# 3.5 Hours Later



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I believe I have the Gay Marriage thread cleaned up to a point where it's not vile. 

Do you want it reopened, open another thread on the topic or leave it closed?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

While a couple of items bordered on offensive I have yet to see anything "vile". It is your realm whether or not to leave it open though and I abide in that...


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

They can post trash faster than you can clean it up. I wouldn't even bother.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

Please reopen the thread so the discussion can continue or die a natural death. As soon as one is voted to be closed you will have set the boundrys that people can use to get rid of a topic that they do not care for.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

I fine with reopening it.

My skin is a little thicker, than the average 5th grader.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Leave it open, not that big a deal.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

There are over a billion Chinese that aren't bothered one whit....leave it open if you wish...


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I don't like closing threads so I can reopen it but I would prefer folks try and keep it halfway civil.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

> They can post trash faster than you can clean it up. I wouldn't even bother.


The "they" in this case looks to be one overly emotional anti-gay person. Simple enough to tell that person to knock it off or else.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Will closing the thread change the S.C. Ruling?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> The "they" in this case looks to be one overly emotional anti-gay person. Simple enough to tell that person to knock it off or else.


Or simply don't respond to it. That works.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Will closing the thread change the S.C. Ruling?


:rotfl:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

That was a good one.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

where I want to said:


> Or simply don't respond to it. That works.


No, that doesn't work. Even if nobody responds to the insults but they are left up, then the member who posts them will simply post more of them and other members will also start posting insults because it is allowed even while against the rules, and then the entire board will quickly devolve into nothing but insults. There's a reason there are rules and there's good reason to enforce the rules. Insults should be removed and if the member cannot stop herself from insulting other members in the future, she should also be removed.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kuriakos said:


> No, that doesn't work. Even if nobody responds to the insults but they are left up, then the member who posts them will simply post more of them and other members will also start posting insults because it is allowed even while against the rules, and then the entire board will quickly devolve into nothing but insults. There's a reason there are rules and there's good reason to enforce the rules. Insults should be removed and if the member cannot stop herself from insulting other members in the future, she should also be removed.


I will say that this particular thread kinda got away from us but it seems that we may have had some sort of glitch. I was away from my desk for a bit on Friday because the big guy always buys himself a new gun for his birthday and I can promise you a guy in a gun store is an event and apparently, nobody is smart enough to put a chair in a gun store so Saturday was spent convincing my therapist that she could make my unhappy ankle smaller than a football and there was something she could do to stop the muscle spasms. 

All that really means to you as a concerned member is that the my failing ankle was the excuse the big guy needed to buy two new handguns and while the app is handy for members, it wasn't working well for me and apparently, Shrek was having problems accessing from his end.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Aw now we know what the playground would look like with out the playground lady !


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> No, that doesn't work. Even if nobody responds to the insults but they are left up, then the member who posts them will simply post more of them and other members will also start posting insults because it is allowed even while against the rules, and then the entire board will quickly devolve into nothing but insults. There's a reason there are rules and there's good reason to enforce the rules. Insults should be removed and if the member cannot stop herself from insulting other members in the future, she should also be removed.


Actually the insult binges come from responding in kind. What you're talking about is an attempt to out insult to drive opponents into silence. That has mixed results at best. If the insulter is capable of self examination, it can create a change in behavior but if not, it becomes a recreational sport.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> Actually the insult binges come from responding in kind. What you're talking about is an attempt to out insult to drive opponents into silence. That has mixed results at best. If the insulter is capable of self examination, it can create a change in behavior but if not, it becomes a recreational sport.


That is a good post and very true. I try to not respond with insults to the person but sometimes fail. I however have decided that every time I see someone continues to put down entire groups of people I am going to respond in kind because I have had enough. For example if someone needs to call liberals liers in every post they can fit it into, I have no problem responding the same about conservatives.

