Admin monitoring of posts for abusive users

[T-Stan RPCV]

Petty insults and a little vulgarity are part of board like this and keep things entertaining,  but personal threats are a problem.  Something should be done to prohibit them in the future.  Unfortunately this is a very subjective issue.

Again, I think Jim is doing a great job letting things go until he receives complaints from a number of members.  Keeping the status quo would be fine with me.

[T-Stan RPCV]

Still attached.

[Bear]

Status quo has worked well T-Stan, censorship is indicative
of he who censors. Its dog eat dog out there...

[ruffian]

I vote no censorship.

Anyone given the job of moderating would at some point be accused of favoritism.

Those that choose to report a poster, could be viewed as assassins, a group of posters or A poster, requesting another poster be removed.

There is only one way to ensure that everyone has a say ... that's no censorship.

If people want to make idiots of themselves in here ...... I say that's up to them.

[T-Stan RPCV]

It said that it would "wake up with my balls in hand".  Considering I have no intention of sleeping next to that creature, they would have to be detached.  Either way, I value my balls and any comment regarding them being in its posession is an obvious threat.  

This is my last post regarding the topic of my nuts.

[Ana]

I think a simple rule, guidlines and a 3 tier warning system with the end result being termination of the membership.  Then if that member wanted to come back could there be a fee to pay?  I can usually ignore the stupidity, cruel and even the boring posters on this board if I choose, but some kind of regukation would be welcomed as far as I am concerned.

I agree with Berwyn Patsy and/or T-Stan.

Petty insults and a little vulgarity are part of board like this and keep things entertaining,  but personal threats are a problem.  Something should be done to prohibit them in the future.  Unfortunately this is a very subjective issue.

Again, I think Jim is doing a great job letting things go until he receives complaints from a number of members.  Keeping the status quo would be fine with me.

[Bear]

Don't forget if you insure them you will have to go to the collectors office and license
said nuts as in bicycle registrations

[T-Stan RPCV]

Berwynite: Are you trying to goad me into breaking my previous statement of not talking about this?   If so, it almost worked, you left the door so wide open that I caught myself typing a variety of comebacks.

Personal rule of thumb: before posting a negative statement I think:  hmmmmmmmm. If I said this to a stranger at a bar is there a good chance I'll be eating fist instead of getting a verbal response?  If the answer is yes, the post is not appropriate.  Let's just say that Gone probably would have kicked my ass, but I would have tried to get the first shot in.

[jqpublic]

Does the board have an ignore feature that can be activated? This way users can choose to ignore posters then deem to be worthless and not even see the abusive posts in the first place.

[ruffian]

Berwynite, gotta stick my two cents in on this one in connection with T.  Many of us on this board HAVE met each other.  Not upon special invitation, but an open invite to all on the board to meet.  From the turn out after the first meeting, there are at least 20 posters who know T not only from the meeting, but from his attendance at the COW meetings, etc.  So, T, unlike many here, is not truly anonymous, only to those who haven't come out to meet him or who are new here and just haven't had the opportunity.

I don't hold anything against those who just prefer to post here.  That's fine with me.  I was the wacko from the old board (I trust that is how I was perceived, and probably still am), however, I still bitch and moan just like I use to.  I'm sure there are those who have met me that think ... "geez, did ruffian say THAT? .. wow", but my moniker ruffian is the voice I use to spit out what is on my mind.  There is literally nothing I say now, nor in the past that I would not say to face to face to another poster.  I've never threatened anyone and although the post may not be around to view ... GONE did indicate a very hositle tone toward T in connection with his ........ spheres.  I'm not here to beat up people ... I'm here to challenge opinions and keep Berwyn on the level, and post a few things that some may find interesting.  I'm in no one's camp and never will be.

This board is just experiencing growing pains.  Those of you that chat and do the blogs have seen it before ... nothing out of the ordinary.  You are always going to have posters that try disrupt and cause a commotion.  The more you feed into it ... the more fuel you provide the fire ... the best way to handle is to ignore ... they soon grow tired.

[Bru67]

If someone makes a decision about Berwyn with a population of 56,000 based on what 160 anonymous posters write then they need their own head examined.

Welcome to the real world.

Nope, it's all the negative things that about 3 anonymous posters say coupled with the negative things already out there about Berwyn that concern me -- like the recent news stories set forth in another thread for example.  As to the power of the Board, don't be so sure.  I relied on what I read on the old board when deciding to move here.  There's a lot of competing towns out there and it's hard for a potential home buyer to get real information about what a town is like beyond the BS the realtor tries to sell:  "It's up and coming," "it's the next Bucktown," "look at this lovely house in Oak Park South," etc.  Even residents aren't likely to say much bad about their town to people considering coming to it.  You won't find a board like this about any other nearby town that I'm aware of.  It's a good source for candid information.  

I'm not at all saying there should be nothing negative said or that this is a sales board.  This is a forum for constructive criticism so we can throw ideas out there -- and the main point isn't for us to simply bitch or cry but, rather, improve as a community.  I think we all agree on that.  Some posters just go too far and contribute nothing to this goal.  It's a slippery slope but it's like what one Supreme Court Justice said about pornography years ago, "I know it when I see it."  Unfortunately some subjectivity will need to be used.  I'd only ban the truly abusive posters.  As I said, there's very few.

[OakParkSpartan]

I think the Pinnochio and starting a fire was one of the funniest damn things I've seen written on the net. 

As far as T-Stan, I guess he'd rather be a Mounds rather than Almond Joy 

Cheers,
Brian

[admin]

Jim, IMO the way you're handling it now is just fine. 

