their post. That has been a problem here in the past. We've had members get ticked off and go back and delete dozens of their posts as a parting gift to the rest of us.

The edit time in casual conversation is 30 minutes. That's usually enough to recognize an error and make the fix. That said, I realize that in some cases, honest mistakes don't show up until later. Unfortunately, the software time limit is across the board and can't be overridden or set for a single user. 

I will gladly make editorial (but not basic content) changes in a post if you'll send me an email.


----------



## DocStram (May 23, 2007)

_Parcus in temperantia_   ....... Moderate in Moderation


----------



## GaryMGg (May 23, 2007)

WRT a jury of our peers and the speed at which things happen I suggested something earlier elsewhere that may be reasonable IF the software allows you to do it.

Some forums have a notification button that sends a message to the moderators with the thread in question auto-linked.
So, IF something like that can be programmed to the interface as an Alert and IF let's say 5-6 users send the moderator team an alert, the thread is auto-locked and hidden until the moderators can look at it and deal with it.
This could work because only the moderators and the individual sender know that an alert has been sent. With all the different personalities here, what's really that chance that so many of us will find something offensive or an attack unless it is?
Even if we err, we err on the side of caution.
The thread can be easily brought back if none of the moderators sees a problem.
Moreover, if some user{s} disabuse the alert button -- that is, chicken little hits the panic button too often -- it's disabled for their account. No one else has to know that's happened (unless they make it publicly known).

It's just more code. [}][]

Gary


----------



## jeff (May 23, 2007)

> _Originally posted by GaryMGg_
> <br />It's just more code. [}][]


That's Funny!

I will be installing such a mod soon. Not the multi-submission part, but an easier way to report a questionable post.


----------



## jeffj13 (May 24, 2007)

I'm not sure that I agree with the jury idea.  I think that a forum like this works best as a dictatorship.  Jeff has done a masterful job of running and maintaining this site.  I am comfortable submitting to his authority.

jeff


----------



## Dario (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by jeffj13_
> <br />I'm not sure that I agree with the jury idea.  I think that a forum like this works best as a dictatorship.  Jeff has done a masterful job of running and maintaining this site.  I am comfortable submitting to his authority.
> 
> jeff



I do too...but the jury idea was supposed to lift some of the "weight" off Jeff's (and the moderators) shoulders.  Please read his post prior to that one.


----------



## Rifleman1776 (May 24, 2007)

Frankly, Dario, I'm still surprised that you even started this thread. You are known as one of the most stable, level-headed, practical and nicest people on this (or other) forum(s). The subject was bound to set off a firestorm. I don't see the point. It is what it is. Jeff 'owns' the site and that closes the door to most further discussion on who and how it should be run. Jeff and I have disagreed several times but I always am sensitive to the fact that he runs things whether I like the way he does it or not. With a few exceptions, I do like the way he runs things. As you know, on another forum (not a pen forum),that we both belong to, the moderation is an effort of a team of three. The members 'own' the forum. But, in reality, there isn't much difference in the outcome.
I respectfully suggest that a "Fini" be put on this thread as, IMHO, it serves no purpose.


----------



## Dario (May 24, 2007)

Frank,

I did think before posting this...and maybe made the wrong decision.

My rationale is that if there is a problem it has to be addressed.  Most of the time I will stay silent but I do care for this forum a lot and (in this case) for me is not right (again maybe I am mistaken).

I will repeat that despite the recent events, I still believe this is the best forum around (which I consider my cyber home).  I am in no way challenging Jeff's way of running it.

Would I act similar on a different forum given the same situation?  Maybe not...maybe because I don't give as much care there as I do here but mainly because I know Jeff listens and that is one reason why I chose this forum as home.

I felt this way about another forum before...but had to move and leave my friends because it doesn't feel like home anymore.  Over the years, i've lost contact with so many friends.  Moving is my loss really, and would hate to have to do it again. 

Like the Eagle thread...I hope good thing(s) come out of this one too. [^]


----------



## gerryr (May 24, 2007)

I think Dario is correct in starting this, if he hadn't someone else probably would, like me.  The topic that caused this was locked, so there was no way to discuss what went on, other than start a new topic.  I think there's been a good exchange of ideas, and I don't recall anyone telling Jeff that he has to change how the site is run.  There have been some suggestions, but that's all they were.  The site belongs to Jeff so he can do what he wants with those suggestions.  If you don't like the subject Frank, you don't need to read it.