Does it elevate the conversation. No not even a little bit. I have however tried polite discourse and that failed. I am sick of seeing the name calling and put downs and have decided to roll in the mud with them. I can only hope they might get the message.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

painterswife said:


> Does it elevate the conversation. No not even a little bit. I have however tried polite discourse and that failed. I am sick of seeing the name calling and put downs and have decided to roll in the mud with them. I can only hope they might get the message.



Hows this new method of yours working out ?


I told you both sides are a bunch trouble makers that love to waste their day arguing with the boogie man.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

oneraddad said:


> Hows this new method of yours working out ?
> 
> 
> I told you both sides are a bunch trouble makers that love to waste their day arguing with the boogie man.


Not sure if they will get it, even now that I told them exactly what I am doing. We will see.

If I want to wast my day then it is all my time. How is that working out for you? You are obviously reading it.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

painterswife said:


> Not sure if they will get it, even now that I told them exactly what I am doing. We will see.
> 
> If I want to wast my day then it is all my time. How is that working out for you? You are obviously reading it.



It's like a train wreck, and drama sells. That's the only reason you have a voice here. If it weren't for the drama of politics and GC this site would dry up and blow away. Good job for supporting your friends and not being selfish, not !


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

oneraddad said:


> It's like a train wreck, and drama sells. That's the only reason you have a voice here. If it weren't for the drama of politics and GC this site would dry up and blow away. Good job for supporting your friends and not being selfish, not !


Why does this concern you so much? You read it, become upset, and post... but why?


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why does this concern you so much? You read it, become upset, and post... but why?


Maybe just maybe some people would like to read the threads without wading through sewage. Some of us are interested in normal discourse, enjoy learning different view points. Everything does not need to be a battle for control.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why does this concern you so much? You read it, become upset, and post... but why?



Because you can't see that you look as dumb as the people you're arguing with.

And you especially need to look in the mirror.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> Maybe just maybe some people would like to read the threads without wading through sewage. Some of us are interested in normal discourse, enjoy learning different view points. Everything does not need to be a battle for control.


I would love to have polite discourse. Exchanging info with no name calling and put downs. I learn so much from the politics and GC section.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> Maybe just maybe some people would like to read the threads without wading through sewage. Some of us are interested in normal discourse, enjoy learning different view points. Everything does not need to be a battle for control.





oneraddad said:


> Because you can't see that you look as dumb as the people you're arguing with.
> 
> And you especially need to look in the mirror.


I have the right to post just as you two do... correct? 

I "look in the mirror" and happy with what I see. If you two (or anyone else) don't like my posts please feel free to put me on ignore, or not read them. 

Pretty simple, huh?


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> I would love to have polite discourse. Exchanging info with no name calling and put downs. I learn so much from the politics and GC section.


I have found that not engaging with the aggressive ones to be effective, now there have been times I have which made me feel childish. There is a poster here who I don't always agree with but he is excellent at keeping his comments expressive without being aggressive. The poster is Nevada, lots of us could take some lessons from him.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> I have the right to post just as you two do... correct?
> 
> I "look in the mirror" and happy with what I see. If you two (or anyone else) don't like my posts please feel free to put me on ignore, or not read them.
> 
> Pretty simple, huh?



Sigh* K ? OMG ! SMH


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> I have the right to post just as you two do... correct?
> 
> I "look in the mirror" and happy with what I see. If you two (or anyone else) don't like my posts please feel free to put me on ignore, or not read them.
> 
> Pretty simple, huh?


:bored:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

no really said:


> I have found that not engaging with the aggressive ones to be effective, now there have been times I have which made me feel childish. There is a poster here who I don't always agree with but he is excellent at keeping his comments expressive without being aggressive. The poster is Nevada, lots of us could take some lessons from him.


 I see how this thread has gone to the dogs by a few. Now just imagine what would happen IF Politics were OPEN TO the Public. Nope that can not be~!


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

arabian knight said:


> I see how this thread has gone to the dogs by a few. Now just imagine what would happen IF Politics were OPEN TO the Public. Nope that can not be~!


