Brainking.com is super.

What I'm asking is..Don't the monitors have a thing to click on to let them see the post before lettting it in there? I thought so

Thanks :-)

Foxy Lady: WEll done

Rose and rod03801 for being chosen Globs.

rod03801:I agree there are several children that can and will see this issue,which is not needed for this great site.

Mike.:o)

Babygirlle: I think specifics of this arguement should be kept to PM or fellowships. It has been more of a general conversation here.

Walter Montego:As too your question,there is no pawns that can read or write on any fellowship boards.
Therefore that shows you are, NOT the big boss,which are fencers decisions.

Any other question regarding this should be directly sent to Fencer.

Czuch Chuckers:The site was down for 2 hours.

ScarletRose:I finally agree with you,i can't speak for him but still the issue at hand,i agree.

harley: OK, I'll try it your way. I sent a request for membership to the Big Boss saying you recommended me.
I'll see you there when she gets around to letting me in.

And in Iran too :-)

Czuch Chuckers: Yep, site was inaccessible to me during that time. Oddly, I don't even get an internet error message, but simply nothing happens when I click on a link to the site.

Czuch Chuckers: Yes, it went down for about an hour and a half here too in the UK

Just had a mess of a time getting onsite, anyone else?

I had to come on in guest mode after trying normal chanels for over an hour!

Jason: I don't think that idea would work because then people who are mad at other people WOULD start saying crap and getting things all riled up...whats the point in that,isn't that what the flame pit (or whatever the fellowship is called ) is for.Unfortanatly,like Tuesday said..our converstaion just happen to fall in the same time line as something else and someone I suppose thought it was personal,which it was not...sorry,girls just having fun here and the timing was bad,not our fault on that one,also,like Tuesday said..mod was NOT rude to me about it AT ALL,I understand she was doing her job and wasn't upset at her AT ALL.I think,all and all,the mods are doing a very good job!!

agree that since pawns cannot participate in fellowships, there are some subjects which they may be excluded from participating in, ie the "Bumble situation". In that instance they were asked to discuss it on another website. That topic was not allowed here, on public boards, because some found it offensive. The problem is that everything can be offensive to someone, even something as benign as talking about a particular song can offend some. So where does it end? Do we really want these boards to be as pure as the most sensative member among us? Maybe so. But if we do, then we have to be ready to remove a post about a particular song, if it offends someone. If we get to that point, then there will be nothing suitable for the public boards.

I think we all agree it needs to lie somewhere in the middle.... That is where the real problem lies, where is this middle ground? When this decision is left up to the moderators, we have another set of problems. Some boards ie gen chat have many moderators, all with the ability to delete any post they think will offend or that they are personally offended by. Do we really really want posts deleted only because the moderator is offended by a topic? Or only because one reader is offended and comnplains? hat doesnt make any sense either, but thats what it has come down to!
What happens if a moderator is a personal friend of someone being discussed? So they dont allow any posts about that person. hen someone else is being discussed who is not a personal friend of that moderator, so the topic is allowed. This does happen on these boards. Is that how we want our moderators to act?


have plenty more, but it seems like most people probably havent even read this far, so I will end it here......

maybe fencer would put up a few more general chat type boards where there is no mods and anyone can post ........im sure this must have been asked for before though , and turned down because of problems that would arise from it and maybe spill onto other boards , but just an idea

BIG BAD WOLF: true

Walter Montego: It isn't my fellowship but it is open to all moderators. If you're serious about wanting to make a difference in how things are done maybe you should join and give us your input.

Vikings: Well the mods that choose to be part of the mod fellowship, some never joined or left.

Walter Montego: "everyone is aware" means that the mods are aware and thats what this is really about

BIG BAD WOLF: I have to leave, but I will check into this fellowship thing. Can Pawn members join them?

harley: The mess I'm refering to is the Bumble affair. I'm also was talking about Tuesday's deal. And check you out, "everyone is aware" What is it that we're aware of? You mean the people in your fellowship, right? I'm not a member, so I don't know. And that is what I mean about the public boards, we are all members of these.

Walter Montego: Could things be changes for the beter? The answer to that is probable always.

