Author Topic: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ  (Read 68327 times)

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2013, 10:30:57 AM »
Am I the only one that is getting tired of this bickering about the moderation at CQ?
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline Bob B.

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Bob the Excel Guru™
    • Rocket & Space Technology
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2013, 03:26:37 PM »
Am I the only one that is getting tired of this bickering about the moderation at CQ?

Yes.  I find it tiring to read people bitch about a situation that they're voluntarily putting themselves into.  If it's so bad over there, just stop going. 

Offline pzkpfw

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2013, 04:17:32 PM »
I read the thread this morning, and I don't see the issue.
Well, I do.  The thread was summarily closed for no apparent reason - the 'troublemaker' had been banned, and yet for some inexplicable reason all he had said was important enough to be allowed and thus committed to history..  But right then it had to suddenly be closed to anyone else, because....  Well, we don't know.  There's no reason given on thread, not even a message saying that moderators had closed it because of discussions held in the back room.. It just suddenly got locked up.

The lack of a specific posted reason for the lock is a small ommission. Usually/often/sometimes such closures are explained. I forget the context of this one, but in any case fail to see the big deal.

Sure, every thing the HB said was committed to history (CQ doesn't delete HB posts just because they are HB posts) but that thread is full of rebuttal - such as Dwights posts; and all that rebuttal is committed to history too. I really do think you care too much about getting in the last word.

Quote
The poster who made the claims is clearly an angry HB - who is now clearly marked as "banned", so his writings wouldn't be taken too seriously.
Well, nobody takes anything seriously on the Internet, nobody ever uses old 'data' to back their new claims, and no new HB would ever quote an old angry HB..  Sheesh - if this is meant to be justification for the thread closure, it could surely be used to suggest that the entire thread be wiped...

Not really sure what you're getting at here. I'm not "using it" as justification for thread closure, I'm "using it" as justification for not getting bent out of shape over the content being there. Besides, even if the thread hadn't been closed, there'd be nothing stopping another HB selectively quoting what they wanted to quote. Wipe the whole thread? There's that "something wrong on the internet" thing again.

Quote
Conversely, Dwights' posts are clear, sane, and full of data.
Which makes the refusal to reopen it even more puzzling / daft.  As for the silly suggestion that he should instead start a new thread to refer back to that one..  Yeah, that's how to run a forum and keep things easy to find and on-topic and coherent!  :o

Not sure why that makes the refusal to re-open the thread daft. What he'd already said (and said very well) seems "enough". Why the need to get in the last word?

I agree with your sarcasm about "on-topic and coherent", but in the context of the policy not to re-open threads for "last words" the "start a new thread" idea is just a simple compromise. A simple compromise is all that's needed to defuse most of these disagreements.

Quote
Anyone reading the thread would know which way the facts lie.
Yeah, anyone who wasn't an HB.  And such a person would never misquote Moonfunk's final words like:
Quote
Dw... you are mistaken... Dw... and I have come to an agreement... Links to a website our esteemed member Dw... helped create have been posted and explained.
No, no-one could possibly mis/quote/read that stuff as if Dwight was supporting Moonfunk.  Everyone on the Internet plays fair and reasonable at all times....

I don't see how reopening the thread would have made any of that better. Those dastardly HB's could still selectively quote what they wanted. If a "last word" had been added, who's to say an HB would still link to earlier bogus claims? Who's to say an HB would read through to the end to see that "last word"?

And there are several other references that Moonfunk made on that thread that were not able to be challenged because of the unexplained closure.  And I'm struggling to see any 'unkind' comments from all the other respondents, so the closure remains a mystery to me.  Indeed, it is clear that closure happened within hours of the banning - so anyone like me on the far side of the planet wouldn't have had any possible way to respond to anything...

When I was a mod, I was on the same side of the planet as you, so any threads I closed were closed in your time zone - and should people on the other side of the World complain about that?

Sometimes HB threads do get left open for a while after the HB has been banned. Those threads mostly just turn into a bunch of people piling on with the same stuff. I don't see that as particularly useful. Also, in those cases, sometimes an HB will come along and kick-start the thread again with further claims; which doesn't help the stuff you were being sarcastic about earlier (that I agreed with) and generate mod work in splitting and such.

