TAY Atmosphere

Most of you won't read this post because it contains no pictures. And alot of words. But it does have a smiley face.

I originally started lurking and reading posts on TAY to learn, then to meet people, then to show off my skiing prowess. Being quickly humbled in that respect, I now post to share the excitement of good snow, the thrill of gravity, new personal milestones, and what I think are funny occurrences with friends in the mountains.

I've only been publicly flamed once, early on, when I crowed about stumbling upon somebody else's skin track and private stash. Even then I mainly wanted to share the joy, but now I understand their protective jealousy better. These days I'm more careful and even a little jealous of a couple of "my spots". When I post a trip report now, it's still to show off a little, but not for any of you - who know how slow I ski. I write them up in TAY because I want to post a link or email it to my family and non skiing friends so they know I'm still the crazy "skis in the rain guy", or "my dad who skis all year long", or the "nut carrying his skis on a hot dry dusty trail".

So, I think Scotty is a hilarious non-sequitar many times. I covet the time he spends browsing the web to pull in nuggets for us, such as the female version of the pee bottle, his Star Trek pictures (or was that Brit), The Royalty Coronation picture awhile back (or was that Joe)... It's those kinds of things, extracurricular to skiing, that broaden a community. I'm not going to go all Amar on him and set up a graph of his comments, but I'm pretty sure his big issues are personal freedom and responsibility, and he'll argue in favor till the glaciers retreat. And if you're on the opposite side of the couloir on his pet issues, get ready for a ski cut down the middle from him. But if you want to laugh at odd mountaineering inventions, discuss the lightest and best safety gear, or who has the most skis, then he's your man. If you want to climb high, smoke filterless, and ski till your legs shake, he's your man. If you want him to drive hours and hours through the dawn - his company car is the way to go.

As to other long random tracks in which people get really up in each other's grills - I'm too ADHD to really focus in on them, so they don't bother me too much. I would like to keep the swearing to a minimum, not because my kids frequent the site, but mainly because it seems like a lazy way to express enthusiasm. And there are ladies present. But I'll never call you on it.

Here are 2 of my 7 reasons to ski cautiously.

I lurk far more than I post.  Nonetheless, I'll share my perspective.

I'm not particularly old, nor am I particularly wise.  That said, the one thing I've learned in life is that I'm unlikely to regret having been too nice to people.  I try to let that philosophy guide my actions.  In practice that means I do my best to give others the benefit of the doubt and help them instead of criticizing or shaming.  I don't always succeed, but I try.

I witness enough sniping, criticism and petty argument at work.  I look forward to reading TAY in the evenings to get away from all that.  Posts like this bring me joy (gotta hang with those Famous Internet Skiers sometime).

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=18863.0

Threads like this (where we are kind of short with a new user) make me sad.

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...32.msg82627#msg82627

That said, I'm a realist and I understand that we all have our own beliefs.  Life has left some with axes to grind and few other venues in which to grind them.  In some cases that venue becomes TAY.

I appreciate Marcus' measured moderation.  It's a thankless, unending job.  Any website of significant scale ultimately resorts to some form of community moderation (eg. reviews on Amazon, comments on Slashdot, articles on Reddit or Digg) where the community holds itself accountable.  For a site the size of TAY that type of solution is probably overkill nor do we have the resources necessary to implement such a solution.

At the risk of digressing, if you've got ten minutes to spare there is a lot of wisdom in this video.



Some of the key takeaways: if you want others to change use humor instead of criticism or shame; be joyful; invite others to join; cranky people provide social cover for other people to be cranky.

Threads like this (where we are kind of short with a new user) make me sad.

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...32.msg82627#msg82627

Thanks for taking time to post your sample jj.

To me I read that totally different and if it were me I would think...Oh, I should try the search function first then frame my question more effectively before I ask. The poor treatment i read is equal to a beating with 3 peacock feathers.
So everyone has a different take on what is harsh.

my impression of TAY is that of a 'NPR type entertainment' (excellent comparison Pete A):

It's nice when I'm alone, like NPR.

Like NPR, TAY is not loud or screaming, "look at me!" like some radio stations or websites.

It's got a great local feel but keeps me in touch with other regions like NPR.