But for how things are now, a solution already in place is the fellowship boards. There are many fellowships which are open to just about any knight or rook to join, and have warnings placed right in the description that it is for more non-family talk. There are at least a couple that are for any type of discussion, and I believe a couple that are around just for non-family type jokes which some may be offended by on the public boards.

As far as I know, those fellowship will accept just about anyone as long as they do not get offended easly.

harley: "Nothing can be perfect, but it can become better...."

Walter Montego: I think 'mess' is a bit strong. Tuesday pointed out a way people can abuse the system and it was discussed in the mod squad so everyone is aware, and it shouldn't happen again. The rest of the time the system we have in place works well. Its not perfect, but nothing ever is.

Walter Montego: .
.
"Your actions lead me to believe that this discussion board stuff is just a sideline. The thing is, it has become one of the defining features of your site."

I was ready to comment about these exact 2 things, but you did it first. And you said what i really wanted to say! You have saved me from some typing. Nice, thanks.....:-)

I second all your other statements also.....!

BIG BAD WOLF: After three years as a member I finally joined a fellowship. I see a big problem with your idea about it. A fellowship is a closed group. The public discussion boards are just that, public. The have a broad and general audience, not the narrow one of a fellowship. Plus the Big Boss chooses who to let in. In the discussion boards, we are all members from the moment we sign up and join BrainKing.

Pythagoras: A very easy solution I like it.

One easy way to create that system is:
Keep the current system as it is with an extra option available to choose from. That is to see the posts removed. As an option. So when a moderator deletes a post, the post would not actually been deleted but only stay hidden from people that haven't enabled that option. Others that have it enabled, can see every post and these that have been "deleted/hidden".

Fencer: And no Fencer you are wrong. This is a very important subject. You might be right about people complaining, but there's no reason to believe that just because this is so that a better way to do it can't be devised and put in place. Just look at what we have now and tell me you think it's perfect. Yeah, uh-huh. Maybe it's because you think it's not important, and that's exactly how this mess happened. Sweeping it under the carpet will work for awhlie. You're a game player, not a conversationalist. Your actions lead me to believe that this discussion board stuff is just a sideline. The thing is, it has become one of the defining features of your site. You really should devote more energy to making it better for more people and getting rid of the potential for abuse and pettiness of the moderators. They are some good moderators on this site. Unfortunately they only have a few boards and can't be everywhere. And then there's trouble makers, which as alanback pointed out will always find a way to get around whatever rules are put in place. Deal with them as it comes up. The rest of us can take of ourselves.

Pythagoras' simple solution will work for me very well. Let me decide what to view. I'm an adult, I don't need some nanny telling me what to read. And give me the abilty to hide individual posts. How about numbering the posts so I can see that some have been deleted when there's a gap in the sequence? This system now just has them vanish into thin air and the moderators can get away with anything. The moderators need policing too. You can't let them set up little dictatorships and run roughshod over the rest of us.

There are already boards set up where a person can post offending & non-family type stuff, they are called fellowship boards. On those boards, the BIG BOSS can decide what stays and goes, with a few boards already set up for just about anything to be on-topic.

Fencer: Correct for the first part!
But the: "There are more important things to do and always will be." should not mean in any way that because there are other things to do, we should not correct some others.....

Walter Montego: Oh, you are going too far, i wasn't thinking actually of a change to the whole system but only of the philosophy of it.
But if we talk about changing the whole system then yes i agree with you. Freedom of speech without ANY restriction is what i prefer too!

Also a correction on the "I disagree with you. This is the system we have now." This is not what we have now, since now every moderator obeys to his own charter.


So suppose we allow 2 options: The sensitive one-> "with moderators" and the other that allows complete freedom of voice.
Well this is a bit odd since it would split the people into 2 categories. That's not the best but it's doable and worth looking at it as an option.....Actually this is the best option i can think of....

One easy way to create that system is:
Keep the current system as it is with an extra option available to choose from. That is to see the posts removed. As an option. So when a moderator deletes a post, the post would not actually been deleted but only stay hidden from people that haven't enabled that option. Others that have it enabled, can see every post and these that have been "deleted/hidden".

Walter Montego: I said it many times but I'll say it again. No matter what system you choose, there will be always someone who would complain "the system is not working for me and a lot of others". There are more important things to do and always will be.