So, HB gets banned, threads generally get closed; people need to accept that "something is wrong on the internet". I can see why people want such threads left open for continued rebuttal, but having been a mod over there and had to deal with the day to day effort of keeping it in good running order, I think the policy is fine.

Quote
Allowing a "last word", for whatever reason, simply opens up the moderators of that forum to fielding many further such requests, and the hassle of having to justify decisions that don't go the way of the requester.
Rubbish - the mod's can completely ignore future requests if they wish, or gee whiz, maybe they could just look at each case on its merits...  Many, many threads are left open for additions and corrections after the thread originator has been banned, and imnsho, that sort of thread should only really be closed if:
- the topic and all related issues/claims are comprehensively dealt with
- it degenerates into silly jokes or bashing of the now banned person.

A request was made in this case to re-open the thread. So we did what you asked us to do ("look at each case on its merits").

We just didn't give the answer you'd have liked.

AFAICS, and correct me if I'm wrong, Moonfunk was the only problem poster on that entire thread.  Sorta ironic that the person he impugned was the one prevented from responding, on the supposed basis that lots of other requests for re-opening had been made and the imaginary floodgates mustn't be opened.

"supposed basis" - the mods of that forum know what goes on or not. Are you saying they lie?

As I said, I've read through that thread and I don't really see that Dwight was impugned particularly badly, nor in a way that needed a "last word". Someone is either going to read the thread properly and understand all posts, or not. A "last word" won't change that.

Quote
I'm not at all surprised the decision in this case was "no".
Neither am I - that's just one small aspect of why the-forum-formerly-known-as-BAUT-and-now-horribly-named-Cosmoquest has lost its way.

I hate the new name, too. The merger was part of why I took a break (permanent?) from being a mod there. Still, it's the same old thing from me - no one forum will work for all participants. I don't think there is one perfect form and style that will suit everyone.

So, some of the people who leave the forum will be good, intelligent, nice people with lots of knowledge, like Dwight. But all those good attributes don't necessarily mean that their departure is something that must be prevented at all costs, or that the reasons for their deperture are by definition things that need to be changed.

Quote
It was quite some time ago. Time enough to get over it.
On the Internet, everything old is new again..

Um, OK?

Mega's quote was on the money:
Quote
This is one of the things that bothers me most about BAUT/CQ - any complaint at all, and you're in the same category as people who are building perpetual motion machines in their basements.
Pzkpfw, you..
Quote
It's the sort of thread flouncy ATM posters make when they see they can't push their non-science.
and Swift..
Quote
You will be lost among the 160,000+ members
and Henrik..
Quote
a very large proportion of the goodbye posts is a cry for a chorus of posts telling the poster to stay
and Jim..
Quote
there have been Members in the past who made the "..I'm leaving.." post and started posting again shortly after.
and Moose..
Quote
don't rub our noses in 'your' ego(s) and expect kind words
..are all doing precisely that - demeaning posters as flouncing egotistical tinfoilhatters.  And there are current and former moderators in that list..   It's not a good look.  BTW, if you would like to see how it *should* have been handled, then I think Strange's post was the sort of BE NICE post that you guys keep saying is the only basic rule that needs to be remembered...

Meh. You are expecting perfection from people that you don't expect for yourself. Most of those replies came after the issue was pushed, and really, were invited. They may not have been 100% polite, but I think they were all well within bounds. Some of them I don't even know why you point them out. Dwight himself called his leaving a "flounce".

I'm very disappointed with the way this was handled.  And still waiting for Moose to explain what was egotistical in my post.. Indeed, Pzkpfw, would you like to point at where I or Dwight have pushed non-science?  Do you believe we will flounce back?

Or was that .. just possibly .. an unwarranted generalisation?  Or just a little harmless tease, like all those other examples?

I don't recall enough of your posts to know one way or the other. I don't recall Dwight ever pushing non-science. Why do you ask? How's that relevant? I must have missed something.

Offline pzkpfw

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #48 on: February 20, 2013, 04:19:14 PM »
Am I the only one that is getting tired of this bickering about the moderation at CQ?