There are several threads that have devolved into ridiculous behavior. Never thought I would say this but a bit more moderation could be applied. :idea:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

no really said:


> There are several threads that have devolved into ridiculous behavior. Never thought I would say this but a bit more moderation could be applied. :idea:


 I have said before and i will say it again a click by a few ruined HT before and now it may just be happening again. Some seem to want to completely take HT down so more to move over to those OTHERS. Well it ain't gonna happen. 
A 'click' by a few can and has been trouble before, and the same thing is happening once again. YES I believe there Does need to be some stronger rules around and stop this once and for all. This back and forth by just a few is sickening. Some just can't take any kind of criticism and just keeps on and on and on.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

painterswife said:


> That is a good post and very true. I try to not respond with insults to the person but sometimes fail. I however have decided that every time I see someone continues to put down entire groups of people I am going to respond in kind because I have had enough. For example if someone needs to call liberals liers in every post they can fit it into, I have no problem responding the same about conservatives.
> 
> Does it elevate the conversation. No not even a little bit. I have however tried polite discourse and that failed. I am sick of seeing the name calling and put downs and have decided to roll in the mud with them. I can only hope they might get the message.


Argue all you want, but it is true certain things are common to certain groups. That does not mean everyone in that group does something, but as a group, they do. Liberals do lie as a group and no one can dispute that. Again, that does not mean ALL liberals lie. It also does not mean some conservatives don't lie, just that as a group they are more honest.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

arabian knight said:


> I have said before and i will say it again a click by a few ruined HT before and now it may just be happening again. Some seem to want to completely take HT down so more to move over to those OTHERS. Well it ain't gonna happen.
> A 'click' by a few can and has been trouble before, and the same thing is happening once again. YES I believe there Does need to be some stronger rules around and stop this once and for all. This back and forth by just a few is sickening. Some just can't take any kind of criticism and just keeps on and on and on.



You know you're part of the problem, right ?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

poppy said:


> Argue all you want, but it is true certain things are common to certain groups. That does not mean everyone in that group does something, but as a group, they do. Liberals do lie as a group and no one can dispute that. Again, that does not mean ALL liberals lie. It also does not mean some conservatives don't lie, just that as a group they are more honest.


I disagree. Conservatives just hide it better.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

poppy said:


> Argue all you want, but it is true certain things are common to certain groups. That does not mean everyone in that group does something, but as a group, they do. Liberals do lie as a group and no one can dispute that. Again, that does not mean ALL liberals lie. It also does not mean some conservatives don't lie, just that as a group they are more honest.



I'm pretty sure you hit a wrong key in there some where cause it's obvious the point came out backwards.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

arabian knight said:


> I see how this thread has gone to the dogs by a few. Now just imagine what would happen IF Politics were OPEN TO the Public. Nope that can not be~!


That makes me so curious to know what manner of elevated humanity populates the sacred halls of the ultra secret Politics club. Probably not curious enough, but still.....


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Holy stink. Who woulda thought that a simple question would have turned into such a big deal. 

I just cleaned up another thread over in Politics and for those that believe they want old style moderation, it would be a good time to point out there would be about 5 members left posting in GC and Politics and some of those complaining would not be among them. 

I realize we came up with some different solutions than have been used in the past and not everybody might agree with them but the same members who object sure seem fond of utilizing the less restrictions. 

Just to make things clear again, we are still not tolerating personal attacks and insults and just because someone doesn't like another member's position on something is not a license to insult someone personally.


----------



## hippygirl (Apr 3, 2010)

no really said:


> I have found that not engaging with the aggressive ones to be effective, now there have been times I have which made me feel childish. _*There is a poster here who I don't always agree with but he is excellent at keeping his comments expressive without being aggressive. The poster is Nevada, lots of us could take some lessons from him.*_


You're absolutely right about Nevada...I don't think I've ever seen a post in which he even remotely comes close to being aggressive, but he still manages to get his point across. I rarely agree with him on anything, but I respect his calm delivery and his dedication to his beliefs.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

hippygirl said:


> You're absolutely right about Nevada...I don't think I've ever seen a post in which he even remotely comes close to being aggressive, but he still manages to get his point across. I rarely agree with him on anything, but I respect his calm delivery and his dedication to his beliefs.


