Shutting Down Threads

[Bill N]

A recent discussion was shut down with one of the moderators making this comment:  "This is an RV forum, let's get back to RVs".  Another moderator shut down the thread and I can't say I  really disagree because the subject was starting to get a bit heated.  But that discussion was in the Shade Tree which by it's very description "A free wheeling discussion of NON-RV items........." makes it a rather loosely described item.  The only thing that was disagreeable in that discussion was that law enforcement officers were described as 'scum' in one persons opinion.  Just my opinion that if no individual is being directly verbally attacked a topic should be allowed to continue.  I am not trying to split hairs only don't want the Shade Tree to be treated as something that now has to be RV related.

Bill

 

[Back2PA]

don't want the Shade Tree to be treated as something that now has to be RV related.

Nothing has changed. I made that comment because this is an RV forum, and people come here to talk about RVing. The Shade Tree is envisioned as a place to have freewheeling, friendly, non-confrontational non-RV discussions. That thread was locked because the conversation had devolved into posts pointed at other members

 

[signcut]

I'm going to guess that the idea was that the idea was to prevent a dogpile that could turn ugly... but that's just a guess. This is one of the more tightly moderated forums that I have been on, and I don't say that as a bad thing; some can get pretty nasty because folks know what that they can get away with saying, things that it would be unlikely to hear face to face. It might mean that there are some subjects that will rarely last long, but that isn't necessarily a negative; while I like to talk about all kinds of stuff, and like to think that I can keep from being a jerk while doing just that, I also don't enjoy seeing others go at it about some issue that will likely remain the same in their own view regardless of the amount of heat exchanged...

 

[RVMommaTo6]

I'm new here, but my perception of things is that the mods know who the "trouble makers" are and could see where things were going, or even where it already was. I personally have already noticed that specific user(s) seem to be here just to throw controversy into every conversation and post inappropriate comment after inappropriate comment. It's too bad that these person/people ruin for the rest of us to continue a mature discussion, but they are apparently incapable of maturity and self regulation and need mods to do it for them.

 

[John From Detroit]

I will say this.. First: this is not the only forum family I belong to.. IN fact I dropped one (An rv family at that) recently.

But in some of them... I see many threads in serious need of closure.  Way beyond their life spans and they are still getting new posts every day.

 

[Guest]

I'm new here, but my perception of things is that the mods know who the "trouble makers" are and could see where things were going, or even where it already was. I personally have already noticed that specific user(s) seem to be here just to throw controversy into every conversation and post inappropriate comment after inappropriate comment. It's too bad that these person/people ruin for the rest of us to continue a mature discussion, but they are apparently incapable of maturity and self regulation and need mods to do it for them.

+1

I knew as soon as i saw that "scum" comment what was comming which is why i just tried to ignore the comment and go on.  Several of us on that thread stated afterwards that you cant paint everyone with the same brush.  I thought that was handled well at that point and we were all going to move on. 

Then there was a reaction about the word used and thats when things got out of hand.  I agree with the fact that the word should not have been used to describe any one group. I am just saying that i had hoped it would not be specifically reacted to as i knew once it was it would blow up and get away from the original point of the topic.  Maybe a better thing to do was to remove the comment and not close the thread.  But i support their choice to do what they feel is right.

I personally have seen threads that got alittle out of bounds and then come right back, maybe this would have to.

 

[SargeW]

I get your point Bill, and usually we try to let things progress naturally. Often times other members will steer the topic back on track. That is usually our preferred method of moderation. Some topics start off borderline, and those are the ones likely to attract the most attention of the mods, just as yesterdays topic did.

All of you make some very good points, and I agree. It's often a fine line deciding how far a topic should go before it has run it's course. Sometimes posts can get so long that the original ideas are so far buried that statements start getting repeated because no one starts looking at the post from the beginning. 

Once a post goes toxic it requires immediate action. It's important to us to maintain the "friendly" part of the forum atmosphere. We rarely ever have to take action like I did yesterday. And that's good, it means that the forum is mostly on track. I did receive several personal messages from members thanking me for taking action, and to those folks I say thank you. Keeping this forum a place to safely share information in a friendly non threatening atmosphere is why Admin and all of the moderators do this task, for free.