Yes.  I find it tiring to read people bitch about a situation that they're voluntarily putting themselves into.  If it's so bad over there, just stop going.

Which was the initial reply to the "how do I end my membership" question.


Starting threads about it there and here, has invited all this.

But yes, enough. Dwight himself has made a very nice post in this thread that I am going to consider a "closure", and this'll be my last post in this thread.

Offline Not Myself

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
  • Unwanted Irritant
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #49 on: February 20, 2013, 09:36:07 PM »
Am I the only one that is getting tired of this bickering about the moderation at CQ?

Yes.  I find it tiring to read people bitch about a situation that they're voluntarily putting themselves into.  If it's so bad over there, just stop going.

I take it the first word should have been "no" instead of "yes".  But, we could apply the same wisdom on a thread-by-thread basis - if the thread is that bad, just stop reading it and posting in it.
The internet - where bigfoot is real and the moon landings aren't.

Offline Glom

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1102
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #50 on: February 21, 2013, 09:06:58 AM »
Conspiracy discussion at BAUT/BABB was at its height when we didn't have mods closing threads by default. All this talk about the after discussion being pointless really is the mods getting carried away with themselves.

Offline RAF

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #51 on: February 21, 2013, 09:55:33 AM »
But yes, enough. Dwight himself has made a very nice post in this thread that I am going to consider a "closure", and this'll be my last post in this thread.

Good, because you're not going to like what I have to say...

It was quite some time ago. Time enough to get over it.

I simply can not believe this. i've noticed that numerous others have said essentially the same thing...

What gives anyone the "right" to say how long, or to what degree someone else should be "upset" about something?

Talk about irrational rationalization....sheesh.

Offline RAF

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #52 on: February 21, 2013, 10:16:12 AM »
...demeaning posters as flouncing egotistical tinfoilhatters.  And there are current and former moderators in that list..   It's not a good look.

Although I was one foot out the door when all this happened, it certainly "helped" mecome  to a decision re. my further participation there.

A very poor showing for those posters ChrLz quotes above...they should all be embarrassed, yet, I'll bet to a person, they are not.

Lets just say, I am very disappointed...

Offline RAF

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #53 on: February 21, 2013, 10:19:38 AM »
Am I the only one that is getting tired of this bickering about the moderation at CQ?

Yes.  I find it tiring to read people bitch about a situation that they're voluntarily putting themselves into.  If it's so bad over there, just stop going. 

Thanks...I did just that.


Perhaps, though, you should take your own advice...If you, or anyone, "tire" of people "bitching", then just don't read that thread. :)

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #54 on: February 21, 2013, 10:49:01 AM »
Perhaps, though, you should take your own advice...If you, or anyone, "tire" of people "bitching", then just don't read that thread. :)

Unlike CQ this is a small community with a long history of accommodative moderation that allows meta-discussion by established members.  I chose to honor that tradition rather than suggest that people should not participate.  The latter being something that is more akin to CQ the AH.
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline Bob B.

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Bob the Excel Guru™
    • Rocket & Space Technology
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #55 on: February 21, 2013, 11:03:30 AM »
I take it the first word should have been "no" instead of "yes".

 :-[

Quite  correct.  For some reason I was hearing in my head "does anyone agree with me" rather than "Am I the only one".


Perhaps, though, you should take your own advice...If you, or anyone, "tire" of people "bitching", then just don't read that thread. :)

For the most part I'm already doing that, though I do occasionally like to skim though a thread to see if anything appears that interests me.

It's not the bitching per se that bothers me.  It that fact that people are bitching about something that they keep voluntarily going back to.  It's like somebody beating their head against a wall and then complaining that it hurts.  I have no no sympathy for someone when the solution to the problem is to simply stop doing it.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 11:48:34 AM by Bob B. »

Offline RAF

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #56 on: February 21, 2013, 11:18:05 AM »
It's not the bitching per se that bothers me.  It that fact that people are bitching about something that they keep voluntarily going back to.  It's like somebody beating their head against a wall and then complaining that it hurts.

