schlimm Ulrich Why not just ignore what you don't want to read? what's up with all the need for buttons? Exactly. Why do some folks need a button or moderators to block certain posts, threads or posters for them? Exercising one's own discretion as to what to read should suffice for oneself, if that is all it is really about.
Ulrich Why not just ignore what you don't want to read? what's up with all the need for buttons?
Why not just ignore what you don't want to read? what's up with all the need for buttons?
That has worked so well to date; especially among those that have no discretion only a sense of rightesnous.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I would think the "ignore" or "foes" button would result in a thread like being in a room with a bunch of people on a conference call where all of them but you is on Bluetooth. You can hear everybody talking but you're only getting half the conversations.
If you are going to do an ignore feature then you ought to show each user how many people (not who) have them on an ignore list.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Steve Sweeney BaltACD, Norm: There's no harm in asking. I know Facebook has this kind of feature, maybe we can too. I will report back to y'all on that one.
BaltACD, Norm:
There's no harm in asking. I know Facebook has this kind of feature, maybe we can too. I will report back to y'all on that one.
My understanding was that the "Foes" feature of the forum software accomplished substantially what has been indicated as needful. It makes posts designated by one's 'foes' disappear from the displayed threads (if I understand the description correctly; I don't believe in using that feature).
An "ignore" button would be most useful if it allowed designation of particular threads to be blocked. Perhaps this could be additionally coded by providing a specialized version of the 'foes' feature that would allow blocking of a particular individual's posts at a certain point in the thread (preserving anything that person may have posted up to that time).
Just for my 2 bits' worth -- there needs to be some method to report abuse, and both the methods currently in use (the yellow triangle and the red "Report Abuse" for detected content) work just fine as they are. The only thing that might need to be amended would be the way in which clicking that button informs the moderation staff -- as an analogy, it seems that this button currently works a bit like the class X priority in the Manhattan Project, notifying everyone whether or not they need or want to know, without any modulation of intensity for serious TOS vs. disagreement. I wonder whether there might be some method whereby the 'yellow triangle' only goes to the Trains moderators from the Trains pages, but there's an escalation to 'all mods' for particular types of violation == and perhaps with the understanding, as with pulling the emergency brake on a train, that there will be consequences for frivolous over-use of the facility for reasons much better handled directly with PMs... ;-}
Norm48327 BaltACD Suggestion for next software 'update'. Eliminate the abuse button; instead create a Ignore Button - when activated, a specific poster(s) posts in a thread are eliminated from display to the poster that activated the Ignore Button. Not sure I would eliminate the "Report" button, but the "Ignore" button is a great idea that works well on other forum software and is frequently used on some forums I regularly visit.
BaltACD Suggestion for next software 'update'. Eliminate the abuse button; instead create a Ignore Button - when activated, a specific poster(s) posts in a thread are eliminated from display to the poster that activated the Ignore Button.
Suggestion for next software 'update'.
Eliminate the abuse button; instead create a Ignore Button - when activated, a specific poster(s) posts in a thread are eliminated from display to the poster that activated the Ignore Button.
Not sure I would eliminate the "Report" button, but the "Ignore" button is a great idea that works well on other forum software and is frequently used on some forums I regularly visit.
Oh, and Zugman ... Bigger avatars. If MR has them, we should be able to get them without a problem.
What else?
~Steve S.
Steve SweeneyDigital Editor, Hobby
zugmann A real question: Who are all the mods on this site? I know we have Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Ang, is there anyone else? They seem to come and go, and half the time we never know their names. Just about any other forum I've been on, the mods are usually listed somewhere really accessible.
A real question:
Who are all the mods on this site? I know we have Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Ang, is there anyone else?
They seem to come and go, and half the time we never know their names. Just about any other forum I've been on, the mods are usually listed somewhere really accessible.
Zugmann:
Mods come and go, and so will we, someday. For right now, the only moderators taking responsibility for Trains are me and Ang.
Kudos to Steve and Ang for doing a good job with moderating the forum. Personally i don't get worked up over troll posts or posts I'm not interested in... I just don't read them. Maybe that's the best solution.
