This forum is getting overrun I'm stepping out. I hope it gets reigned in soon. Till then best of wishes to the rest of you.
A few times, but definitely not for a long time, I had posted on some forum that I was fed up and not going to take it anymore and, as Chad phrases it, "stepping out". That forum's activity did not come to a crashing halt, I did not get countless entreaties to change my mind, and eventually I wandered back.
Subsequently when I got fed up, especially since I never noticed giving public notice made any difference, when I've felt like "stepping out", I simply stepped out, and didn't waste the precious seconds of my life and even more precious interweb electrons to advertise it to the world. The effect was, as far as I could tell, exactly the same. I expect the effect to be the same in this case, but of course only time will tell.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
Words of wisdom from Garden. I'm another who has publicly quit, only to return, drawn back by my original interest. Points of irritation -- uneven moderation, obnoxious posters -- have a way of evening out or going away. When they are too slow in doing that, I try to do as Garden recommends and simply take some time out myself.
Easier said than done sometimes, for sure.
It really doesn't take long to learn who to pass over when their names appear as an originator of a thread or as the person who last replied to a topic.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
dakotafred Words of wisdom from Garden. I'm another who has publicly quit, only to return, drawn back by my original interest. Points of irritation -- uneven moderation, obnoxious posters -- have a way of evening out or going away. When they are too slow in doing that, I try to do as Garden recommends and simply take some time out myself. Easier said than done sometimes, for sure.
IMO, moderation has improved since Steve and Angela took over. It's more even-handed.
Obnoxious posters? Well..........
Norm
Couldn't agree more re. Steve and Angela's work.
If people think there's some obnoxious ones on this forum you should see what else is out there. I gave up trying to find some intelligent discussions on a lot of newspaper websites a long time ago. Most seem to degenerate pretty quickly to the "You suck!" , "No, YOU suck!" phase pretty rapidly.
Steve and Angela, you're doin' just fine, keep it up!
And everyone else, there's always cowards that will hide behind a computer screen and use it to do whatever they please. It's this "brave new world" we're living in now and there's no going back. We've just got to deal with it, they're never going to go away.
In regard to even handedness:
Say you have a legitimate, on-topic thread where many people are participating within the rules. Then say a half dozen troublemaker show up and start a flame war because they do not like the thread topic. So the moderators delete the entire thread with no comment. Do you really think that is even handed? It is as UN-evenhanded as you can get.
Past Moderator Bergie was evenhanded.
Bergie was by himself and very busy. He didn't trial, and then elect to continue, member-moderators because he had little else to do. He had little choice in the matter because he couldn't do his job effectively, and that includes being 'even-handed'. He couldn't do his job even-handedly because he was busy and because the site was beset by bickering and unruly behaviour between 2004 and 2007. He found himself getting exasperated and causing about as much trouble with his 'evenhanded' and spotty moderating as just doing nothing. When a few of us stepped up and asked if we could help, he was grateful. Naturally, as soon as we began to do what we thought best, and what he agreed was right to do when we sought his feedback, the accusations came out from those whose freedoms of expression were being curtailed that we were heavy-handed and not even-handed. So, with Bergie the Even-Handed, you were happy, but with member-moderators you were unhappy, yet he approved of our actions.
Weird, huh?
"Obnoxious" is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose, but it seems to me that does not equate to trolling. And the example Euclid gives is not trolling but is a deliberate attempt to get the moderators to lock or delete a thread whose substance they dislike. While trollers are a bother who can easily be ignored, the behavior Euclid mentions succeeds in essentially censoring free speech. In the past, some moderators were on to that game. But we should not blame the moderators; blame the people who engage in that behavior.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
In the past if a large flame war broke out in a thread, the moderators might lock the thread or they might just warn the participants either by PM or directly in the thread. If they did lock the thread, they would always make the last post explaining that they were locking the thread and the reason why they were doing so. And they would usually tell us that we were free to start a new thread on the same topic as long as it stayed civil.