----------



## wudnhed (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by clement_
> <br />Hi all,
> I've read all the posts in this topic and in Ron's topic about his blank, I will not post about this because I wil stay neutral ( as you know in Belgium we have two different communities and we are familiar with compromises [B)])
> But I like to tell you something ;
> ...



Except for making the bowls, I feel exactly the same way.  Thanks Clement and thanks IAP[]


----------



## DocStram (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Rifleman1776_
> <br />Frankly, Dario, I'm still surprised that you even started this thread. You are known as one of the most stable, level-headed, practical and nicest people on this (or other) forum(s). The subject was bound to set off a firestorm. I don't see the point. It is what it is. Jeff 'owns' the site and that closes the door to most further discussion on who and how it should be run. Jeff and I have disagreed several times but I always am sensitive to the fact that he runs things whether I like the way he does it or not. With a few exceptions, I do like the way he runs things. As you know, on another forum (not a pen forum),that we both belong to, the moderation is an effort of a team of three. The members 'own' the forum. But, in reality, there isn't much difference in the outcome.
> I respectfully suggest that a "Fini" be put on this thread as, IMHO, it serves no purpose.


Frankly, Frank, I'm surprised that you're frankly surprised that Dario  was frank enough to start this thread.  Whether Dario is one of the most stable, level-headed, practical and nicest people on this forum isn't the issue. (Doesn't Cav hold that honor??) Accusing Dario of "starting a firestorm" is, in itself, worthy of starting one. Besides, since when does "seeing the point" of a thread matter?  Some of the best threads in IAP started off without a point.
Get the point?  
 []


----------



## wdcav1952 (May 24, 2007)

Hey Al, long time no "see"!  Since you've been gone I've been told I'm not even intelligent appearing! []  Thanks, JimGo. []  I may be considered to have a flat head, but a level one is questioned in some corners. [8D]


----------



## ed4copies (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by wdcav1952_
> <br />Hey Al, long time no "see"!  Since you've been gone I've been told I'm not even intelligent appearing! []  Thanks, JimGo. []  I may be considered to have a flat head, but a level one is questioned in some corners. [8D]



How could I have missed that????[:0][:0][:0][:0]

I always try to agree with JimGo whenever I can!!!!![][][]


HMMMMMMmmmmmmm.[}][}][][]


----------



## gerryr (May 24, 2007)

Ed,
You were off hawking some more plastic, trying to draw even more people to the "dark side."[}]


----------



## ed4copies (May 24, 2007)

Oh, then I was using my time WELL!!!

Almost forgot: I second the "HEY DOC, good to see you!!"[][][][]


----------



## wudnhed (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by ed4copies_
> <br />Oh, then I was using my time WELL!!!
> 
> Almost forgot: I second the "HEY DOC, good to see you!!"[][][][]



Ditto, and miss ya Doc!


----------



## Randy_ (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br />I think Dario is correct in starting this, if he hadn't someone else probably would, like me.  The topic that caused this was locked, <b>so there was no way to discuss what went on</b>, other than start a new topic.....



Seems like both you and Dario missed the point, Gerry!!  The thread was locked precisely because the administrators determined that the discussion was or would become disruptive and they "WANTED" it discontinued.  You will remember that a mod even politely asked for members to limit the discussion to the original topic...a pen blank...and quit mad-mouthing the mods and their decisions.  And you will also remember that the request was ignored by a few individuals who felt they were above the rules.

On some forums I frequent, there are explicitly stated rules that reopening discussions in locked threads is forbidden and violators are subject to immediate banning and on many other forums it is an accepted if unwritten expression of respect for the decisions of the moderating staff to let sleeping dogs lie.      

IMO, Jeff has shown remarkable restraint and tolerance for a questionable decision by Dario and suspect that it was a coin toss as to whether or not this thread should be locked and some private warning issued and I suspect that Dario probably got the benefit of the doubt because he is a well respected member of IAP.

