Seeking a Moderator for the Moderators

[Isaac]

You are referring to the individual who initiated a thread titled "T. is still the world's best bet." How hypocritical. And this is not the only example I recall. It is rather convenient for @Uncle Gizmo to make such a statement, considering he himself started and contributed to numerous political threads, none of which he is willing to acknowledge apparently.

I tend to agree with you. I respected and liked Uncle Gizmo, but that doesn't mean he's perfect, and I think in some cases he did have a strange habit of getting annoyed with people making comments on his own already-wild AI related threads. They already read like a rabbit on adderall, to be honest with you, which is fine - he was excited about it. But you can't project that kind of unlimited excitement and not expect people to post their own thoughts on the subject too.

@_edgar I am sorry to hear that happened to you, it does sound like he unreasonably became upset.

So now we are faced with a strange set of evidences to inform our next steps, @Vassago , because Pat left due to NOT being given ENOUGH free rein to spout political opinions. Now UG , supposedly a close friend of Pat's, yet he left precisely because a few people made comments in his wild AI threads that he didn't approve of. Frankly, doesn't seem like someone who ought to have been a moderator to begin with.

For example, for all my disagreements with @The_Doc_Man, I will say one thing: He NEVER retaliated against me by abusing his moderator power to delete a post he didn't agree with.

It seems Tony's fuse was shorter than I thought.

 

[Isaac]

If you go back to the early days of Microsoft’s Access newsgroups Usenet, microsoft.public.access, and other Microsoft-related boards you’ll remember that these forums were moderated by some very tough MVPs. If you misstated your request or your syntax was even slightly off, you’d get a paragraph of correction with little hope of getting back on track. At least, that was my experience.

When I look at this site today, I think to myself that folks have it pretty easy compared to 30 years ago.

And easy even compared to how it is TODAY on stuff like stack overflow.

I remember when once I dared to post on SO about a SQL question, one of those "Why am I getting this result from this query" (with a bunch of contextual information, of course), but I dared to post the question WITHOUT posting COMPLETE DDL that could run to re-create the tables, data, and problem. I almost burst out laughing at the time - as if nobody was smart enough to make a helpful suggestion unless they could fully replicate the problem on their end, which seemed absurd to me.

So this site is nice, because it allows imperfect people to post imperfect questions. At places like Stack Overlow, the method-of-asking has become the religion, and more thought is given to it than the damn answers.

 

[Isaac]

So @Uncle Gizmo thinks shutting down my thoughts is his luxury? talk about reasons to moderate mods.

Edgar Underscore makes a very valid point. This, @Vassago , is evidence that the moderation has gone a bit awry. You have the English law tightening the restrictions on what can be said, which none of us are used to - even the liberals. Then you had Tony, who stooped to the level of deleting someone's post merely because it challenged something he said about AI, and how dare we, as Tony was married to it. Sheesh. This is a mess.

 

[Vassago]

Edgar Underscore makes a very valid point. This, @Vassago , is evidence that the moderation has gone a bit awry. You have the English law tightening the restrictions on what can be said, which none of us are used to - even the liberals. Then you had Tony, who stooped to the level of deleting someone's post merely because it challenged something he said about AI, and how dare we, as Tony was married to it. Sheesh. This is a mess.

I think much more than moderation has gone awry, but that's deeper than this forum. It's sad that some people can't have one single place where they don't have to let their political biases drive EVERYTHING. I hated that it even became something discussed here. It never used to be and we had fun. I think most of those members moved on years ago for the same reason, they didn't want to participate in the politics. It's a shame, really. Many of them were very smart and helped out many people, too.

Anyway, it's got nothing to do with me. I will probably disappear for another 5 years soon.

 

[Isaac]

where they don't have to let their political biases drive EVERYTHING

well, I agree with that

 

[AccessBlaster]

Anyway, it's got nothing to do with me. I will probably disappear for another 5 years soon.

Or you can leave your emotions at the door and engage in debate, the rules are clear.