It's like the internet equivalent to AM broadcasting with technology (all good, but jason should be able to post more 'banger' TR's)

my personal impression is that this should not be a TGR. this website has helped me observe and learn many things about backcountry skiing- i like to think of it as if most of the information shared here is like a good article from NPR. I give it credibility to an extent that i wouldn't at some other ski sites or something.

my impression is that this community is warm and well receiving of folks anxious to tour or learn. there are a few threads (more and more) that trend negatively and i think that it will happen enviably with newer users/people really bored. I think that you are expected to know the 'climate of TAY conversation' because you've been posting for x amount of years. I think you should be moderated to stay positive if you are an experienced poster/contributer. you're accountable to maintain the 'climate' for others to feel when they become new users. otherwise, 15 new people join a week with the impression that this is a looser and more TGR type of forum to banter on in. then we can't have these types of threads where Marcus wants to hear feedback!

other impressions:

i think that this forum is past the point of sharing stashes- it's okay- lots of people read this site, they understand newbie tips: Search the ooooooooooold TR's

i'd vote for more photo's as long as it doesn't cost $ for anyone to host, join, yada yada.

all this being said- thank you marcus and crew.

Just wanted to chime in that I think this a great site. I've learned a lot here and hope it continues to carve its own niche. I think some of the issues that arise are from posts that are trolls, written simply to provoke an emotional response. This is pretty common anywhere, but not feeding the trolls is an effective way to deal with these.

The job of a moderator seems difficult, but it shouldn't really have to be. Just as being a bouncer is actually a pretty quiet job at a bar where the patrons are cool and respect each other. In my opinion, Marcus and Ron do good jobs at it, especially considering its a volunteer gig.

Agreed on the general goodness of the moderation.

jj - thanks for that video link. It's a fun to watch. If you have constructive thoughts on how to use humor in the context of TAY and encouraging folks  to lay off the personal attacks and bullying (to be clear, the relatively small minority who sometimes veer this way), I'd love to hear what your'e thinking. Humor can clearly works well for things like filling the coffee pot or selling a new product or a vision to a team. There are other sorts of behavior changes that seemed to require other sorts of stimulus. E.g. look back at the "broken windows theory" link Lowell provided. The history of how NYC reduced crime is very interesting. Look at the history of desegregation and equal rights in America. I'm not trying to equate folks' concerns about "TAY atmosphere" to these far more serious situations, but rather simply pointing out that some types of change require more than just humor.

I must admit that I'm on the fence about the degree to which some minor tweaks in moderation might change the situation for what I consider to be "the better," or if we'll slide down a slippery slope toward some sort of "worse." The law of unintended consequences weighs heavy here.

I don't, however, buy the "those overly sensitive folks who are backing off their participation on the forum should just buck up/grow up/etc." line. So what if there are other sites where all the community members are "able to take some personal jabbing from time to time?" All this proves to me is that if left unchecked, personal attacks will drive away the folks who can't stand them, and you'll end up with a more homogenous and exclusive site. You can search the web for discussions of "online civility" and you'll see a recurring theme - that where personal attacks are allowed, the participants self-select and the "thin skinned" folks bow out. Echo chamber. All the exhortations to "buck up" aren't going to change the picture. And for those who are hiding behind the notion that any argument will drive these folks away - give it a test! Try being as argumentative as ever, but discipline yourself to avoid going personal. Don't take your "right" to be petty and mean so seriously!

Just because the other kids are doing it doesn't mean we should (TT, CC, TGR, comments on newspaper stories, etc.). Part of being a fully developed adult is having self control - the ability to check one's behavior when it is non-productive. I'd ask the folks who want to hold hard onto the "right" to play hard here whether they feel OK about disenfranchising other community members? If so, perhaps you should carry on. Will avoiding "attacking the person instead of just the ideas" make participating here so pointless that you'll be the one to bail? Does it really need to come down to that? Just something to think about.

To those of you who lean toward the POV expressed by folks like Lowell, Mad Dog, and me, find your own way to speak up, whether in public here or in PMs to folks for whom you might be able to suggest a more constructive approach to discussion and debate. Take up Tangerine's challenge:

Why do the rest of you let it happen? And, where is the respect for each other that we should all demonstrate? Showing civility is not being faux-positive, or superficial, or even passive-agressive. We are a community of backcountry skiers, and we should feel and show respect for each other, period.

