Let's stay on topic...

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Poulet

For all your pointing out the presence of logical fallacies in others' arguments, you sure seem susceptible to making them yourself. Nice straw person.

Thank you, but it's more reductio ad absurdam.

This is where all arguments of the "if you don't like it, go away" sort end up: absurdity.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Amadeus

holy ****, people. removing off topic threads and posts isnt censorship, and its not excessive, its good moderating.

while inside jokes and extended banter is fun, it belongs in the water cooler. that's why we have that forum.

honestly, i dont know of any other forum whose moderators think that threaddrift and off topic discussion are acceptable when the title of the forum is this specific.

I'd be willing to give up banter in return for people using the shift key, spelling correctly and puntuating their sentences properly.

I'm guessing you wouldn't see that as "good moderating"? Odd how one's own ox being gored kind of changes one's opinions sometimes.

If one reads all of the posts in this thread, it becomes apparent that everyone dislikes something, and the variety of pet peeves is amazing. How then is one to please all? It's not possible. And the quest for perfection is no more likely to bear fruit here than anywhere else in life. Maybe we could just realize that forums evolve into creatures their creators never made, and leave well enough alone?

Ah, but no. Ve must haff order! ORDER!

[Publius]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Maybe we could just realize that forums evolve into creatures their creators never made, and leave well enough alone?

Ah, but no. Ve must haff order! ORDER!

Beware of Utopian engineering!

The Utopian attempt to realize an ideal state, using a blueprint of society as a whole, is one which demands a strong centralized rule of the few, and which therefore is likely to lead to a dictatorship.

[Peach]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

I'd be willing to give up banter in return for people using the shift key, spelling correctly and puntuating their sentences properly.

AND spelling correctly.

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by Peach

AND spelling correctly.

I somehow think 'puntuating' was exactly what he meant.

[RITFencing]

Originally Posted by Publius

Beware of Utopian engineering!

The Utopian attempt to realize an ideal state, using a blueprint of society as a whole, is one which demands a strong centralized rule of the few, and which therefore is likely to lead to a dictatorship.

Don't you think invoking the pen name used to author The Federalist Papers is a bit much when dealing with forum moderation? Just a little bit overboard and rather pretentious to boot?

[Publius]

Originally Posted by RITFencing

Don't you think invoking the pen name used to author The Federalist Papers is a bit much when dealing with forum moderation?
Just a little bit overboard and rather pretentious to boot?

Would you feel better to learn that my cell phone rings to Chopin's Fantasie-Impromptu?

[KD5MDK]

Originally Posted by Zilverzmurfen

I somehow think 'puntuating' was exactly what he meant.

It is now.

Seriously, whoever it was a page or two ago who said that the most common posters set the tone for the forum, they're right. Thusly, if you think the tone should be different, it is incumbent upon you to do your part in providing more of the content that you want, and not submitting that you don't want.

[Craig]

Good comments all.

Now, we have a lot of posts talking about "This is how I want to use the forum" - mainly from people with a lot of posts. Pretty selfish standpoint when there are about 2x as many guests as registered users on the forums (spiders already subtracted out) and many more lurkers/less active than extremely active registered members.

I've already seen a few people who's posts were valuable and thoughtful bullied out of here by people who have much more time to post or more of an inclination to keep shouting others down. That's also the kind of approach/mindset that keeps people like FOC reps away from the forums.

Is some banter okay? Sure. Is there a time when there is too much banter on a thread and so much "drift" that there should be a new topic started and split off? Yes. Should the vocal minority be allowed to call all of the shots by saying "if you don't like it, don't read it?" I don't think so.

I've been spending some time thinking about this and I'm sure the analogies can be picked apart, but I'll throw them out anyway.

One is that we have various conversations going on and those morph, grow and change as the conversation goes. There will be drift. But what about those conversations where there is a definate question and answer/group of thoughts coming out and then a small group wanders in and starts shouting out monty python quotes. Some forum members may be able to follow the inside jokes and filter out the conversation, but I would guess that at least as many don't get it and would not prefer it.

The forums are like a public park - anyone can come in and "play" and there are no rules against starting up a game of flag football right in the middle of a group of people playing catch, but it's a bit rude and I'm not sure if people would actually do it in real life where your identity is right there. There are times when these posts that FG likes for "stirring the pot" are basically doing that.

In most cases, the anarchist in me can appreciate the humor or attempt at humor. In most of the cases the gardener/archivist in me hates the fact that another thread is rendered useless for those attempting to learn by staying on topic and (sometimes) using the search feature.

Where does that leave things? I really don't know. Right now it stays as status quo for where we've had things for the past several years. (All of this has been "suddenly brought to light" because Gav made a sticky post, not because something suddenly changed.)

There is a balance to be struck and agreed to.

As an aside, I'm more inclined to listen to the views of those who stick by their main persona rather than deciding that a new persona / screenname are the way to get their message across (or at least use their main/established/preferred persona as the one that advances the ideas).

Craig

[keith]

Originally Posted by Craig

There is a balance to be struck and agreed to.

Since when was this a democracy, or even a representative republic????

I have to say that the mods could be even more aggressive with the moderating and not damage the fencing part of the forum - keepin the watercooler stuff in the watercooler is kinda important. Will that make the fencing discussion slower, well yes, but at least discussion of BBQ won't be required to fill in the gaps when folks are busy thinking of something on topic to post.

Anyway it's not as if any of us having our posts deleted is some act of gross affront - folks if it was worth saying we'd be payed for it.

