Vague, yet mindless, hostility

[sheablue]

I assume you belong to the cartel, too. Or as they say, throw a rock into a pack of dogs and the one you hit howls.

Zzzzzzz ...

 

[LadyVer]

Zzzzzzz ...

Please stop quoting the miserable, misogynist asshole. Thank you.

 

[sheablue]

Please stop quoting the miserable, misogynist asshole. Thank you.

Quite right. As a loyal member of ... the human race, I recognize his pathetic vileness is not always entertaining to all. No more quoting.

 

[LadyVer]

Quite right. As a loyal member of ... the human race, I recognize his pathetic vileness is not always entertaining to all. No more quoting.

...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Zzzzzzz ...

You and blubber butt got caught.

 

[jsmiam]

This thread isn't even rising to irony. More like inevitability.

{{Crocodile Dundee voice}}"Ahh... Heh, heh, heh. That's not Irony..."

{{quote quote quote}} (in place of "swish swish swish from the Movie)

This person appears to have staked his *life* on the security of a website run by people with no credentials in security, and a sleazy business model. My sympathy is limited; there are a number of stupid ways to die and he's chosen one.

if being here can get you fired or divorced, LEAVE.

Done with this conversation. I'm on this site to deal in fiction; knowing what real people think just pisses me off.

{{{Crocodile Dundee voice}}"THAT'S irony."

In other words... You're not exactly in a position to lecture others on being contentious, are ya?

(Quotes from the Ashley Madison post also somewhat current, OP's comments start at about page 5: http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1209307&page=6)

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I'm happy to be contentious. I'm happy to argue ideas. It's the ad hominem I object to, and that's what I called out in this thread.

Though, yeah, the comment in being done with a conversation was needlessly pointed.

 

[waking_dream]

I feel for you OP, you're far from the only one with this opinion. I don't think it's solved by blocking one or even five people, either. It helps, definitely, but once a thread is derailed, the original point gets lost, sometimes in pages of other crap. Surely there must be a grown-up, troll-free writing forum out there somewhere?

And forgive me if this is a silly question, but why isn't AH moderated when so many are? Hopefully for a better reason than no one wants the job...

 

[HandsInTheDark]

And forgive me if this is a silly question, but why isn't AH moderated when so many are? Hopefully for a better reason than no one wants the job...

Moderators would be bound to offend the people they corrected. My guess is that Lit doesn't want to offend the unpaid people who make the site possible.

Moderation has never struck me as a great solution to rudeness anyway. But yeah, not a job I'd care for. "You deleted my post? I'll Two your stories for the rest of my days."

 

[oggbashan]

...

And forgive me if this is a silly question, but why isn't AH moderated when so many are? Hopefully for a better reason than no one wants the job...

There was a campaign some time ago to have the Authors' Hangout moderated. That campaign led to very angry exchanges and personal attacks, much worse than happens now.

I would not want to repeat that. It was very unpleasant.

The problem was that no moderator could satisfy everyone. Some wanted a very proactive moderator to remove everything that was considered offensive - in a particular group's definition of 'offensive'; others wanted that group removed because they were offensive in themselves by wanting censorship of everything that they objected to.

Literotica supports Free Speech. As I have posted in an essay, one of the principles of Free Speech is that other people's Free Speech can offend you.

 

[sr71plt]

I feel for you OP, you're far from the only one with this opinion. I don't think it's solved by blocking one or even five people, either. It helps, definitely, but once a thread is derailed, the original point gets lost, sometimes in pages of other crap. Surely there must be a grown-up, troll-free writing forum out there somewhere?

And forgive me if this is a silly question, but why isn't AH moderated when so many are? Hopefully for a better reason than no one wants the job...

Except the OP is playing a forum game too. Coming here with a 200-post history and wanting the forum to be reupholstered to his/her claimed desires. If the OP wants to be part of the solution rather than the problem, she/he wouldn't just "pat on my back" complain. The OP would trace down where the problems start on threads and post an objection to those responsible for that.

The question for why the AH isn't moderated isn't for the forum, it's for Laurel. PM her directly with that question.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I've been on boards since 1997, and whenever a board gets a moderator it dies, because moderators hate all speech but their own....its like farts, our farts are the best.

 

[TxRad]

LOl

JBJ doesn't want the AH moderated because he'd get tossed out on his ass like he was in three of the moderated forums on Lit.

Now back to our regularly scheduled conversation already in progress.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

LOl

JBJ doesn't want the AH moderated because he'd get tossed out on his ass like he was in three of the moderated forums on Lit.

Now back to our regularly scheduled conversation already in progress.

^^^^his farts smell the best, he told me. He wont mention how a moderator was defeated by vote a while back. Wasn't even close.

 

[waking_dream]

Yikes, this whole moderator issue goes much deeper than I realized! I don't believe censorship is the point of a moderator, keeping what is meant to be an earnest discussion on track is (and I'm not just referring to this thread). Of course it wouldn't be necessary if self-moderation in the face of disagreement came into play, perhaps that was the OP's point.

Ultimately, it's the variety of personalities that makes this place interesting. Carry on!

 

[TxRad]

Yikes, this whole moderator issue goes much deeper than I realized! I don't believe censorship is the point of a moderator, keeping what is meant to be an earnest discussion on track is (and I'm not just referring to this thread). Of course it wouldn't be necessary if self-moderation in the face of disagreement came into play, perhaps that was the OP's point.

Ultimately, it's the variety of personalities that makes this place interesting. Carry on!

We had a vote on whether or not to have a moderator here in the AH a while back. Funny thing is, 90% of the people who voted hadn't posted to the AH in years, sometimes never. Kind of defeats the whole purpose when the people who are here every day get shouted down by a mob that aren't here..

