Life without moderators

[MrPumpernickel]

As for sexuality, that's taboo here because we do have some children (as young as ten, if I'm not much mistaken) who post on the Lounge, and I think MK wants to keep this place family friendly.

I can somewhat understand that, not that I agree with it but I can understand the justification. Personally I don't think that discussing homosexuality for instance (of which threads have been closed in the past) is anything which could be considered PG-13 or NC-17.

When it comes down to it, this is the Fedora Lounge - not the politics lounge, gun control lounge, sexuality lounge, etc.

True, but then it's not the beard lounge, age lounge, eBay lounge, Paris Hilton lounge nor the noir lounge either, all of which are topics which are on the first page of the Observation Bar

I think you'll find that a proportionally small number of threads have been closed.

Indeed, but is that because the moderators do a good job or because people follow the rules, whether they like them or not? I'd wager the latter, but by that I don't mean that the moderators don't do their job.

others are upset if certain issues aren't

I would not count myself to one of those, I don't have a problem with the lack of political threads, I simply have a problem with killing any discussion that may be walking into that territory and making people feel like they have to censor themselves. I not only have to think about what I write but I have to think about how others will react on it too so it doesn't spawn an unwanted discussion. I honestly don't think anyone wants a "free for all" though, such forums degenrate as well. However, I'm a strong believer in that anyone who's unable to listen to others opinions (regardless if they agree with them or not), and can't respond to them in a respectful manner, doesn't belong on an online forum, regardless if politics, sexuality or whatever are allowed or not.

Further I'd like to comment about 4chan, it's not a forum, it's barely even a message board. People discuss jack diddly there, it's mostly just a compendium of questionable pictures with asinine comments posted about them that gets purged every few days. Comparing a proper forum with 4chan is like comparing a filet mignon with road kill stew.

 

[Smithy]

Kitty, in my first post I was talking purely about my view that the political discussion ban here was a good thing.

I didn't know that fur and ivory topics were no-nos here and I would disagree with them being so. I was also unaware that all moral issues were off-limits as well. There are many topics which are discussed here which could be construed as morally offensive to some (guns, eating meat, hunting).

At the end of the day I personally believe that some moderation is needed here, although that's not to say it has to be draconian.

Smithy.

 

[KittyT]

Kitty, in my first post I was talking purely about my view that the political discussion ban here was a good thing.

Well for the most part, I think it is too. However, Pumpernickel is right in stating that the "support our troops" posts ARE political AND tolerated. I constantly notice how, with many issues, it is acceptable for one side to state their opinion and unacceptable for the other side to state theirs. In fact, this is one of the things that bugs me the most about this forum.

I didn't know that fur and ivory topics were no-nos here and I would disagree with them being so. I was also unaware that all moral issues were off-limits as well. There are many topics which are discussed here which could be construed as morally offensive to some (guns, eating meat, hunting).

Well they aren't, per se, but they sure do get nipped in the bud fast when they happen. Again, a topic where one side is free to state their opinion and the other is not.

At the end of the day I personally believe that some moderation is needed here, although that's not to say it has to be draconian.

I agree with you, and feel that the moderation and rules set up for the FL are good and have been successful. That still does not change my opinion that the moderation is occasionally heavy-handed in areas where I feel it is unnecessary.

 

[Miss_Bella_Hell]

Yes, I would say, sometimes opinions that are on-topic but potentially unpopular are deleted arbitrarily and when it is unnecessary because a mod thinks it might become controversial and lead to arguments. Which isn't really such a bad thing, is it? Arguments, I mean.

This is so getting deleted. Who else feels it coming?

Of course, this is "Mods" generally. As individuals, I have no complaints about Scott, Feraud, Neceerie, etc. I will totally go get cocktails with them all.

