Let's stay on topic...

[Fencergrl]

That's why I think that instead of having people report posts they should be active in their community.

I have privately pm'd some people and suggested they rephrase or delete their post. I've also commented with a post.

This way the person who's posting, knows if their post is offensive or needs to be written differently.

I also have edited or deleted posts that others have either misunderstood (because of the way I wrote it) or because I crossed the line. If my posts got deleted, it would be unlikely I would notice.

[smurfette]

A few witty one-liners, which might otherwise be counted as thread drift, can make frequently overly verbose and sometimes mundane discussions a bit more interesting. There are a stock group of frequent contributors who always weigh in -- in detail -- on every thread. Nothing wrong with that. But having a few folks who, as FG says, "stir the pot" a bit" -- this too can be productive. Perhaps I am misguided in imagining the forum as conversation. Conversations bring with them surprises -- some can be obnoxious, but some can also be productive and exciting. Why police the surprise and serendipity out of the forum?

[KD5MDK]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Take a look at many of your recent posts. I would classify many of them as short, choppy, and difficult to read.

But is that an artifact of the post itself, or does it interfere with the thread?

Looking at my last 50 posts, and excluding the ones in the Water Cooler, I see that most are indeed short, though I won't try and find the average sentence length. However, out of those 50, not so many were not related to the content in the thread or contributed especially to thread drift. Maybe 6 that a particularly zealous critic would say were not "Fencing Discussion" or "Armoury". I don't think that's so bad.

[Mr Epee]

My point wasn't that your posts are non-contributory, but rather that they are commonly in a form that Gav doesn't feel appropriate for this forum.

edit: I'm pretty sure at least one of your posts was deleted yesterday.

[KD5MDK]

I'm trying to figure how how giving a response, or asking a small question, in 5 lines will make it more effective than in one.

[Mr Epee]

It doesn't

[Allen Evans]

I very much appreciate both Craig and Gav as moderators. I would hate to see too many rules put in place to control thread drift -- which sometimes has turned some dumb questions into good topics.

On the other hand, some of the threads that have started out very interesting have quickly degenerated to "water cooler" topics. I find I spend a lot of time scrolling through posts that are only one step above "Did not!" "Did so!" "Did not!"*. It's tiresome, but I also understand that it's part of what being a member of a forum is about.

In full disclosure, Craig asked me, a few weeks ago, to help moderate F.net. I turned him down for two reasons: first, because I don't think I would have enough time to do the job properly, and second, because I don't think I COULD do the job properly. My personal criteria is more to Gav's approach than Mr. Epee's, and I think my hand would be a lot heavier than Gav's, who is getting a lot of flak.



*Or any other variations on 3rd grade bickering.

[Fencergrl]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

*Or any other variations on 3rd grade bickering.

Complete with flaming bagel food fights!

[Goofy]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

My point wasn't that your posts are non-contributory, but rather that they are commonly in a form that Gav doesn't feel appropriate for this forum.

edit: I'm pretty sure at least one of your posts was deleted yesterday.

I think you missed part of Gav's original post. The bold lettering is mine:

Originally Posted by Gav

One other thing.

A discussion forum is not a chat medium - unlike AIM or MSN messenger - so don't use it as such*. Short, choppy - normally off-topic - replies make it difficult to read what other people have to say. If you have nothing to say then don't say it.

This ends your service announcement - have a nice day.

* Ok, so sometimes a short answer is all that is needed. I mean; come on folks, use some common sense. Ymmv.

So he said that the Forum is not for chat-style posts, but short answers/posts are acceptable.

[Bryn Ralph]

I agree with Craig. I have noticed a tendency to denigrate the usefullness of dialogue towards a form of personal aggrandizement. This comment should not be construed as a call for censorship; rather a call for good judgement and personal responsibility. I am grateful to one and all who would advance the art and science of swordsmanship.

Let's take the higher ground.

Let's approach our discussions on at least a semi-professional level; ethical issues are at work. And, yes:a wee bit of humour is encouraged.

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Bryn Ralph

Let's take the higher ground.

Why don't you take the lead by becoming a more regular contributor?

[Bryn Ralph]

Thanks for the encouragement, Mr. Epee.

Perhaps the reason I have not contributed more is due to the Mies van der Rohe algorithm. Alas. Nontheless, I will attempt to become a more regular contributor when the situation so merits.

Again, thanks!

[campb1pr]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Why don't you take the lead by becoming a more regular contributor?

Am I correct in reading this to mean that you feel that the greater number of previous postings gives more credence to a person's post, or their opinion? Or are you saying that you feel that if people want to have discussion, they should participate more?

I am just trying to understand here. I believe that there is a misconception in each of these interpretations, but you may also be thinking yet something I didn't see.

