Who was arguing for no action? You are putting words in my mouth Gord. That's not like you. I was simply commenting on the nature of accountability and internet hostility.
New things are already well under way. A new forum solution with improved functionality and user focussed moderation will be part of that solution.
Hi Cam, let me explain my point of view: in my other thread "Forum Changes" you offered up the reply I quoted you on. My opinion… and it is only an opinion… is that you threw me a bone… there was nothing on it… maybe you were sidetracked with family and just threw it out there but, "what I read" was a nothing… so I responded to what I interpreted.
Is how I interpreted "putting words in your mouth?" In your point of view, it was.
I will acknowledge that I was being provocative… yes… as a tactic, to draw something, (what I do not know) out…
And now we hear there are changes afoot and Scrooge is gone.
Fantastic… I wish you could have indicated that initially in the "Forum Changes" thread that predated this one as it would have alleviated my not knowing the facts of what was afoot. So in this regard I apologize by putting you on the spot.
We all know business has two variables… money in and money out. As one forum participant noted… you make no money in on the clicks. We get that. I hope the money out on the changes afoot are not too much.
We all appreciate the opportunity to share our points of view in your NSMB shared space that you and Pete provide us.
It is special and meaningful to many, if not all, of us…
And it is that reason why there is such a great discussion with shared points of view on this exact topic.
Recall… I initiated this conversation in the thread "Forum Changes" with that this is my first sentence: This is my opinion… Please discuss…
So, it is all really a point of view, as each of us have. So, at the end of the day… we are here since you let us and as I have said before, some things have to be top down. And I respect that. Which is why I suggested that maybe a members only forum would be better suited at the NSMBA where they have the Societies Act providing a back stop on participation etiquette. I intend to approach the NSMBA on this in the New Year and to see if they would be willing to embark on a strategy for this within the next 5 years.
This way, the anon aspect of fun can be maintained here… yet, as a community, we defer to you and the moderators to keep it a safe place.
The false news perpetrated by individuals being initially a wolf in sheeps clothing harms the personal reputations of those related to the vitriol and gas lighting of the post. We do not need that. Irrespective of personal viewpoints of subject matter, no one needs that here.
We should be accountable to us, real names or anon, and those crossing the community line of acceptableness of remark need to have a response.
I think there is some work to do on a new rule of Forum Participation… and really, you could nuke all the accounts and start fresh on the same architecture with an acceptance of a new Terms and Conditions for participation.
Dunno… maybe getting ahead of myself on that one as I am not the decision maker… but anyways, thanks for your time on this matter and thanks for the NSMB community channel you provide. It is important to all of us here.