Thing is with his approach he is heard, others that prefer aggressive tactics after awhile it becomes just blah, blah, blah. Than like a contagion it infects the whole the whole forum.


----------



## FutureFarm (Mar 1, 2013)

Watcher is another great poster. I might not always agree with him, but I have learned a lot. It's really interesting to read him and Nevada debate. I'd probably pay to watch it live.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

FutureFarm said:


> Watcher is another great poster. I might not always agree with him, but I have learned a lot. It's really interesting to read him and Nevada debate. I'd probably pay to watch it live.


In my opinion, the key to that comment is debate. Once people affix a value to winning or losing a discussion, they tend to make things personal and we do have some members on both sides of most discussions that are very skilled at debate.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> I have the right to post just as you two do... correct?
> 
> I "look in the mirror" and happy with what I see. If you two (or anyone else) don't like my posts please feel free to put me on ignore, or not read them.
> 
> Pretty simple, huh?


I prefer to read everyone's posts, that way I get a better understanding of who they are and what they are all about. That helps me in making out my Christmas party invitation list.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

YH how bigs that party going to be ? If I'm good till then can I have eggnog ?


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

wr said:


> I will say that this particular thread kinda got away from us but it seems that we may have had some sort of glitch. I was away from my desk for a bit on Friday because the big guy always buys himself a new gun for his birthday and I can promise you a guy in a gun store is an event and apparently, nobody is smart enough to put a chair in a gun store so Saturday was spent convincing my therapist that she could make my unhappy ankle smaller than a football and there was something she could do to stop the muscle spasms.
> 
> All that really means to you as a concerned member is that the my failing ankle was the excuse the big guy needed to buy two new handguns and while the app is handy for members, it wasn't working well for me and apparently, Shrek was having problems accessing from his end.


No worries. I wasn't criticizing your moderating but supporting you for cleaning up the thread. I think it was right to do. Ignoring insults like another poster suggested is not the way to go.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

where I want to said:


> Actually the insult binges come from responding in kind. What you're talking about is an attempt to out insult to drive opponents into silence. That has mixed results at best. If the insulter is capable of self examination, it can create a change in behavior but if not, it becomes a recreational sport.


Responding in kind doesn't help, but if the original insults were not allowed to begin with there would be nothing to respond to with more insults. All the deleted posts were because of one person posting insults and others responding to those insults. Get rid of the originals and you cut out the responses automatically.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> I see how this thread has gone to the dogs by a few. Now just imagine what would happen IF Politics were *OPEN TO the Public*. Nope that can not be~!


It would be no different, since "the public" can't post.

Please explain how allowing more people to read would change anything, or how allowing all members the option to post would make a big difference, when most have that option now?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> nobody is smart enough to put a chair in a gun store


The one where I worked used to have a couch, several chairs, and a great BBQ restaurant next door, even though they aren't in these pictures.
http://gunsunlimitednc.com/


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The one where I worked used to have a couch, several chairs, and a great BBQ restaurant next door, even though they aren't in these pictures.
> http://gunsunlimitednc.com/


I'm starting to think it's a setup. They used to have a little table and chairs for people to sit at the last time we were there, it had been removed but I was told it was being replaced. I happened to have just shattered my ankle so they finally sent me down to sit with the gunsmith because he had a spare chair. 

I didn't want to bother him so I just pulled my knitting out of my purse and started working on a sock and he just happens to be Norwegian so we had a great visit about good warm hunting socks. 

