Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - New feature discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (3259)	1/26/2014 1:44:33 PM
From: greenspirit	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7352

Well Sam, I really did intend that to be my last post on the topic, unfortunately, you had to get snarky in response and ask questions that I would prefer not being left on the table. So here goes... First of all, please don't try and tell me about how SI works, how diverse the place is or how threads are created. I began threads on SI over a decade ago and every single one of the threads I started (granted a modest amount), were friendly, cordial and inviting places to hang out. Second, you failed to address why a moderator should be allowed to ban someone and then trash talk them once they've been banned. Sure, you talked around the issue mentioning people and processes in general, but haven't offered any logical reason why SI should continue the practice. It makes no sense to allow moderators to ban someone and then openly discuss the banned member in ugly and provocative ways. Not surprisingly, the same people you defend posted this after banning me. And look, 20 posts up is Sam, apparently, with no memory of the event. siliconinvestor.com In regard to your why questions; maybe it was a bread crumb left for you. So, it appears these sorts of comments do bother you when the recipient is able to respond any way he/she chooses. So, what’s the story? Do comments of an ugly nature only bother you when the recipient is one of your SI pals, but they're perfectly fine if the recipient is someone you dislike? I used to be one the nicest guys on SI, but I learned the hard way a few years ago when SI management stopped moderating the moderators, or moderating the ugly posters, not responding to repeated insults did nothing but embolden them to continue the practice. I personally know a half-dozen members who left, specifically, because they got sick of dealing with the lack of moderation on stock threads as well as coffee shop threads. That's why one member cannot effectively change the culture of SI. We can have an impact on a few threads; however, the issue should be dealt with at the site owner level via careful moderating to experience systemic change. Maybe I can say it a little different way for you to understand my point. Between the extremes of total freedom on the one hand and total moderation of each post, is a center where moderation on obvious things like using foul language, spamming, and the TOU reside. In that center there are also subtle issues which require a careful hand, one being when a member is banned from posting on a board, they should not be trash talked about. Once a member has been banned, the moderator should have the responsibility to make a statement as to why the person was banned (any reason they choose), then set a standard of reasonable conduct toward that person. I've said this once before but it bears repeating. Years ago, Jill would pop out of nowhere day and night to admonish posters for being difficult, harassing or ugly. It didn't matter where they posted or whether they were the moderator of a thread. She probably worked 24X7 moderating the site, because, you never knew when she would pop up to correct out of line posters. It wasn’t a perfect system and I’m sure there were a few hurt feelings along the way, but for the most part it worked. We lost that over the years, it may have been a purposeful business decision to get as many eyeballs as possible when the net was exploding. I don’t know. What I do know is open season was declared behind the protection of thread bans. So what happened? Some members started threads specifically designed to attack other posters and the divisions became more and more pronounced - the ugliness grew. All I’m suggesting is tone it back a bit to improve the site and enact one policy regarding how members should be treated when banned from a thread.