Why are my threads on XYZ being deleted?

[Moonlight Graham]

How to improve this site? I base this suggestion from the site I hang out in:

If a post had received a warning, that particular post is highlighted so everyone will know that it's been dealt with. Knowing that it's indeed been dealt with is very important.

That would also be a great idea because then other posters could see what "breaking the rules" looks like and can avoid that behaviour.

[Guest American Woman]

That would also be a great idea because then other posters could see what "breaking the rules" looks like and can avoid that behaviour.

It also lets the target of the post, when it's an insult/attack/tirade directed at another person, know that it was dealt with - and if it's not something that admin feels needs to be dealt with, than said poster knows that they won't get in trouble themselves for responding. As it stands, it seems as if a lot of crap is allowed - unless someone responds. Then everyone is reprimanded. It also seems as if some get away with behavior that others are reprimanded/punished for, and if one is going to use the analogy of the cop not catching everyone speeding, to me it appears more as if the cop chooses to let some get away with speeding.

This forum isn't the forum that it was when I registered - and it's not one I would have chosen to register at. I wish we would have had the option to have our accounts deleted once the site was "no longer actively maintained," as that's not what I signed up for.

[bush_cheney2004]

I would propose that those who wish to shine sunlight on this area just post all of their warnings with context. Not sure if this would violate forum rules, but it may be awkward for the moderators who really do try to keep our members' spankings private.

[BubberMiley]

I wish we would have had the option to have our accounts deleted once the site was "no longer actively maintained," as that's not what I signed up for.

Why would someone need their account deleted? Couldn't they just not come here anymore?

[Michael Hardner]

I would propose that those who wish to shine sunlight on this area just post all of their warnings with context. Not sure if this would violate forum rules, but it may be awkward for the moderators who really do try to keep our members' spankings private.

You could explain it to anybody who asked. I think suspended posters are viewable by status... I respect that the mods want to stay out of the business of publicizing punishments.

[Moonlight Graham]

You could explain it to anybody who asked. I think suspended posters are viewable by status... I respect that the mods want to stay out of the business of publicizing punishments.

As far as I know, only being banned shows up in a posters' status, not suspensions.

[Bonam]

I wish we would have had the option to have our accounts deleted once the site was "no longer actively maintained," as that's not what I signed up for.

In case you are unaware, you have the option of discontinuing your participation in these forums at any time you choose... it does not require your account being deleted from above.

[betsy]

Like anything, before we can fix something, we have to acknowledge that it's broken...or that it needs some fixing.

By comparison with the number of guests that comes in here, and the numbers of active posters that posts....it is quite obvious and very plain to see that this site definitely needs some work. It's a far cry from its glory days. There is that to compare it with. It was awesome then. There is no denying that.

I keep tab of the numbers of guests at the bottom. That's important to me.

It's like an actor who'd won an Oscar years ago - and he keeps showing that Oscar statuette as proof that he's made it - yet in the meantime, all his movies now are direct-to-video B-movies.

We need more members - newbies and current ones - to actively participate. We need new members not only to sign-up, but to actively participate! Let's deal with that first.

Do you think the current condition of this site will encourage and generate active participation?

Answer that. And be honest.

Edited November 6, 2013 by betsy

[Michael Hardner]

Answer that. And be honest.

Yes, I do. I don't think new posters are failing to register as a result of any change in policy that you (correctly or incorrectly) perceive.

[BubberMiley]

I think the "condition" of this site is as good as it ever was. Forums like this have become less fashionable with the advent of twitter and newspaper comments sections, so traffic is bound to be reduced some. I've seen various forums come and go, and they usually exhibit a gradual slide to complete inactivity. This one is reasonably robust under the circumstances. Traffic ebbs and flows, but it never grinds to a complete halt. Considering such a website is an artifact from another time, it's surprisingly healthy.

[Michael Hardner]

And the site is moderated quite differently from MSM media sites, too, which is an advantage IMO.

[Guest American Woman]

In case you are unaware, you have the option of discontinuing your participation in these forums at any time you choose... it does not require your account being deleted from above.

I am totally aware of that, but thank you for pointing out the obvious. And in case you are unaware, there's a difference between not posting here any more and not having an account here.

[BubberMiley]

And in case you are unaware, there's a difference between not posting here any more and not having an account here.

No, there's no difference. Look at the member list of the thousands of people who have accounts that aren't in use anymore. It's like they were never here.

It's hard to believe this isn't even the first time someone has complained that they don't want to post here anymore but can't stop because their account is active.

Edited November 6, 2013 by BubberMiley

[Greg]

Note: if requested, I will remove the account but not the postings of a member. The member's name will be removed, but I can't remove existing postings, as that would leave large holes in the discussion. Not to mention that postings are often quoted by other members, which would be next to impossible to remove.

[betsy]

Yes, I do. I don't think new posters are failing to register as a result of any change in policy that you (correctly or incorrectly) perceive.

I'm not saying that.

I'm saying, it's one thing to sign in members.....actually, it's easy to sign in members!

But it's another thing to keep them, and to get them to become active regulars.

That's the most important part. That's all I'm saying.

I've signed up as a member to several forums in the last few months. However, I hardly visit some of them anymore, and now I have become an active regular to two forums.

Edited November 6, 2013 by betsy

[BubberMiley]

I'm saying, it's one thing to sign in members.....actually, it's easy to sign in members!

