General Discussion Thread Policy Poll

imported post

My two cents...

Unlike a government, a forum is dependent on membership to thrive and attract sponsors. If members leave because the owners and mods ignore the will of the membership, that's to the detriment of the forum as a whole. The membership is not running the forum, but in instances like this poll, providing feedback so the owners/mods can better choose between tailoring the forum to its membership, or sticking to their ideal model of the forum and risk losing members.

Make "General Discussion" about general discussion. As I posted in the other thread regarding this, there are already other forums for various OC- and gun-related topics, making General Discussion redundant if restricted solely to OC- and gun-related threads.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

It is a tenet of good writing to write to your intended audience. There are some here that aren't confused. With what level of writing reading are you comfortable or not confused?

Click to expand...

While I'm sure we're all flattered, it's a forum. So conversational english is much more appropriate than formal english.

Honestly, I think Doug justhas one of those "word of the day" calendars. Or maybe he's a failedwriter who likes to take his frustration out on people that don't speak latin.

And I would think that it'sjust a little condiscending to say "With what level of writing reading are you comfortable or not confused?" Especially since we all know that the reader's comfort level and understanding of your writing is absolutely none of your concern. That's not really the nature of a superiority complex.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Democracy being the rule of fools by fools, I hope that the owners make the dissidents squeal like Deliverance's piggies!  Do I enjoy OCDO the way it is?  Danmdy right I do.  Could it be better?  Better is the enemy of good enough, IOW don't screw with a good thing.

Click to expand...

Doug...

It doesn't matter if I agree with you or not, I do enjoy the way you put things.

On this one I am with you 100% !


Oh yea I didn't vote in the stupid poll.

imported post

Sa45auto wrote:

Doug Huffman wrote:

Democracy being the rule of fools by fools, I hope that the owners make the dissidents squeal like Deliverance's piggies! Do I enjoy OCDO the way it is? Danmdy right I do. Could it be better? Better is the enemy of good enough, IOW don't screw with a good thing.

Click to expand...

Doug...

It doesn't matter if I agree with you or not, I do enjoy the way you put things.

On this one I am with you 100% !


Oh yea I didn't vote in the stupid poll.

Click to expand...

Thank you. That's what matters. Thank you for your timely post considering what is above it as I write.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Doug Huffman wrote:

SNIP ...one-liners...

Click to expand...

Doug,

You and I are in agreement with the idea that a pure democracy is a bad idea.

I think--and I could be wrong--that what you run into is people who have been inculcated with the idea that democracy is the greatest form of government.  They just don't have the backround on it, and therefore don't understand what you mean.  Part of it is perhaps that they think they live in a democracy, so when they here you cut on a democracy, they think you're cutting on the democratic republic.

This isn't to say this is Unrequited's objection.  I can say I too, when seeing the same one-liner over and over, have to remind myself that you are targeting folks who don't know yet.

Click to expand...

A BIG ditto from me.

Doug you can do what you want, but if you shared some of your knowledge it might help the blind to see.

And aren't we all blind sometimes?

imported post

savery wrote:

irfner wrote:

This is a tough one. While I like the idea of open discussion I have seen these things deteriorate with political and religious tripe that quickly change from discussion to argument.These off topic discussions canconsume large quantities of band width for little gain. Which ever way you decide to go I am for it but I recommend staying true to the name and at least broadly limiting the topics.

Click to expand...

If you build it - they will come. You shouldn't open a discussion forum without expecting people to discuss everything. You shouldn't open a restauraunt and expect people to not have a conversation over dinner... you get the idea.

Click to expand...

Do you think the restaurantshould limit the menu or serve everything? It doesn't really matter to me sense I am not the cook. But a menu that thick can become difficult to sort through.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Decoligny wrote:

Knowledge is power. I am not suggesting they provide any more service to us than they have already so generously provided. I am simply suggesting that it would help them in their decision making to know the midset of the members.

Click to expand...

Youwere not suggesting that it would help them in their decision-making. You were trying to get up a little "proof" to make yourself right.

By the way, the second and third sentences in the immediate quote are contradictory. If you didn't want more service, why bother with a poll?

Just take your lumps and move on. I'm happy to have you on the forum and look for your posts. I just wish you wouldn't try this poll tactic.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the Psychic hotline where "Citizen" can read minds and the intent of men's hearts. I am so glad that you know so much moreabout my thought processes than even I do.

As to the second and third sentence being contrary take the following example:

Should we keep doing what has always been done? Work = X amount. Or should we relax the rules and quit doing so much? Work < X amount.

If we maintain the status quo, then there is no change in the amount of "service" we get.

If we change and moderate the General Discussion area less, than less "service" is what we actually get.

So by knowing the mindset of the members, it will result in either no change or less service, i.e. less moderator involvement. How can that be asking for more service?

imported post

expvideo wrote:

Personally, I would like to see this be an open discussion area that doesn't necessarily have to pertain to the topic at hand. Regardless of what other forums may be out there, some of us enjoy talking to other particular people from this forum. I think that we should allow this discussion, or at least create an area to discuss off-topic things.

