TexasCHLforum.com

Just want to take a moment to give the mods some credit. They tried very well this morning to keep the Heller/DC Threads to a minimum. I think they did pretty good. While there are still a couple floating around there are not as many as there could have been.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks all you moderators.

Wildscar wrote:Just want to take a moment to give the mods some credit. They tried very well this morning to keep the Heller/DC Threads to a minimum. I think they did pretty good. While there are still a couple floating around there are not as many as there could have been.

Keep up the good work.

I'm confused on why limiting the conversation of the most important event in the fight for RKBA within our lifetimes was a good thing. While there has been some great postings, and its been 4 days and I still cant get enough.!!! Its certainly more fun than the endless OC threads. Different strokres different folks i guess .Thankfully there were lots of other sites covering thoughtful analysis on what this is going to mean.

I don't think it was "limiting conversation" that Chas. referred to. Rather, the number of threads on the same topic.

KBCraig wrote:I don't think it was "limiting conversation" that Chas. referred to. Rather, the number of threads on the same topic.

I don't understand why 20, 30, or more threads is bad. If its something I like there is never enough. Other topics I find boring (OC anyone) Everyones millage varies.

Someone posted an interesting article from a Boston paper and the thread got locked. That topic was on how the folks in Boston felt about the Heller decision was effectively censored and killed. I would have enjoyed seeing folks reactions to that. I do understand that some folks find this as tedious as I do the ongoing OC threads, and the mods try to find a balance. My thought is there were over a 100 pages of opinions from the Supreme Court to parse out what his really means and cause and effect as they happen is worthy of many many postings. And that I for 1 would be happy with more threads on this.

I would be perfectly happy if the mods just stopped and we had completely open discussions. Others would be horrified. I understand and appreciate the differences. I also understand the concept that some folks feel they need to be protected from "bad" words. Others here don't understand what makes one word more bad than another. (words only have the power that a receipient gives them)

I'm not really complaining because I do understand that the mods have a impossible task, and that the calls they make are often subjective and likely to to make someone unhappy. I also understand that many (most?) folks feel that heavy moderation is a good thing. but just trying to clarify that not everyone likes seeing the threads frozen. And at least one person likes seeing lots of new threads on this topic and doesn't mind seeing them in any of the subforums.

Liberty wrote:

KBCraig wrote:I don't think it was "limiting conversation" that Chas. referred to. Rather, the number of threads on the same topic.

I don't understand why 20, 30, or more threads is bad. If its something I like there is never enough. Other topics I find boring (OC anyone) Everyones millage varies.

Someone posted an interesting article from a Boston paper and the thread got locked. That topic was on how the folks in Boston felt about the Heller decision was effectively censored and killed. I would have enjoyed seeing folks reactions to that. I do understand that some folks find this as tedious as I do the ongoing OC threads, and the mods try to find a balance. My thought is there were over a 100 pages of opinions from the Supreme Court to parse out what his really means and cause and effect as they happen is worthy of many many postings. And that I for 1 would be happy with more threads on this.

I would be perfectly happy if the mods just stopped and we had completely open discussions. Others would be horrified. I understand and appreciate the differences. I also understand the concept that some folks feel they need to be protected from "bad" words. Others here don't understand what makes one word more bad than another. (words only have the power that a receipient gives them)

I'm not really complaining because I do understand that the mods have a impossible task, and that the calls they make are often subjective and likely to to make someone unhappy. I also understand that many (most?) folks feel that heavy moderation is a good thing. but just trying to clarify that not everyone likes seeing the threads frozen. And at least one person likes seeing lots of new threads on this topic and doesn't mind seeing them in any of the subforums.

+1

Liberty wrote:I don't understand why 20, 30, or more threads is bad.

I used to be a moderator on a very busy, now-defunct forum. We typically had several hundred messages per day. Threads quickly drift off-topic, and soon you have teenagers posting personal information and other things that could be subject to criminal prosecution. In short, it's a lot of work.

You know what happens in unmoderated forums and newsgroups. It's a field day for lunatics and bigots.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

Liberty wrote:I don't understand why 20, 30, or more threads is bad.

I used to be a moderator on a very busy, now-defunct forum. We typically had several hundred messages per day. Threads quickly drift off-topic, and soon you have teenagers posting personal information and other things that could be subject to criminal prosecution. In short, it's a lot of work.

You know what happens in unmoderated forums and newsgroups. It's a field day for lunatics and bigots.

- Jim

I ran a BBS in the 80s and today somewhat run a blog, and even back then I had to moderate to keep myself and posters legal.
While I have no tolerance for bigots even the lunatics can be entertaining. An even bigger problem with public forums is spam. Software and moderation have always been pretty effective here. The issue is how much moderation is good. I believe that it would be better if there were less of it. I'm sure that there are others that believe that topics drift off more than they should. To paraphrase Chas., Its all about that line and where to draw it.

Well...It is his website...Been that way for a while...

I would suggest a "sticky" folder or thread titled:

"Before you post a new O.C. thread, read this!"

And if you must say something about it, post it in there...That way it all gets funneled into there instead of in the other main topic threads...

It might even be easier to moderate this and other popular, but over-exposed issues, but then again, just my opinion...

Maybe I like to be able to read all the opinions in one thread rather than having to click five hundred thousand times. Excuse me for being nice. Wont let it happen again.