Thinking of Leaving

[OC Richard]

Wowza 22 pages!!!

I haven't been involved in many forums, but of the few I have been involved in, I think this one is the best-moderated.

It's true that on a couple occasions my posts have been attacked for, as far as I could tell, stating facts. That's easily dealt with: rather than saying X all I have to do is look through some books and find a passage where somebody with FSA Scot after their name states X, and quote it, or find a photo of X, and post it. It's better that way, because I have to consult sources rather than talk off the top of my head.

Far better than another forum where mods shut down very interesting threads for reasons like "I don't find this thread interesting any more".

[Jock Scot]

Alright then--------so what have we gained from all this?

[CDNSushi]

I don't think we need to liken this process to dictatorial regimes as much as we have been. Let's not Godwin this thread -- it's just not necessary.

But...

I think it might be less cumbersome and without the need for a week-long super-seekrit PM fest if the responding mod takes a quick peek at the offending post, contacts the poster and says something like, "your post on thread (whatever) about (whatever) has been reported because (insert possible rule infraction here). Would you like to review this and edit this post, or would you like me to?"

In most cases I would expect that a reasonable member would admit the error, edit the post and perhaps apologize if given a gentle hint in the right direction. And only then if the poster sticks to his guns and his words then let the whole rigamarole begin.

I would agree with your statement here.

[Dale-of-Cedars]

Alright then--------so what have we gained from all this?

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the process here is fair, protecting both the innocent and guilty, if a little labourious for the moderators.

Some people are thin-skinned and will take offense where none was intended; reporting posts and causing inconvenience that will eventually be straightened out.

Others forget that free speech does not extend everywhere, and that we all need to self-moderate when 'speaking' in a forum that has very specific rules in force to encourage conversations to remain polite.

It's not perfect but I like it here.

[Father Bill]

It's not perfect but I like it here.

Bingo! Nail on the head. When you find Utopia, let me know!

[MacBean]

Alright then--------so what have we gained from all this?

I've learned something I already knew: that I sometimes learn the most from people whose views strike me sideways. I've also learned that finesse in handling differences of opinion takes experience and a sense of humor.

I'd be sad if anyone left here because of the moderation. I'd be even sader if it became boring so I felt like leaving. Keep the debates coming!

[Bigkahuna]

To quote Russel Crowe, " Are you not entertained?" Wish I could post that gladiator picture.

[AFS1970]

In most cases I would expect that a reasonable member would admit the error, edit the post and perhaps apologize if given a gentle hint in the right direction. And only then if the poster sticks to his guns and his words then let the whole rigamarole begin.

This is all well and good in a situation where a mistake has actually occurred. Otherwise your explanation sounds a bit like you can admit your guilt or we can judge you guilty but either way you are going to jail. The whole point of presenting a defense, is that you argue that you are not guilty as charged.

I would assume that when contacted by a moderator if one were able to effectively argue that they had not in fact broken a rule, then the issue would go away entirely, but I have no first hand knowledge.

I've learned something I already knew: that I sometimes learn the most from people whose views strike me sideways. I've also learned that finesse in handling differences of opinion takes experience and a sense of humor.

I'd be sad if anyone left here because of the moderation. I'd be even sadder if it became boring so I felt like leaving. Keep the debates coming!

I too have learned stuff from this thread, and had a bit of fun in doing so. One thing I have learned is that we have more to share with each other than just a love of kilts, we have shared our opinions, not that they are always welcome gifts.

[Burly Brute]

Alright then--------so what have we gained from all this?

Migraine and upset stomach....

haha I jest of course, but in all seriousness it has been good to see how people agree and disagree, even over agreement in general

Perhaps this will change the mood of things:

http://youtu.be/yGL4ZtvDN0o

[Bing]

This is all well and good in a situation where a mistake has actually occurred. Otherwise your explanation sounds a bit like you can admit your guilt or we can judge you guilty but either way you are going to jail. The whole point of presenting a defense, is that you argue that you are not guilty as charged.

You are not given the opportunity to present a defense. My suggestion is essentially pleading guilty with mitigation.

I would assume that when contacted by a moderator if one were able to effectively argue that they had not in fact broken a rule, then the issue would go away entirely, but I have no first hand knowledge.

There's no argument because (in my experience) there is no opportunity to argue. One is contacted by the mods who informs you of the report, alleged infraction and then disappears behind the scenes to continue the trial via PM with the rest of Star Chamber. When all is done a mod reappears in your PM box to announce the verdict and pass sentence if appropriate.