 

[Isaac]

I guess the interesting question about the human condition that comes out of all this, for me, is why some people are upset by political discussions and others aren't. So my 'wonderings' and musings lead me to a different, but similar, question - why is it that SOME people cannot for the life of them put aside anger and offense when political things are discussed? They're inevitable and you already know half the world disagrees with you, for Pete's sake, come to expect it and be OK with it. That was Pat's problem - she wasn't OK, in a very personal way, with disagreeing

 

[Isaac]

Oh, yeah - what Access Blaster just (more succinctly) said, I see it now

 

[Vassago]

Or you can leave your emotions at the door and engage in debate, the rules are clear.

I don't need another place for that. I already have plenty of places to debate politics, so I'll pass. This is a place I came to ESCAPE that, honestly. But that was probably 20 years ago.

Now I feel old.

 

[Jon]

The truth is, you can't please everybody. People come, people go. It's their prerogative. For example, some loved the politics section, others hated it. All I can do is provide a place where you can all interact. I've little control over who decides to join and what you want to talk about.

Ultimately, this site will end at some point. Just enjoy yourselves while it's still around.

 

[Jon]

The combination of derogatory social posts, AI, and the thought police are what's been diminishing AWF. Perhaps this site could make a comeback if it were limited to technical topics, including current concerns such as cyber security, Access app migration, etc.

You can limit it to technical topics. Use the Ignore function.

 

[Minty]

The combination of derogatory social posts, AI, and the thought police are what's been diminishing AWF. Perhaps this site could make a comeback if it were limited to technical topics, including current concerns such as cyber security, Access app migration, etc.

@BlueSpruce You have a strong opinion of how this site should operate and what it's apparent "problems" are for someone that has only been here for 5 months.

Whilst I agree that some of the technical posts had become too political, there has always been a history of solid debate available here, and the ability to disagree with someone. And as Jon has stated the Ignore button is there waiting to be pressed by any user.

Unfortunately, the general divisiveness of the current society we find ourselves in, has contributed to the souring of the ability to engage in a non-polarised debate.

 

[Jon]

Unfortunately, the general divisiveness of the current society we find ourselves in, has contributed to the souring of the ability to engage in a non-polarised debate.

I was going to make a similar comment. The site reflects the trend in general society, rather than just a specific issue here.

 

[NauticalGent]

You have a strong opinion of how this site should operate and what it's apparent "problems" are for someone that has only been here for 5 months.

 

[GPGeorge]

Irony is the art of expressing outrage when others mirror one's actions.

 

[NauticalGent]

Unfortunately, the general divisiveness of the current society we find ourselves in, has contributed to the souring of the ability to engage in a non-polarised debate.

Well stated!

 

[NauticalGent]

Membership time is irrelevant. Think about non-members contemplating joining, and the many members who no longer visit this site. The toxic content tarnishes AWF's reputation.

Feel free to start your own site so you can show us how to go about this properly...

 

[Jon]

In my view, the site has 3 threats ranked in order of importance:
- AI in Google search, slashing the number of visits (for most sites, not just this one)
- Online Safety Act - stifling speech, increasing risk, leading to heavier moderation which upsets users
- Insufficient ad revenue to sustain the hosting costs

Everything else is virtually irrelevant.

 

[Jon]

No thanks Frank.

 

[GPGeorge]

This is an apocryphal story.

Having recently moved into a house in a new neighborhood, Mark and Karen were eager to meet their neighbors, so they decided to have a house-warming party.
All of their neighbors were invited. As the guests arrived, most commented on the way Mark and Karen had upgraded the lawn and landscaping, or how they had improved the look of the house with new paint. Inside, some neighbors complimented Karen's taste in decorating, such as how the pictures decorating their walls reflected the local environment.

Then, good old Bruce arrived. Before he even got in the door, he was criticizing the way Mark had mowed the lawn too short.

And the pictures everyone else loved? Cliched and out of date. Bruce handed Mark a list of local painters he should track down to replace them.

The couch in the living room was in the wrong place. He loudly told Karen it would be better for him, and the other guests, if she moved it to the other side of the room.

As the other guests drifted out of the house, Bruce remained to explain to Mark and Karen how important it was to make a good impression, so they should talk to him before planning another neighborhood party.