Moralizing or Moderation?

[viscousmemories]

I guess what I don't understand is why you think Farren expressing his opinion of your style is just him exercising his right to free speech, whereas when livius or I do so it's "attempted moderation". <snip>Well, gosh, vm... Could it be that despite Farren's erudite, enlightening, engaging and amusing postings, he is not an authority? You are. Both of you. <snip>
I asked godfry this question in response to this exchange, but in lieu of a response I'd like to hear some input on this from anyone else who might want to comment: Does anyone think our committment to a mostly unmoderated forum precludes livius and I, because of our administrative position, from being able to express our opinion of how people treat each other here?

As this is our second forum, we naturally talked a lot about how we intended to manage it before we opened. We even deliberated at length about the fact that given our power to edit posts, ban people and even shut the forum down we are unavoidably blessed/cursed (more the latter, imo) with greater "social currency" than everyone else and that as such, our input on various issues might be perceived as weighted unfairly. What we decided is that we were building this forum as much for ourselves as everyone else, and so we would do everything we could to level the playing field short of muzzling ourselves.

Quite frankly, the amount of time, energy and money it has taken to build and maintain this forum wouldn't be worth the investment if we weren't allowed to freely participate in it, and when/if it veers too far afield from what we hoped it would be (ie. we start not wanting to be here) we aren't likely to keep investing in it. Unlike other forums we aren't supported by a non-profit corporation or the desire to promote an ideological agenda. We started this forum because we wanted a place to express our views, learn about others and play. Fortunately we feel like the FF is a great success so far, by and large. There has been some really exceptional content here in all three of those arenas. But there seem to be spontaneous tidal shifts from time to time that cast a pall of uncertainty on the future of this place.

I haven't missed many of the under-the-breath comments people have made about the FF, me and/or livius or our administrative approach. I know there are people who think we're too 'moralizing' and that we want to mold everyone here into shiny-happy people. I know there are people who post here much less or not at all since we banned latinijral (ironically in an effort to keep the community together), I know there are people who would've cut down their posting or left if we hadn't, and I know there are people who have cut down and/or left because we don't moderate behavior even more strictly. I know there are atheists who refuse to register here because of our attempts to give theists an equal voice, and that there are theists who refuse to post here because they feel we show favoritism to atheists.

And so on...

And there's some truth to some of these whisperings, of course. We are, to a certain extent, opinionated, self-righteous and moralizing. After all, we started this forum because we thought we could create a better environment than the other forums we were a part of, and we had very clear and personal ideas about what that meant to us. Naturally we think our way is the right way or we'd do things some other way. But we have made a concerted effort, especially in recent weeks, to minimize our 'nannying' tendencies and to express our concerns in a less judgemental way.

So, what are we supposed to take away from all this? Given everything we've put in to creating and maintaining this forum, is it reasonable for livius and I to encourage positive interactions (by which I mean productive, not necessarily gentle and loving) or is it an unfair use of our social power? Is it not enough that we allow members to post almost anything they want (with extremely few exceptions) and limit ourselves to voicing our personal preferences for how people interact?

And most importantly to me, because this came up when livius and I left our old forum behind: Does anyone think we have been unclear (in the beginning or recently) about our objectives in starting and maintaining this forum?

[LadyShea]

Any group or community has leaders that apply social pressure. I think you should participate or not participate as you see fit.

Quite frankly, I never view either of you as "authorities" when it comes to content. I don't really understand why anyone would.

[godfry n. glad]

vm...

I think that liv and you have created a wonderous resource.

I do not deny you posting as you desire. I am aware that you ride me because you think I'm unfairly abrasive. In some circumstances, I'd agree. I've come to think of your actions in regards to my "going on a tear", as liv so aptly referred to it, as concious attempts to moderate my behavior. That is your perogative....as it is any other person here.

I think we just get each other's hackles up on occasion. So far, we've been able to step away from it. So far, you've lived up to every assurance I've ever heard from you, or liv. As far as I'm concerned, you are what you say you are. That's good enough for me.

Of course, then, you could make it clear you regret ever inviting me and I'd slink off and annoy the denizens of HH.

[Ymir's blood]

I haven't missed many of the under-the-breath comments people have made about the FF, me and/or livius or our administrative approach. I know there are people who think we're too 'moralizing' and that we want to mold everyone here into shiny-happy people. I know there are people who post here much less or not at all since we banned latinijral (ironically in an effort to keep the community together), I know there are people who would've cut down their posting or left if we hadn't, and I know there are people who have cut down and/or left because we don't moderate behavior even more strictly. I know there are atheists who refuse to register here because of our attempts to give theists an equal voice, and that there are theists who refuse to post here because they feel we show favoritism to atheists.
You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time. No matter what course you choose, some people will feel alienated. Do what you feel is best and damn the consequences. Don't compromise your principles in an attempt to become more popular.


Quite frankly, I never view either of you as "authorities" when it comes to content. I don't really understand why anyone would.
I tend to view them as 'straight men' (excusing the gender specific phrase). :wink:

[viscousmemories]

Quite frankly, I never view either of you as "authorities" when it comes to content. I don't really understand why anyone would.
Hey thanks a lot. :glare: It just so happens I'm an authority on many subjects, just none that have any economic or social "value". Hmph.

vm...