I also would support the creation of an "IGNORE" button. I believe that would solve many of the issues we are currently facing on this forum.
I also recommend keeping the "REPORT". That is a necessity in any forum such as this.
One again...kudos to Steve and Ang for their work in moderating this forum.
Norm
cx500 My chief complaint, and there is no easy answer, is that some threads which started out interesting and instructive degenerated into a tedious morass, of hypothetical theories based mostly on ignorance. It is easy enough to just ignore any postings by that (or those) specific individuals, but I fear that other people with less knowledge of railroading may be misled. Attempts in the past by a number of knowledgeable railroaders on this forum to correct the gabble were, and are, mostly just buried by more of the same. I'd not be surprised if some lost their temper and flamed at the foolishness. Was that what the veiled discussion was about several months back? John Sutherland
My chief complaint, and there is no easy answer, is that some threads which started out interesting and instructive degenerated into a tedious morass, of hypothetical theories based mostly on ignorance. It is easy enough to just ignore any postings by that (or those) specific individuals, but I fear that other people with less knowledge of railroading may be misled.
Attempts in the past by a number of knowledgeable railroaders on this forum to correct the gabble were, and are, mostly just buried by more of the same. I'd not be surprised if some lost their temper and flamed at the foolishness. Was that what the veiled discussion was about several months back?
John Sutherland
You have hit the nail squarely on the head. Theories don't cut it; results do, and there is a total lack of practicality in some of those theories. When confronted with the facts, the poster takes offense even the experienced people may have tried the idea in the past and found it to be unworkable. I certainly can't blame the railroaders for getting frustrated when they are repeatedly told they don't know what they are talking about.
If I understand correctly, the abuse button lets the submitter write text explaining their complaint. Certainly it must let the moderators send the submitter a request asking for more details about what the submitter's problem is, and I hope the moderators at least try to decide which are bogus complaints. Complainers likewise could still send moderators private messages, or as I've seen, open new threads which complain about other threads. I'm not sure how eliminating the abuse button helps.
I haven't paid attention to if it's on trains.com, but on other sites I've seen a "mark as enemy" button, which when selected will stop one from seeing enemies' content unless one clicks on a "show" button. The downside, to me, is that like a horrible sight which I don't want to see but to which I'm inexplicably drawn, I wind up clicking that button. It's a lot like the way "Do not walk on grass" signs affect me. So marking somebody as an enemy in that case doesn't help me much, my mental illness seems to handle just ignoring the posts, but the "show" button just tempts me too much.
Perhaps you meant to have the "ignore" button keep the system from showing that they posted at all. A downside of that would be if other posts refer to them one would still have some hint at their presence in the thread, and just a more cumbersome way of suspending "ignore" when curiosity overwhelms one.
zugmanngardendanceAgain the quick and callous answer, "so what?". I'm not sure it matters much who the moderators are, I don't think it matters any more than who the posters really are.And time for me to be callous: I wasn't asking you! I was asking the moderators. Kind of the whole point of this thread.
gardendanceAgain the quick and callous answer, "so what?". I'm not sure it matters much who the moderators are, I don't think it matters any more than who the posters really are.
Hence my lead off "I'm not sure if Steve Sweeney intended this thread to be a discussion between participants. I hope this falls under the 'post your concerns' part of Steve's initial post." I'm expressing my concerns. It seems to me there can be several valid interpretations of this thread's whole point, but if Steve Sweeney were explicitly to clarify that he wanted only questions from participants to the moderators that'd certainly show me that my interpretation's not valid.
