Closed thread???

[Andy Gehle]

Why did the SuperModerator thread get closed?
Content?

Are oppositional opinions now banned also?

I thought you had previously mentioned how much you respect the right to free speech.

Just in case you missed my original point, I do not at all disagree with your right and/or decision to remove the photo. It was your subsequent personal bashing that I had a problem with.

[Thunderflight]

I concur.

TF

[XX78]

Code of conduct (Terms of Service)
The rules below apply to everyone regardless of prior donations to the site or payments for premium site features:

1. Rudeness to other members and especially sponsors will not be tolerated. Difference of opinion is fine and is to be expected but out-right nasty rude exchange will not be tolerated and don't be surprized when they are promptly deleted.

2. Any post that has racial overtones will be promptly deleted and that user who made it considered for removal.

3. This is a family site. We have male and female members of all ages. I expect that your posts recognize this fact. Any post that involves sexually objectionable language or content will be deleted, and the poster will receive a strike. It is the judgment call of the Administrators and Moderators as to what constitutes objectionable, so if you are unsure whether or not your post is appropriate for a family audience, do not post it.

4. As editor of this site I maintain control over what goes up on it (as much as possible anyway). I will continue to exercise this control. Call it censorship if you must, but if it is neccessary it will be done.

5. Any post that is intentionally made to degrade or disrupt the flow of the thread and/or posts that (in the opinion of the moderating staff) are meant to be or are malicious in content will result in a official warning. Trolls (see definition) will be promptly removed.


6. Personal conflicts and grudges that have occurred among members outside of this site should stay that way. Keep it off the site. This is supposed to be a positive place for thoughts about the outdoors, not a soap opera.

The larger gatherings of members get, the more frequently conflicts will probably occur. Again keep it off the site,.... I don't want to hear about it here via a post. We run a website. We are not the police and I don't have the time to investigate every case where somebody feels they got a raw deal from somebody else.

Finally, a personal attack on anyone, by anyone else whether it be because of a grudge at an outing or over a high charged topic in the forums, will be deleted by myself or a super moderator,.... no questions asked. We don't care who you are,... moderator, long time user, or first time poster. Personal messages also fall under this rule. Personal messages can be reviewed to verify what has happened.

7. Any user of these boards including moderators will be permanently banned upon receiving three warnings (strikes) as determined from the collective moderation staff.

We still maintain the right to ban anyone immediately, no questions asked, but to date have done this very sparingly and have never taken this action (without warnings) with an established user.

8. All posts made within the forums become the property of GreatLakesOutdoors.com LLC (the posts themselves only, not the intellectual content) after they are made and may be stored indefinitely at our discretion.

By making new posts after 10/10/2003 you affirm that you agree with this new TOS addendum.
Last edited by Steve on 10-02-2003 at 04:42 PM

[Duffy]

I noticed that myself. I was going to comment on the thread, as well as inform the Super Moderator that there is only one "r" in "countyroad". But alas...

[Links r Us]

Just in case you missed my original point, I do not at all disagree with your right and/or decision to remove the photo. It was your subsequent personal bashing that I had a problem with

[Andy Gehle]

.

[Steve]

Threads often need to be closed when there is nothing good that can possibly come of them.

[CatDaddy]

I have been trying to read up on all of this since it happend and hope I didnt miss anything. The way I see it, just my 2 cents, It may have been a little in bad taste to post the picture of the kid with the gun to his head but it did not bother me. You could tell by looking at the kid he was nuts. The thing I did see that was in EXTREME bad taste and sportsmanship, courtesy, adult, being grown up and kindness to all is the name calling and most of all the verbal abuse to the person who posted the picture. The picture should have just been deleted and a PM sent to that person explaining why, and without yelling, griping and name calling. I dont believe I have ever seen the person who posted the picture do anything in the past to warrant the negative posts he has recieved since posting the picture. It was not wrong in the posters eyes when he posted the picture and was not wrong in my eyes but sometimes we dont think about all the views of people before we post. I have seen plenty of other pictures on here that I would not like to see my child looking at. I dont mean to offend anyone or upset anyone just wanted to post my thoughts.

[Thunderflight]

I agree.

TF

[Andy Gehle]

Steve,
I see what you are saying. But lets call a sapde a spade here. We ALL know who closed the thread and it had nothing to do with "nothing good can come from it"
In fact, I think quite a bit of good can come from it. I have an open mind. I'd love to have a mature exchange about content and our images as sportsmen in the world. I think a TON of good could come from it.
Instead what we got was an overzealous moderator with his finger on the dump button who exercises that right when HE personally feels his arguement doesn't hold water.
Is this the kind of moderating that you want?
I have received a PM from the SuperModerator in which he goes on to defend his language in his posts. Saying that words like BULL $HlT are not profanity. Maybe I'm confused as to the consitency of the message here at OS.com. You place a filter on words to keep it a "family friendly" site, yet in the same breath the SuperModerator riddles his message with profanity to make a point.
Another moderator started a thread entirely about Sh i t. The entire point of the post is to talk about sh i t. He very thinly veils his words and inserts the word poo. But I think you get the point.
Now exactly what "good can come from that"?
So please don't attempt to defend actions that simply cannot be defended. Or get your house in order and show some consistency with the "moderators" of the site.