 

[SpencerPJ]

Is there a way to flag a thread that you do not want to see again, so we don't have to look at it?  Or flag a member if we don't want to see their comments?  I always just hit the 'unread posts since last visit', and there are threads that I loathe seeing time and time again, and like a fool, I click on them like the curious cat. 

 

[Rene T]

Is there a way to flag a thread that you do not want to see again, so we don't have to look at it?  Or flag a member if we don't want to see their comments?  I always just hit the 'unread posts since last visit', and there are threads that I loathe seeing time and time again, and like a fool, I click on them like the curious cat.

\

Go into your profile and you'll find a place where you can add a members name if you don't want to read their posts.
Click on "Modify Profile, then click on Buddies/Ignore Lists then click on "Ignore List". Then just add the name of the person.

 

[Alaskansnowbirds]

You can ignore individuals but I don't think you can ignore threads.
To ignore individuals, go to your profile, click on account settings, buddies/ignore list, edit ignore list.  There you can list the individuals that you don't want to see their posts. When you are reading a thread, you will see that they posted a comment but you won't see it unless you click on it.

To ignore an entire board on the forum, go to your profile, ignore boards and put a check in the box next to the boards you don't want to see.
Hope this helps.

 

[Bill N]

As usual I got off the track I intended when I started this topic.  What I was trying to say and didn't come out very clearly is that please do not turn every board into an RV related board only.  The Shade Tree is serving as an outlet for NON RV posts but the comment that this is an RV Forum only seemed to imply that somehow, non-RV posts were not to be tolerated.  Nuff said before I stir up the natives even more...lol

BTW - I do agree with the shutdown of that thread - it was headed for the drain at lightning speed.

Bill

 

[Back2PA]

Bill, as I said, nothing has changed

 

[Tom and Margi]

I believe it's important to remember that this is a forum owned by Tom Jones.  He makes the rules and he and his all-volunteer staff enforce the rules.  If you don't want to follow his rules, don't frequent the forum.  Having been a member for well over 20 years I can vouch for the fact that they are very fair and very consistent in keeping this forum on an even keel as envisioned by the original founder/owner Ed Juge. 

 

[Tom]

FWIW the description of our Shade Tree board says:

"Freewheeling non-RV discussion over coffee, under the shade tree, or around the campfire."

As Scott said, nothing has changed, including our forum rules.

 

[Tom]

Thanks Margi. Glad you've stuck around all those years. Remember when the Shade Tree was used by folks to discuss their grandkids?

FWIW this is our 25th anniversary.

 

[Tom and Margi]

Thanks Margi. Glad you've stuck around all those years. Remember when the Shade Tree was used by folks to discuss their grandkids?

Yes, I do! ;D  Lots of good natured teasing, Joe Lacey's riddles, and other light hearted subjects.

 

[Guest]

Since it was my thread i guess maybe i should apologize for it.  I sorta knew it might be a prickly pear but i was hoping it would not go in that direction and it would remain friendly.  I will try to be more cautious going forward regarding the topic of my threads.  Now that i am getting more aware of how things are and how some members reflect on things at times, caution is necessary.

 

[Alaskansnowbirds]

Remember when the Shade Tree was used by folks to discuss their grandkids?

I've been around I think from the early 90's. Now if that subject came up it would be about our great grandkids.

You're making me feel old. :-\

 

[Tom]

Me too Don  ;D

 

[signcut]

Since it was my thread i guess maybe i should apologize for it.  I sorta knew it might be a prickly pear but i was hoping it would not go in that direction and it would remain friendly.  I will try to be more cautious going forward regarding the topic of my threads.  Now that i am getting more aware of how things are and how some members reflect on things at times, caution is necessary.

I wouldn't worry about it too much; ofttimes, it's less the topic than the response, and nobody is forced to make a comment, so don't feel that you have to take responsibility for something that you didn't do. Of course, some topics are just dynamite with a lit fuse, waiting to blow up, but I didn't think that that particular one was presented like that.

Just saying...