But he didn't do that yet, and he didn't tell me that I'm not allowed to post my thoughts, or concerns, about your post. Also in this case we do know who the moderators are, Steve Sweeney and Angela Pusztai-Pasternak
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
gardendance Steve Sweeney For the next few days, post your questions, concerns, and complaints on here about the forums Murphy Siding cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/232539.aspx Each and every day, a half dozen of these threads are started with the sole purpose to smother the rest of the threads. There is no input from the OP, just a new thread for the sake of annoyance. What does that look like to a casual or new reader? I'm not sure if Steve Sweeney intended this thread to be a discussion between participants. I hope this falls under the "post your concerns" part of Steve's initial post. Murphy Siding, I don't believe you can tell what cajonsummit's sole purpose is. The result certainly has not been to smother the rest of the threads. In fact when you explained that your complaint was that your desired threads had gotten pushed to page 2 and I asked you to give an example of a smothered thread, the only example you gave was a deleted thread. So I question not only what you say is the sole purpose, I also question your belief that it's the sole purpose. I believe you're the one who's posting just for the sake of annoyance. I don't consider myself to be a casual or new reader, but I don't think, and I've mentioned in the "post after post" thread that I don't care and have found no reason to complain about the half dozen PER PAGE, not as you say it EACH AND EVERY DAY, of cajonsummit's posts.
Steve Sweeney For the next few days, post your questions, concerns, and complaints on here about the forums
For the next few days, post your questions, concerns, and complaints on here about the forums
Murphy Siding cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/232539.aspx Each and every day, a half dozen of these threads are started with the sole purpose to smother the rest of the threads. There is no input from the OP, just a new thread for the sake of annoyance. What does that look like to a casual or new reader?
cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/232539.aspx
Each and every day, a half dozen of these threads are started with the sole purpose to smother the rest of the threads. There is no input from the OP, just a new thread for the sake of annoyance. What does that look like to a casual or new reader?
I'm not sure if Steve Sweeney intended this thread to be a discussion between participants. I hope this falls under the "post your concerns" part of Steve's initial post. Murphy Siding, I don't believe you can tell what cajonsummit's sole purpose is. The result certainly has not been to smother the rest of the threads. In fact when you explained that your complaint was that your desired threads had gotten pushed to page 2 and I asked you to give an example of a smothered thread, the only example you gave was a deleted thread. So I question not only what you say is the sole purpose, I also question your belief that it's the sole purpose. I believe you're the one who's posting just for the sake of annoyance.
I don't consider myself to be a casual or new reader, but I don't think, and I've mentioned in the "post after post" thread that I don't care and have found no reason to complain about the half dozen PER PAGE, not as you say it EACH AND EVERY DAY, of cajonsummit's posts.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Sam: Can you tell by either a date or the locomotives how old these videos are?
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
cacoleAs widely scattered as these linked videos are around the country, it seems that the poster is just getting them off of You Tube and none of them are his personal video shoots.
I went back over the last 20 pages of thread titles... since July 23 (which is the oldest one I found and was on page 15), there have been 80 (by my quick count) posts of videos by one member in those 54 days. This member also started several other threads on various other topics about the RR industry, but I didn't count them.
I then checked the locations of the videos and they come from 3 areas of the country... most are centered around Cajon Pass in southern California, the next most common are around Austin Texas, and there are a few from the Wyoming/Nebraska border. There are many city names but they are all within those areas. They are all UPRR, BNSF and a couple of Amtrak on BNSF track.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
And time for me to be callous:
I wasn't asking you! I was asking the moderators. Kind of the whole point of this thread.
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
Steve, for what it's worth, I think you answered Murphy Siding's questions adequately.
So far I think I'm repeating sentiments Semper Vaporo already expressed at the top of page 2, and Paul of Covington dittoed. And I agree with him that the "yes but" posts and beat the dead horse images have probably gotten to the beat the dead horse stage. Although the recent one with the Star Wars storm trooper is a cute, refreshing change of pace, I bet it'll get tiresome soon too.
zugmannWho are all the mods on this site? I know we have Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Ang, is there anyone else?They seem to come and go, and half the time we never know their names.
zugmannI have one complaint. I want bigger avatars like the model RRer side has.
AND NOW FOR my actual thoughts on how I think moderators should modulate:
If there's a problem, lock the thread, post that you're locking the thread and will review, invite anyone who's concerned to send private message, ask "meanwhile please don't open a new similarly theme thread", if you haven't had a chance to complete review in a reasonable time, post "I haven't forgotten, will try to get on it soon" to bump the thread to the top of the list, but by all means eventually straighten things out to at least your satisfaction.