Click to expand...

Ok you have a point to a degree. But I would submit to you sir, aren't there mechanisims in place, alternatives if you will, that will allow you to accomplish the same thing without taking up space on the forum? Why not PM people and say hey, I'm staring an email about this, would you like to be included.

(I will make a concession) Granted it's easier to use something like this board to express your thoughts - but is that really fair when you have other means to do so? Of course, while I'm writing this I think that I'm guilty of doing exactly what I am criticising you of wanting but in the interest of spreading the idea quickly I think I'm justified. Others may think I'm wrong and if so please delete the response, lol. I won't be offended.

imported post

bohdi wrote:

Ok you have a point to a degree. But I would submit to you sir, aren't there mechanisims in place, alternatives if you will, that will allow you to accomplish the same thing without taking up space on the forum? Why not PM people and say hey, I'm staring an email about this, would you like to be included.

(I will make a concession) Granted it's easier to use something like this board to express your thoughts - but is that really fair when you have other means to do so? Of course, while I'm writing this I think that I'm guilty of doing exactly what I am criticising you of wanting but in the interest of spreading the idea quickly I think I'm justified. Others may think I'm wrong and if so please delete the response, lol. I won't be offended.

Click to expand...

We could just ask people for thier mailing addresses and write letters by snail mail,but to encourage maximum participation in a particular area of interest you really need a forum setting. If I decide that I want to start a thread on knives as a backup defensive weapon, how would I know which members have an interest in that topic? Would I need to PM every member on the board? What about that the individuals who might not ever post, but read every single post on the board? Or how about the individual that happens along and has the same interest, yet wasn't involved in the initial round of PMs so they don't know an "e-mail discussion" is going on? Are they then excluded?

"but in the ineterest of spreading the idea quickly" and as widely as possible seems to be the main reason for the whole forum concept.

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

bohdi wrote:

Ok you have a point to a degree. But I would submit to you sir, aren't there mechanisims in place, alternatives if you will, that will allow you to accomplish the same thing without taking up space on the forum? Why not PM people and say hey, I'm staring an email about this, would you like to be included.

(I will make a concession) Granted it's easier to use something like this board to express your thoughts - but is that really fair when you have other means to do so? Of course, while I'm writing this I think that I'm guilty of doing exactly what I am criticising you of wanting but in the interest of spreading the idea quickly I think I'm justified. Others may think I'm wrong and if so please delete the response, lol. I won't be offended.

Click to expand...

We could just ask people for thier mailing addresses and write letters by snail mail,but to encourage maximum participation in a particular area of interest you really need a forum setting. If I decide that I want to start a thread on knives as a backup defensive weapon, how would I know which members have an interest in that topic? Would I need to PM every member on the board? What about that the individuals who might not ever post, but read every single post on the board? Or how about the individual that happens along and has the same interest, yet wasn't involved in the initial round of PMs so they don't know an "e-mail discussion" is going on? Are they then excluded?

Click to expand...

Decoligny,

Your continued and complex evasion of the key points does more to convict you than anything I'm saying.

1. Its John's forum; you're here, in a sense,athis invitation.

2. It was extremely rude to try to get upa little bit of revolt against John and his moderators by using their forum to launch a poll against their policies and practice rather than just PM them.

Its a hostile action. Plain and simple.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Decoligny,

Your continued and complex evasion of the key points does more to convict you than anything I'm saying.

1. Its John's forum; you're here, in a sense,athis invitation.

2. It was extremely rude to try to get upa little bit of revolt against John and his moderators by using their forum to launch a poll against their policies and practice rather than just PM them.

Its a hostile action. Plain and simple.

Click to expand...

Well Said. :exclaim:

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Your continued and complex evasion of the key points does more to convict you than anything I'm saying.

Click to expand...

Maybe 'impeach' rather than "convict," absent a particular accusation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment

I'm pleased to see that others are discovering the utility of the Wikipedia. Beware, 'believe nothing your read or hear without verifying it your self unless it fits your pre-existing world view.'

imported post

irfner wrote:

savery wrote:

irfner wrote:

This is a tough one. While I like the idea of open discussion I have seen these things deteriorate with political and religious tripe that quickly change from discussion to argument.These off topic discussions canconsume large quantities of band width for little gain. Which ever way you decide to go I am for it but I recommend staying true to the name and at least broadly limiting the topics.

Click to expand...

If you build it - they will come. You shouldn't open a discussion forum without expecting people to discuss everything. You shouldn't open a restauraunt and expect people to not have a conversation over dinner... you get the idea.

Click to expand...

Do you think the restaurantshould limit the menu or serve everything? It doesn't really matter to me sense I am not the cook. But a menu that thick can become difficult to sort through.

Click to expand...

My example wasn't about the "menu" rather the conversation of patrons. Not sure about everyone, but if I go to a restauraunt with others, I don't limit my discussion to things related to the restauraunt itself.