And Tangerine (and other "mostly lurkers") - you don't need to let it happen either! Come join us as an active and respectful member of the community!

Perhaps then we can continue with the relatively "light touch" moderation we've seen to-date, no one will feel like their liberty is being reduced, and the moderators can get on with their day jobs.

IMHO, and very H it is, it seems by reading some of these comments that there are some folks here who take themselves WAY too seriously, and don't know how to deal with it when someone gives them a little shit. If you don't like it don't read it, and if you can't take a little crap, make sure you don't attract it.

Not everyone agrees that giving someone shit is in the spirit of keeping it civil.

Not everyone agrees that giving someone shit is in the spirit of keeping it civil.

I didn't say that they did. I said that being given shit is to be expected in life and on the intertubes at times, and that to take it personally and let it bother you very much is probably not the best personal strategy. Those who do choose - and it is a choice - to get bent out of shape because someone gives them a hard time on the web, criticizes their opinion, behavior or position do, I maintain, need to grow up or sack up. As adults we are supposed to be able to deal with this kind of thing without it ruining our day. My kids get pretty upset with each other when they get teased, but I'm pretty sure they'll outgrow it sooner or later. Not to say I'm perfect. Far from it, but I do work to take things in stride when they aggravate me.

It often appears to me there is much confusion or at least lack of consensus about the differences between personal attacks and criticism, sarcasm and teasing, however full of bluster it might be.

often appears to me there is much confusion or at least lack of consensus about the differences between personal attacks and criticism, sarcasm and teasing, however full of bluster it might be.

Yes, clearly people have different threshholds for this stuff. So why not try avoid even sarcasm and teasing with people who you don't know super well while posting here? Is really that big a sacrifice to act on what most of us learned about social behavior while still in elementary school?

Sure, I try not to attract it and I can take it in reasonable doses, but it bums me out to see other valuable community members withdraw due to it. As noted above, I don't believe it's realistic to expect them all to simply "buck up and take it." And if you watch jj's video link, I'd note that the "cover" thing mentioned in that video can go both ways. Seeing folks "get away" with sarcasm and teasing gives cover to others to do the same. Others who may draw the line further toward what many would consider "personal attack." It's a slippery slope. For my part, I'd prefer to be giving cover to folks who want to stand up for a more mature and civil atmosphere.

...What you said, jj. Well put.

Moderators, keep up the good work. Continue to use your best judgement. I am only a lurker, but I appreciate courtesy and civility wherever it is found.

I agree with Jim. "giving shit" in person is vastly different in person than it is online. At least in person, if I'm confronted with sarcasm and or ribbing, you will know by my non-verbals if/when you have crossed that fine line and are in danger of getting your butt kicked. Over the net there's no such feedback between users.

Those who do choose - and it is a choice - to get bent out of shape because someone gives them a hard time on the web, criticizes their opinion, behavior or position do, I maintain, need to grow up or sack up.

It's also really easy to choose not to be a dick on the internet.

Just sayin'.

Posting on the internet requires a bit of a thick skin.  By posting, you're putting yourself out there for all to see.  This, at times, requires a little courage and the ability to not take yourself so seriously. 

By posting in public, you open yourself up to criticism from strangers.  That's just the way it is.  If you want TAY to be just for yourself and your friends, you could always start your own site I guess, or just share with your friends via email, text messages, or phone calls (this is what I suspect most people already do in terms of condition reports).

That being said, I like the TAY atmosphere.  It sometimes feels a little dominated by the conservative, PNW-club (mountaineers, WAC) vibe, but then again, so do the mountains around Seattle, so I suppose that's the way it should be.  I, personally, would prefer Trip Reports to be be actual trip reports with a little effort put into the writing and photos, not just tweets on conditions which I don't really find any value in, but that's just me.

I think that the light-handed moderation that Marcus has brought to the table is great.  Keep up the good work. 

It's also really easy to choose not to be a dick on the internet.

Just sayin'.

