Censorship etc... have at it

EDIT (Marcus): If anyone wants to discuss TAY policy, here's a spot for it. Go to town.

********

A lot of us had our post deleted... no problem... censorship is accepted on this website and we can live with the rules and the results of breaking them..... When they are evenly applied.!!!
Your post after basically agreeing with the censor and telling him he's done a good job then goes and calls  out the people whose posts were deleted  as acting like 7 year old girls.
Why is this not a personal attack on those people whom believe their posts were valid criticism's after all yours is just an opinion like ours was.
I and i'm sure the others are offended as being characterized as acting like spoilt seven year old girls.
Your post should be deleted as well in fairness even though it sucks up to the administrator.
Censorship should be applied evenhandedly not just to the opinions you disagree with.

I have used the report to moderator button to ask that this post be deleted for the reasons outlined above.
But it probably won't!

Censorship should be applied evenhandedly not just to the opinions you disagree with.

I'm not so sure that's true, Scotty. I suspect you may find that historically censorship may have been applied more often than not in a manner just the opposite of what you are suggesting.

I have used the report to moderator button to ask that this post be deleted for the reasons outlined above.

Request denied ;D (posters don't make that decision, Scotty. You know that)

I'm not so sure that's true, Scotty. I suspect you may find that historically censorship may have been applied more often than not in a manner just the opposite of what you are suggesting.Request denied ;D (posters don't make that decision, Scotty. You know that)

I suspected as much.
Brown nosing the new regime and then making a personal comment about others acceptable from now on. Good to know.
Rules are always changing, I like to keep updated on where the boundaries lay.
Thanks Ron. ;D

I guess I missed the action when it was occurring, but I have done a little reviewing to try to understand.

Here's the thing: often a moderator needs to make quick decisions on the action to be taken, if any. When there are a lot of posts involved, reviewing them and trying to understand all of the factors in play takes considerable time. Adding to the complexity are "report to moderator" messages which need to be considered. On top of that is the issue of interpreting the written words of a post without the normal conversational clues which give a clue about nuances (sarcasm, humor, anger, etc). Then there is the time needed to actually moderate, which can requires moving posts, editing posts and adding editing notes, and posting about actions taken. All of this needs to be done in an impartial way that removes from consideration the identity of the posters whose posts are being moderated.

Several posters seem to be implying that they could do a better job of moderating than the current moderators. I encourage these posters to consider putting their money where their mouth is and volunteering to become a moderator. As a moderator you can expect to:
- spend time throughout the day, each day, reading posts to make sure you don't miss any potential problems;
- spend time throughout the day, each day, checking your email for reported problem posts in case you have overlooked a potential problem;
- spend time evaluating potential problem posts and deciding what action to take, as described above;
- spend time taking action;
- spend time dealing with posters who are unhappy with the action you took;
- receive condemnation for actions you took;
- never receive praise for actions you took, even if you moderated in a very even-handed way;
- receive zero compensation for the time you spend moderating.

Moderator volunteers: please post in this thread regarding your desire and qualifications to become a moderator.

Rules are always changing, I like to keep updated on where the boundaries lay.
Thanks Ron. ;D

The RULES have always been the same Scotty. How you chose to perceive and interpret them for your own entertainment value is, of course, your prerogative, as you so aptly demonstrate.
You have been invited to become a moderator before. You might actually want to consider this time making application as Charles suggests in order to help maintain  greater equality in the moderating process on the site. We both acknowledge that I have some lacking in the "fairness" side of the process (luckily, my being fair is not part of the rules, however ) Of course if you are only in it for the entertainment and you are not really that interested in fairness then it would obvioulsy be a waste of your time.

You have been invited to become a moderator before.

If there was hope, it must lie in the proles?

If there was hope, it must lie in the proles?

A learned man
"If there is hope . . . it lies in the proles" (George Orwell).

Instead we have a Chestnut Tree cyber Café

Every time I or anybody else complain about some censorship by a moderator we get the same response.
"if you think you can do better.... etc etc. and how its a thankless job"
You counter any criticism with a defensive posture and the same refrain " If you can do better..." like a 7 year old!

I know its a thankless job and I didn't force you to take it, but it's an important job.
I don't want to be a moderator, never had , never will, not because I'm lazy or not prepared to put in the time. I know I don't have the temperament for it and wouldn't be good at it.

However as I stated in my post that was deleted,TAY had become the Singapore of skiing websites, a pleasant place to spend some time but very controlled by rules on behaviour that in my opinion, and I accept that probably the majority will feel differently, stifles meaningful discussion on some issues and inhibits creativity and evolution of the website. It also, and I was extremely thankful Lowell made reference to it in his post to Charles ( although we probably disagree on the outcome), creates a lot of hubris within TAYers that the "civility" of their website somehow elevates it and them above others who decide upon a more uncensored approach and live with the messy but dynamic results. TAYers are very quick to make disparaging remarks about other websites , TGR in particular and make it clear that  they think the inhabitants of that website are juvenile gangstas.

