Closing threads - would you ever stop it !

[Moses]

Lets face it , you have absolutely no idea how many members 'thoughts'...

You too, unless you can read my Inbox in PM.

Forum is private property. And nobody will "vote" what should I close and what should I open. Point. Anyone can use forum "as it is" within limits established by rules, or... don't use. Members aren't taxpayers, and I'm not elected president. So please stop to dream about democracy and to count "voters"..

[newalaan2]

Your estimate of dissatisfied board members may be correct, but neither you nor I can provide authoritative numbers.

Certainly if the board owner took to arbitrarily closing threads left and right, or banned members indiscriminately, that would be a cause for concern. That has not happened.

One thread was closed, admittedly for a reason that was not substantive. The thread could easily have been left to end naturally. And some deletions by a moderator may also have been contentious.

Should the forum be maintained on an "anything goes" level, without the involvement of the owner or moderators? I would say "yes", but with one exception. Posts which are personally abusive should not, must not be tolerated. The owner or moderators have every right and duty to determine what is personally abusive and remove such posts, as they see fit.

I am sure we will never reach an agreement on this so I don't see any point in prolonging the discussion.

Cheers.

Bobsaigon, no! I didn't say I knew the amount or had authoritative numbers, I didn't even say I had an estimate as you claim I did, so please don't put words in my mouth, what I said precisely was that I knew for a fact there were more than your authoritative 'no more than a handful'.

Again I did not say these were dissatisfied board members, what I said was that the more-than-a-handful were disgruntled at the one decision to lock a thread for no good reason and the precedent it set, a precedent you don't seem concerned about. I don't really care what the owner thinks about members who have a concern regarding the forum they contribute to, that of course is entirely up to him, but as with any forum if I have a post to make with an opinion, I'll make it.

Yes one thread was closed, you mention threads being closed right and left and that it 'has not happened'. I did use the term 'thin edge of the wedge' for a reason, so far only one thread "on the right" has been closed, as for "the left" we will just have to wait and see. But closing a thread as you did agree, for no good reason is not a step in the right direction. I stand by that post in that if the owner continues down the path of closing threads for no good reason where members have taken their time to post he will lose a great deal of goodwill. If he doesn't care about that and continues down the path where the opinions of the members who contribute to his forum which in turn attracts the views he values so much, count for nothing, that is up to him.

Your quote "should the forum be maintained on an 'anything goes' without the involvement of owner or moderators I would say yes" I think you will find contrary to the decision made to close the cdnmatt thread. If the owner is prepared to close a thread which contained little or no 'anything goes' content, for no good reason other than 'he didn't like it', I think you should be as concerned as some others here about the possible direction of the forum.

Actually you are quite wrong about never being able to reach an agreement. You want to see the forum maintained on and 'anything goes' basis, so do I, and that's precisely why I made the post in the first place.

[bobsaigon2]

OK, newalaan, I guess we're in agreement somewhere / someways in all of this.

[sglad]

What evidence do you have that the moderating team was in any way involved with the closing of the thread?

Please provide the board with whatever evidence you have.

It's difficult, if not impossible, for members to even bring up allegations of moderator impropriety, let alone "evidence", with the "no discussion of moderator decision in the open forum" rule in place. This rule encourages and has led to abuse of power to settle old scores and personal vendettas. Why not do things the old-fashioned way, through debate and persuasion, wit and repartee, instead of using gestapo-type mechanisms to silence people you disagree with?

[Moses]

Why not do things the old-fashioned way, through debate and persuasion, wit and repartee, instead of using gestapo-type mechanisms to silence people you disagree with?

Cuz it is private property. Visitors don't vote "what color should be painted walls in the kitchen" unless owner invited them to do that.

[sglad]

The owner or moderators have every right and duty to determine what is personally abusive and remove such posts, as they see fit.

"Personally abusive" is too broad and relative a classification to be left in the hands of a single moderator. If something is truly "personally abusive" it should attract sufficient outrage from the membership in which case moderator intervention may be necessary. From my personal experience, rules are being created, interpreted and applied at random. I know the rules are supposed to protect the membership and promote the smooth running of the board, but what's to protect us from a moderator who abuses his power for personal reasons and knows he can get away with it because of the "no discussion of moderator decision in the open forum" rule?

[sglad]

Visitors don't vote "what color should be painted walls in the kitchen" unless owner invited them to do that.

Perhaps but one day you might end up with a very cold kitchen, with only yesterday's leftovers and a rusty can of baked beans on the table, instead of a delicately prepared chicken gently simmering on the stove, the smell of which is so tempting that new neighbours come knocking with their own offerings, hoping to have a delicious potluck where everybody gets to join.

[Brad the Impala]

Cuz it is private property. Visitors don't vote "what color should be painted walls in the kitchen" unless owner invited them to do that.

But in a convivial spirit the owner of the house might be interested in what colour his guests thought would work well. And since his guests are doing the painting/posting, it might be thought both worthwhile and motivating if both the colour and the process of painting had some element of consensus.

[Moses]

But in a convivial spirit the owner of the house might be interested in what colour his guests thought would work well. And since his guests are doing the painting/posting, it might be thought both worthwhile and motivating if both the colour and the process of painting had some element of consensus.

"colors" are described in rules... everyone accepts them at time of registration

a classification to be left in the hands of a single moderator.

that's how forums work... is it new for you?

[sglad]

"colors" are described in rules... everyone accepts them at time of registration

But the rules can be misinterpreted, sometimes intentionally and maliciously so and I'm aware of at least two instances where they have been but I can't discuss them because of the "no discussion of moderator decision in the open forum" rule.