This is a perfect example of somebody (oftpiste) being personally attacked (even with bad language), passive aggressively, and it's OK since super yeti appears to be part of the "civil majority."

Unless it's reverse psychology to point out the hypocrisy of the "civil majority"!

It's also really easy to choose not to be a dick on the internet.

Just sayin'.

^^^^Stop calling me names. You're a bully. That's not civil. You should be banned for that. My feelings are deeply hurt and I'm not ever coming here again.

See? This is a good example of what I'm talking about. Did he call me a dick or not? I don't think he did, and I absolutely agree with his point and I haven't been a dick to anyone. There is a case to be made that he did if I wanted to read it that way and it would be my choice to read it that way, but would me doing so seem seriously reasonable to anyone? If he was indeed saying I was a dick, who's the real dick here since my discourse in this thread, though possibly unpopular, has not been anything less than civil and respectful?

OR....... I could CHOOSE to ignore being called a name (if it actually happened) and simply move on. Wouldn't that be the grown-up thing to do?

^^^^Stop calling me names. You're a bully. That's not civil. You should be banned for that.
My feelings are deeply hurt and I'm not ever coming here again.

See? This is a good example of what I'm talking about. Did he call me a dick or not? I don't think he did, and I absolutely agree with his point and I haven't been a dick to anyone. There is a case to be made that he did if I wanted to read it that way and it would be my choice to read it that way, but would me doing so seem seriously reasonable to anyone?  If he was indeed saying I was a dick, who's the real dick here since my discourse in this thread, though possibly unpopular, has not been anything less than civil and respectful?

OR....... I could CHOOSE to ignore being called a name (if it actually happened) and simply move on. Wouldn't that be the grown-up thing to do?

Good example IMO...
I actually know Super Yeti personally, have so for years.
If I called him out for his post, maybe said something like, "d00d you're dick for posting that", he would know that I'm just razzing him, however others might get bent out of shape because they don't understand the nature of the relationship.

Also, I think it's a stretch for anyone here to expect someone to change their personality to suit someones sensibilities.
Someone being direct can and will be seen as being a dick. This falls into the grey area of what I feel becomes intolerant judging of others based upon your own back ground and influences. In my experience, when people start judging others, they 1) set them selves up for disappointment 2) lower themselves in the process of giving into their own self righteous indignation.

My personal feeling is, write/type what you would want someone to write/type back to you.
Avoid making it personal (in the case of disagreement), count to 10, read it again, then press "post".

Bottom line, this is the internet, there is no safe harbor, if you don't deal with confrontation well, perhaps this isn't for you.

Somewhat related:
There's been a fair amount of disdain and judging here of TGR and those who post there.

Sure, there are some people that post there that are less than civil, who don't contribute anything of value, and can be outright abusive. What TGR has that this place doesn’t is an "ignore" feature. It works well, and while I haven't used it a lot, there are at least 5 posters who I block because I know that I wont be missing anything of value. Call it user moderation.

With that said, I have met and made many solid friendships as a result of my interactions over there over the years, many of who, also post here. These are people who's families I have gotten to know, who's cabins I have spent the evening, who's tails I have followed up skin tracks, or down through power stashes. These are people who I trust my life with, and who's backs I keep eyes on. So, perhaps before you find yourself judging an entire community, ask yourself what it is, you don't know and perhaps take a look in the mirror and ask yourself what they might say about you?

To Marcus, I say good job.
I think that in general your approach is working and that you are evolving with it on a daily basis.
Stay true to your own standards, I personally feel that it's heading in the right direction.

PS. What others have said about media

To be crystal clear, my only point about TGR is that just because the people there have thick enough skins to deal with what's often dished doesn't mean everyone can or will learn to do so. The people who can't or won't just don't play there. So let's make this really explicit. Are some of you suggesting that if some "harder play" in the form of name-calling, claims about the intelligence/competence/intentions of others, etc. leads to some long-time members of TAY to bail and prevents some lurkers from diving in, that this is just fine and should be considered "acceptable cost of business on the interwebs?" Is that really what I'm reading?

Oftpiste - thank you for providing a good example of stating your POV w/o needing to resort to making it personal. You raise the issue that it's a fuzzy line between what's personal and what's not. However, to claim that therefore one should entirely ignore the question of abusive posts and personal attacks here is to fall into the "continuum fallacy."

