moderation poll

[Jojo]

Newbies welcome?

Many who have commented on this post are complete strangers to me, why have they not contributed before? Why are they not ALL full members.

Phil invited all members, by email, to respond - this is the first time the subject has been debated openly, under an appropriate heading, with an opportunity for normally non-posting members and non-members to discuss it. Seems to me valuable that several people (myself included) have been moved to post. Rather than criticize them for doing so why not welcome them? (I don't think your question, bopper, was a criticism, but there have been several carps from others, perhaps thinking this is 'their' forum, not everyone's). The reality is that only 1-10% of forum members participate actively - perhaps this forum is more active than average because most of the members are welcoming, friendly - and sensitive to the feelings of others.

But I can understand why non-members hesitate before joining if they see bullying and personal attacks in the non-technical discussions. It's not only sticks and stones that hurt - online bullying can be very damaging (see "adult bullying", cyberbullying ) and it doesn't just affect kids... anyone can be made to feel vulnerable by repeated denigration. Why would you spend time and money if there's a chance you'll be attacked? A community that harbours and tolerates bullying isn't one that most people would want to join.

Anyway... I'll probably post more when I finally get my house sold, my van on the road and have something to tell you ; )
(and if anyone sees a La Finca van on their travels, please would you ask them if they have a habitation handbook, or some info about the power control panel - I'm still in the dark!)

 

[bopper]

I welcome all members whether they be free or otherwise but it is not the norm to allow non-members to vote on such important policy.

 

[Jojo]

I welcome all members whether they be free or otherwise but it is not the norm to allow non-members to vote on such important policy.

makes sense...

 

[Proff]

I'm one

I'm one of the people emailed, I hadn't posted on the site for around a year or so, mainly because of the backbiting comments that were starting then..
I'm quite happy with the 3 strikes and out...
BUT Moderators definitely help in running a forum such as this..
I'm quite happy taking on the trolls etc, and do so on other forums [BMW bike ones mainly]
They soon throw all the toys out of the pram and so get warned and or banned...
I am not and never would be a moderator tho', thankless task as you appease one and piss of another..
This site was and could be again, the BEST Wildcamping forum....
I've voted and would like to see the 3 strike rule on here, maybe I'd post more then....

 

[AuldTam]

I welcome all members whether they be free or otherwise but it is not the norm to allow non-members to vote on such important policy.

What do you mean when you say "non-members"? Do you mean members who have not paid £15?

 

[Byronic]

No doubt I have set myself up for retribution!

Really, the one thing that bothers me is that there are members on this site who have a lot to contribute, especially practical skills and experience and some of them it seems are looking over their shoulders wondering if "Sir" (as in teacher) is watching, and that they should be ever mindful of their Ps and Qs.
If we want this expertise and experience then we have to accept a certain degree of laxity in grammar, spelling etc. The alternative will just result in scaring such members off.
No one I imagine could or would argue that better use of the language would be a positive thing, but realistically I don't think any member joins this site to improve their useage of the English language, or to be be advised of how they rate in its correct application.

 

[bopper]

Yes I mean the persons who have not paid into the running of this forum. To subscribe to such a club/forum one denotes a commitment to uphold financially the burden of running such a club/forum and therefore should entitle that person to actively take part in it's continuance.

Those who do not subscribe with the annual fee can contribute with their skills or knowledge to help other members, but it seems from this particular thread that there are many who do neither.

 

[oldtech]

[No message]

 

[jamesmarshall]

Yes I mean the persons who have not paid into the running of this forum. To subscribe to such a club/forum one denotes a commitment to uphold financially the burden of running such a club/forum and therefore should entitle that person to actively take part in it's continuance.

Those who do not subscribe with the annual fee can contribute with their skills or knowledge to help other members, but it seems from this particular thread that there are many who do neither.

I see your point Bopper but I guess one of the concerns highlghted is that the effect of some, over robust, responses to threads is putting new members and guests off from taking part or becoming full members. It could be argued that they have a voice that should to be heard in order for Phil to make a fully informed decision on whether to ban or not

 

[oldtech]

Northerner says that this is a "pointless thread "

I

So yes, it's Phil's forum and, to really get me banned, I am going to say this.
Phil, in a nutshell, delete this pointless thread, which has done nothing whatsoever to create harmony and has increased the disharmony with which you are unhappy. Scrap the poll and start again with a fair and sensible system of moderation.

I have to disagree with " Northerner " about this being a "pointless thread ".
When I first looked at it this morning , there were 102 people viewing and over 190 replies.
I've never seen such high numbers for a thread started less than 24 hours previously.
Nor have I seen such a high ratio of replies vs. viewings .... that must mean something !.

To me , it strongly suggests that this topic is far from "pointless" to all of these people.
It seems like a large number have opinions , one way or the other , about the "free speech" issue ,
or whether there should be a system of banning.

As an example , much as I hate racism and bigotry , I recognise the need for certain types of people to be able to
express their views publicly , privately or collectively , or as political parties if necessary.
If not , we do not have a democracy ( or even an approximation to it ) and we thus become more like them.

And as you said , Northerner , " ...it's Phil's forum ..." so why would he want to close a thread which :-

[a] he started in the first place , and
has got the attention of so many people ?