I think that liv and you have created a wonderous resource.
Thanks. :)

I do not deny you posting as you desire. I am aware that you ride me because you think I'm unfairly abrasive. In some circumstances, I'd agree. I've come to think of your actions in regards to my "going on a tear", as liv so aptly referred to it, as concious attempts to moderate my behavior. That is your perogative....as it is any other person here.
I'm sorry that you feel like I ride you, really. I honestly feel like I interject very little and when I do I try (harder lately) to talk about how I feel or how I would interpret what someone said or react in a given situation. Contrary to how it might appear this isn't some passive/aggressive attempt to coerce you to behave a certain way. It's precisely because I tend to have my own issues with jumping the gun (and consequently, people) that I try to frame it in terms of my own self-examination and desired outcomes. I think I'm as abrasive as anyone, even when I'm grossly contorting myself in an effort to emulate livius' diplomatic expertise. :D

I think we just get each other's hackles up on occasion. So far, we've been able to step away from it. So far, you've lived up to every assurance I've ever heard from you, or liv. As far as I'm concerned, you are what you say you are. That's good enough for me.
I agree and appreciate that, thanks.

Of course, then, you could make it clear you regret ever inviting me and I'd slink off and annoy the denizens of HH.
Don't be silly. I think you've contributed a lot to this forum (not least your awesome travel photos and extensive knowledge of local politics and religious history) and I'm glad you're a part of it. I'm not about to cast any stones at you for sometimes failing to live up to discursive standards I frequently fall short of myself. We all have our own crosses to bear, I'm more concerned about the mote in my own eye. :giggle:

[viscousmemories]

Don't compromise your principles in an attempt to become more popular.
I've always believed that, which is probably why I'm so unpopular.

[Ymir's blood]

Don't compromise your principles in an attempt to become more popular.
I've always believed that, which is probably why I'm so unpopular.
I've rarely suceeded at that and was still hugely unpopular.

[viscousmemories]

I've rarely suceeded at that and was still hugely unpopular.
Damn. Another addage bites the dust.

[JoeP]

I started quoted bits of your op I agreed with, vm, but there were so many it just boils down to: you're doing fine. I will revert to normal behaviour.

Moralizing or Moderation?Why can't we have both?

short of muzzling ourselvesBan the admins!

the under-the-breath commentsNo way? You have voice-recognition software enabled in vb?

we want to mold everyone here into shiny-happy peopleliv!!! We need a new smilie!

[pescifish]

:laugh: I was just about to pick all the same quotes as JoeP, so now I have to rethink my response...Does anyone think our committment to a mostly unmoderated forum precludes livius and I, because of our administrative position, from being able to express our opinion of how people treat each other here? No, not at all. I count on both of you to say what you want to, when you want to. For me, it is important that you both get what you need out of this forum and do what you think it takes to make that possible.

My preference is for this forum have a very strong livius drusus and viscousmemories feel to it. I don't want to have to hang out with a representative melting pot of all of humanity; personally, I really don't like most of humanity. :oscar:

I want a place to hang out with other people who enjoy your company and whose company you enjoy. That's the cross-section of population I would like to see here.

This means you both have to have a strong presence on the forum in order to set the tone of the forum.And most importantly to me, because this came up when livius and I left our old forum behind: Does anyone think we have been unclear (in the beginning or recently) about our objectives in starting and maintaining this forum?Seems pretty clear to me. Your continued strong presence and your own interactions make it clear through example, as well.

BTW, any chance at a link to the exchange quoted in the OP?
we want to mold everyone here into shiny-happy people.I like my people somewhat moldy. The shiny-happy ones tend to freak me out a bit. :robot:

[Skep]

we want to mold everyone here into shiny-happy peopleliv!!! We need a new smilie!
A reverse of :fflove: would be perfect. :yup: liv?

[Pyrrho]

When you're an administrator, your express and implied authority is always present when you post. There really is no avoiding it. Some people are bound to feel pressured or uneasy in the presence of "authority". The best you can do is make a clear distinction between your "official" posts and your "regular" posts, or use a sock puppet for your "regular" posts, thus dissociating your official role from that of regular user. A potential ethics problem occurs if you must act officially in a topic in which you participate. In such cases it is best to recuse yourself from taking action.

[Farren]

Of course, then, you could make it clear you regret ever inviting me and I'd slink off and annoy the denizens of HH.

Don't you dare leave. :whup:

Frankly I'm surprised and admiring of how graciously you've responded to criticism on that other thread, even though you disagree with it.

vm:

Tom, you wouldn't be Tom if you didn't agonise over stuff like this. I think we're all aware that benevolent and enlightened dictatorship is the best form of administration. Even though its unsustainable and impractical as a long term model for governing countries, its ideal for Internet message boards.

There is nothing compelling anyone to use a particular message board. We are all at liberty to immigrate to one of a multitude of other boards at any time, or hold dual citizenship, or whatever other configuration we fancy.