As soon as I started limping bad, the guys up front sent me back down to visit the gunsmith and when the big guy came to check on me, he just volunteered to barter a pair of handknit hunting socks for the second largest man I've met for a new trigger :rotfl:


----------



## Marshloft (Mar 24, 2008)

wr said:


> I believe I have the Gay Marriage thread cleaned up to a point where it's not vile.
> 
> Do you want it reopened, open another thread on the topic or leave it closed?


 You don't have to worry about me getting involved.
I learned my lesson when "Mean Dean" gave me the kabosh back in 08 because I said the word "dildo". Altho I'm sure it was the context, not the word.
G.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> YH how bigs that party going to be ? If I'm good till then can I have eggnog ?


Its normally a good wingding, you are welcome to all of the nog you can bring.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> Responding in kind doesn't help, but if the original insults were not allowed to begin with there would be nothing to respond to with more insults. All the deleted posts were because of one person posting insults and others responding to those insults. Get rid of the originals and you cut out the responses automatically.


Yes but the difference is an individual can not control what others do but can control their responses.
Insults do not "have" to be responded to-there is no requirement. 
Also an unfortunate number of people read insult when it is only contradiction and respond with deliberate insult. Hypervigilant for insult, they always manage to find it.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

This seems like a very simple issue. Politics has a relatively small audience. If I want to be heard by a larger audience, I pick to post in GC, which takes in political forum people plus a bunch of others if I can make the slightest case for it fitting there. 
A few of the GC people simply are irritated by the arguing that the political forum participants love. Those individuals would prefer to isolate the people fond of arguing in the Political Ghetto where they don't bother anyone else. They can neither resist looking and commenting yet resent getting caught up in it. And voice their disapproval in a very nasty way.
While the Political Forum folks want more debate and therefore more people commenting. Going round with the same small group is boring. New ideas and outlooks make for more vigorus debate and more interesting conclusions. Although there seems to be an element of freedom to be their true and very nasty selves too. 
So can you make a policy that makes both happy? 
The answer is "no" since an indiviual sort is apparently impossible. So pick a rule and stick to it.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

where I want to said:


> Yes but the difference is an individual can not control what others do but can control their responses.
> Insults do not "have" to be responded to-there is no requirement.


Yes, as simple members all we can do is ignore the insults, but we were discussing moderating. A moderator does have some control over what others do on the site. And we all know not all members are going to ignore the insults, regardless of the fact that you and I think they should. Like you said, we have no control over others so we can't control their responses, only our own. Even if nobody ever responded to the insults, it would still make sense to continue deleting them and dealing the people posting them if they don't stop.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> Yes, as simple members all we can do is ignore the insults, but we were discussing moderating. A moderator does have some control over what others do on the site. And we all know not all members are going to ignore the insults, regardless of the fact that you and I think they should. Like you said, we have no control over others so we can't make them ignore the insults. Even if nobody ever responded to the insults, it would still make sense to continue deleting them and dealing the people posting them if they don't stop.


But what is an insult in the first place? For example, there was a post about it being alright to just let their dogs run loose in the "country". Where upon I said that two dogs just killed my neighbor's two alpacas then killed my most precious old pet goat before I drove the dogs off at personal risk to save the remaining goats who already had many injuries from bites. I said it was not alright.
The original poster said I had insulted her. Mentally I said to myself "well good for me." But did not respond in writing and that was the end of that.
Frankly being insulted is an awfully personal choice for a few. And those few tend to be the most aggressive. So sometimes there is no option but ignoring three quaters of what they say, especially the most nasty of their posts.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> But what is an insult in the first place? For example, there was a post about it being alright to just let their dogs run loose in the "country". Where upon I said that two dogs just killed my neighbor's two alpacas then killed my most precious pet goat before I drove the dogs off at personal risk to save the remaining goats who already had many injuries from bites. I said it was not alright.
> The original poster said I had insulted her. Mentally I said to myself "well good for me." But did not respond in writing and that was the end of that.
> Frankly being insulted is an awfully personal choice for a few. And those few tend to be the most aggressive. So sometimes there is no option but ignoring three quaters of what they say, especially the most nasty of their posts.