LAST RESORT should be deleting the thread. Next to last resort should be deleting posts.
What I would like to suggest to the moderators is that when a dispute erupts, they don’t automatically conclude that everybody in the thread is equally at fault as though we were a collective. That is not fairness.
Which is exactly the source of "Yes, but..."
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
What's wrong with demanding some civility? Folks can vehemently disagree with opinions of others. That makes for interesting threads. After all, that is what the "marketplace of ideas" is supposed to be all about. Clearly ad hominem attacks, as opposed to factual disagreements, should be off-limits. In my opinion, allowing some folks to divert/deflect the topic of the thread into a series of off-topic posts is deliberately disruptive and should also be discouraged. Recognition of both of those tactics by the moderators should not be difficult. It's not rocket science.
The abuse button is the tool of the 'passive-aggressive forum disrupter'. Makes it much too easy for someone to get, and/or direct attention when he got his/her feeling hurt for actions by a 'outside' 3rd party (Mods, Steve or Ang). [ie.- Mommy - Daddy my siblings are antagonizing me]
This is a forum to discuss all aspects of the very adult business of railroading, including some of the life and death aspects of operations. Life & death are taken seriously by all participants and are frequently discussed in heated language.
Additionally the adult business of railroading is inextricably entwined in politics in all levels from a local precinct to Congress. Many aspects of railroading cannot be discussed without getting into political waters. Amtrak is a politically created and controlled entity. Carriers in their efforts to improve their operations run into political road blocks all over the country.
Running the forum like Mommy & Daddy is abhorrent in the 21st Century. Better the Brian France (NASCAR) model - 'Have at it boys'.
Whiners will always whine - especially if they get a audience. There is no need to reward whiners. Punishment should only be applied to the most egregious of actions.
Well, Norris, ummm...[cough]...it could be that their mutual dislike is a very strong and unsuppressable factor in the rancour we have all experienced over the past several months...and it has been going on for quite some time.
When people develop a theme, or author a thread, it becomes an emotional extension of them as a personality, and they'll go to great lengths to defend them, even to the extent of drawing the annoyance and ire of many onlookers. Eventually, some will begin to retaliate some way, often with their own emotional input. From there, she's a conflagration fueled by more of the same...no shortage of it, really.
Before I go, and this is to everyone reading, when Norris and I were mods, we often felt that the best response to many complaints (and oh did we get 'em...!) was for the complainants to just not participate in the thread if it was annoying and didn't contain direct references to them that they felt compelled to address. If they had responded with what they thought were facts, and the other person was unwilling to accept them, there is no point in berating the person, casting aspersions, or in continuing to explain or to defend one's position. The conversation has to end at some point, and the person should just cease the engagement. We would only begin to delete replies, or to lock threads, when they began to, as I used to describe it then, pollute the entire series of exchanges that were informative and civil. Entire threads were not to be deleted...almost ever. The only person who did that, two or three times while I was a mod, was Bergie, or Dana Kawala when he replaced Bergie as our boss.
Lastly, nobody will be above bias in his/her acts on the forum, regardless of their capacity or status. I wasn't, Norris wasn't, and you, Dear Member...aren't. It's human nature. We work hard to be even-handed, and we try to be both reasonable and helpful. But anyone who insists they work in any venue free from bias is naive. Moderation, by definition, is going to be discriminatory, even if it is strictly consonant with the rules of the forum.
-Crandell
Guys- I believe the moderators are making an effort to improve the forums, by determining what the issues are. I don't feel that actively showing personal dislikes among ourselves on this thread does much to assist that endeavor. Trust me, by now I'm pretty sure the moderators have a pretty good clue about who doesn't like whom and why. Since Steve asked us to direct questions toward him and Ang about the forum, I feel like that would be the most productive way to proceed from here.
Deleted
MurrayEuclid, there is NOTHING "so-called" about your redundant posts. They are real, actual and in my opinion, highly annoying.
I have one complaint. I want bigger avatars like the model RRer side has.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.