In retrospect, I will acknowledge that this thread has produced some good discussion and members have been reasonably well behaved.  That fact, however, does not change my opinion that reopening the discussions in locked threads is discourteous and disrespectful of the decisions of the moderating staff.  I don't know that this wasn't done, but I think that the only circumstance under which a locked thread should receive a second hearing is after a "PRIVATE" request to the administration is made and granted for permission to do so.


----------



## Dario (May 24, 2007)

Randy,

I understand all that you said and you have very good and valid points.  

As I said before, I thought of it and knew that by doing so, I am sticking my head out potentially on harms way...still I believe (then and still does) it is better to start this thread than not.  In essence, I didn't miss the point in that regard and I became a "rogue" in my own way (Rebel with a cause? []).  Believe me, the intent is good though.

People may have vented a bit (me included) but in the long run...I believe it is for the better.


----------



## jeff (May 24, 2007)

A lot of sleeping dogs should be left alone, but this wasn't one of them. 

Do I like controversy? Not particularly. Do I want this place to operate the way the members want it to? YES, absolutely. Sometimes it takes a Dario to get everyone to throw their cards on the table. I knew that his intent was not to start a huge battle, but rather to discuss. I am sure that if it had gotten out of hand, he would have been one of the first to step in and calm things down. 

The situation where someone opens up a new topic on a closed subject for the sole purpose of seeing the fireworks gets handled differently. Maybe it's an arrogant viewpoint, but I think I can tell the difference between that and what Dario did here.


----------



## gketell (May 24, 2007)

And that is exactly why we all love IAP, Jeff.

Thanks to you and your team for being such reasonable and open folks!!

GK


----------



## gerryr (May 24, 2007)

Since Jeff has already posted a response to Randy, I will restrain myself.


----------



## wdcav1952 (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br />Since Jeff has already posted a response to Randy, I will restrain myself.



I'm with you on this, Gerry.  The only thing I would add is that Jeff posted outstanding response to Randy.


----------



## RogerGarrett (May 24, 2007)

If there is one thing I have learned in nearly 20 years of teaching in higher education, it is that, regardless of university policy, such policy is only good if it is enforced with zero tolerance.  The problem is that zero tolerance is rarely a good thing - it doesn't allow for the nuances of every unique situation - complete with every nuance and twist.  Thus, zero tolerance is rarely invoked, and, when it is, it is rarely enforced!!

Of course we should respect and respond to a moderator's request.  But we don't do that always and in every instance - because it is contrary to the free association of ideas, thoughts, and opinions.  Sometimes, sa in a court of law, protocol is broken to assert a point that is necessary - and, as with a courtroom, a judge (a human being) will take a moment to consider the break in protocol.  It happens a lot.  In fact, it happens ona daily, probably hourly basis!  Therefore, the idea that "reopening the discussions in locked threads is discourteous and disrespectful of the decisions of the moderating staff" may be correct by the rule, but it is contrary to normal, everyday, human interaction - at least normal in a free and open society.  And frankly, it is contrary to even those situations which demand that such rules be followed (courtroom).

Dario's post was well accepted by all because he has a reputation of careful, thoughtful, considerate behavior over a long period of time.  That track record gives him more flexibility and more leeway than a person who has not demonstrated such positive behavior.  Why?  People want to trust - and they will trust someone who has been around a long time and shown consistent postings.

The old cliche', rules are meant to be broken, comes into play simply because it always will.

Best wishes,

Roger Garrett


----------



## JimGo (May 24, 2007)

> _Originally posted by ed4copies_
> <br />
> How could I have missed that????[:0][:0][:0][:0]



Here ya go, Ed...wouldn't want you to miss out or anything...
http://www.penturners.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24584&whichpage=4


----------



## wdcav1952 (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by JimGo_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...




OK, it is time to dust off the attorney jokes!!!!!!!!!!! [}][]


----------



## Rifleman1776 (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by gerryr_
> <br />Since Jeff has already posted a response to Randy, I will restrain myself.




Yer no fun. Stick a needle in and wiggle it. [:0][]
Actually, I see very little point in this whole discussion.


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (May 25, 2007)

I been reading this thread with great interest and I guess it's time I chime in, especially since it was my topic that may have started this.

When Curtis stepped in and questioned the reasoning behind me posting Eagles pen blank his timing was perfect. I explained my intent and he took action that he thought was necessary. That is what Mods are supposed to do.

