Mods, Rules, and Consistency

[stdreb27]

Personal opinion. Take it or leave it. Just how I approach forums.

consistency? Mods volunteer. (Not that it matters)

It's the internets, not a socialist university campus.
No one is perfect. Neither are any boards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Savage805]

Climate change.

QFT

 

[Hoji]

Wow, clever response; but that still doesn't mean it's appropriate for Texas Gun Talk.

If we're going to allow politics, then why not religion, evolution, transgender identities and every other debatable subject under the sun? Then the original purpose of the forum can be buried in all the bullshit that is unnecessary; just so a few have to spew their political beliefs on here and not on a political forum...

Sorry to argue logic against your witty reply, but actually it shows why such topics and discussions need to be purged from this site, whether you like them or not...

Again, just don't look and it will not rustle your jimmies.

 

[mitchntx]

What does concern me is the idea of making TGT a gun-only board, but I already brought that up elsewhere.

Slippery slope. I quit frequenting TGT because it has become a gun-occasional board.

Eliminate all the posts with nothing more than a link to a radical internet post posing as a news source.
That would cut the traffic in half and most of the bickering.

 

[bones_708]

Slippery slope. I quit frequenting TGT because it has become a gun-occasional board.

Eliminate all the posts with nothing more than a link to a radical internet post posing as a news source.
That would cut the traffic in half and most of the bickering.

I personally hate posts with just a link and no text which seems to be most of that sort of posts. Honestly it's just a few posters also. Doesn't seem that it would be a big change and would have a sizable effect.

 

[bones_708]

Again, just don't look and it will not rustle your jimmies.

Or you could just do what the Moderators asked and not "fan the flames".

This is a problem I have. Say Major gets upsets and makes an unfriendly remake after what is clearly several antagonistic posts. Is he at fault or is it the poster who continued to antagonize after he was asked not to. Often it seem it's only antagonistic if the posts are of a minority opinion. If posters opinion are well represented they seem to be able to get a few jabs in at those of a differing beliefs before it's an issue. Everyone has seen what I'm talking about. The poster who replies with some comment about "you liberal types" or whatever. Because if that isn't meant as an insult on this board then nothing is. So if the response is a verbal smack down on the person making that comment to often it's the response not the instigator that seems to draw the ire of the moderators. Heck I have seem moderators poke at people with subtle but, IMO, obvious insult.

So my point being is if you are going to try and make the forum a more, heck I'm not even sure what the right word is, congenial? place. Blunt and direct should be fine, but the sly words and the put downs also need to be addressed.

 

[Moonpie]

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

We work with each other as mods to be consistent and balance out the moderation as much as possible. I certainly appreciate PMs vs rage quits or other juvenile antics in threads. I'm glad to see folks commenting on their experience here so we can learn from that as well.

It would go a long way if folks would also not get so wound up about stuff.

It's just the Internet.

 

[Mreed911]

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Classic, lol....

 

[TheDan]

I don't know if the forum software can support it, but I think some form of collaborative moderation would be useful. If we could up/down vote individual posts, then posts (and replies to the post) that have a sufficient negative score could automatically be hidden. You could set it so that they could be manually un-hidden, but you have to be a member for X amount of time or something to do so. That would prevent the really contentious stuff from being publicly viewable, but it's still there for the people that want it.

Again, just don't look and it will not rustle your jimmies.

Good advice for all of it really.

 

[Charlie]

We gonna' get a "like" button? Oh boy!

 

[karlac]

We gonna' get a "like" button? Oh boy!

Well, you can already have "friends" ...

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I could really use a "safe spot" on here. I need a place where words can't hurt me and the mean people aren't allowed.

 

[Orbie]

We gonna' get a "like" button? Oh boy!

I like that

 

[Charlie]

How about just a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down" smiley with no requirement to explain your choice?

 

[Moonpie]

I want a button that says: You're ugly and yer Momma dresses you funny.

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

How about just a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down" smiley with no requirement to explain your choice?

Tapatalk already has this. I'm sure it could be incorporated in the rest of the forum.

I just find it funny this is brought up. When the forum was bought and the new owners tried a few changes, one of the changes was giving the forum a "like" / "unlike" button for each post. There was a lot of complaining that this isn't a popularity contest and it was removed pretty quuckly.

Sent from Command Central

 

[majormadmax]

MajorMadMax, I'm willing to have a respectful discussion with you. However, if I can't get the same in return the discussion will be short lived.

Feel free to enlighten me to as where I was disrespectful to you in any way or form...

 

[majormadmax]

By the way, maybe the one rule in the Code of Conduct that allows things to get off topic ("We aren't going to enforce any stringent on/off topic rules. So long as the thread is progressing and people are getting the info they need we don't mind if it ends up in left field.") is the root of the problem. It is too prevalent across the forum despite there even being a section for it. It is a cause of confusion and honestly I don't see how anyone can moderate fairly with that rule present. There needs to be a decision, either you are going to allow a free-for-all or there is going to be some effort to keep things on track. Right now many threads are being closed for simply the "potential" of going off topic which is allowed per your own Code of Conduct. Mods are not here to make up or apply the rules as they want, they should simply be enforcers of the standards that have been set forth in each and every case. Otherwise, it's hypocritical...