 

[Fleur De Guerre]

I typed a reply and then deleted it because I was afraid of how it would come across. Let's just say that emphasises that I agree with some things that have already been agreed with by others. lol

 

[Pink Dahlia]

I can somewhat understand that, not that I agree with it but I can understand the justification. Personally I don't think that discussing homosexuality for instance (of which threads have been closed in the past) is anything which could be considered PG-13 or NC-17.

:eusa_clap

 

[Spitfire]

Well for the most part, I think it is too. However, Pumpernickel is right in stating that the "support our troops" posts ARE political AND tolerated. I constantly notice how, with many issues, it is acceptable for one side to state their opinion and unacceptable for the other side to state theirs. In fact, this is one of the things that bugs me the most about this forum.

You are right there.
After all the gunthreads - at one time I counted four different - I got this satanic idear, that I would start threads with titles such as:
"Show us you hippie wardrobe", "Show us you peacesigns" or "Where were you in the 60's?" Just to balance things of...but I didn't. And I never said that.

 

[Smithy]

Well for the most part, I think it is too. However, Pumpernickel is right in stating that the "support our troops" posts ARE political AND tolerated. I constantly notice how, with many issues, it is acceptable for one side to state their opinion and unacceptable for the other side to state theirs. In fact, this is one of the things that bugs me the most about this forum.



Well they aren't, per se, but they sure do get nipped in the bud fast when they happen. Again, a topic where one side is free to state their opinion and the other is not.



I agree with you, and feel that the moderation and rules set up for the FL are good and have been successful. That still does not change my opinion that the moderation is occasionally heavy-handed in areas where I feel it is unnecessary.

I think we're pretty much on the same page Kitty and I'm with you on the objectivity side of things entirely, if you don't allow something, then you don't allow any side to post about the issue.

"Show us you hippie wardrobe"

lol

 

[Paisley]

It's worth remembering that there's no cover charge at the Fedora Lounge.

 

[pigeon toe]

Kitty, Pumpernickel, Bella, you guys are right on. Thank you all for saying so eloquently what I was thinking.

The fact that threads about homosexuality have been closed really bothers me. I know for a fact that not everyone on this board is straight, and closing a topic on homosexuality completely devalues their experiences. Sexual orientation isn't a "sexual" topic to me as much as it is an identity topic. We've had discussions about our various heritages and those identities, why not be able to discuss, or let alone MENTION, our sexual identities?

 

[PrettySquareGal]

You can always start a new forum.

 

[Pink Dahlia]

You can always start a new forum.

What for? Just to watch it get closed and then deleted?

 

[PrettySquareGal]

What for? Just to watch it get closed and then deleted?

No, not a new thread, a new forum. Not the FL. An online forum where you can make your own rules, or have none, or whatever. There are certainly enough affordable web hosts with self-installing forum scripts so that it can be easily done.

 

[Samsa]

The fact that threads about homosexuality have been closed really bothers me. I know for a fact that not everyone on this board is straight, and closing a topic on homosexuality completely devalues their experiences. Sexual orientation isn't a "sexual" topic to me as much as it is an identity topic. We've had discussions about our various heritages and those identities, why not be able to discuss, or let alone MENTION, our sexual identities?

I think there's another side to this issue. I believe the thread in question asked people to indentify themselves (in the form of a poll, or by individual posts to the thread) based on their sexuality. I'm as normal as you can get (a straight, white male), but I have to say that I found the thread a little unnerving. Not because I have something against people with different sexual orientations (I don't), but simply because asking people explicitly about their sexual orientation is a pretty personal, prying question, and that thread had the opportunity to make people feel singled out. I don't think that my sexuality is anyone's business other than my own, and someone here asking me about it point blank - no matter what the circumstances - would rub me the wrong way. Perhaps there were people who did not respond who felt that they would be singled out based on their sexuality, or felt the same way that I did. This is quite likely. It's not a perfect world (or a perfect forum), and there is undoubtedly some prejudice here. Why give it an opportunity to show itself?

It's also good to keep in mind that the bartenders have the un-enviable job of trying to please as many people as possible...and, as the saying goes, you can't please everyone.