There is a lot of dross on TGR but it has far more meaningful discussions about skiing, politics etc than TAY and continually evolves.
Now, people may say , fine TAY is like this ,TGR is like that, you gotta choice! That's true but it's my opinion, and only mine, that TAY's format is stagnant and parochial and deters some meaningful discussion because of it's boy scout, be positive all the time attitude that has been created by the implementation of the behavioral rules..... a bit like Singapore.

FWIW, I'm among those who appreciate the tone set on this site. No, I don't agree with very scrap of policy (e.g. the much-discussed photo posting limit), but I appreciate the fact that vitriol is kept in check. I've seen the liberal allowance for focusing on other posters instead of on the topics at hand (beyond the topic of how stupid, selfish, etc. etc. other members are) lead to some long-term grudge matches elsewhere that don't seem in any way positive. Is something lost to get the civility? Sure. For me, it's a good trade. Clearly there are others who prefer a different balance (including owners and moderators of said other sites), and I don't in any way hold myself as being better than them. I can choose how much or little I frequent those sites, and how I behave there. But I do appreciate the tone Charles and his moderators have managed to set here. And I've seen both substantive discussion and creative posts happening on this site, so I do not buy that moderating for civility leads to pure pablum.

And I think it's quite reasonable for the mods to ask people who demonstrate energy and opinion for how the site is run (through incessant posts about it) to consider using that energy and opinion by stepping up to be a mod themselves.

Being a moderator seems like a pain in the @$$! Sure, the decisions are going to come across as uneven and perhaps even arbitrary. Only a moderation-free site will avoid that phenomenon...

This is one of the best moderated forums I've been on (if not THE best). 

Since this whole thread seems to stem from Z-bo's comment:  This site does seem to allow for a discussion on the state of the average bc skiers skills in a non-personal non-attacking way.  Moving the discussion from a TR thread to random tracks makes sense.  So what's wrong with removing Z-bo's post which could have been interpretted as personal?

Policy and actions by the moderators seem good in this case  IMHO.


PS. what's with the pic limit gripes? doesn't everyone have a pic account somewhere to link to?

There is a lot of dross on TGR but it has far more meaningful discussions about skiing, politics etc than TAY

TGR is a much larger-profile site with more members, so it follows that there would be a greater quantity of posts and topics, but does that hold true of the quality as well?

A social experiment probably could be designed to answer this one.  A new member could try posting the same question about skiing both here and at TGR, and then would see what responses he/she receives.  I'm guessing it would be fairly easy to determine on which site they receive more creative, constructive, and meaningful feedback at.  Maybe this wouldn't be entirely a reflection of the level of moderation, but it surely has an influence.

Interesting idea BUT you've already skewed the result!

Good point. OK, slightly different question then, for disguise.

So what's wrong with removing Z-bo's post which could have been interpretted as personal?

Well , thats part of my point.
COULD HAVE= WAS SUBJECT to ITERPRATATION
Many of us who were involved, felt that Z-Bo's post ( even if some didn't agree with it) felt it was honest, written in the vernacular , the way people actually talk and although contoversial, brought up some valid points.
If, as I understand it, he had more generalized his statement like, " Nothing personal to those that did it, but in general , it really concens me when people who can't ski, ruin a beautiful powder face. " that would have been OK.
The people who runied the face would still have taken it personally because they knew who he was refering to and although he would still have got a lot of negative feeback the post wouldn't have been deleted.Maybe it would have because it was negative about some established TAYers??
Semantics and interpretation.
If you really examine the discourse with an open mind, it was actually the TAYers who responded in an rude, virulant and even more derogatory fashion.

PS.  what's with the pic limit gripes?  doesn't everyone have a pic account somewhere to link to?

I'd rather read a TR with rich and plentiful supporting visuals here than have just a link to your blog or picassa account.

Rather interestingly the very finest content at TGR, outside of the many instances of massive community support, huge database of technical knowledge, industry insider news, regional/international diversity and runaway sense of fun, are the picture laden TRs. In perhaps the ultimate irony Most of the authors of the highest quality TAY TRs cross post there complete with their unrestricted visual content.

The argument against such a posting style here, as far as I can gather, is that someone might be irritated at slow page loading via dial up or have too teenzy a telescreen?

Also... I've met many. many, many dedicated BC skiers who ridicule the rather too precious attitude of this place and who mostly just read it rather than bother contributing and complying. Ever notice the replies:reads ratios here?

It seems a pity that in the current TAY circle  j**k of self congratulation the fact that content and "width" is being turned off or away is completely overlooked.