But it's another thing to keep them, and to get them to become active regulars.

That's the most important part. That's all I'm saying.

I think if there's a problem, it's too much retention, not too little. There are many posters who've said their piece over and over, and it's enough already. I think, personally, my best-before date was around 2008.

[betsy]

And the site is moderated quite differently from MSM media sites, too, which is an advantage IMO.

Just curious....how is it different?

[betsy]

I think if there's a problem, it's too much retention, not too little. There are many posters who've said their piece over and over, and it's enough already. I think, personally, my best-before date was around 2008.

I don't agree with that. Some issues are just too controversial - and they're the ones that usually get the attention.

As an example, the forum that seems to be the best one so far have a section exclusively for Abortion. Sure, a lot of arguments are mostly rehashed, but it's popular and robust, nevertheless. The viewer count is good (the viewer count is also displayed for each portal section so you know how many are viewing each section).

If you want to get active regulars from new members, you've got to increase the traffic.

The more traffic you have the more likely active regulars you'll get.

All the sections, and threads, and discussions are being provided by your current active regulars.

Thanks to active regulars....they're like an ad! If browsers like the "ad" enough that they want to participate - they'll buy. Some will like it so much they'll be donating money for the board's upkeep.

It's also not palatable to see sections with no current postings, or with only one or two current issues.

It makes the board look dead and struggling to stay alive. You want to see - as much as possible - all latest posts are dated, "today." Of course it's hard to maintain that if there's only a handful of active regulars!

Another thing too, if a browser sees only a handful of regular names - and these ones are the only ones keeping the board going - it also gives a certain perception. And lo and behold that they happened to browse at Religion Section and read the thread "THE COMING FOUR BLOOD MOONS," and how it's been dealt with by some of the active regular posters....what does that suggest to a browser?

Edited November 7, 2013 by betsy

[betsy]

Another thing too, if a browser sees only a handful of regular names - and these ones are the only ones keeping the board going - it also gives a certain perception. And lo and behold that they happened to browse at Religion Section and read the thread "THE COMING FOUR BLOOD MOONS," and how it's been dealt with by some of the active regular posters....what does that suggest to a browser?

That's why it's important to let everyone know when a posting got warned, or someone got suspended for what.

Lighting up the offending post is a good way to show that. It's a good deterrant. Who wants to have their post lighted up like a X'mas tree?

How do I know? It happened to me!

My sense of humor got the better of me. But because I've never had an infraction, I was given only a warning. I posted an apology....and guess what? I received a pm from the moderator commending me for the apology.

The gesture by the moderator has had a positive effect on me.

It's not only for the benefit of the insulted poster (and other members) to know that there is equal justice and transparency.... it's also to reassure the ones who are contemplating on signing up that these kinds of posts are not tolerated. That there are no cliques to pounce on anyone who happens to post something they don't like to see.

Most, if not all forums now, have a report button - we do not have to pm to report.

Also, before that offending poster can get back to posting again, he had to go through the rules and regulations section.

I hope Greg will consider this suggestion.

Edited November 7, 2013 by betsy

[Michael Hardner]

Just curious....how is it different?

They have more stringent control, and also control the creation of threads - ie. based on stories.

[bush_cheney2004]

....My sense of humor got the better of me. But because I've never had an infraction, I was given only a warning. I posted an apology....and guess what? I received a pm from the moderator commending me for the apology.

Good point.....I have learned after several spankings that some commonplace discussion/debating elements used in other media formats are not well suited to this forum. Satire, sarcasm, humour, irony, sharp wit, etc. are either lost in translation or are outright warning worthy offenses. Voltaire would have been banned from this forum in short order.

[GostHacked]

BC 2004, you are one of the worst offenders on this board.

[The_Squid]

I find it is already an echo chamber. Out of only a handful regular posters who keeps this forum going, how many are actually dissenting voices?

I posted a thread on Religion. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/23105-the-coming-four-blood-moons/

Take a look at the kind of responses I got. Mostly ridicules and personal insults. And you could tell they didn't bother to read the referred materials that were given for the discussion.

I understand that they don't want or believe in religion, or any diety.....but the section is supposed to be for RELIGION.

I think you are confusing "about religion" and "for religion". Religious topics are not above criticism and debate on this board. The religion section of the forum is for discussion about religion, not for people to post sermons.

Then somebody wondered:

Quote

The_Squid, on 30 Oct 2013 - 5:32 PM, said:

Was this topic posted to generate discussion, or is it just spam?

What "discussion" is he on about? What moron would bother?

I PMed Greg about that thread, btw....asking him to take a look. I don't know if he did.

You linked an hour long video and some wonderful text about so-called blood moons and how they portend significant events.

I doubted whether you actually wanted to discuss these, or if you are just posting a sermon. Sermons are spam. They are no different than someone posting an advertisement... You're just selling religion rather than a product/service.

[bleeding heart]

Good point.....I have learned after several spankings that some commonplace discussion/debating elements used in other media formats are not well suited to this forum. Satire, sarcasm, humour, irony, sharp wit, etc. are either lost in translation or are outright warning worthy offenses.

Or maybe are not quite as strong or sharp as the interlocutor believes them to be.

[bush_cheney2004]

Or maybe are not quite as strong or sharp as the interlocutor believes them to be.

Missing the point entirely.....which applies to all members, no matter how brilliant and smugly superior they assume to be.