When all the votes are in , I'm more interested to know the total number of votes cast rather than the actual result.
And how did I vote ? ..... that's nobody's business but mine ( but it shouldn't be hard to guess ) !

Hey Phil , are you beginning to wish that you never started this particular ball rolling ? ( ... only joking !).

Maybe you should invite people to email you with nominations ( up to 3 perhaps ) as to who they would like to see banned !
( that's an even LESS serious idea .... you would probably spend the rest of your life coping with the results ..ha ha ! ).

regards to all
Happy Wildcamping

Oldtech

PS I just looked at the current poll results .... it looks like I've backed the loser .... ha ha !

But I promise , I will abide by the majority decision .... my dummy will stay firmly in my mouth
..... and the toys will remain in my pram ..... and if certain other members think I am referring to them
with this comment ...... well , possibly I am !!!

 

[scampa]

Yes I mean the persons who have not paid into the running of this forum. To subscribe to such a club/forum one denotes a commitment to uphold financially the burden of running such a club/forum and therefore should entitle that person to actively take part in it's continuance.

Those who do not subscribe with the annual fee can contribute with their skills or knowledge to help other members, but it seems from this particular thread that there are many who do neither.

James Marshall makes a good point about Free members, and to be fair, there are plenty of Free members who contribute a great deal to this site by way of their posts with help, advice and humour etc. I'd guess that there are also many Full members who pay their £15 mainly to get the POI's, but then rarely visit or contribute any positive posts afterwards. Which types are more valuable or deserve more rights or opinions?

At the moment, the poll looks pretty conclusive with over 91% voting "Yes" for bans, but I'd like to know if we are talking of temporary bans of a month or so, or do we mean lifetime bans?

 

[frankhazel1]

And you speak with the vast experience of someone making his very first post on this forum, and an inflammatory and unreasonable one at that? So, since you joined four months ago, what have you contributed to this forum?

Well thank you Northerner for your reply,it provides a perfect example of the point I was making. :wave:
Does one have to make many hundreds of posts to become an expert on such issues? Then to please you I will only voice your opinion and not my own in any further posts,that usually satisfies most of your kind.

 

[Smaug]

Well thank you Northerner for your reply,it provides a perfect example of the point I was making. :wave:
Does one have to make many hundreds of posts to become an expert on such issues? Then to please you I will only voice your opinion and not my own in any further posts,that usually satisfies most of your kind.

This is exactly how the fights start. You original post provoked a sharp response & you reply does little to reduce the flames.

You know it's not about hundreds of posts, but you use exaggeration to try to defend yourself instead of considering the issue raised. Northerner does much the same all the time by exagerating possible offence to bolster his argument & denigrate the initial poster.

The original post topic gets lost in personal fights around side issues. So it goes, enjoy yourselves before the bans kick in. I voted against, cos this sort of idiocy can be fun for spectators - provided you don't start to take it seriously & get sucked into the fight.:lol-053:

 

[The Rebel Camper]

This is now bl..dy boring me to tears

I thought this would have been settled by now,,,,Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn:blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blahT

Ill come back later...:scared:

 

[Smaug]

I thought this would have been settled by now,,,,Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn:blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blahT

Ill come back later...:scared:

You don't have to keep looking do you? It's like bad TV progs, there is an off button if it doesn't suit you!

 

[harry]

ban

yellow card and then red card

 

[scarymary]

banning

i have only recently joined ,,when asked a question ,,nobody replied anyway lol ,,,,so no slanging matches needed ,,lol:wacko:

 

[Miriam]

to ban or not to ban

I love reading people's opinions but I don't think any abuse should be tolerated - define abuse..... well if several people consider something abusive it is. I have found so many nice things on these pages and find it strange and pathetic that people would think to get so hot under the collar about anything. If you don't like or agree with something ignore it - don't write a snotty or abusive reply. There are nice ways of expressing an alternative opinion. I like the idea of 3 strikes and out.... At the end of the day this is supposed to be a nice, kind, fun, informative site and above all that should be respected - Phil do you have a delete or censored button so you could 'disappear' anything that was not nice, kind, fun or informative? Phil is the adjudicator and his word should be final.

 

[Dezi]

I can understand Phil’s concerns because everything else he has tried, has failed.

First we the ignore button – this was obviously ignored because the retaliation carried on

Then we had a black hole forum “I have never visited” because in my opinion anybody who wishes to enter an argument zone and has to give a special password to do so is obviously a person looking for an argument. Do I wish to interact with such people? No

The black hole did not alter anything because the trouble maker continues on his merry way arguing & being abusive over the most innocuous subjects outside of the black hole zone simply because it is their right not to have their anti social behave confined.

Human nature being what it is means that certain individuals are going to argue & refuse to ever see another’s point of view because they know best due to the fact that they have had vastly more experience, have travelled further, been better educated or are just on a far higher intellectual plane.

Yea right !

It will be interesting to see how this one pans out.

Dezi c:

 

[Boxerman]

I used to be a full member and a regular contributor to these pages, but I got fed up with the attitudes of some members (not towards me, I must point out) and stopped visiting.
I have only returned on rare occasions and I am undecided about whether to re-join as a full member or not. Praps if the stirrers were removed then others like me would join?

Frank