Pythagoras: And I certainly don't want some moderator to force me as to what to post or believe. We can turn the tables and make them conform to how I believe if I was the moderator. I let eveyone post as long as it doesn't contain profanity or racial epitats. The topic isn't even that important in most of the cases, though it can be steered towards if it demands it. This is what I want to get away from, having it NOT matter who the actual moderator is. The system as is now is not working for me and a lot of others. It needs changing. It is too personality driven.

Pythagoras: I disagree with you. This is the system we have now. What we need is a different system. One that will let those of that don't mind what people post to have all posts show on their screens and those that are sensitive can choose to have moderators. We can all hide something we don't like, so why do I need a moderator to look out for me? I would like the ability to hide individuals posts too. That way I can still see other things that person has posted. This should at least be added to this site for the moderators now. The default set up could be the "Familiy" setting. One would have to purposely choose to have the unmoderated one and would be responsible for their account and their own children. I haven't seen anything on this site that a twelve year old would even bat an eye at unless their parents have been hiding out in the commune of puritanical beliefs somewhere.

Walter Montego:.
.
.
Agreeeeeeeeed!

The current system with the moderators:
-delete anything THEY think should not be posted or
-do anything THEY think is right, is not good at all....

The way the moderators should act is to have a charter and force the posters to follow it.
Anything that doesn't violate the charter should be allowed even if the moderator disagrees with that!
The charter of course SHOULD be crystal clear, without the slightest possibility to generate any different convenient interpretations, by the moderators in order to do again what THEY think right.

For example the charter could be like this:

The moderators should force the members to make posts that:

Are, within reason, on the topic of the discussion board.

Are not abusive in nature.

Do not contain personal or libelous attacks on others.

Are not of questionable legal status.

Are not obvious trolling.
Other of course can be added.
The moderators should force the posters to follow these and only these rules, without creating any new personal criteria.

Walter Montego: it is mostly due to Fencer wanting this site to be more Family oriented..

welcome to the wonderfull PC world

Walter Montego: To be honest i didnt think they were that offensive it had the word "Privates" in them, obviosly "Somebody" found that offensive, so i was asked to remove them.

WatfordFC: Just because someone doesn't like something does not make it offensive. Is the community standard going to be that of the most sensitive member of us? That's where this is leading. If people are that thin skinned they should get over it. I'm being denied the opportunity to read other people's posts because someone doesn't like them.
If you carry this to the extreme it will become impossible to post anyting but of the most banal nature, fluff, or inconsquential things. This would be a shame because I believe there's some very smart people on this site.
Any post can be deemed off offensive to at least one person. This system of moderation is a joke. Let's all become politically correct.

Even following a board's guideline isn't enough. Those that don't like the posts change the guidelines and still delete
the posts. I notice there's been a big drop off in the number of postings to my favorite boards. Is this a coincidence?

Fencer, please entertain ideas of finding a different way to moderate the public boards. It is too arbitrary and capricious as it is now.

harley: I put a couple of posts on the GC which were deemed offensive, the Mod pmed and asked me if i could remove them, this person ws very polite about it, so i removed them.

harley: it dont work for me that way....

There are always others to take there place, which is a shame.

Well up to now moderators generally ask people to delete their own posts if someone messages to say they find it upsetting or offensive. The problem is I think (and this is only my opinion) that we have been a bit too trusting of people who say they're offended. This hasn't been a huge problem by any means though and its good we have caught it early.

One thing remains unclear:
Tuesday said some of her posts have been deleted while the moderators agreed that her posts have been OK with nothing wrong at them.
There is a contradiction right?

If i am a moderator and don't find anything bad at a post but delete it, then if i didn't delete it by mistake, i'm a moron and have to be replaced with someone better.....!

Naming people isn't a great idea, they feel the need to defend themselves then arguments and accusations start. Much better to keep posts neutral and inoffensive.
Tuesdays problem has been passed to the mod squad fellowship so all moderators can be aware of this particular action that some users have been taking lately. I don't think the person in question has any hold over moderators (to answer your question, Pythagoras), its more because moderators act when they are messaged saying someone found a post offensive. Its a shame that some members play on the good intentions of moderators and use this as a means to 'get at' someone they may dislike. Hopefully we'll find a middle ground where offensive posts are dealt with ASAP, while people claiming they are offended to cause problems are spotted and not allowed to abuse the system.