I understand. It's one of the reasons I have waited a week and a half since posting anything there, before posting anything here about it....I needed time to "decompress" from all boards.

Heck, it was only this morning that I finally decided that I would continue posting here, as I was fully prepared to simply stop posting at all to internet forums.


Offline Glom

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1102
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #57 on: February 21, 2013, 02:56:18 PM »
I could never flounce though. I have too much intellect invested. Just search polyamoury there. I'm sure the only post to mention it is mine. And it's my finest post.

Offline Not Myself

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
  • Unwanted Irritant
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #58 on: February 21, 2013, 05:18:36 PM »
I could never flounce though. I have too much intellect invested. Just search polyamoury there. I'm sure the only post to mention it is mine. And it's my finest post.

And it's in a thread called "OK How does Chemistry Work?"
The internet - where bigfoot is real and the moon landings aren't.

Offline ChrLz

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
Re: Terminating membership at BAUT/CQ
« Reply #59 on: February 22, 2013, 05:51:39 AM »
To Bob B:
Quote
I find it tiring to read people bitch about a situation that they're voluntarily putting themselves into.
As has been pointed out by others, that is a tad ironic..  But when added to this:
Quote
.. they keep voluntarily going back..
..like somebody beating their head against a wall..
 ..stop doing it.
..I've got to ask the obvious:
Who keeps 'voluntarily going back' and repeatedly 'doing it'?  And what exactly is .. 'it'?
 

To Pzkpfw:
Quote
Why the need to get in the last word?
Why the need to PREVENT the 'last word'?  What are discussion forums for?  If the 'last word' is ontopic, relevant and heaven forbid, corrects something, or if a respected and knowledgeable poster feels slighted..  I'm not sure why the 'last word' is such an evil/terrifying/undignified concept..

Quote
When I was a mod, I was on the same side of the planet as you, so any threads I closed were closed in your time zone - and should people on the other side of the World complain about that?
Yes, they should, if there was more to be usefully said... and more importantly Yes, they have.  Remember that link I posted, that you didn't refer to?  In it, here's Jay Windley (JayUtah):
Quote
Lately.. I find little more than a wall of locked threads {in CT}...thread closure seems to be the rule, often leaving misbehaving claimants to have the last word and precluding further enlightening discussion.
..{BAUT is} getting a reputation as a place where even productive debate is stifled, and where skeptics don't even want to go.
.. Jason Thompson:
Quote
.. thread closure seems to be an excessive response.. very frustrating to contribute to a thread, then come back to it and find that you have been insulted/challenged or even simply responded to or questioned but you have no way to respond.
.. CJSF:
Quote
an increasing number of veteran posters have been saying is that things seem to have gotten more and more restrictive.. when someone as well spoken, rational and fair as Jay speaks up against it, I would listen to him.
.. caveman1917:
Quote
.. everyone is thrown out of the room and the room is locked. Why?
.. Paul Beardsley:
Quote
.. it is getting a bit stifling in here. I am very relieved that somebody of as high a profile, and commanding as much respect, as Jay has commented on it.
.. sts60:
Quote
.. the CT subforum.. is overmoderated to the point of choking it off. Thread after thread is closed before posters like me, who aren't on every day, have a chance to engage at all.
Those quotes are all from just the first 2 pages of a 17 page thread..  So, maybe it's not just Dwight and me..?

And another observation from Jay:
Quote
At this point it seems that more moderation is being exerted in shaping the debate rather than keeping it from jumping the shark. If you want to attract the contributions of well-educated and thoughtful people, treat them as such.


Pzkpfw:
Quote
this'll be my last post in this thread
I won't post the very obvious, slightly ironic response..  :D

Anyway, go take a long hard look at the CT section over there, and then re-read the comments above by people I tend to think are the sort of folks worth listening to..  The CosmoBaut CT (and ATM) forums are not exactly broiling with activity - but I'm sure the mod's know best..


PS - Glom, I remember reading that little chemistry essay you wrote and thinking it was a very effective set of analogies, in a world where analogies are routinely misapplied horribly..  Nice work! And I can't really flounce either - I'm always ChrLz or chrLzs - nothing else seems right.