That seems pretty fair to me. There were people posting in the thread that were following the rules, and so locking the thread did punish them. So that might not be fair, but most accepted the practice as being reasonable. I don’t recall a thread ever being deleted.
One very important point is that a locked thread can still be read, so that anyone who wants to learn more about who caused the trouble is free to read the thread and judge for themselves.
Lately, moderators delete threads with no public explanation. Often the reason is that spiteful members mob the thread with snarky insults and off-topic gibberish for the sole purpose of provoking the moderators to lock or delete the thread. These troublemakers get the moderators to take their bait. This is how the troublemakers get even with people who express discussion points they object to.
By deleting the thread, the moderators may feel that they are punishing the troublemakers, but they are actually rewarding them.
It is bad enough that deleting a thread under these conditions punishes the innocent members who were contributing to a legitimate discussion within the rules.
But punishing the innocent while rewarding the guilty is as far from evenhanded as you can get.
I haven't noticed too much obnoxiousness on this forum. It's sure not like You Tube where the comments about almost everything usually degenerates into anti-America and/or anti semitism.
Bucky,
If you think you're being treated unfairly, look back a couple of years to when posts that disagreed with you were ordered deleted by Steve Otte.
54light15 I haven't noticed too much obnoxiousness on this forum. It's sure not like You Tube where the comments about almost everything usually degenerates into anti-America and/or anti semitism.
Oh brother, You Tube comments. Some are enough to curl your hair and curdle your blood.
Someone did post a perfect squelch on You Tube concerning the inane arguments. I won't repeat it here, it was nasty, but it was succinct and to the point.
So, 54light15's right, things could be worse. A lot worse.
Intelligent people quickly get bored by drivel.
Trolls think drivel is exciting.
Draw the obvious conclusions.
Tom
Euclid. Lately, moderators delete threads with no public explanation. Often the reason is that spiteful members mob the thread with snarky insults and off-topic gibberish for the sole purpose of provoking the moderators to lock or delete the thread. These troublemakers get the moderators to take their bait. This is how the troublemakers get even with people who express discussion points they object to.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
I really wish that some threads, which contained some useful information, could have been laundered and locked. I also miss the moderators' explanation of that action.
Simply deleting a thread in its entirety smacks of tossing out the baby with the bathwater.
As for obnoxious comments, thank (Diety or power of choice) that political posts are verboten. On the news sites a story about finding a lost dog takes about four comments to degenerate into party versus party name-calling.
Chuck
Norm48327 Bucky, If you think you're being treated unfairly, look back a couple of years to when posts that disagreed with you were ordered deleted by Steve Otte.
Norm,
Nothing that disagreed with me was deleted by anybody. What was deleted was several dozen snarky, off-topic, and nonsensical posts that were made purely to disrupt the conversation because a bunch of people resented it.
The moderator Jeffery-Wimberly removed those disruptive posts. There was no issue of whether or not these nonsense posts disagreed with me because I did not even reply to them. I was told by the moderator not to reply because it would just raise the temperature of the thread. Anything of substance that disagreed with me is still there today.
When this happened, I was accused of having the moderator remove all posts that disagreed with me just as you now say. Do you really believe that anybody could convince a moderator to remove all comments that disagreed with them? Get real.
Yes, in fact, Mr. Wimberly e-mailed me and stated that is exactly what he was ordered to do, remove all posts that disagreed with you as the most expeditious way to stop the constant abuse reporting you and your side kick had initiated.
That's about as "real" as it can get.
23 17 46 11
Murphy SidingThe best example I can give-without naming names- would be the poster who has now started 6 or 7 threads over the exact same topic, each with the underlying tone of "Those careless railroaders don't know what they're doing!". These threads aren't meant to encourage any meaningful discussion. They are meant to elicit a response from those in the railroad industry to defend themselves and their industry. You can't do that over and over and act innocent. It's too transparent. How many threads would I have to start saying "You're mother wears army boots!" before it would start eliciting some negative feedback? 6 or 7?
