Message 181 of 191 (456150) 02-15-2008 7:04 PM

Reply to: Message 177 by Admin 02-15-2008 3:44 PM

Then let's all draw a line under this whole sorry mess. I have made my feelings clear about the suspensions, there is no need to repeat them, save to add that I am sorry to see nator and Trixie leave the site. I have tried to change your mind Percy, as have others, and we have clearly failed! If you choose to reverse suspensions at some later date, then I would welcome that, but if not, that is just the way it is, so let that be an end to it. This is your site and I respect that.
I'm sure that quite a few people are sorry to see their buddies go, but the fact is, most of those folks can still be found on-line, elsewhere. My advice to anyone who is peeved is; Google and ye shall find. Flouncing out of EvC in a huff isn't going to solve anything.
Where people have voiced disagreement with you Percy, it has almost always been because they shared your desire to make EvC a better place to debate. I too want to see this, because this is a great site. Anyone who doubts that the debates in this forum have a real impact should look at this post;

For what it's worth, you have my full support in your continued efforts to make EvC a quality forum.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Changed end of URL from "m=53#51" to "m=51#51". Having those two numbers the same insures that the link will work well for all members page setups.

Message 182 of 191 (456165) 02-15-2008 10:18 PM

Reply to: Message 1 by Admin 01-24-2008 2:50 PM

I agree with a lot of posts on this thread, this is the best evc forum on the web that I've seen.

How about giving moderator or (Host) powers to the host of the thread or topic and let them worry about how the debate goes. The host would have the power to temporarily or permanently suspend members only on that thread.

Message 183 of 191 (456175) 02-16-2008 12:47 AM

Reply to: Message 177 by Admin 02-15-2008 3:44 PM

percy, i know i can't speak for anyone else, but i certainly do not mean to abuse you. i don't think most other people (including many of the banned people) who are objecting intend to be abusive, either. we're just frustrated, i think.

adminning a site this large is a huge responsibility, and can take a great personal toll on one's sanity. this was one of my two main initial worries when you announced that you would alone shoulder all of the moderation duties. i hope you will not take this as abuse or insult, but if you are no longer emotionally able to continue carrying this load, perhaps you should step back, take a vacation or something. let some others carry this cross for a while. i say this out of both concern for you, and for the site. perhaps returning the moderation style to its older form is the only workable solution for such a place.

i think it's also worth noting that brenna's comment, which you responded to with a ban, was out of equally genuine concern for your wellbeing, and not meant to be patronizing or insulting. i believe i can speak for her in this case, because i know her very well.

with all due respect, your bans have had this as an interesting side effect. the evolution ranks have been seriously thinned out, with many of the most informative posters now missing. the playing field is now somewhat level. people are just reading this as the intended effect. and i have to say, it's tempting to see things that way. hell, if that was your super secret motivation, it might not even have been a bad thing for the site in the long run. not especially even-handed, and seriously damaging to quality of information, but it sure kept the debate moving.

percy, perhaps this is the problem. i don't really think those qualify as ad hominems, especially when what we are debating is the motivation of someone who was then the sole moderator of the board. like it or not, as the admin of a debate board, your motivations will always be questioned. and those are certainly not insults.

this is, i think, the same basic fallacy used routinely in politics these days, that it is somehow unpatriotic to question the administation. if the administration is doing something to damage the country, then the only real course of action that could be called patriotic is to question their actions. percy, we all love this site and what you've given us these past few years. it's just that many of us think that what are you doing is damaging to that. i've tried to voice my objections as respectfully as i can, and without any implications of entitlement. but those are very hard things to do. other who have not done so well at carefully wording their concerns have been banned because of it, for supposedly "trashing" the place they're trying to fight for.

i would rather people come here. as i said before in this thread, the single greatest thing about EvC was that people could freely voice their grievences. it ensures fairness in operations. on a more personal level, i'm also the kind of person that prefers true friends -- the kind that will stab you in the front. if someone has a problem with me, i'd rather know what it is than have them talk about me behind my back.

i can understand if there's a persistent problem with a member who insists on continually posting about how horrible this place is. but this is not what these people have done -- schraf, jar, omni, et al are not trolls who are simply flaming away for giggles, or because they're mentally unstable. in the worst cases, they have posted out of frustration watching what they believe is a sinking ship. in the best cases, they have posted out of concern for the site and for you personally. and in one case, not even posted on the subject at all. maybe the comments were not the most constructive, but must one poor post be met with a lifetime ban?

Message 184 of 191 (456176) 02-16-2008 12:51 AM

Reply to: Message 179 by Buzsaw 02-15-2008 5:20 PM

i would also like to respectfully remind you, buz, that it is because of the people who continually fought the moderation over your bans that you have been allowed back. the very people who are now being banned for the same actions -- bugging the moderation over bans they feel are unfair.

granted, it is all at percy's mercy. but i would fight for them the same as i have fought for you.

Message 185 of 191 (456189) 02-16-2008 5:53 AM

Reply to: Message 182 by LucyTheApe 02-15-2008 10:18 PM

This is already on the to-do list, but it isn't yet scheduled.

