19038Re: [UFOnet] Re: Moderator vacancy
- Apr 13, 2006Geoff Richardson <geoff@...> wrote: Posted on behalf of Joe (ex moderator) as he has to rejoin the group following his resignation as moderator.
>This is unbelievable. One off topic post has generated more >discussion than the on topic UFO discussion. From what I see onA couple of points here.
1. You make my point for me about the negative potential of off-topic postings to the smooth running of the list. Yet to quote you from previous posts:
"Take a pill Joe. Sit down and enjoy the eagles"
"Thanks for posting the eagle url. I appreciate it."
BB: There was no "negative potential" to that post, it became negative. It should have been acknowledge by those who wanted to acknowledge it (2 of us) and then go on. IF it generated more than a few comments AND it looked like it could dominate the discussion THEN put an end to it.
2. Do you really consider the administration of the UFONET list to be off-topic for this list?
I agree, it is unbelievable.
BB: Yes, actually. If you want to discuss the administration of this list then do it with personal email between yourselves, or create a list for the administrative staff. Remember, this is a UFO discussion list not an admin list, and administration of the list is "off topic". But somehow this is ok... little bit of a double standard Joe. Joe wants to complain on the "UFO" list, thats ok, but Brian posts a URL about eagles, thats not ok.
>the message board the interest in this list is waning anyway. Rather than taking your ball and going home Joe, why dont you cut the childish behavior and throw yourself into making the >list more interesting and viable.In order to improve the list, I need the support of my
fellow-moderators, and the list membership.
BB: I will agree with part of that. If you all agree to keep off topic comments from the list, then Brian was wrong because that was the agreement...but the membership has no obligation to "support" you.
Moderator Frits has more pressing demands on his time, which is why he requested assistance in the first place. Moderator Brian, by making the off-topic post, has undermined the authority of the moderators - how can he now justify rejecting off-topic posts in the future? Shortly prior to Brian's off-topic post, I rejected a number of posts because they were off-topic.
BB: This is how I handle it. I will reject a post that is blatantly "off topic", but if it is something that is "planetary" (like eagles) I usually allow it. Thats the way I deal with it. I have only had problem with one person who kept posting Moon Hoax on the UFO list, which would not necessarily have been an issue but there were clear "sides" and the constant bickering became annoying to the others. I created another list which became politics/conspiracy and everyone was happy.
Comments like your own own and Linette's
demonstrate a lack of support from the membership, though this is balanced by comments like those from Geoff and Dean. Out of a list with nearly 800 registered members, only 4 people felt strongly enough about topicality to express an opinion either way. Hardly support for
me as a moderator.
BB: Why do you keep turning this into a personal issue? I dont know you. I have nothing against you as a person or a moderator. 800 subscribers and 4 expressed an opinion, doesnt that set off some alarms for you? Rather than turning this into a "poor Joe" list, like I said before, you, and the other moderators, should be concentrating on the positive, bring more topics to the list. You know, if there was something more interesting on the list, this thread would have fallen off immediately instead its the only chatter.
Moving on to your suggestions, you clearly have the knowledge as to how to cure the ills of the list, and the time to carry them out (since you can afford the time to read off-topic posts and act on them).
BB: Ya, I clicked on a URL. That took a lot of time. What has taken time is this debate about off topic posts.
Why don't you apply your resources and take up the vacant moderator's position? You would certainly have my support in this.
BB: Sure, why not? I guess I can handle five lists.
--- In email@example.com, "Linette Sukup" <linettesukup@...>
> Listen, I know that I got blasted for my remark about jaded cynicism. But > Brian seemed genuinely excited about the eagle pics. A sense of wonder is athe > interest in this list is waning anyway. Rather than taking your ball and > going home Joe, why dont you cut the childish behavior and throw yourself
> sense of wonder. > I also hope that my remark didn't contribute to Joe's walking off. I have > regularly posted things that I thought might spur discussion, but they > didn't. Either people didn't find them interesting, or they, like me, have a > helluva lot of things to do.> Let's not be acrimonious over one slip-up, but at the same time let's not > limit ourselves to such a degree that we become stagnant.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "B. Becker" <becker65201@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 10:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [UFOnet] Moderator vacancy
> This is unbelievable. One off topic post has generated more discussion than > the on topic UFO discussion. From what I see on the message board
> into making the list more interesting and viable.Missouri Investigators Group
> Joe McGonagle <joe@...> wrote:
> I must have got it wrong, I thought this was a UFO list. Given my > gross misunderstanding as to what the topicality of the list is, I > have no choice but to stand down as a moderator.
> Apologies, please feel free to post whatever you like to this list
> (whatever it's subject is).
NUFORC / Mo Reports
Sightings in Missouri/graphs
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>