Obviously the larger boards, which have a stated mission and are run by legally registered entities with boards of Directors and stuff, have to fall back on a uniform, consistent and inviolate set of rules and principles in order to sustain themselves, but benevolent dictatorship is far more suitable for a board like FF.

Having said that, hardly any dictating goes on. Both yourself and Liv act more as facilitators than board bosses and spend a vastly more time serving us as a community (smiley admin, board features etc) than making demands. There's a geniune sense that your first priority in most difficult decisions is the emotional welfare of others on the board, rather than your simply own egos.

And I think those qualities, along with the thoughtful, stimulating and entertaining people that frequent FF is what make FF the board I spend the most time on.

I know I sound like a suckup but this is honestly how I feel. As I said, you wouldn't be Tom if you didn't agonise over stuff like this. It seems to be something you have to do from time to time to reassure yourself that you're not screwing up somehow, which itself is a result of commendable modesty.

[ceptimus]

Much as I would like to post in this thread, I feel stifled by the omnipresent and omnipotent admins, so I won't.

:lmao: :P

[Dingfod]

Even worse, I'm one of those "under the breath" posters. Because the opinion I hold will probably rub someone the wrong way and I'd rather just get along, I'll leave this thread with only this comment: You do what you feel is best, damn the opinions of others.

[Gurdur]

I would post here, except I moralize.

[viscousmemories]

Thanks for all your input, you guys. Like I said I think the forum has been remarkably successful in many ways and it's really reassuring to hear that at least some of you agree and think we're doing okay.

Pesci, that exchange was from this thread (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3379).

Some people are bound to feel pressured or uneasy in the presence of "authority". The best you can do is make a clear distinction between your "official" posts and your "regular" posts, or use a sock puppet for your "regular" posts, thus dissociating your official role from that of regular user. A potential ethics problem occurs if you must act officially in a topic in which you participate. In such cases it is best to recuse yourself from taking action.
Thanks for the reminder. I shouldn't need one since I used to have a big problem with authority myself. But if I learned nothing else in the Army I learned how to do what I'm told when I have to. I'm sure that's the only reason why I've very rarely been edited and never banned from a forum. Fortunately we have very little moderation so the occasions when I have to post 'officially' are very few and far between, but I completely agree that the delineation is important.

[justaman]

Ultimately I disagree with Godfry for the very simple reason that you don't ban people. Even if you were to go to the extent of "listen fella, I'm a freakin admin and you can't talk to me like that", I STILL don't think you're being authoritarian. The only time you could be accused of that sort of thing is if you actually started banning people. Since you don't do that (and latinjral doesn't count - of course - given that he was more-or-less banned against your wishes), then as far as I'm concerned you can say what you damned well please, because it's all bark no bite.

And mostly it isn't even a bark. More of an incessant yipping kind of thing.

[Seven of Nine]

I asked godfry this question in response to this exchange, but in lieu of a response I'd like to hear some input on this from anyone else who might want to comment: Does anyone think our committment to a mostly unmoderated forum precludes livius and I, because of our administrative position, from being able to express our opinion of how people treat each other here?

No! Please continue to express away! I have so few good influences on my behavior that I can't afford to lose yours and liv's... :kickscan:

[livius drusus]

Oooo! Great new avatar, Seven. :glomp2:

[MonCapitan2002]

I happen to think that overall, this place seems to be a fairly laid back forum. It certainly feels a lot less rigid than IIDB can be at times.

[koan]

I have never felt like I had to agree with you or livius. I just often do. If I thought you were wrong I would feel perfectly safe in saying so without worries of being banned for it. In that manner, I don't find you intimidating at all. I try to be respectful in that it is your board and you have a right, I feel, to say when you are unhappy with how it is being used but I don't feel like you would ban me for it if I wrote something abusive in response. I think godfry has proven that theory. :giggle:

That you carry clout with other members who are likely to speak up in your defense is not contrived it is earned. If you were authoritative dictators people wouldn't give you the respect that you have gained and that says more than anything. The complainers are always the loudest but it doesn't mean they are the greatest in numbers.

[viscousmemories]

Thanks. :)

[MooseIBe]

I never think 'ooh, admins!' when I talk to you or Liv. Someone's gotta oversee the place but I've never noticed any intrusive administrating.

(pppstt.... okay Liv, I said it, when do I get my reward??)

[Seven of Nine]

Oooo! Great new avatar, Seven. :glomp2:

Thanks, liv! Iwas hoping you'd like it! I'll pass your compliment along to the avatar maker. That'll be fun! :D

...That you carry clout with other members who are likely to speak up in your defense is not contrived it is earned. If you were authoritative dictators people wouldn't give you the respect that you have gained and that says more than anything. The complainers are always the loudest but it doesn't mean they are the greatest in numbers.

Here! Here! Well said, koan! :appl:

[Shake]

I'll also add my 2¢ here as one who often does -- though not always -- agree with you two, but value your inputs anyway. I don't know exactly how you feel about it, but I feel things are working very well on this board. Discussion is indeed very free and problems have been quite rare.

[viscousmemories]

I'm glad you think so, Shake. Thanks. :)