So, you do you, and let others decide for themselves what they will respond to and what they believe warrants a response. Some times enough is enough and a response is more than warranted.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

where I want to said:


> But what is an insult in the first place?


Thankfully I don't have the responsibility of determining that. The moderators seem to do a fairly decent job of it. I see lots of posts that I would delete for being rude but I'm sure there would be a lot of backlash against treating people like children. I think if you act like children you can be treated like children, but the reverse may also come into play in that treating people like children makes them act even more childish.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

painterswife said:


> So, you do you, and let others decide for themselves what they will respond to and what they believe warrants a response. Some times enough is enough and a response is more than warranted.


I agree but the difference comes in the nature of the response. It is a nasty assessment of the person or is it a rebuttal of their agrument? 
Otherwise it's just screaming insults in a junior high cafeteria. And that is just an attempt to bully into silence that causes general disruption.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> Thankfully I don't have the responsibility of determining that. The moderators seem to do a fairly decent job of it. I see lots of posts that I would delete for being rude but I'm sure there would be a lot of backlash against treating people like children. I think if you act like children you can be treated like children, but the reverse may also come into play in that treating people like children makes them act even more childish.


That's why I keep advocating for the adults to moderate themselves. Otherwise every conversation is taken over by those who can't restrain themselves.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

In a perfect world, that's a great idea. Unfortunately, there were vile attacks from at least one of the adults in this forum. If ignored, it would just continue. I don't think that's acceptable for a family site.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Poof! It's gone.

OK, I haven't watched much of the moderating play out here real time before.

It says deleted, but also under review?

I gather it takes time to make decisions about things.

But, I want to know, do entire threads just get deleted?

Cause that's an awful lot of time in that thread that many people spent sharing thoughts, even if some was Snarky or worse (depending I'm sure on each person's perspective).

I'm just wondering if whole threads just get deleted around here? Still not sure I get the whole standards system being used to moderate here. Not saying to be whiny about it, I get that moderating objectively probably is difficult when most content is rather subjective to at least some degree.


----------



## J.T.M. (Mar 2, 2008)

no really said:


> I have found that not engaging with the aggressive ones to be effective, now there have been times I have which made me feel childish. There is a poster here who I don't always agree with but he is excellent at keeping his comments expressive without being aggressive. The poster is Nevada, lots of us could take some lessons from him.


Nevada is a good poster and I love to rib him  However, he is the only person here who has ever caused me to step back and rethink a belief of mine . He's even changed my mind on a few things < GASP > 



EDIT : Tiempo has changed my way of thinking on some things as well


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gibbsgirl said:


> Poof! It's gone.
> 
> OK, I haven't watched much of the moderating play out here real time before.
> 
> ...


There has been a lot of time invested in that thread and there are some terrific thoughts but perhaps you're also not aware that the mod team is all volunteer and we put in the time we feel we can. 

The thread you're complaining about shows as deleted to you because it is not available for public viewing on comment at this time, mods will review it and likely clean it up again and reopen it but I can assure you that after a thread has been reduced to personal attacks and insults three times, the logical conclusion is that it's going to carry on with personal attacks and insults.

It is my understanding that you've been a member for quite some time so you would be aware that many posts like this have simply been deleted or locked down in the past and we are trying to give members a chance to continue discussion but we do expect civility.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

I was trying to ask about if threadsjuust get deleted in their entirety. It was not meant to be a complaint to volunteer moderators.

And, I wasn't trying to time pressure any volunteer. I actually have not read the message before i was seeing saying deleted thread, then under mod review, so I was confused about if the deletion was temporary or if it was gone.

I have been a member for awhile. But, I don't remember following or being on a thread that was having anything modified real-time. I have seen a few things before on threads, but it was stuff that were old threads so I didn't really know what stuff had been deleted, which isn't seeing the whole picture 

Again, wasn't trying to complain, or make requests that pressure volunteers, just was confused by the messages, so I thought this was the place to ask.