[RoninX]

Craig,

Thanks for the update. It has been interesting following this discussion, and seeing where people stand. On this issue. I for one am glad no sweeping changes are on the horizon, but am also glad to know what people value in a post, as well as what some do not. Now the only question is whether to use this knowledge for good good... or for ill

Perhaps Morion will lend me guidance, lest FG turn me to the drift side

Originally Posted by keith

Anyway it's not as if any of us having our posts deleted is some act of gross affront - folks if it was worth saying we'd be payed for it.

What if we are relaing something we paid for, does that validate our posts? Or what if we are paid in another setting for the information we decide to donate to f.net? Is the possible monetary value of a post the only measure of merit.

P.S. - PM me and I'll send you my bill

[keith]

Originally Posted by RoninX

What if we are relaing something we paid for, does that validate our posts? Or what if we are paid in another setting for the information we decide to donate to f.net? Is the possible monetary value of a post the only measure of merit.

P.S. - PM me and I'll send you my bill

Well I suppose I must concede that perhaps a few of the massed musings here have some value; but none of these are the posts that seemed destined for moderator mediated massacres.

[Publius]

The truth is greater than its mouthpiece.

Keith is correct, when he observes that this forum is not a democracy. It is a mob and it behaves like one. The energies of this mob are controlled controlled through three primary tools: (1) social norms, (2) individual charisma, and (3) use of technology.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Publius

The truth is greater than its mouthpiece.

Keith is correct, when he observes that this forum is not a democracy. It is a mob and it behaves like one. The energies of this mob are controlled controlled through three primary tools: (1) social norms, (2) individual charisma, and (3) use of technology.

I really worry about people who confuse a forum with the world and feel a need to use unique fonts

Perhaps the mods could do something about stamping this out before fragile minds are damaged?

As for the authorities of f.net fearing deposition by the ravening mob?????

complete the following for rep;

"The members of f.net couldn't overthrow a......."

[RoninX]

Originally Posted by Publius

Keith is correct, when he observes that this forum is not a democracy. It is a mob and it behaves like one. The energies of this mob are controlled controlled through three primary tools: (1) social norms, (2) individual charisma, and (3) use of technology.

Show me a democracy where that is not controlled by the same 3 things. Besides, it looks to me like Craig opted to take the discussion to the people by opening up this thread. Seems to me like our Dictator for Life and First Tiger (that would be Gav) wish to be more democratic than authoritarian.

[RoninX]

Originally Posted by keith

"The members of f.net couldn't overthrow a......."

website?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Craig

Now, we have a lot of posts talking about "This is how I want to use the forum" - mainly from people with a lot of posts. Pretty selfish standpoint when there are about 2x as many guests as registered users on the forums (spiders already subtracted out) and many more lurkers/less active than extremely active registered members.

A number of sociologists estimate that the under normal conditions interactive communities are naturally limited to 150 members. The optimal size of an active on-line social communities is usually around 60. This has been tested on other online games and forums.

Do a Google search on "Dunbar's Number" for more information.

If you want a larger participative base, then you will need to find a way to divide the members into multiple distinct communities.

I'm surprised to hear the feelings of regular contributors being classified as "selfish"... I'm guessing you didn't think that statement through.

[purpzeyFCLI]

Having read a good deal in this particular thread and understanding all the perspectives as I believe I do I don't think it's as complicated as anyone seems to make it.

The mods have requested something. Perhaps it was stated in an overly capricious manner -- PERHAPS.

That being said I think Craig's most recent verification on that has changed things a little bit.

I don't get the impression (perhaps I misunderstand) that Gav or Craig have any interested in quelling conversation just for the purposes of being power hungry, or having an agenda...etc...

My feeling is that there certainly is a level of discussion about fencing, sometimes a thread may go beyond the bounds of fencing and still be appropriate and manage to be on topic.

In my estimation the main idea here is, let's talk about fencing (in this topic) and if our "journey" takes us elsewhere we may digress a little but let us not find ourselves talking about something completely unrelated.

As per mods deleting posts, personally, unless the post is offensive in some way I don't think that really accomplishes much. Yes, the post is gone but, the person might not hesistate to post off-topic again.

It seems fairly simple to me -- try to stay on topic -- if you must digress, it happens...If you digress frequently you are just not being beneficial to the ideas behind the entire board in the first place.

As per choppy threads, or inside jokes or anything else, I am currently a member of 3 web forums and all 3 have choppy posts and inside jokes. It's the nature of a web board. I don't personally think there's much to be done. A lot of people don't LIKE reading long posts (like this one).

In short, I don't think the mods are trying to be jerks, or police, nor do I think they want to be. By the same token, I've never dealt with the police and you know why, because I'm a good citizen.

It's common sense, it's descretion, and in some sense it's just think before you speak.

In this case on this forum I do believe "We can all just get along"...

It is in the nature of fencers, from what I can tell, to be argumentative, and I for one, in this case, say, there can be a happy medium. There can be a high road...It is not a "touch right" or "touch left" situation. Let's all be adults or at least try to be. . .I'll do my best, won't you do yours?

Just one man's opinion
--Purp

EDIT: A thought, let us not play tug of war, let us play catch.

[zéphirin]

Inq. Post # 46
..........
Or in Latin, De gustibus non disputandam est.

Inq. Post # 61
..........
Thank you, but it's more reductio ad absurdam.
This is where all arguments of the "if you don't like it, go away" sort end up: absurdity.

Inq. Post # 62
...........
I'd be willing to give up banter in return for people using the shift key, spelling correctly and puntuating their sentences properly.


Since you advocate correct spelling (I assume in English) let me point what is a systematic fallacy in your use of the Latin language where proper "spelling" is essential to understand who does what to whom.

In both citations above you should have used the neuter form, disputandum and absurdum and not the feminine form disputandam and absurdam, unless you harbor repressed misogynistic tendencies. Since I believe you are a