If you worry about it being too subjective perhaps users should send you a personal message if they are offended by a poster.  Once you receive 5 messages from different users regarding the same person then they're gone.  Or, 5 complaints would result in a poll to vote that person off.

We need to have something so people don't feel threatened when posting here, taking a tribunal approach is a good idea but maybe too much.

Thanks.  I'm leaning towards some type of polling system to determine who should go, once all of the warning channels have been exhausted.  I don't want to single-handedly have to continue removing people, but polling their depature might serve to get a well-rounded opinion from all site users.

[admin]

I think as owner of the board, you should do things how you want.  I don't like the tribunal idea, as I have seen it break down before.  Ignore the little red devil if you see that post.  It's not difficult to do.

How many complaints are you getting?

Cheers,
Brian

Good ot know about the tribunal idea.  What caused it to break down?  Lack of effort on the side of the members?  The complaints very from week to week, but in this last example, I'd say I've seen at least 4 to 5 complaints regarding separate threads from separate users, all of whom felt very personally offended by the user's choice of words.

[admin]

I vote no censorship.  I like Berwynite's if you don't like it don't read it suggestion, or even respond by saying you don't like it.

This will work for me too, but before that I'd like to present site users the option to ignore specific users completely.  After spending quite some time on the SMF support website, I've read a number of threads from forum owners who also want the "ignore user" option--the authors of the software do not wish to include this feature because they fear it will severely fragment the database that serves as the backbone of the SMF software (forum software running on this site).  I can understand that, since with such an option every time a user clicks on a any thread, the site will have to first read the entire thread and the filter out what it doesn't want.  Over time this can slow down the performance of the site.  We're not at this point yet though, our user base is still relatively small. 

Any php+sql programmers out there?  Boris?  

[admin]

Some items to consider:

1.  People considering moving to Berwyn or doing business here are reading these posts and drawing conclusions about the community based on them.  You don't think potential residents research this community on the internet and find this board?

2.  Abusive posters, like Gone, don't add anything of value (except maybe a laugh or two) but do create a negative impression of the community -- probably more than you realize.

3.  There are many posters with contrary or controversial views who express them intelligently and add value so supression isn't an issue.

4.  There simply aren't a lot of abusive posters -- maybe a couple?

If these discussions were only being viewed by Berwynites, I'd probably have a different opinion.  However, because they are not, I think you delete their accounts.  My $.02.

Very good points, thanks for sharing.  From day one, this site has been designed to help "further Berwyn" into becoming a better community through open discussion.  Knowledge is power, right.  I wish to stay along this line of thought yet still preserve freedom of expression.  You're right--there are less than a handful of abusive posters... not too many at all.  Interesting aspects to consider, re: effect of this site on people just surverying Berwyn from afar.

[admin]

Does the board have an ignore feature that can be activated? This way users can choose to ignore posters then deem to be worthless and not even see the abusive posts in the first place.

I wish it did.  The people who wrote this site's software feel such an option at present would severely impede the performance of the site... it makes sense, but I don't agree with that assessment.  Anyway, I'll keep bothering the authors so that maybe one day such an option will come to light.  Jim

[Paul Fuentes]

I believe the debate between censorship and the flow of free debate is not that difficult to manage.  You oly have to look at the 1st amendement for guidance.  To this point, I have not found Gone's posts so offensive as to warrant banishment.  Although some shots made and taken might be considered by some as low or offensive, profanity was never used and never crossed the line 1st amendment privileges protect. 

Example:  His comment regarding "A Day Without  a Mexican" might be offensive to some.  To me, it was a resounding reminder of the fact that the participation rate of Hispanics in elections is often severely lower than the general turnout.  This is FACT.  I admit it and will not try to justify it.  No need to censor such posts.  In fact, I'd rather remain informed of the opposition's thoughts. 

On the opposite side of the spectrum, when you have spammers, profanity, or graphic sexual content, then yes, banishment, beheading, and eviceration and spewing of entrails is and must be a recourse.  As this is nothing more than forum terrorism.  And we shall make no distinction netween such terrorists and those who harbor them.

Do not give in to onion- skinned complainers.  If we are not adult enough to withstand an adverse comment, then maybe those that should be banned are the children and not the adults.

[The Shadow]

Our beloved country was founded on certain rights and freedoms not afforded to our ancestors. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution insures us the right to free speech. Men and women have died fighting for that freedom. This board is just a simple forum for discussion. It is not the round-table of the Central Intelligence Agency or the G-8. The soft-minded individuals who are so easily offended by sophmoric language or visual images, should find another place to visit if this board is unpallitable. To censor and banish an "obnoxious" poster without warning was both unfair and biased. I have read much worse posts on this board and the perpetrators are still posting. Censorship should not be the sword of justice weilded recklessly, to satisfy a few disgruntled prudes. Most of the comments here seem to support free speech. You even have an attorney's evaluation of the situation and he agrees that censorship is not the answer.

The Shadow  

[OakParkSpartan]

I think as owner of the board, you should do things how you want.  I don't like the tribunal idea, as I have seen it break down before.  Ignore the little red devil if you see that post.  It's not difficult to do.

How many complaints are you getting?

Cheers,
Brian

Good ot know about the tribunal idea.  What caused it to break down?  Lack of effort on the side of the members?  The complaints very from week to week, but in this last example, I'd say I've seen at least 4 to 5 complaints regarding separate threads from separate users, all of whom felt very personally offended by the user's choice of words.

The moderators eventually develop a god complex, and start whacking posts for personal reasons.  Basically people can't handle a little responsibility.

Cheers,
Brian