It is interesting to note that the topic took twists and turns and evolved into an interesting thread.

For the most part, the majority of the people who visit here are mature and know when to walk away form a conflict. 

IAP is a good place to hang out.


----------



## jeff (May 25, 2007)

Ron is right on. That topic and this one took interesting twists and exposed some things that might not have surfaced otherwise. I really appreciate that.

We're going to engineer a few changes in the way things operate here to address some of these issues. One thing we are going to TRY to do is put more consistency and structure behind moderation and in the rare cases when it's needed, discipline. This is something I've been working on for a long time, but other issues keep pushing it down the list.

I'll keep you all informed as we progress toward a these changes. I think you'll like where we end up.


----------



## wdcav1952 (May 25, 2007)

Heck Jeff, I like where we are now.  This is one of the reasons I like to hang out here.  You listen to feedback and keep improving the site.


----------



## ed4copies (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by wdcav1952_
> <br />Heck Jeff, I like where we are now.  This is one of the reasons I like to hang out here.  You listen to feedback and keep improving the site.



DITTO!!!


----------



## GaryMGg (May 25, 2007)

Hell, I thought both you two just came here 'cause your gluttons for punishment. []


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by ed4copies_
> DITTO!!!



I thought you where a copier salesman, dittos are old technology, get with the times!


----------



## gerryr (May 25, 2007)

That was a good one, Ron.[)]


----------



## ed4copies (May 25, 2007)

Laughed so hard I turned "Ditto purple!!"

(Only the REALLY old farts will get that one - like Ron!!)


----------



## Mudder (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by ed4copies_
> <br />Laughed so hard I turned "Ditto purple!!"
> 
> (Only the REALLY old farts will get that one - like Ron!!)



Although I was alive when Kennedy was president I don't consider myself an "old fart". Just remember one thing Mr. Brown (with the exceptionally light Durango) no matter how old I am, I'll never be as old as you.

http://www.officemuseum.com/Ditto_Model_E41_div_of_Bell__Howell.jpg


----------



## DCBluesman (May 25, 2007)

I'm old enough to remember when they were called mimeograph machines - and I, too, have suffered the ignominy of purple fingers!


----------



## gerryr (May 25, 2007)

What, has this become an "old" contest?  I remember 5 cent Coke in 6 ounce bottles from a machine that was full of cold water.  Top that![]


----------



## JimGo (May 25, 2007)

Wow Gerry, I saw those things in the Coke museum!


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (May 25, 2007)

Do any of you guys remember the smell of a <s>ditto</s>  mimeograph machines?


Gerry, I pumped gas when it was 19.9 cents a gallon. I was required to clean both the front and rear windshield of every car that pulled in and ask if they want me to check their oil. My boss would have a canary if he didn't see me open the hood of every car.

I even remember when there was 9 planets, but due to the current budget cuts and layoffs, we now only have 8!


----------



## gerryr (May 25, 2007)

I remember that smell.  It was, uh, unique.[xx(]


----------



## alamocdc (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Ron in Drums PA_
> <br />Do any of you guys remember the smell of a <s>ditto</s>  mimeograph machines?
> 
> Gerry, I pumped gas when it was 19.9 cents a gallon. I was required to clean both the front and rear windshield of every car that pulled in and ask if they want me to check their oil. My boss would have a canary if he didn't see me open the hood of every car.
> ...



Ron, I only knew them as mimeograph machines. And the smell of freshly mimeographed papers was one of my favorites. I used to volunteer to run the copies just so I could smeel it... okay, it's not like y'all didn't already know I was a bit weird.[]

My grandfather owned full service gas stations until he retired. He had at least one of the cold water bath Coke machines (maybe he just kept taking it with him to the new station). Anyway, the 6 ounce bottles hung on rails and dangled in the water. You would have to snake the bottle through the rail maze to get it out (after depositing your nickel, of course). When I was in High School I worked for him, and every gas purchase regardless of amount (16.9 cents/gallon) came with a clean windshield, oil level check, and correctly adjusted tire pressure.

Of course back then we still left our doors unlocked and a kid could ride his bicycle 5 miles to the swimming pool on the other side of town without mom and dad giving it a second thought. For the sake of my grandchildren, I truly miss those days.


