New Members

[cdnmatt]

Why you think what I will report here?

Are you serious? That was your response to Smiles' very simple and respectful question?

If this is how you're going to act, then say goodbye to your forum, along with your ad revenue.

You do know that Smiles was previously in your position, and owned this board, right? Just a guess here, but it might be beneficial to listen to him.

Moses, you have myself, Smiles, bobsaigon, Brad the Implala, and more all telling you you're taking this forum down the wrong path. Why are you not listening?

If you're that tired of being board owner, then give it to me. I'll send you $3000 USD right now via bitcoin in exchange for you transferring the domain, and providing me root access.

[Moses]

Are you serious?

Yes.

By the way: why you again bring here mythical "ad revenue"? Do you see any ads here besides Siamroads? Also it been declared by me more than 3 times already: any gay-targeted business will have here advertising for free.

[cdnmatt]

No, I don't see at all actually. I remember back when I could see, you had this place plastered with ads, not to mention were constantly promoting your tour guide service.

Again, if you're tired of taking care of this forum, then understandable, and offer remains on the table. I can have you $3000 USD within the hour if you want.

[Moses]

I remember back when I could see, you had this place plastered with ads

Who is your dealer?

[bobsaigon2]

..... Moses, you have myself, Smiles, bobsaigon, Brad the Implala, and more all telling you you're taking this forum down the wrong path. Why are you not listening?....

Matt, to clarify, I did not tell Moses that he is taking this forum down the wrong path. The path, that is the posting guidelines, was already in place when Moses took over.

What Moses has done is to appoint moderators to attempt to prevent the posting of objectionable content. I see nothing wrong with that. I made the observation that this is a difficult task since present guidelines allow so much latitude.

Good natured, congenial bantering is welcomed by all. The unwelcome posts are those that are monumentally offensive or personally abusive. It is these posts that I hope can become unacceptable under revised posting guidelines.

I am sure owner/moderators would welcome your suggestions in this regard.

[joe552]

As far as I'm aware, each mod lives in a different time zone - a447 in Australia, christian in Thailand and arsenal in the UK.


Surely between the 3 of you it should be possible to monitor the board.

[a447]

The only editing so far has been in relation to the violation of board guidelines, apart from:

A) my editing of my own post - and the negative consequences that caused, for which I have apologised, and
B) Christian editing out members' spelling and grammar.

I agree 100% that any editing should be done strictly in accordance with the published guidelines.

What seems to be lost in this discussion about moderation is that only a couple of people now are causing trouble - and they have been dealt with in accordance with the Guidelines and Rules. It's the same people who are posting the "objectionable content" referred to by Bob, apart from one member who had a bit of a brain fade and I deleted his post. He agreed that he had slipped up and has since apologised.

For years the board seems to have operated without moderators and we saw what happened. We were slowly but surely having down the path to the Bitchboard. Moses has decided that he doesn't want to be a part of that and so asked three members to moderate.

But we need to tread carefully and not rush into issuing sanctions when the rules are so open to interpretation.

So yes, suggestions would be welcome.

And Joe, we are monitoring the board. As far as I can determine, objectionable posts have been dealt with swiftly.

[Smiles]

I am sure owner/moderators would welcome your suggestions in this regard.

Exactly. My suggestion -- the only one -- would be that Moses does the right thing and puts the "Nada" on Moderators crawling into Members' posts and editing them with no reference to a specific guideline violation.

[joe552]

This might bring down the dogs of war, but here goes. Take Tom Daley for example. I found him attractive when he was 16. I still think he's a good looking guy.

[bobsaigon2]

Sorry to be repetitious, but I agree, there should be no language editing by moderators. If a post is unintelligible, moderator can PM the poster to find out if he wants to clarify his post. Faulty grammar or spelling should not give moderators cause to intervene. Whether or not a post is objectionable and deserves deletion is an entirely different matter.