The continuum fallacy (also called the fallacy of the beard[1], line drawing fallacy, bald man fallacy, fallacy of the heap, and the sorites fallacy) is an informal logical fallacy closely related to the sorites paradox, or paradox of the heap. The fallacy causes one to erroneously reject a vague claim simply because it is not as precise as one would like it to be. Vagueness alone does not necessarily imply invalidity.

The fallacy appears to demonstrate that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct (or do not exist at all) because between them there exists a continuum of states. According to the fallacy, differences in quality cannot result from differences in quantity.

There are clearly reasonable and clearly unreasonable cases in which objects either belong or do not belong to a particular group of objects based on their properties. We are able to take them case by case and designate them as such even in the case of properties which may be vaguely defined. The existence of hard or controversial cases does not preclude our ability to designate members of particular kinds of groups.

If it really needs to come to it, I'm sure we could easily dig up cases from the TAY archives from the past year of psts that are much more clearly lacking in basic civility than the example you chose to drill in on.

With that said, I have met and made many solid friendships as a result of my interactions over there over the years, many of who, also post here. These are people who's families I have gotten to know, who's cabins I have spent the evening, who's tails I have followed up skin tracks, or down through power stashes. These are people who I trust my life with, and who's backs I keep eyes on. So, perhaps before you find yourself judging an entire community, ask yourself what it is, you don't know and perhaps take a look in the mirror and ask yourself what they might say about you?

Hear hear. I can't even begin to count the good things I've experienced from TGR as well as here, more so actually from TGR as it's such a much larger and international outfit. Lots of great people, a few knuckleheads. Just like the real world! Don't let the knuckleheads get you down, because whether you like it or not there will always be a few wherever you go.

So let's make this really explicit. Are some of you suggesting that if some "harder play" in the form of name-calling, claims about the intelligence/competence/intentions of others, etc. leads to some long-time members of TAY to bail and prevents some lurkers from diving in, that this is just fine and should be considered "acceptable cost of business on the interwebs?" Is that really what I'm reading?

As your post comes on the heals of mine, I'll comment even though I don't feel singled out.

yes and no.

Just like how Web 2.0 changed the way that brands interact with consumers by giving individuals a voice, communities are effected too. Thinking that you can control something like this is wishful thinking. You can guide it, nurture it, and provide a positive example and hope for the best (sort of like raising a child), but in the end the user group/audience is going to determine in part the end result. All shapes, colors and sizes. You don't always get to choose who your neighbors are going to be.

I think that everyone is responsible for being good citizens, and otherwise following rules of fair play and decent interaction. What I am saying is that people and personalities come in all shapes and sizes, from different backgrounds and different environments. As an example, some people have social skills that are less refined, therefor they may come across as less than civil. this is (and I think Oft also made this point quite well) how the world operates, and as fellow citizens we can CHOOSE to take things personally and lash out, or we can CHOOSE to ask for clarification, to understand what is really going on behind a post. In the end, we share a responsibility in how we respond in these interactions.

I buy all of that. And I truly think diversity is a good thing. I think sharing divergent POVs is super important, and I get great benefit from it when it doesn't degrade into mostly noise.

When someone crosses "the line of civility" I don't think "lashing out" is terribly useful. I do think that calling the line-crossing out, however, in as respectful a fashion as possible, is an example of the way a community defines its norms, and it seems to have some effect. I've gone on record above saying that I'm not sure increasing moderation to in essence "have more control" will yield a great result. But does that mean we just roll over as a group on this?

I don't really see an answer to my question. I'm still left wondering if folks think it's just OK to see some community members pull away because some other members are unwilling to try to share their POV w/o making it personal, or if it would be better to try to shift the tone a bit in a more positive direction (and I'm wide open to constructive and specific suggestions of what might work).

Whose 'line of civility'?

It's too bad some members pull away, but that's their choice. None of us can control how others behave. We can only control our own behaviors. To try to suggest that the majority measure their tone to some undefiniable line in the sand in order not to offend a few with soft underbellies seems to be going in entirely the wrong direction.