I think that you and the other aggrieved are overreacting with this perception. And in your above comment, I think you exaggerate to make your point. I have never said anything nearly as provocative as “Your mother wears army boots.”
All I have to do is suggest that there might be something about railroading that can be improved, and a bunch of people tell me I don’t know what I am talking about. Then if I don’t just cave in to their wisdom, they throw a tantrum. People that are so quick to defend themselves ought to ask whether they may be too defensive.
Euclid Norm48327 Bucky, If you think you're being treated unfairly, look back a couple of years to when posts that disagreed with you were ordered deleted by Steve Otte. Norm, Nothing that disagreed with me was deleted by anybody. What was deleted was several dozen snarky, off-topic, and nonsensical posts that were made purely to disrupt the conversation because a bunch of people resented it. The moderator Jeffery-Wimberly removed those disruptive posts. There was no issue of whether or not these nonsense posts disagreed with me because I did not even reply to them. I was told by the moderator not to reply because it would just raise the temperature of the thread. Anything of substance that disagreed with me is still there today. When this happened, I was accused of having the moderator remove all posts that disagreed with me just as you now say. Do you really believe that anybody could convince a moderator to remove all comments that disagreed with them? Get real.
I, too, had side conversations with Jeff Wimberly, and what Ed just said is truth. Moderators were ordered to remove post that offended you. Don't try to twist facts.
Euclid Murphy SidingThe best example I can give-without naming names- would be the poster who has now started 6 or 7 threads over the exact same topic, each with the underlying tone of "Those careless railroaders don't know what they're doing!". These threads aren't meant to encourage any meaningful discussion. They are meant to elicit a response from those in the railroad industry to defend themselves and their industry. You can't do that over and over and act innocent. It's too transparent. How many threads would I have to start saying "You're mother wears army boots!" before it would start eliciting some negative feedback? 6 or 7? I think that you and the other aggrieved are overreacting with this perception. And in your above comment, I think you exaggerate to make your point. I have never said anything nearly as provocative as “Your mother wears army boots.” All I have to do is suggest that there might be something about railroading that can be improved, and a bunch of people tell me I don’t know what I am talking about. Then if I don’t just cave in to their wisdom, they throw a tantrum. People that are so quick to defend themselves ought to ask whether they may be too defensive.
Murphy Siding I hope you realize that "Your mother wears army boots" is just a phrase, like 'So's your mother", or "Passive-Aggressive".
Yes I do realize that. I just think it is an exaggeration of my alleged provocation.
I'm curious Euclid:
Why did your "Bucyrus" account disappear, only for you to return as "Euclid" a few weeks later?
Was that per your request, or per the staff here?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Euclid Murphy Siding I hope you realize that "Your mother wears army boots" is just a phrase, like 'So's your mother", or "Passive-Aggressive". Yes I do realize that. I just think it is an exaggeration of my alleged provocation.
Norm48327 I, too, had side conversations with Jeff Wimberly, and what Ed just said is truth. Moderators were ordered to remove post that offended you. Don't try to twist facts.
What, interfere with expert fact twisters?
zugmann I'm curious Euclid: Why did your "Bucyrus" account disappear, only for you to return as "Euclid" a few weeks later? Was that per your request, or per the staff here?
I am waiting for the disappearance of Euclid and a new account for Terex or maybe Mahindra in a effort to support diversity.
I find it very interesting to see the truth finally come to light on the actions of Euclid.
Both Euclid and Schlimm are the two individuals who are the most responsible for causing problems here in this forum.
They were the two most vocal opponents of any moderator decisions made in this forum.
They are your two "troublemakers."
Neither one. I had asked them to close my account, and eventually they did. My username was taken off of all posts.
Then later, I decided to open a new account, so I thought I would need a new username. As it turns out, the original account was not really closed. All I had to do is sign in with the old password. So maybe I could have reopened it with the old username. But by that time, I had reopened with the new name.
There is nothing sinister about it. And the names have nothing to do with Ohio. I just like names that sound like a first name and last name as one. I have a whole bunch of them for future use.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.