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

We had a vote on whether or not to have a moderator here in the AH a while back. Funny thing is, 90% of the people who voted hadn't posted to the AH in years, sometimes never. Kind of defeats the whole purpose when the people who are here every day get shouted down by a mob that aren't here..

I'm the man TEX and Lady Ver long to be.

 

[waking_dream]

We had a vote on whether or not to have a moderator here in the AH a while back. Funny thing is, 90% of the people who voted hadn't posted to the AH in years, sometimes never. Kind of defeats the whole purpose when the people who are here every day get shouted down by a mob that aren't here..

Yes, that would lessen the effectiveness of their collective voices!

Speaking from experience, it's difficult to want to jump in and offer my .02 when I don't know if it will end up earning me a smack-down. I guess many writers aren't in-your-face types, and they're really only comfortable with outright conflict and name-calling in a fictional format, if at all.

Some of us are quiet types who wish we could voice our opinions and have meaningful dialogue without the threat of derailment or vitriol. I'm guessing those are the 90% who voted pro-moderator. I would have!

As the OP stated, moderators don't cure rudeness. Self-restraint and good old fashioned manners do, but it's moot when people just post shit to entertain themselves.

All of that aside, the silent 90% probably still enjoys lurking here, I know I do

 

[sr71plt]

Y
As the OP stated, moderators don't cure rudeness. Self-restraint and good old fashioned manners do, but it's moot when people just post shit to entertain themselves.

Being regularly called down for rudeness and irrelevant attack by third parties who can be seen as not just tag teaming has been effective in the rare instance it's been used. Fact is, though, that most enjoy it being done as long as it isn't being done to them--and people post shit not only to entertain themselves but in the knowledge that it's entertaining a lot of other forum users too. Reality time.

 

[oggbashan]

...

Some of us are quiet types who wish we could voice our opinions and have meaningful dialogue without the threat of derailment or vitriol. I'm guessing those are the 90% who voted pro-moderator. I would have!

As the OP stated, moderators don't cure rudeness. Self-restraint and good old fashioned manners do, but it's moot when people just post shit to entertain themselves.

All of that aside, the silent 90% probably still enjoys lurking here, I know I do

The vote was massively AGAINST a moderator.

But by that time the vitriol in the Authors' Hangout was really poisonous.

 

[waking_dream]

Haha I read that completely wrong! I assumed it was an unofficial vote that wouldn't have meant anything anyway! Well there you go, the people demand a free rein, even if they don't get involved.

 

[redzinger]

On another forum I frequent, they were short of mods.

I started a thread asking who, out of the regulars, would make a good mod. There was quite a serious discussion, with several names being thrown in of people who immediately stated they weren't interested. A shortlist was created, and I hoped the admins would take notice of it.

No joy.

In the end, one of the admins created a secret moderation forum, to discuss and decide action reported posts. However, very few of the people chosen were ones selected by the forum users. And some of the first actions consisted of most of those ganging up on a couple of mouthy unpopular posters, which led to their banning, and many regulars leaving.

Though I dislike when threads here descend into tiresome, petty bickering (and I can never keep track who's in which clique or whatever), I'm not sure which is worse - hands off or hands on.

 

[oggbashan]

I'm a moderator for several places elsewhere, not on Literotica.

My attitude is hands off as far as possible with an off-board warning if people get too aggressive.

 

[Laurel]

The question of a moderated AH has come up now and then over the years. It's currently moderated by admins, and we remove anything that violates our Forum Guidelines:
http://www.literotica.com/support/forum_rules.shtml

Those rules apply to the entire forums. There are other targeted forums - GLBT, Personals, etc. - which have other guidelines. In those forums, posts that aren't on the forum topic are moved to a forum where they are better suited.

Currently, the AH has been designated as a place for "[a] place for writers and readers to socialize and discuss the craft of writing." That is, non-authors can come here and discuss writing, stories, and related issues. Literotica authors (that is, people with stories published on the story side) can post whatever they like, from writing tips to plot bunnies to vocabulary-stimulating games.

We are fine with having a moderated AH - if that's what the overwhelming majority (3/4) of the AH wants. Moderation implies that there would be guidelines specific to the AH. It also implies that someone would be there to enforce those guidelines (by moving off-topic discussions to where they would be on-topic).

Given the diversity here, we've never had a 3/4 majority agree on 1) a set of AH rules, 2) a moderator, and 3) that the AH should be moderated in the first place.

One thing that's important to remember is that you are the ones who make this place what it is. We just supply the software and the e-space; you guys (and gals) are the ones who set the tone, give this place the atmosphere it has.

Each one of you has the power to make this place whatever you want it to be. You do this by promoting discussions that are of interest to you, and ignoring/banishing those discussions/themes that are not of interest.

It's easy to think that if you come across something/someone that irritates you, you must fight against it/them. This does not work in online communities. Engaging someone you don't like in a flame war will not bend them to your will or make them be nicer/smarter/kinder/whatever it is you want them to be.

You can decorate this place however you like, using the tools provided. Put people who routinely irritate you on your IGNORE list (be it your internal list or the VB one). When you find people whose posts make you happy/inspired, let those people know by posting at them. Engage them. Encourage them. Start the kinds of threads you want to see here. Post to threads you on topics that you enjoy, help these discussions grow.

Those users who you don't enjoy - they'll still do that irritating thing they do. And that's fine, because you're too busy doing your thing to notice them. By individually moderating your own AH experience, the need for forum-wide moderation may be eliminated, and the diversity of thought that has made this place inspiring and great can be preserved.

If you ever do decide you'd like moderation, or have questions on anything, feel free to PM me.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

On ELLEN today TEX revealed that he's Trans-SMART and made the change from birdbrainiac to brainiac.