I'll again make my periodic but never-answered plea for coding help. Perl, HTML, Javascript and CSS familiarity is very helpful. Those already familiar with C and C++ would have no problem with Perl. Javascript is straightforward but arcane because of significant variations in supported features across currently available browsers.

Message 186 of 191 (456190) 02-16-2008 5:57 AM

Reply to: Message 185 by Admin 02-16-2008 5:53 AM

If I'm still considered a viable candidate, I'm still interested. You were going to email me some code to get the ball rolling?

Message 187 of 191 (456191) 02-16-2008 6:31 AM

Reply to: Message 183 by arachnophilia 02-16-2008 12:47 AM

I appreciate the expressions of concern, but I'm fine. The board is now structured very close to the way I had it when I first created it, and I'm very happy with that.

I really don't know what more I can say. I know the disruption to the EvC Forum community has been extremely significant, but I've had several weeks to think about this and I still don't want the indefinitely suspended members back. I will probably never want them back. I can't count the number of times I've been persuaded to unsuspend someone and quickly regretted it, Randman and Faith being two well known examples. It was constantly argued that even though they behaved badly a great proportion of the time that because they caused very valuable rebuttals to be posted that they should be permitted to stay, in fact, that it would be better for the site if they stayed.

My own view has always been that bad debate pushes out good debate, and while I've been talked out of acting on this on a number of occasions, that has always been my unwavering view. Those who can focus their attention on the topic of discussion while following the Forum Guidelines are welcome, and those who can't will be advised about it and eventually suspended, like Randman in his recent return where he gave up after just a couple weeks under my preferred approach to moderation.

This is why I so strongly disagree that it is a reasonable interpretation of my recent actions that I don't care about the quality of debate or of the debaters, as you said when you referenced Schraf's reply. I'm the person who cares most, and those who make it more difficult for me to keep the quality of debate high certainly cannot be said to care about the quality of the debate. If they did they'd still be here. Instead what they cared more about was not having disruptions to their community of buddies.

I also think that by and large the suspended members don't want to be back, because I haven't received a single request for reinstatement. Jar has a new board over at Dreamcatcher, the entire former EvC Forum community can be reunited there.

I think we've gone back and forth on this enough. I appreciate the concern, but I'm not changing anything I've done.

Message 189 of 191 (456193) 02-16-2008 7:14 AM

Reply to: Message 188 by Admin 02-16-2008 6:36 AM

Acknowledged

---

Ahhh, that might be a fundamental discontinuity in communication methods :) I figured that there wasn't anything else to say, so didn't - but I guess you were expecting an ACK. I almost did the same thing again for this post.

Anyway that would be great Percy, I'll let you know how I get on with it.

Message 190 of 191 (456220) 02-16-2008 12:26 PM

Reply to: Message 187 by Admin 02-16-2008 6:31 AM

i know i was one of the primary people making that argument. but i don't feel that's the case here. these are not repeatedly problematic posters -- they're one-time offenders. and some of them, not even that.

i recognize that you care about the quality of the debate. so do i; we just disagree about the best method to get the highest attainable quality. the problem i see is that by banning the people who object to your actions based on their principles of reasonable and fair debate, you are effectively limitting the contributors to the site to only those who do not have such strong principles of fair debate. get rid of the people who want fair and constructive debate, and you'll be left with trolls.

percy, i truly hope you understand that this is simply not the case. for instance, i strongly object to brenna's ban. i can talk to her anytime i want; we talk on aim all the time, i've got her cell number and she has mine. when she lived here, we hung out all the time. but she acted like an idiot or a troll, i would tell her so. and have, on occasion. this is not me sticking up for my friends -- you are well aware that i have quite frequently stuck up for my enemies in the past. i'm objecting because i don't see a good reason to ban her. i'm objecting on principle.

because most of them still read the board, where you state every time that they will never be back. and frankly, most of them are quite disiullusioned and disappointed in what the site has become because of this. they don't want to be part of a site where they can be banned for speaking their conscience about moderation procedures. certainly, if you were to ban me because of this discussion, i would be frustrated to the extent that i wouldn't be asking to come back either. maybe it's an issue of pride or dignity. maybe it's that they don't want to be subject to the authoritarian regime.

yes, and much of the older community is there, myself included. but it's still in its infancy, and participation is currently very low. this board had something special, and i'd just hate to see it ruined. i'm not sure another board would do.

i'm not changing anything i'm doing, either. i will keep fighting for what i think is right, including defending members i feel were banned without good reason. that's simply part of who i am, and the principles i have come to expect from this place. and i will do it respectfully, compassionately, and calmly, and if i can, without breaking any forum rules. this is not going to go away.

Message 191 of 191 (456243) 02-16-2008 2:29 PM

Reply to: Message 190 by arachnophilia 02-16-2008 12:26 PM

As I've said in this thread a number of times, we're not going to be doing that any more. That's why the moderation threads are closed. It's ironic that I allowed this to happen in the very thread where I announced that we're not going to be doing this anymore.

If this site was special for you then it was the people that made it special, and you know where those people are. Anyone who needs help contacting anyone just send email to Admin and I'll see if I can facilitate.