Time for a discussion.

[Chris]

Rest Easy even had the forums merged i would not have been returning to this one at least not without certain conditions i know would never be met.

Ah well... at least *I* can say I tried. I doubt if I'd marched into your front room and spread  *censored* in every direction I'd have been given the sort of hearing you've had.

The option was yours to return or not... you chose not.

I think we're managing quite well without you, but I was willing to give you yet another chance to prove you can behave in some sort of civilised manner. All we've ever really asked in here is that people are polite to one another, but it appears even that one simple request is beyond your capabilities.

Go curl yourself back into your ball of vitriol and spite and carry on snapping and snarling at all that's good and decent in the world if you will. The rest of us will continue to believe in the fundamental 'goodness' of people... even as you prove us wrong.

[Patricia]

To be honest I doubt anything would have been gained by a merger. As has been said elsewhere people come & go on forums and there are so many out there on the internet these days. I in particular find forums on the bottom of my "to do" list list these days....real life seems to be getting busier.....that's not to say I don't enjoy reading up when I do get the time...once upon a time I'd sit and have my morning cuppa & catch up...even that doesn't seem to happen often. 

[Crankenstein]

The reason I haven't been posting as much is because I now have a paid job as a columnist on another website and I have been devoting most of my online writing time to that.

I'd just like to put it out there that If a merger went ahead I'd be more than willing to step down as a moderator. The only reason I stepped up in the first place is because there was no one else.

[Senexx]

Apart from what is popular in the tabloid news, this site has been quiet ever since I joined.
I've seen the guest thing active on another discussion board that I occasionally post on and from my point of view when guests who cannot be tracked by the public take a negative tack it is detrimental to the board.

If it is possible to ensure guest posting consistency such as consistently using the same name, I could support it.

I don't know much about the ex-members of this board and the new board other than the link to it on the tipping competition.  I know absolutely nothing about it but I have raised the issue before that it seems that everyone that has left or banned have a different political disposition to the owner/admins here.

I find that concerning for a discussion forum.  The utmost principle for a discussion board is respect.

Then again ideally I'd like to see three other aussie discussion forums I participate or have participated on merged with this one.  Or this one merged with those three. That could be seen as disrespectful too though.

I think the owner/admin needs to decide do they want a chat room forum, which is what this has been or a news/politics forum with a few other attachments.

I have niche interests and thus my posting is not very active and for that I apologise.

[jen]

I know absolutely nothing about it but I have raised the issue before that it seems that everyone that has left or banned have a different political disposition to the owner/admins here.

I find that concerning for a discussion forum.  The utmost principle for a discussion board is respect.

I don't want to continually chase the same circle, but I am also concerned that members in here still think that we deleted accounts because  people have a different opinion to us. We have a system whereby a report is made about a post or poster, then we (that is ALL mods) discuss if there was a rule breach and how it should be handled, I would say that almost all decisions are unanimous. I can only think of one deletion where it was not a unanimous decision, but a majority decision.

The utmost principle for a discussion board is respect


This is the truest part of your quote, and the thing that is most difficult to define. We did define it to the best of our abilities, in the rule set that we, the membership created, and your mod team always discuss this as a team prior to letting a member go.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the opinion you hold, but has Everything to do with the way you present it. We like being a civil place. That's our niche Senexx. Please don't misunderstand us.

[Senexx]

You're not chasing your tail.  I am not even saying that is the reason you did it.  You have made the reasons clear previously.

All I am saying is it is the impression that is given Jen.

[jen]

Okely Dokely

It's just that when this is consistently brought up, it makes me feel like our members don't trust us. A lot goes on behind the scenes (as it should be done in my opinion), keeping the privacy of a reported poster in tact, yet we are constantly (sometimes even though we aren't even talking about removing a member) questioned. Why would anyone assume that we aren't doing our best? It's not like we are here for the money! Y'know? I sometimes feel like the Royal Family... taking it on the chin and on a hiding to nothing.

Ok vent complete

[Chris]

I don't know much about the ex-members of this board and the new board other than the link to it on the tipping competition.  I know absolutely nothing about it but I have raised the issue before that it seems that everyone that has left or banned have a different political disposition to the owner/admins here.

I find that concerning for a discussion forum.  The utmost principle for a discussion board is respect.

Jen is quite right in her 'defence' of the forum and it's policies, but at the same time I *do* appreciate there could well be a perception that people with political affiliations (different to my own especially) might appear to have been barred from posting for specifically that reason, however as jen has pointed out that perception really *is* wrong.

The most obvious example of where the perception doesn't fit the facts is that the two 'Admins', i.e. Minx and myself, actually have diametrically opposed political opinions... and also wildly differing opinions on a lot of other issues and areas! Where she and I differ from those members that were prevented from making further posts, is that despite our political differences we remain polite to one another whenever we *do* discuss our diverse opinions (or have a tacit if unspoken agreement not to discuss them at all!! !

In virtually *all* cases (other than spam artists of course) where someone has been barred from posting here the cause has been their inability to discuss the issues themselves and for them to resort to attacking the personality of the poster when they feel they are losing an argument. It's just been unfortunate that those people have (so far) nearly all seemed to have affiliations with the far right wing of political thought. This might say more about the nature of right wing politics than anything else, but maybe this isn't the post to be discussing that theory?

The *one* rule that is, almost ruthlessly, enforced is a requirement that people are reasonably polite to one another! It's not a hard rule to follow,  to respect or adhere to and yet again I have a solid example to offer.

Over the years I've repeatedly defended bambu's right to post almost anything (within reason and the law) even to the extent that people have left because of his ongoing rants against various sections of both the international and local community. As far as I'm concerned so long as what is posted adheres to the rules and Australian law then anyone can post virtually anything!! The reason bambu was finally (if temporarily) suspended was because he began to overstep the mark with posts that were becoming racist and seemed unable to tone down the rhetoric. However, bambu is almost invariably polite in his posts. He rarely indulges in aggression and I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times he retaliated in kind despite severe provocation!! I might not agree with much of what he says, but he has the right in here to push his views just as much as those that disagree have the right to refute them!!

Yes politically I *do* consider myself to be 'socialist' (with a small 's') but it's that very 'social inclusiveness' that drives me to try to make it clear that everyone is welcome to post here, and post whatever they want... with the two simple caveats that posts must lie within the limitations of law and the more nebulous requirement of 'good manners'.

I don't mind 'defending' the forum against erroneous perceptions, and the fact this thread is *still* visible instead of being moved behind the cover of our private boards should (I hope) give some reassurance!