Here's why I think the "Really" thread needs to go away

[Sully]

I have really struggled with whether to express this thought over the past few days and seeing the development of the "Really" thread. Personally, I think that thread needs to be unapproved. There has been quite a bit of hostility unleashed in that thread that has been dispensed under the guise of a "healthy discussion".

To that end, we need to make the decision (or maybe it has already been made -- in which case I need to be filled in) as to what constitutes a personal attack. Does a user have to expressly use a members name (or handle) for it to constitute a personal attack? For example, the posts by Wayne and Mike were pulled because they were deemed personal attacks; I agree with that.

That being said, in the really thread the following words have been used several times, and frankly it seems to be a personal attack on one of our members ("pacific493"). For example, this situation has been characterized as "underhanded manipulation", "taking advantage", "profiteering", "overcharging", "If your desperate for an easy buck", etc. The first few posts in the thread really emphasize my point, but there are several later occurrences as well. In my mind, the only logical course of action is to unapprove the thread.

Anyway, I'm done now and will move the soapbox back to the middle of the room .....

 

[NCTurner]

I agree there is nothing about this thread that is healthy to the site in any way shape or form.

 

[TracyP]

I can't say I disagree. I haven't liked the thread from the first post. The thread will probably die out on it's on soon. My concern is the damage has already been done. Another option is to close it to posting then it would definitely die out. Either way we are going to start a fire among the members. Option three would be to edit the posts that are offensive. Tell me what y'all think.:eusa_thin:eusa_thin.

 

[Douglas Robinson]

I think there was some healthy discussion in the thread. Having said that, any post that violates policy should be moderated. I leave that up to you the mods.

I am disappointed that the thread got off the specific instance here, which is unique as it involved the companys themselves contacting us. I also find some people post to read their own words. They add nothing. Others are hypocrites, as I know some have posted one thing here and do the opposite in the real world. Except for my one long post, that I ran by the BoD, I have no posted again because I need to keep my personal feelings about some people out of the mix. (Self-moderation!)

Bear in mind that there is no thread the some NCWW will NOT drive to Weirdsville!

 

[b4man]

I compare this thread and our discussion of it to a (good) Judge in a courtroom. Regardless of the Judges personal opinion as to the facts and descriptions of events leading up to a specific case, he is bound by the Law's implemented in his jurisdiction to uphold. In our case it's the site rules and regulations. Unless there is an obvious violation there is no merit in shutting it down. We can disapprove comments, we can suggest a change in direction but I believe it would be a disservice to the members to close a thread that we may be tired of worrying about or personally disagree with.
I see many more valid and sage points made by a number of members than I do covert and disrespectful post by others. I'd like to give the membership some credit to read between the lines and decide for themselves who's who and what's what instead of controlling what they can and cannot read.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Barbara

 

[Glennbear]

I agree there is nothing about this thread that is healthy to the site in any way shape or form.

Although this thread is problematic I feel that it does have some value.

I can't say I disagree. I haven't liked the thread from the first post. The thread will probably die out on it's on soon. My concern is the damage has already been done. Another option is to close it to posting then it would definitely die out. Either way we are going to start a fire among the members. Option three would be to edit the posts that are offensive. Tell me what y'all think.:eusa_thin:eusa_thin.

I think that left alone and moderation of off the wall posts is continued it will die a natural death, to premeptively shut it down might cause hard feelings with those ( I have seen several) posters who feel it has been a good discussion.

I think there was some healthy discussion in the thread. Having said that, any post that violates policy should be moderated. I leave that up to you the mods.

I am disappointed that the thread got off the specific instance here, which is unique as it involved the companys themselves contacting us. I also find some people post to read their own words. They add nothing. Others are hypocrites, as I know some have posted one thing here and do the opposite in the real world. Except for my one long post, that I ran by the BoD, I have no posted again because I need to keep my personal feelings about some people out of the mix. (Self-moderation!)

Bear in mind that there is no thread the some NCWW will NOT drive to Weirdsville!

That is soooooooooo true Doug, many times I have read the title of a thread and see where it has led and think to myself "how the heck did we end up driving off this cliff" :gar-La;

I compare this thread and our discussion of it to a (good) Judge in a courtroom. Regardless of the Judges personal opinion as to the facts and descriptions of events leading up to a specific case, he is bound by the Law's implemented in his jurisdiction to uphold. In our case it's the site rules and regulations. Unless there is an obvious violation there is no merit in shutting it down. We can disapprove comments, we can suggest a change in direction but I believe it would be a disservice to the members to close a thread that we may be tired of worrying about or personally disagree with.
I see many more valid and sage points made by a number of members than I do covert and disrespectful post by others. I'd like to give the membership some credit to read between the lines and decide for themselves who's who and what's what instead of controlling what they can and cannot read.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Barbara

Barbara best expresses my feelings on this thread, however I am still 100% ambivalent and undecided. :rotflm:

 

[froglips]

To the original question, I think if any of those "code words" are specifically targeted at a person or group/buisness, then its a personal attack. Or if its a blanket condemnation of a group using slanderous or inappropriate wording.

I'd see a big difference between "I think its unfair to do underhanded sales in the classified" vs. "John is underhanded when he sells things" or "Lowes Depot is profiteering and evil".

I'd not personally like to see a thread closed for a few bad posts. Unless the thread gets out of hand, which somehow/amazingly "Really" hasn't done yet. Its been teetering to be sure.....

Jim