Southern York County Life

Wolfgang - 02 May 2008 08:00 PM

Rainsong - 25 April 2008 09:55 PM

The moderators were suggested by forum members

I must have missed that.  Did that happen in a thread?

One reason you may have missed this (I did too) was that it was posted in the “SYC - All” section of the message board, not in the “SYC - East” where most of us post and read.  I will point out that the entries in “SYC - East” are substantially more than in the “All” section.  Knowing this, as Mr. Baldwin must, I find it odd that he did not either post his notice in both places or just in the “SYC - East” section.  I also note that, even though there were 228 views of Mr. Baldwin’s post, there was not one single reply.  I have taken an interest in this item because I have noticed of late one particular moderator who seems a little eager to censor members’ posts.  Of course, censorship may have been warranted but we will never know, will we?.  Prior to the addition of two more moderators, I almost never noticed Dan Baldwin rejecting posts in the past.  Now it seems more frequent.

I’m sure you notice, when you log into the forum, that new and unread topics are highlighted.  All you would’ve had to do was click on the highlighted link and *poof* you would’ve read the ‘hidden’ post about adding moderators.  There probably aren’t many (or any) public replies because many people (including myself) sent Dan PM’s to suggest possible additional moderators. 

Lastly, the ‘one particular’ moderator you mention (and frankly, both of the additional moderators have had to do this pretty frequently lately) might not have to do so much ‘censoring’ if people could behave themselves.  I saw some of the posts that were up before they were taken down, and truthfully, they were correct in pulling them.  Dan asked for additional moderators for the plain fact that he felt he couldn’t keep up with it anymore, ane people are getting out of control.  Obviously he saw the need for extra moderators and chose people he felt would uphold the TOS.

Oh, and let’s not forget that this is a privately run site.  Dan, and whomever he may appoint to, can do whatever they want.  If you don’t like it.  Start Wolfgang’s Life.com and post all you want....or don’t want.

Dear Dan (and ALL of the moderators:

I, for one, truly enjoy this site! Matter of fact, even when health is an issue, sometimes, I try to come to this site at least daily! Thank you...ALL of you for providing a MEMORABLE resource for our community!

By the way, while I started the “Gizzy’s History” thread, I was absolutely delighted to see how many people added their comments and memories!

PLEASE continue your EXCELLENT efforts!

Take care and God Bless!

Gizz Davis

Chris_McGraw - 02 May 2008 09:29 PM

If people could only behave, moderation would not be required

+1

Wolfgang - 02 May 2008 08:00 PM

Rainsong - 25 April 2008 09:55 PM

The moderators were suggested by forum members

I must have missed that.  Did that happen in a thread?

One reason you may have missed this (I did too) was that it was posted in the “SYC - All” section of the message board, not in the “SYC - East” where most of us post and read.  I will point out that the entries in “SYC - East” are substantially more than in the “All” section.  Knowing this, as Mr. Baldwin must, I find it odd that he did not either post his notice in both places or just in the “SYC - East” section.  I also note that, even though there were 228 views of Mr. Baldwin’s post, there was not one single reply.  I have taken an interest in this item because I have noticed of late one particular moderator who seems a little eager to censor members’ posts.  Of course, censorship may have been warranted but we will never know, will we?.  Prior to the addition of two more moderators, I almost never noticed Dan Baldwin rejecting posts in the past.  Now it seems more frequent.

You’ve raised a couple of interesting points here.  What I did was to post to the most appropriate section.  The goal was moderators across all areas, and the “SYC - ALL” forum is meant for that.  I routinely delete duplicate posts for others, so I don’t want to model forum behavior that I don’t find acceptable.  As has been pointed out, there are visual clues to new posts in each forum.  As far as only 228 views, the post did not generate discussion, which is what drives views up.  Most people only visited it once since new replies were not added.  Nothing unusual about that.

Regarding the moderation, I fully support the moderation that has been done.  Actually Alex and Chris leave more of a trail when they moderate by not actually deleting the entire post, only its content.  I often delete the entire post, so many people don’t realize that the moderation has taken place.  Either method is fine by me...I guess you could call the way I do it more devious, but really it’s just easier to me.  Moderation is not an exact thing.  In the early days of the site there was a hot issue that people were quite passionate about.  I had to do some light moderation and was quite taken aback when people from both sides of the issue sent me emails accusing me of biased moderating.  I appreciate the great support most forum members give to the moderators.  Without them the site would not continue to exist.

Gizz - 03 May 2008 01:22 AM

Dear Dan (and ALL of the moderators:

I, for one, truly enjoy this site! Matter of fact, even when health is an issue, sometimes, I try to come to this site at least daily! Thank you...ALL of you for providing a MEMORABLE resource for our community!

This is why the site was created, and what makes the effort worthwhile--to be a resource for the community!  It also gives back.  Gizz, I have also greatly enjoyed your posts and those of others in the “Gizzy’s History” thread.  It is without a doubt among my all-time favorites.  Thanks!