• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Mods and banning (split from 'what color are you')

Yes, hello, the "select group of rabble rousers" here again.

Just pointing out that I'm a member in good standing of five other forums, and I've visited quite a number of others. This is the only forum where I've see this sort of ongoing questioning of the moderators and how they do their job and whether they apply the rules fairly and equally to everyone, including themselves. It's also the only forum where I'm a "select group of rabble rousers."

And this has been a topic here since before I became a member and has continued to be a topic even when I've chosen to be a non-contributing member. Someone wake up and smell the parmesan! With or without Irene Wilde, The Book Forum has a moderator problem. Just as there is no "conspiracy of mods," there is no "Wilde gang" (My! Such wild rumors circulating these days!) aiming to "disrupt" The Book Forum. I think mistakes have been made. I think there are flaws in the system. But I'm only one individual. If other individuals here see the same flaws and choose to voice their concerns, they are not doing it at my direction.

I hope the management of The Book Forum takes a close look at this thread and will start asking the hard questions that need to be asked about its leadership, its structure, and its oversight.

I didn't come here to make enemies. I didn't come here because I'm a personality that loves to court controversy for controversy's sake. If people from other forums knew some of the things I've been called here, they'd be amazed that such labels were being affixed to the generally pleasant lost soul that here is known as Irene Wilde.

People here will believe what they like about me, I know. It's already become evident that there is nothing that I post that will meet with approval in certain quarters of this community. I only ask that no one mistakenly gets tar and feathered because of some perceived association with me that doesn't exist.
 
Fair enough, and perhaps my comments were unfair ... I will withdraw the rabble rousers comment, although it remains my personal opinion that there are those here with an agenda to merely cause trouble rather than do anything constructive towards building the community. It seems to me that the root of the conflict here is nothing to do with the Moderation of the forums, but that there is personal animosity between some of the members and some of the Mods, and that is spilling over into how people react on both sides.

To you Irene, I would make one comment about your statements above - surely it be more helpful and proactive to actually make suggestions for improvements rather than just critise how things are currently done. What exactly is wrong with the structure of the forum, how could it be improved and why does it need such improvements?

Phil
 
I have tried making suggestions and they have fallen deaf ears.

I have two wonderful and very specific recommendations but to state them publicly would be to cast aspersions on other members of the community, which, even though it is not evenly enforced, is technically against the rules. And making them privately, based on my experiences here, would be as futile as me trying to fit into a size 2 dress.

However, to show good faith, I will PM the Admin with my recommendations.

Also, if I may be allowed to make a clarification. This latest tempest started because, in the original thread, I made a couple of joking references to past members. To my knowledge, it is not against the rules to refer to those who are banned (but apparently to question the rationale is according to the lastest updated membership agreement). These people haven't disappeared. They did not spontaneously combust. In fact, one of them is sunning himself on a Greek Island as I'm writing this. I made no plea for their return, no protest, just a passing reference, nothing inflammatory was meant or intended. For this, a moderator had a melt down. A moderator. Or was he just being a member then? Either way, it still read "moderator" under his name.

And finally...I will humbly disagree with you that there is a "hidden agenda" among the membership. I honestly don't believe that. I believe there's a problem here and people are reacting to it.
 
There's was so much activity here, so fast I kind of glanced over this:

"promotion of RainowGurl to a moderator's post"

Has RainbowGurl been promoted to moderator status?

She was not mentioned in the list of Darren, Ashlea, Ell, Martin, Wabbit, Ice...and who did I forget...I'll have to come back and edit...

edit: Halo...sorry...brain fart....
 
Just want to say that I thought the National Stereotypes thread started by a moderator a while ago nicely combined an invitation to post direct personal attacks and racist comments with a more subtle invitation to post some political flamebait.

Made me realize how much the referees enjoy sticking their feet out to trip the players running the bases.

Not an isolated incident at all, mind you. Just an artifact indicating a certain attitude toward the game.
 
"She became a mod sometime ago, but I don't believe she still is."

That makes sense. Since I've been here she is "just a regular member" and her status states that on the members list.


Thanx
 
phil_t said:
To you Irene, I would make one comment about your statements above - surely it be more helpful and proactive to actually make suggestions for improvements rather than just critise how things are currently done. What exactly is wrong with the structure of the forum, how could it be improved and why does it need such improvements?

Phil
Click to expand...

My suggestions have been made privately. I think it's time for milk and cookies.
 
novella said:
Just want to say that I thought the National Stereotypes thread started by a moderator a while ago nicely combined an invitation to post direct personal attacks and racist comments with a more subtle invitation to post some political flamebait.
Click to expand...

I've stayed out of this discussion intentionally as I don't really feel that I have anything to add as I have not had any bad experiences on this forum.

But I just want to question novella's comment about that thread. From what I recall, the concept of 'National Stereotypes' was for people to talk about stereotypes they are supposed to conform to. I don't think it really had anything to do with politics or racism. I quote from Martin's first post in the thread:

I was having a discussion about this with two of my most annoying friends , and it got me wondering - what national stereotypes exist about the country you're currently living in.

What silly things do foreigners expect you to say, do, eat, wear, etc .. when they meet you?
Click to expand...

This thread never degenerated to any attacks on people, politics or race. I think there was a brief mention of WMD at one point, but it never progressed beyond that. My point, is that the intent of this thread, and the resulting posts do not correspond to what you are implying, novella.
 