 

[pigeon toe]

I think there's another side to this issue. I believe the thread in question asked people to indentify themselves (in the form of a poll, or by individual posts to the thread) based on their sexuality. I'm as normal as you can get (a straight, white male), but I have to say that I found the thread a little unnerving. Not because I have something against people with different sexual orientations (I don't), but simply because asking people explicitly about their sexual orientation is a pretty personal, prying question, and that thread had the opportunity to make people feel singled out. I don't think that my sexuality is anyone's business other than my own, and someone here asking me about it point blank - no matter what the circumstances - would rub me the wrong way. Perhaps there were people who did not respond who felt that they would be singled out based on their sexuality, or felt the same way that I did. This is quite likely. It's not a perfect world (or a perfect forum), and there is undoubtedly some prejudice here. Why give it an opportunity to show itself?

It's also good to keep in mind that the bartenders have the un-enviable job of trying to please as many people as possible...and, as the saying goes, you can't please everyone.

I guess I just understand it as if you feel uncomfortable about questions like that, don't answer! I don't know, sexuality is something I'm very comfortable discussing, and don't feel like it should be a taboo subject at all. It's a part of everyone's lives, and in my opinion, is no more "vulgar" than anything else. I understand that maybe that can be too personal for some people, but there is always the option to not participate in discussions like that.

You can always start a new forum.

I participate in a lot of different forums that don't have any sort of rules on what can and can't be discussed. However, the reason why the Lounge is the one I post on most often is because there's a great mix of individuals here and we all share a love for something pretty unique! While I have some qualms with this board, it doesn't bug me to the point where I feel like I need to leave or should make my own board. I think we are all just offering our opinions and constructive criticism. Doesn't mean anyone has to take it!

 

[Miss_Bella_Hell]

You can always start a new forum.

That's about as constructive as saying "Everyone who disagrees should leave!" Which is to say, not at all.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

That's about as constructive as saying "Everyone who disagrees should leave!" Which is to say, not at all.

Why wouldn't that be constructive? I mean, if I was hosting a forum in my free spare time with no ads and not charging anyone, and there was a group of people that strongly disagreed with how I ran it, I would welcome their suggestions, but beyond that, I'd show them the door. I think that would be very constructive!

 

[PrettySquareGal]

Why wouldn't that be constructive? I mean, if I was hosting a forum in my free spare time with no ads and not charging anyone, and there was a group of people that strongly disagreed with how I ran it, I would welcome their suggestions, but beyond that, I'd show them the door. I think that would be very constructive!

No, now that I think of it, I'd just ban them, just like that! That would be fun, too. So really, I think you 'd hate my forum that I don't have.

My first rule in my fictional forum is that we all support our troops because we know that without them, we'd have no one protecting our freedom of speech. But that's just me, and my forum I don't have.

I would also know that to say supporting our troops is merely political would devalue those people in my forum I will never start who are actually in the military.

Anyway, no forum starting for me.

 

[DavidVillaJr]

Lot's of folks venturing opinions here, and all are equally as valid. However, I would like to speak to a topic a little nearer to my heart.................






Twitch, can I have the HatDork name?



It says everything while saying nothing.....lol


Mommy, Daddy, stop fighting!!!

I wanna go to Disneyland!!!

 

[Samsa]

Why wouldn't that be constructive? I mean, if I was hosting a forum in my free spare time with no ads and not charging anyone, and there was a group of people that strongly disagreed with how I ran it, I would welcome their suggestions, but beyond that, I'd show them the door. I think that would be very constructive!

Which is exactly what it says in the Fedora Lounge FAQ:

"If anyone has a problem with the above, the owner (MK) will be happy to refund your dues and you can find a Wild West political board where they'll allow you to shoot it out. This board has a great reputation for being civil and we will do whatever is needed to keep it that way. Everyone -- without exception -- will conduct themselves as ladies and gentlemen."