Now, I don't have a lot of posts on this forum, and many of them are in the Water Cooler. But, I do that because that is where I am more comfortable, since it is mostly not topics that require expertise or experience. They are also fun, IMO. I only weigh in on the Fencing Discussion section where I feel that I can add something to the discussion, or want to emphasize someone else's post if I beleive it to be of certain merit. I personally do not post just to agree with someone without adding something else. Therefore, I do not post much in the more traditional parts of the forum. Does this mean I do not have worth? I hope not. I have been a fencer for 24 years, a coach for 10, was a rated ref for 5 or so, and a division officer for many years as well. I just don't feel that I have much current material to post (I was out of fencing for a couple of years), and so do not want to waste people's time or energy by posting inaccurate information or opinions. I would imagine there are many other people out there who also do not post prolifically for various reasons, some similar to mine, and others as well.

Everyone's opinion is their own, as is their reasoning. I do not believe that we can weigh the value of a person's opinion by the # of posts they have on the board. Now, I will not argue at all that you learn more about a person, and can form more of an opinion of them the more they post (as many people start to think to themselves that campb1pr is a bit of a blowhard... ), so that you can learn who to respect, and who is just trying to push buttons, and who may be an idiot. See Fencergrls very relevant posts on the topic above.

Also - as to the second interpretation of your remark - there are just some people who are natural lurkers, and that also does not mean they do not have valid opinions when they choose to share them.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Fencergrl

That's why I think that instead of having people report posts they should be active in their community.

Except there is a cycle of people who come in, set up several alias accounts, and make a run out of turning the main discussion area into FencingSucksII.

I have privately pm'd some people and suggested they rephrase or delete their post. I've also commented with a post.

Such problem posters have been warned via PM before. Sometimes they back off, sometimes they don't. They are also told where the line is and they usually manage to cross it again after some period of being good.

This way the person who's posting, knows if their post is offensive or needs to be written differently.

I'm of the belief that any person with the ability to sign up using the registration forms and be let loose on the Internet by themselves knows some basics like: calling people Nazi or starting threads in the main discussion area for the sole purpose to discuss the sexual preferences of another person (forum member or not) are out of bounds.

I also have edited or deleted posts that others have either misunderstood (because of the way I wrote it) or because I crossed the line. If my posts got deleted, it would be unlikely I would notice.

Good for you, really. You can't expect everyone to respond to "please don't do this again" though. If they did, we wouldn't have this thread in the first place.

Craig

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by campb1pr

Or are you saying that you feel that if people want to have discussion, they should participate more?

This was my point.

I don't think it's appropriate for people to sit on the sidelines and complain about the quality of conversation that other people are having.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Fencergrl

Complete with flaming bagel food fights!

Uh oh...coming perilously close to "banter" here, FG. And there seems to be a rising animus against that...

[Fencergrl]

I guess Craig is right.... some people *fencergrl whistles innocently* can't help but be bad.

I better run over to the Religion thread where I think Latenight has a confessional open for naughty Catholic girls before I get into more trouble here.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by campb1pr

there are just some people who are natural lurkers, and that also does not mean they do not have valid opinions when they choose to share them.

BUT--- Those who post often set the tone of the community. If the people who post the most happen to be people like Mr. Epee, Inq, Oiuyt, etc etc, there may be a good deal of fencing content, but there will also be a good deal of banter, and puns, and such.

If the only people who post never engage in banter, then banter will be discouraged.

It's silly to complain about the tone of the community when you don't contribute to the community.

This goes back to the thread about how we often see the exact same threads. Part of the problem is people not using the search function, but part of the problem is people would rather complain about not seeing new threads than starting a thread of their own!!

If you're not part of the solution.....

[akaiyuki]

I thank Craig and Gav for reminding us the stay on topic. I agree with Allen Evans that "some of the threads that have started out very interesting have quickly degenerated to "water cooler" topics". Sometimes it's not spammers purposely trying to hijack the thread, but it's us frequent f.netters who unintentionally degraded the thread to visitors by making fun of other f.netters with our inside jokes. And when these inside jokes goes on for a page or two, it makes the topic really boring to follow for others. Again, I thank Gav and Craig for the reminder to stay on topic.

I'm sure each forum has this same problem, and there's no perfect way to solve it. And don't get me wrong -- I'm against deleting threads, unless it's obviously an ad/spam. Some people find certain posts offensive, while others find it funny. Who are the moderators to say which posts crosses the line, and which posts are just jokes? If you don't like someone, use the ignore function! (Hence I completely forgot about this RL person until now...)

Except there is a cycle of people who come in, set up several alias accounts, and make a run out of turning the main discussion area into FencingSucksII.

As for those people... Unfortunately I don't think making this thread will make them stop......