----------



## DCBluesman (May 25, 2007)

I don't want to cast any aspersions on some of the "old timers" who obviously suffer from CRS, but the bottles were 6-1/2 ounces. []


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by alamocdc_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



Okay Billy, You're old...


----------



## ed4copies (May 25, 2007)

> _Originally posted by Mudder_
> <br />
> 
> 
> ...



Ah, yes, my friend, but it DOES give you something to which to aspire!![:0][:0][:0]


----------



## mdburn_em (May 25, 2007)

Ron and Billy,
4 miles (3.5 minutes) from here, down the highway, they wash the windows...all of them, they will ask the ladies if they want the oil checked.
Nobody locks their cars, takes the keys out or locks their houses.  My mom doesn't have a key to the house and if she had one, she'd have had to put a lock on the door(s).  
Tourists freak out because they don't know why all those people keep waving to them as they pass on the highway.
Don't try and pull off the road to eat your lunch.  You'll keep getting interrupted by folks stopping to ask if you need help, a ride and if it's at night, a place to sleep until the garage opens in the morning.
It's not all gone.

It's why I moved back.


----------



## woodbutcher (May 25, 2007)

Mark, where do you live? I need to buy some land there!


----------



## Roy99664 (May 26, 2007)

Over moderated? Under moderated? I don't feel qualified to say. I do know, however, that without this site I probably wouldn't be participating in this fantastic hobby. I would have lost interest long ago. Knowing that there are others that share my passion keeps me interested. I enjoy reading the posts, learning new things, and viewing the new pictures. Keep up the good work! And, thanks!

Yes I remember those old Coke machines, and, no we still don't lock our doors up here. []


----------



## wdcav1952 (May 26, 2007)

> _Originally posted by woodbutcher_
> <br />Mark, where do you live? I need to buy some land there!



Jim,

You might find Montana just a mite colder in winter than Florida. []


----------



## Ron in Drums PA (May 26, 2007)

> _Originally posted by mdburn_em_
> <br />Ron and Billy,
> 4 miles (3.5 minutes) from here, down the highway, they wash the windows...all of them, they will ask the ladies if they want the oil checked.
> Nobody locks their cars, takes the keys out or locks their houses.  My mom doesn't have a key to the house and if she had one, she'd have had to put a lock on the door(s).
> ...



Jim 
Sounds like heaven. 

The town I live was once the same way, and it was only a five years ago when it changed. My area was once listed as one of the top 10 safest towns in USA. No longer, I miss it. 

It's funny you posted this because my wife keeps on telling me that we need to move to Montana when we retire.

I can tell you why it changed, but that is too political for this thread/forum.


----------



## mdburn_em (May 26, 2007)

Jim,
The summers are great.  Winters can be a <s>bi</s> er, nasty.  

I really appreciate Jeff and the people who take on the unenviable task of moderating.  The fact this thread got past the first page and people have been able to "work the kinks out" here, demonstrates why I like this site so much.  Due to the winter and my school schedule, I couldn't turn from last August until May but I felt like I could stay in touch, learn and keep the fires stoked by hanging around the rapscallions on this site.


----------



## alamocdc (May 26, 2007)

> _Originally posted by mdburn_em_
> <br />Ron and Billy,
> 4 miles (3.5 minutes) from here, down the highway, they wash the windows...all of them, they will ask the ladies if they want the oil checked.
> Nobody locks their cars, takes the keys out or locks their houses.  My mom doesn't have a key to the house and if she had one, she'd have had to put a lock on the door(s).
> ...



I'd move there in a heart beat... if the winters weren't so dad blame cold! I've heard MT was like that... as well as some small towns in the desert southwest. Hmmm, I could move there...


----------



## gerryr (May 26, 2007)

I live about 250 miles from Mark, which out here means we're almost neighbors.[]  The middle school our son attended still has a rule on their books that if a student rides a horse to school, the school has to provide a place for it to graze while the student is in school.[:0]  We thought about testing it, but it's about 7 miles one way to the school so decided against it.


----------



## mdburn_em (May 26, 2007)

Hey Gerry,
I think there's still a law on the books that when someone is released from prison, they're to be provided with a saddle.
Not for me though...I'm 0 for 7 on horse riding...well, the riding is fine it's the rather rapid dismount that's painful.     [B)]


----------

