View Single Post
Old 03-31-2010, 02:34 PM   #80
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster View Post
I appear to be losing this war. The members who responded in this thread almost unanimously agreed that this forum should be "lake only" and yet the number of non-lake related posts keep rising. The "Laconia jobless/unemployed" and "Health Care in the Lakes Region" threads are just a few examples.

It seems like the members want the forum to be lake-only but just can't restrain themselves from posting about Obama, Health Care, Global Warming and other political issues. Maybe these issues are getting so large and important that they overwhelm the small local issues.
The thread Laconia Jobless/Unemployed, was started by a bomb-thrower. No hits on the first try, throw another bomb. It went downhill from there. So yes, I fully understand your frustration. I would have sent PM's to everyone indicating their tones were not acceptable, and recommend that they edit them (sooner than later). A far better policy than selective moderation, which can be addicting in the wrong hands. I was actually surprised that the thread wasn't intruded on by an adult.

You're not losing any battle Don, just a cyclical thing all sites go through. This is a very political year, and the economy is still not peaches and cream for most people. Foul language, outright hostile attacks and other such behavior is pretty well spelled out on most sites (not all), as taboo which will get you booted.

I think a well-rounded site always has topics that stray from the primary mission. If not for such topics, you'd be reduced to weather, ice outs, some restaurant reviews, direction, and sewing circles. Nothing wrong with that, but real life is quite a bit larger than that. This site has many, many different forum areas and topics. Some topics obviously can get out of hand and create extra work for you. On many sites, it's usually the ones that state they don't want to read the topics, that complain about the topics After reading them all

I agree with most here, that you don't want a free for all discussion of the religion/politics threads that really cause problems. But if you want no dissension, you'd probably have to eliminate the restaurant threads first

One of the most successful methods of controlling contentious topics is to make those threads available to only paying members. AND continue a policy of moderation for offensive language, personal attacks, etc. I personally think that a politics thread is a bad idea, paid or not. It never ends, and never will accomplish anything positive. On the other hand, topics like health care and unemployment are a part of everyday life. It would be quite hard to describe the lake last summer without discussing the economy, unemployment, and other cyclical events around us all.

One of the hardest jobs of moderation is to know when to delete and close. I have always felt it should be rules-based, not personal opinion based. Sites that skew reality tend to end up with a homogenized sameness that clouds reality. I know a few sites where the discussions left on the entire site all read like a Ditto of whatever the site owner thinks. (he deletes the rest). So basically, you know what every post will read like.

There are lots of different people on this site, and the overwhelming majority are good, decent people. They also share opinions, and have differing points of view on a wide variety of topics.

Last edited by VtSteve; 03-31-2010 at 03:51 PM. Reason: spelling (:
VtSteve is offline   Reply With Quote