I feel badly that they're offended, but I'm not willing to be constantly worried about offending the most easily offended. That makes for a pretty dull conversation.

When someone crosses "the line of civility" I don't think "lashing out" is terribly useful. I do think that calling the line-crossing out, however, in as respectful a fashion as possible, is an example of the way a community defines its norms, and it seems to have some effect. I've gone on record above saying that I'm not sure increasing moderation to in essence "have more control" will yield a great result. But does that mean we just roll over as a group on this?

I don't really see an answer to my question. I'm still left wondering if folks think it's just OK to see some community members pull away because some other members are unwilling to try to share their POV w/o making it personal, or if it would be better to try to shift the tone a bit in a more positive direction (and I'm wide open to constructive and specific suggestions of what might work).

I don't believe the line is as undefinable as you make it out to be. Am I alone in this regard? Anyone? Bueller?

As I think about this discussion, I'm coming to the point of believing that, outside of pretty wildly clear abuse, the only "control" that should be exercised is "self control." But I'm fine with "influence from other community members, including but not limited to the moderators."

I'm coming to the point of believing that, outside of pretty wildly clear abuse, the only "control" that should be exercised is "self control."

This...

And, if others choose to stay away, for better or worse, I'm not sure that there's a much that can be done about that in any way that might not have further reaching, unforeseen impact. As an example, if one chose to moderate and exert more control in an effort to bring those members back in, the resulting environment my cause others to leave, possibly in greater numbers. End result, success or failure? Who's to say?

I don't believe the line is as undefinable as you make it out to be. Am I alone in this regard?

No, not alone.  

In a previous post, gravitymk wrote, "I think it's a stretch for anyone here to expect someone to change their personality to suit someones sensibilities."

I don't think anybody expects people to change their personalities. What we're asking for is for people to moderate their behavior. Moderating one's behavior happens all the time in public spaces. TAY is effectively a public space (for the sake of this discussion).

What we're asking for is for people to moderate their behavior. Moderating one's behavior happens all the time in public spaces.

I believe people here do that as they would in public places. The problem (if you see it as such) is that everyone moderates their own behavior to their own standards. My moderation is probably different than yours or Jim's or the guy that called me a dick.



I'd rather be treated like an adult and be trusted to self-moderate, and be prepared for the fact that others may self-moderate to a greater or lesser degree than I as opposed to being held to someone else's standard of 'civility'.

Another lurker.  I have alternatively been amused and irritated by flame war type "discussions".  Despite the argument that constructive criticism is being presented, I don't find them all that constructive (although occasionally I do find them entertaining).  How about a little rating button for posts?  Enough "flags" and the post gets minimized so you have to click a button to see it.  It would also allow Marcus to see where discussions are getting rowdy quickly (even an e-mail alert?) in case he needs to wade into the fray.  An ignore feature would also work, although I don't think I'd use it much.  Most of the "offending parties" here post valuable info on a pretty regular basis and I wouldn't want to lose that.

In general, Marcus, you're doing a fine job.  I occasionally think you're a little late to pull the trigger, but that's based on my own personal line.  Most of the time I think you walk the tightrope just right.

To the aggressive posters: just please try and tone it down a notch.  If you're getting moderated, please stop to think that maybe there is a reason that isn't based on "the man keeping you down".  If you sincerely didn't mean anything, just re-post with more carefully selected words.

To those who would leave insulted: Relatively few of these shenanigans go on in the trip reports.  Staying there would limit the exposure.

I have been quiet on the following issue waiting for Marcus to address it which he hasn't so I will.
It's no big deal but I think should be in the public arena especially since everybody seems it OK to be so frank  and talk about me.

Firstly, disclosures. PNWBrit is a good friend of mine and is as generous and nice a guy as everybody who knows him says he is but also has an absolutely wicked dry sense of humor and a sarcastic talent equally by very few.
He is not concerned he got banned from TAY... doesn't want back.... hasn't asked any of his friends to get him back and the Bring PNWBrit thing on his friends banners on TAY are just a joke.
I miss the little devil but neither am I concerned if he gets back or not.