In perhaps the ultimate irony Most of the authors of the highest quality TAY TRs cross post there complete with their unrestriced visual content.

Also... I've met many. many, many dedicted BC skiers who ridicule the rather too precious attitude of this place and who mostly just read it rather than bother contributing and complying. Ever notice the replies:reads ratios here?

It seems a pity that in the current TAY circle  j**k of self congratulation the fact that content and "width" is being turned off or away is completely overlooked.

Exactly, and I absolutely agree with your observations and have the same experience with lots of people who use the telemetry but think the site too "precious".
Even Lowell Skoog, who had been very dismissive of TGR in the past posts and stated his disdain for it, posts his NMJJ ( whatever its' called ) on TGR! And thats not a personal attack, just a fact.

I see your point about content. The high view:post ratio is both good and bad. If people don't have real comments to add, then we get more self congratulation if more viewers post comments. On the otherhand, ALL of my bc partners are NOT members of TAY, but do commonly view TR.

While I agree the pic limit is on the low side, can't you just url-tag as many photos as you want in a post? It doesn't take that long to do. And yes, the TR that are well-written and have more pics are more enjoyable, but for every one of those there's a 2 sentence TR with 20 non-inspired pics that are a waste of bandwidth and storage.

Many of us who were involved, felt that Z-Bo's post ( even if some didn't agree with it) felt it was honest.  .  .  .

z-bo erroneously implicated our group as putting in "skin track-like" tracks on the subject line, which seemed dishonest to me because it was a manifestly false charge.  Hence, I corrected him via a public post and shot him a PM to advise of his error.  So, no, in my informed (I was there) view, his post was either not honest or unwittingly erroneous.  I really really don't like being falsely accused of anything.

There's more to the story.  I heard yesterday that someone (not in my party) skied the subject line that day with a broken Dynafit heel, and he experienced at least one nasty fall.  It is well possible that the big broad tracks z-bo found to be offensive were laid by the guy flailing to get down on a broken binder.  IMV, a guy ought to get his facts straight before launching personal attacks.

Re the santization of this site in the name of civility, it is what it is, not unlike other moderated forums (e.g., NWHikers).  Charles has been hosting the party and now Marcus is the host, and the host has the discretion to moderate the tone.

I recall seeing some spirited debate in Random Tracks -- the one responding to the "nothing is worth doing unless one's life is on the line" or some such similar quip comes to mind -- and I'd like to see more spirited discourse on TAY.  But, if the mods want to glean name-calling and other cheap shots on TR's, that's fine with me.  But, then, I'm biased because I was the subject of an unfounded false attack.

It would depend entirely on the question. Stupid questions, questions that could easily be answered by doing a search, (especially in the wrong forums) or those with underlying attitude get the treatment at TGR. One has to earn credibility there, and sometimes that involves having a thick skin for a while.

I've had tons of great experiences there. Been JONGed a few times early on, especially when I was looking for someone to ski sidecountry with in Utah where I failed to be clear about my experience and understanding of avalanche safety. I learned from that and adjusted my approach to such things as a result.

I've met and skied with many, many cool people there including a bunch of guys that helped my son select his line at the jr. comp at Snowbird last year and showed us goods for 3 days, bought countless items at extraordinarily good prices, sold a boatload of gear, and learned so much about everything skiing that I can't even express it. If it weren't for TGR I'd never have attended str8line camp - a life altering time.

As for their lack of moderation? Well, things have a way of working themselves out. Those who can't take the heat bail out. Those who can benefit enormously. A temporarily bruised ego isn't necessarily a bad thing.

TGR is a much larger-profile site with more members, so it follows that there would be a greater quantity of posts and topics, but does that hold true of the quality as well?

A social experiment probably could be designed to answer this one.  A new member could try posting the same question about skiing both here and at TGR, and then would see what responses he/she receives.  I'm guessing it would be fairly easy to determine on which site they receive more creative, constructive, and meaningful feedback at.  Maybe this wouldn't be entirely a reflection of the level of moderation, but it surely has an influence.

I'm not in favor of censorship, but I do like to take some of my news in a well mannered library.  Sometimes the subway station is fine, but much of the time, the noise level is too much there.  As for read/reply ratios, I couldn't say if there might be an optimum participation level, but please don't turn this into another TT with endless chatter over almost nothing and where the goal appears to be maximising posting numbers

Re the santization of this site in the name of civility, it is what it is, not unlike other moderated forums (e.g., NWHikers).  Charles has been hosting the party and now Marcus is the host, and the host has the discretion to moderate the tone.

You are right, the host, owner of this site has the absolute right to do what they want. No denying that, but lets be honest about the moderation.
Here's an example.
The post that starts this thread is mine, moved from the other thread and edited by Marcus.
In it I asked for a thread by a friend of Marcus's to be deleted because it contained IMV a personal attack based upon the rules that Marcus was defending. ( it don't bother me at all but I was doing it to make a point.)
Marcus deleted the thread so which I objected and then edited my post to take out the name of the person who made the post , whom I mention in my preface ( as it not being personal) before complaining.

