jjoyce wrote:If you're going to hold me responsible for offensive content (insisting that not condemning it means condoning it), when I have produced none of it, then you need to take responsibility for your own role in the situation.
You're the administrator of the forum. Your responsibility is to make it good. My working theory is that people do what they want to do and stop doing what they don't want to do. So my assumption is that you approve of the forum just as it is.
jjoyce wrote:Retweeting implies agreement, to invoke a saying from another part of the web. If you think there should be less offensive language on this board, then what the hell are you doing re-posting it? A link would have worked just as well.
Quoting something means you agree with it? I have never heard of that concept before. That is one of the most bizarre things I have heard here. Besides, this forum is not Twitter.
jjoyce wrote:But instead, you made the decision to reproduce it. I see what you're doing there, but if you want the boards to be less offensive, then maybe you should pitch in on the cleanup. I operate under the assumption that most people want to participate in a lively, somewhat politically incorrect conversation, like they'd find at the neighborhood tavern. But it's becoming increasingly clear that there's a small group of people who don't like the board, don't like the people who participate here regularly, don't like Madison, don't like liberals. Apparently, they just can't help themselves from logging on constantly, however, and making sure we all know about their dislike. There's no winning with them. It's impossible to build a board they like and even if you could, you'd abandon all the decent posters.
No you wouldn't. Delete any comment you find not to be decent. You'll get a mix of contributors who will learn what your standards of decency are.
jjoyce wrote:I'm also aware that there are a number of people who don't have much on their plates who like to pick fights here. I have no problem until that tone starts to take over the board. These folks have big issues with profanity. They often don't have much of an issue with regurgitating hackneyed talking points or presenting their unoriginal ideas ad nauseum or berating others over their politics and lifestyles, however (and a lot of them do it anonymously, for those of you lobbying for an end to that). There's no winning with these people, either. I think they're bored and angry most of the time.
I said before that I don't think the problem is use of pseudonyms. It's also not offensiveness or incivility. The problem is boringness, cliquishness, and self-indulgence.
jjoyce wrote:That's the problem with rules. It's hard to write them to keep the true a-holes in check. The board is best when people who are neither bored nor angry dominate. These folks tend to work in kitchens, play in rock bands, ride mountain bikes, play pond hockey, throw pots, smoke pot, drive cab, listen to punk rock, listen to classical music, drink cheap beer, drink expensive beer, write bad poems, hate Brett Favre, hate Rick Santorum, hate Facebook, hate email, love standing around talking shit. A lot of those people like to use colorful language and a lot of people who object to that are hypocrites and/or not very interesting.
I agree. Ha ha - very poetically written.
jjoyce wrote:This is why the best Forons don't limit their activities to the hot-button political threads. They might sound off there, but they'll also chime in when it comes to handyman recommendations or road construction or lake odor or drinks or grilling tips.
The best contributors to this forum rarely post on this forum. They would post more if the administrator used a stronger hand on the delete key and erased stupidity, personal insults, boringness, and indecency. You have to be careful though. It's easy to over-delete. But it's an art and it results in vigorous lively debate that is diverse and not cliquish.
jjoyce wrote:We've tried writing rules before. All that leads to is people working to exploit loopholes, which leads to needing more rules which then leads to arguing about rules. The government that governs least governs best, right? You can never keep up with the people intent on breaking rules.
You're the administrator. Take control. That is your job, right? Just like with being a parent - never argue, never explain. Make the rules and change the rules as you see fit. You are not the government - you're the administrator. The administrator who administrates most, administrates best.
ps: My suggestion of charging a dollar per post was half serious. But why not charge something? What's it worth to have a community forum to post on? What does the bandwidth cost Isthmus
? I think you'd get better contributions if "free speech" here wasn't completely "free" if you know what I mean.
Thanks for entertaining my suggestions.