[Duffy]

Andy Gehle:

Why must you be so vehement in your expressions of disagreement?

[Andy Gehle]

If you mean vehement, as "expressed with conviction", than I'd say that it is because I am a man of conviction. I have them. I express them. I consider it an attribute.

If you mean vehement, as "showing intense feeling", than maybe you are reading my posts with an affliction that is placed by you and not me. I am a rather soft spoken individual in regards to the volume of my voice. I maintain the ability to disagree with someone or something without the need to shout.
Quite possibly this does not translate very well in hte written word or possibly others place an empahasis where this is none.

Either way, I think it's OK to disagree with someone. Maybe some others do not like to engage in any dialogue that is confrontational. But I tend to think that nothing of significance ever comes about if everyone always agrees with another.
Afterall, healthy debate is the foundation on which all good ideas are built upon.

[Duffy]

Of course I concur that disagreement and "spirited" debate are healthy, and form the substance of a civilized and democratic society. I don't believe I am "afflicted" with any tendency toward deliberate misinterpretation, however. I simply think that given the limitations of the written word in such a venue as this, care should be taken in the presentation of our opinions, that offense may not be taken, whether intended or not. As an example, pointing out that people have no class is tantamount to ridicule, and such actions ought to be avoided.

Your contributions to the forum are admirable, impressive, and of great value. Though I do not intend to admonish you for the content of some of your postings, peception is everything, and care is warranted.

[Andy Gehle]

Very sporting indeed, Duffy.
I couldn't agree with you more in your assessment.
My comment about "Show some class" is just as it was intended to be, as I think the action that I was referring to was completely lacking of any class.
Too honest for some? Probably. Vehement? No, probably not.
Do you not agree that posting a private message on a public forum lacks class? I certainly do. In fact I think it's the epitome of a lack of class. It is, afterall, called a private message and was intentionally sent with the intent of privacy.

So I guess what you and I have may be a disagreement of what constitutes an acceptable level of honesty. Everyone has a line drawn somewhere in their mind as to "how honest" we choose to be with others. My line is somewhere between "Yes, I think you're out of line" and "No honey, those jeans don't make you look fat".

Possibly in a strange, disconnected way, it is easier for me to be "more honest" in a forum such as this one than I'd be if I were sitting in front of someone. But if you knew me well, I think you'd find that my actions wouldn't be too different. I have a strong sense of right and wrong, I have a distinct set of moral convictions, and I choose to express myself when I feel appropriate.

I suppose if the content of my posts do not correspond with your personal set of beleifs and values, that you could feel free to not read them. Although it's much more interesting to hear a counter point to my own.

[Duffy]

OK, so we "agree to disagree to agree"? Something like that. Anyway, well said, and thank you for your reply.

How about we share an "electronic handshake" and move forward?

[Andy Gehle]

Electronic handshake it is, Duffy.

If we ever have the opportunity to meet face to face, I think that we'd both find that we are more similar than not. In fact, I think most guys on here have very similar viewpoints. It is the expression and interpretation of those viewpoints that sometimes varies considerably.

I know that I can be an opinionated son of a gun. I also know that when I feel "vehement" about something that my words lose their soft edges and I tend to speak in a manner that can induce a strong reaction. I still don't know if that's an entirely good or entirely bad thing. But I am who I am.

Take care. Spring is almost here.:rolleyes:

[Duffy]

I agree. And really, you're right about our probable similarities, and I appreciate your viewpoint.

As for Spring, what's that?!?!

Take care.

[Buckmaster]

Love is in the air! The joys of spring.

[Buckmaster]

Group Hug! :)

[Thunderflight]

Thank goodness they didn't electronicly kiss.....:eek: ;) :eek: :D :p :D

TF

[Buckmaster]

So true TF. Thank God for his small miracles.

[Duffy]

LOL!

I know, we created some soap opera. Don't worry: Electronic kissing (or anything else, for that matter) never occurred to me!

[Andy Gehle]

C'mon, Duffy!!! And just when I thought you and I had something........well you know......special.
Would you at least consider some cyber-spooning?;)

[Duffy]

Blushing! I'm blushing!

[XX78]

Electric Handshake, I thought that was something u could get at Fredricks of Hollywood

[countyroad]

You're wrong. LOL It's Spencers. :rolleyes:

[CritterGitter]

Well, after the hugging and all that silly stuff, I'll chime in.

I believe I am some sort of moderator, but I don't think I have any control really. That's fine by me as I don't see my role as someone who should police the threads. I feel as though my role is simply to encourage participation and inspire healthy debate. I think I do that most of the time. Sure I got a little pissy in the photo forum, but I learned from that and moved on.

I don't like to see threads closed. I accept that this sometimes happens and that it happens for a reason. I think if it happens too often that it could be detrimental to the site. I don't know if only Steve can close a thread or if others can do so as well, but I think it should be only Steve that can do so.

There's an old saying about "too many chiefs, and not enough indians." We wouldn't want that here. We should all feel as though we can contribute equally as much to any thread.

That's my take on it.

CG

[Steve]

There are more people than me who can close a thread here and the volume of posts and threads neccessitates that. Enough said.