Marcus is then quite happy to move my post ( edited by him) to a prominent position to promote this discussion.
I can only infer from this, that Marcus removed his friends name so as to not embarrass him but quite wiling to let me fly in the wind.  Selective moderation and cronyism has always been the TAY way up to now and the new regime seemingly intends to perpetuate it.

Scotsman, you seem to have a very clear idea of how things should be done as well as how things are failing to be done as they should be done. The offer to make you a moderator still stands so that you can put this knowledge to work and help improve the forum.

I'm generally letting this discussion develop on its own, Scotsman, but that's an intentionally poor misreading of the actions here.  

You are, of course, free to edit the first post as much as you like.  I removed Randy's name not because I wanted to save him embarrassment, but because you quoted his reply in your comment, thus the perceived insult (which, as you say, didn't actually offend you at all) was perpetuated.

You're the one who wanted to discuss censorship here -- I'm pretty sure you don't really feel like you're flying in the wind.  This thread is here to let the community speak out about the tone and norms of the site, not to single out any particular user.  I'm happily to delete your post if you'd like me to.

So post moderation frenzy:

The various offendees remain offended.

The several offenders, including those that escalated the offending, remain unchallenged, unaccountable or... wait for it..... maybe even right!

Opposing sides of the conversation (it doesn't even deserve to be called a spat) are still set.

The topic remains unresolved.

Big Steve, broken Dynafit heel guy and Zbo don't get to communicate anything.

But that's Awesome! Because TAY remains all sparkly clean.

I'm generally letting this discussion develop on its own, Scotsman, but that's an intentionally poor misreading of the actions here.  

You are, of course, free to edit the first post as much as you like.  I removed Randy's name not because I wanted to save him embarrassment, but because you quoted his reply in your comment, thus the perceived insult (which, as you say, didn't actually offend you at all) was perpetuated.

You're the one who wanted to discuss censorship here -- I'm pretty sure you don't really feel like you're flying in the wind.  This thread is here to let the community speak out about the tone and norms of the site, not to single out any particular user.  I'm happily to delete your post if you'd like me to.

Really,I can assure you it was not an intention misreading , what else could I construe from your actions. ( the insult , 7 year old girls still remains so your explanation difficult to understand)
Selective censorship and censorship in general  is a very difficult subject and the complexities and ramifications of it ,as you are finding ,persuasive. One man's balance point is another man's tipping point on the see-saw of human interactions.
No, thank you for your offer, but I do not want my post deleted.

Scotsman, you seem to have a very clear idea of how things should be done as well as how things are failing to be done as they should be done. The offer to make you a moderator still stands so that you can put this knowledge to work and help improve the forum.

No , thank you Charles. For all the reasons I have mentioned before, its not the time invoved, or the effort, or the thanklessness of the job, I prefer to remain independent and do not have the skill required. ( and I'm not being sarcastic for once)

Edit to add: However, I can still be bought off with the offer to be in charge of the "Woman's touring group" that I made in the Passing the torch Thread. ;D

It would depend entirely on the question. Stupid questions, questions that could easily be answered by doing a search, (especially in the wrong forums) or those with underlying attitude get the treatment at TGR. One has to earn credibility there, and sometimes that involves having a thick skin for a while.

I've had tons of great experiences there. Been JONGed a few times early on, especially when I was looking for someone to ski sidecountry with in Utah where I failed to be clear about my experience and understanding of avalanche safety. I learned from that and adjusted my approach to such things as a result.

I've met and skied with many, many cool people there including a bunch of guys that helped my son select his line at the jr. comp at Snowbird last year and showed us goods for 3 days, bought countless items at extraordinarily good prices, sold a boatload of gear, and learned so much about everything skiing that I can't even express it. If it weren't for TGR I'd never have attended str8line camp - a life altering time.

As for their lack of moderation? Well, things have a way of working themselves out. Those who can't take the heat bail out. Those who can benefit enormously. A temporarily bruised ego isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Good points, you definitely have to go through an apprenticeship period on TGR but whats wrong with that?

Good play-by-play, PNWBrit

Interesting that TAY is discussing censorship on the day after issuance of the most important First Amendment SCOTUS opinion in decades.  FTR, re governmental censorship, I'm pretty near a First Amendment absolutist.  Re whether corporations, the creature of the legislative branch, are entitled to unbridled free speech, well.  .  .  I'd happily discuss that one over a few beers with some fellow TAYers after a tour.

Yea TAY is so full of better people and TR's  than those juevenile gangstas on TGR.
See this just posted.
Terrible.
www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=182795