Thanks for the info.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gibbsgirl said:


> I was trying to ask about if threadsjuust get deleted in their entirety. It was not meant to be a complaint to volunteer moderators.
> 
> And, I wasn't trying to time pressure any volunteer. I actually have not read the message before i was seeing saying deleted thread, then under mod review, so I was confused about if the deletion was temporary or if it was gone.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry if I sounded curt. I will clean it up but we haven't decided if it will remain locked but available to be viewed of it will be reopened and members can take another run at each other.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

gibbsgirl said:


> I was trying to ask about if threads juust get deleted in their entirety. .........


Sure, it has happened lots of times.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

I may not have worded my question great. I just put it up here cause I didn't know what the messages meant.. Wasn't trying to be harsh asking.

I wasn't on here much between Christmas and a month or two ago. From what I gather there was some kind of upheaval. But, I missed it all real-time and have only seen snippets of talk of it.

I' n guessing maybe things are still tense between some people, so maybe that's why there seems like a lot of heated talk? But, I honestly don't know. I don't remember seeing much tension before. 

But, I may be drawing the wrong conclusions. Maybe I just wasn't in heated threads very often before, and just was in more homestead less news and politics ones ....


Anyway, just wanted to ask how to read the message, so thanks for explaining. I have read that rules and moderating have changed, but just didn't have a lot of experience watching any of it before or now to really see how it's all managed here.

Thanks again.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Fennick said:


> Sure, it has happened lots of times.


Thanks, I was a little lost earlier with the messages saying deleted and under review on the screen for that forum


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

GG, just for your information, there have been a lot less deletions and censorship of posts and threads during the past 2 or 3 months (since "the upheaval" this spring) compared to the numerous posts and threads that used to get deleted or heavily censored before "the upheaval" happened. Deletions and censorship now are practically non-existent by comparison. As a consequence I think some people are testing the limits to see how far they can push with their harrassment and insults before a moderator has to step in.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Fennick said:


> GG, just for your information, there have been a lot less deletions and censorship of posts and threads during the past 2 or 3 months (since "the upheaval" this spring) compared to the numerous posts and threads *that used to get deleted or heavily censored* before "the upheaval" happened. Deletions and censorship now are practically non-existent by comparison. As a consequence I think some people are testing the limits to see how far they can push with their harrassment and insults before a moderator has to step in.


And those were just the ones you could see, since I know there were also deletions that were done underhandedly so as not to be detected

The new way is much better


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Fennick said:


> GG, just for your information, there have been a lot less deletions and censorship of posts and threads during the past 2 or 3 months (since "the upheaval" this spring) compared to the numerous posts and threads that used to get deleted or heavily censored before "the upheaval" happened. Deletions and censorship now are practically non-existent by comparison. As a consequence I think some people are testing the limits to see how far they can push with their harrassment and insults before a moderator has to step in.


Thanks, I really had no personal history following that kind of stuff before, during, or after here. But, I got the feeling several other people did. It's good to get a little reference for what's been changing. Makes some stuff make a little more sense in my mind that I've read now knowing people are testing limits and learning how thick or thin skinned they are. Thanks. I was hesitant to ask because I didn't want to get sucked into the middle of something I gathered had already played itself out.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Fennick said:


> GG, just for your information, there have been a lot less deletions and censorship of posts and threads during the past 2 or 3 months (since "the upheaval" this spring)


ou can not compare what is happening now to what happened a few months as a Whole lot of folks are NOT here. Some of them also did some damaging posts. and you know it. So trying to say less now then before sure there are less because they are LESS People posting.,.~!


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

What?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

nchobbyfarm said:


> What?


I think he is saying that membership is down and he figures that as it increases, I'm going to be deleting more threads for some reason.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

wr said:


> I think he is saying that membership is down and he figures that as it increases, I'm going to be deleting more threads for some reason.


Thanks for translating.


----------