Now the story.
Brit was well known on TAY for delivering snarky one-liners especially against posters who he felt had made a stupid statement or action. I have to admit that there were times when even I would do a double take and think that his reply was too harsh and unkind. He knows this.
A few years back he posted a particularly virulent reply to a poster and when he and I were talking about it he mentioned that he had received a PM from Marcus basically congratulating him on the harshness of his post and that some people needed to be slapped down to get the point across and telling him well done. He thought it very strange and significant to the extent that he copied me on the e-mail so I could see it. We discussed it afterwards and I told him I was very surprised by Marcus's message and I never thought about it ever again until Brit got banned. Nor did  Brit and I ever discuss it from that day until the day he got banned.
Now admittedly at that time Marcus was not a moderator or owner of TAY and just a common member of the proletariat like me.
When I raised the issue with Marcus after Brit's banning, he said he vaguely remembered the message . My point to Marcus was that his message to Brit certainly enabled Brits harsh postings. Marcus's defence was that if Brit felt that he( Marcus) had somehow encouraged Brit to post harshly, Brit could have and should have contacted him to clarify especially when he took over as TAY owner.
I suggested to Marcus that he should go public about it out of fairness and he said he would think it over but the discussion got derailed by recent events .
Do I think bad about Marcus for congratulating Brit for a particularly harsh post and then banning him for the same behaviour. No, not really... we're all fallible  and flawed and hypocritical at times and Marcus like Brit is a great human being whom I admire.
However that being said, I do find the story ironic and germain to this thread especially given the posturing by some.

… I suggested to Marcus that he should go public about it out of fairness and he said he would think it over but the discussion got derailed by recent events .
Do I think bad about Marcus for congratulating Brit for a particularly harsh post and then banning him for the same behaviour. No, not really... we're all fallible  and flawed and hypocritical at times and Marcus like Brit is a great human being whom I admire.
However that being said, I do find the story ironic and germain to this thread especially given the posturing by some.

You’re wrong, Chris, it’s absolutely NOT germaine.

Nonetheless, just so the whole story be told, Marcus actually did give some thought to your suggestion at the time that he “out of fairness” go public with the matter and in fact asked me my opinion on the matter. My opinion was then as it is now: “just because you supported the brit on a particular post long before you had anything to do with the management of TAY does not obligate you to support the brit in belittleing and driving off good members. Nor do you have any obligation to explain your past actions to the brit, scotty or anyone else.”

Chris you keep trying to play the “fairness card” and claim that TAY is a republic not a monarchy. But the fact is it is neither. It is a business; a solely owned business owned by one person who may choose to run it in any way he wishes. He has absolutely no obligation to be “Fair” to you or anyone else. Check the Terms of Use; nothing in there about the site, moderators or owners having any obligation to be fair. Probably nothing in the articles of incorporation or by-laws either.

The fact that he started this topic leads me to believe that he truly cares to provide a valuable resource for skiers in an atmosphere that the majority of the current users would prefer. But “fair” is off the table, mate. If you don’t like it go somewhere else and play

You’re wrong, Chris, it’s absolutely NOT germaine.

It is a business; a solely owned business owned by one person who may choose to run it in any way he wishes. He has absolutely no obligation to be “Fair” to you or anyone else.

  But “fair” is off the table, mate. If you don’t like it go somewhere else and play

Well thanks for clarifying that Ron and now I fully understand what TAY is and hopefully everybody else does and that fairness, honesty and trying not to be hypocritical  within your " community" are not requirements of posters or Owners on TAY.
One minute it's a community where good virtues are expected and demanded and the next its a business where they are not required... it gets confusing

Let's not run this one off the rails completely.

First, thanks to everyone for truly excellent comments -- a lot of really good stuff here. I'm going to chew on it for a few days and post my thoughts on it later in the week. Please do continue to chime in here.

Re: the last few posts -- Chris and I have talked at length about this and I'm happy to discuss it here if folks really want to. I knew when I shut down the "Smuggest" thread that we'd be having this larger conversation down the road and I knew this particular topic would come in, so it's not a big deal.

I'll touch on it more later in the week -- don't have time now -- but reducing the process of managing this site to fair or unfair doesn't do it justice. Anyway, more on that later.

Again, thanks to everyone for such thoughtful responses.