You're right, Kook. Everyone was very well-behaved in that thread. I'm not saying otherwise, merely questioning the motivation behind starting such a thread. To me it seemed to invite insults.
 
novella said:
You're right, Kook. Everyone was very well-behaved in that thread. I'm not saying otherwise, merely questioning the motivation behind starting such a thread. To me it seemed to invite insults.
Click to expand...
Mmm... I didn't interpret it that way, but everyone has their own opinions of things, I guess. I'd like to think there was no inclination towards creating flame bait in the starting of that thread. We'll agree to disagree :) .

I'm now going to hop back into the wardrobe and view this thread from afar - there seems to be too much anger and angst that I don't understand... and am happier not too. I prefer to smell the flowers growing in the forum, rather than wonder why they're planted there, who's agenda they're planted for, who is destroying them and whether the garden caretaker is behind it all. I'm greatful for the garden and whatever it can give me... so long as the plants aren't poisonous.
 
Kookamoor said:
:) .
I'm now going to hop back into the wardrobe and view this thread from afar - there seems to be too much anger and angst that I don't understand... and am happier not too. I prefer to smell the flowers growing in the forum, rather than wonder why they're planted there, who's agenda they're planted for, who is destroying them and whether the garden caretaker is behind it all. I'm greatful for the garden and whatever it can give me... so long as the plants aren't poisonous.
Click to expand...
Very well said Kookamoor! I'm just happy to have a place to talk about/read about books and the people who read them!

I don't envy the job of a moderator, but I think they do a good job considering theyr'e dealing with a diverse group of people from all over the world from all sorts of different backgrounds. :)
 
Wow, hectic day today. That'll teach me for naming this thread the way I did.

Couple of points.

Novella: Your remark about my 'National Stereotypes'-thread made me laugh. Go read the thread again, especially my initial post, and come back here and claim, again, that I started that thread with hostile intentions.

Of course it had the potential to get risky (every thread can be turned into a cesspool - all it needs is a single member with the right (read: wrong) attitude), but I had enough faith in the members to keep the thread light and funny. And guess what, it worked.

You're reaching.

Furthermore.

What I've been reading boils down to this: You guys (a few of you) believe that a mod should not participate in discussion, albeit serious or non-serious ones. A mod should take a step back and do whatever it is a mod does, and nothing more than that. A mod should, in effect, leave the boards and not post again, for fear of giving the wrong impression.

The above is exactly the reason why Wabbit and myself have taken so much flack in the above posts - we are mods, but we also wish to keep participating in the forum; to join others in discussions; to have harmless fun; to kid around; to share experiences; to recommend or criticise books. The other mods do this also, but to a far lesser extent. Should we be denied this?

Cheers
 
Martin said:
What I've been reading boils down to this: You guys (a few of you) believe that a mod should not participate in discussion, albeit serious or non-serious ones. A mod should take a step back and do whatever it is a mod does, and nothing more than that. A mod should, in effect, leave the boards and not post again, for fear of giving the wrong impression.
Click to expand...
Not my place to say anything here, but that doesn't always stop me. I don't think that is what they are saying. What I understood is that a mod is always a mod and everything they say and do reflect the official line of the forum. Therfore a mod should always abide by the rules to perfection. This, in my mind, does not mean that they have to withdraw from the discussions but they have to moderate themselves before anyone else. What I think some people are upset about is that that is not always the case, and that makes it seem like the mods can do what they want and avoid warning.

I don't have anything against anyone on the forum and would rather see that none left or were banned. I haven't seen or read anything here that would make me want to complain. The only one I can remember being banned is the grumpy old fart who hates bloody students and I found him funny but I can still see why people can take what he says the wrong way.
 
Ok, ok, I'm trying to understand here.

So, you claim that rules have been broken by mods? What rules? Where?

I'm not trying to be a prick here, just trying to figure this out.

Cheers
 
Perhaps this forum also needs a bit more reality. If I have a problem with someone in "real" life I don't go running to some higher authority, I talk to the person I have a problem with. I don't think the people here are that unreasonable if you come to them with something. I think it's more effective to hear something from the person/people who were offended.

I have a very silly side to me as people here probably know, but I have toned it down a lot since I came here, just because people didn't like all the junk posts. That I got from one of the members, not in a pm but in a thread not aimed at me, but I got the point. If I see someone is unhappy with what I say and do here, I'll try and change it. I'm not one of the most intelligent on this forum, but I try to be considerate.

The picture I posted yesterday, I really didn't think people would be offended by that. Or not true, I thought there might be as slight chance of that, or I wouldn't have posted the line asking if anyone got offended by that. That line was supposed to be an indication that people could just tell me if they didn't like the picture, and apparently a lot of people didn't like it. But why not tell me instead of a mod? I am just as capable at removing the picture, and that way I can appologise for offending the person. Sorry to the people I offended, that wasn't my intend.

I think I have whined enough now, but I hope there was some point in what I said.
 
Martin said:
So, you claim that rules have been broken by mods? What rules? Where?
Click to expand...
No, but I think there has been posts where a mod have displayed hostility towards a memeber. That should not happen under any circumstances. I can't give you an example, because there are a bit to many threads to look through when you don't know what to search for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top