or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Welcome to Mothering! › Site Help › Moderation of MDC - What do you think?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Moderation of MDC - What do you think? - Page 11  

Poll Results: Moderation of MDC - What do you think?

 
  • 56% (416)
    I think the current minimal moderation is great. It allows members the freedom to express their opinions without fear of their thread being shut down or a warning issued. Discussions of all types should be permitted and the community should be allowed to respond with their opinions unrestricted. I feel there are some situations where heavy moderation may be necessary but these are very few (explain).
  • 27% (204)
    I do not like the minimal moderation and feel that it is leading to problems. To help protect the integrity of the forums and make the community a comfortable place to post we need the moderators to return to their previous moderation approach. They should oversee discussions more and remove things that are mean, snarky, sarcastic, and harassing. They should remove threads and posts that are against Mothering's parenting philosophies. Members who refuse to post appropriately should be moderated and those who persist in such behavior should be warned consistently and, if necessary, their membership removed.
  • 15% (114)
    Other (explain what sort of moderation you think should be in place)
734 Total Votes  
post #201 of 612

I guess I don't see any issues with how things are going now at least in the threads I have frequented.  I am good with the way it is.

post #202 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake777 View Post

I'm somewhere in between. I think that moderation was too strict before, but not strict enough now.

 

I think if you're going to have forums which are intended to lean towards certain philosophies, they have to be pretty tightly moderated. Otherwise MDC might as well just call itself a mainstream forum.



I agree with this completely!

post #203 of 612

While every now and then I'm totally turned off by such snark - I always assumed this community was here for supporting each others as mothers - I'm absolutely for the least amount of moderation possible.  We're all adults here and should all have the ability to ignore rudeness and snark.  And thankfully the vast majority of posters do support one another, which should outweigh the outlying negative nellies.  In my mind, introducing increased moderation is akin to censorship, which ALWAYS produces some form of the chilling of speech.  

 

Cheers to mamas!  I'm so happy MDC exists - I check it almost daily.  :)  (I wouldn't be here that often if I felt threatened or generally turned off by some random posters.) 

post #204 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post



hey if you think they are one and the same, have fun posting over there. 


And thank you for proving my point once again.  thumb.gif

 

post #205 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post



Quote:
View Post

I want to respond to this. In all my years of lurking on the UC forum, I have very rarely seen anyone come on there with a blanket "You people shouldn't UC. Ever!" attitude.

What I have seen is people - midwives sometimes, folks with a lot of knowledge - responding to individual women, individual situations. I've seen these people say, "Hey, with the xyz condition you describe mama, and with your prior history, UC might not be the safest choice for you." Those are the kind of posts that have been yanked. That's the kinds of input that gets shot down by a volley of "Don't listen to the evil medical conspiracy! Trust your instincts, Mama!"

I don't think it's right.
 



Totally agree.  And to the poster who stated that all the UC mamas have done their research and soul searching... I'm sorry, but that is just obviously not true, or the "research" they are looking at is majorly flawed.  There have been some scarily uninformed posters on the UC board who have been encouraged to continue with UC despite it being obviously dangerous in the situations they described and asked for advice on. One particular UC advocate who has since supposedly left these boards chronically gave out terrible, dangerous information.  She followed up any comments voicing concern about UC with straight up attacks on the poster, including skilled midwives and others who have been UC supporters or had UCs themself.   I'm not going to sit back and shut up when that is the kind of "research" some of these mamas are doing.

 

Avery'sMama--You had some fantastic points and I can see how you're ticked about UC if you are someone who has actually done real research and soul searching.  You can still hold your beliefs while admitting that there are some, and maybe a minority, of posts on the UC forum that are downright dangerous and continue to be perpetuated by die-hard UC advocates (no pun intended.)  An impressive rant, indeed, as someone else mentioned.  I do think though that you have a real double standard when it comes to some of the judgements you made about things other than UC. 

 

post #206 of 612
Mostly in the less moderation camp, but its ok to have some.

I feel in general asking adults to act respectful and then expecting them to do that is the way to go. Moderation that is on behavior is better than moderating content or opinions.
Living in a bubble where no one is allowed to say something that you don't want to think is not helping you or them. I love this site for all I learn from it, but if I'm not even allowed to ask what particular is wrong with a book, approach, or the like, how can i learn? I'm not the type to just " take your word for it" I want to be able to talk thru different sides of big issues.

So I say moderate if someone is being a ass and not respecting that they are talking to other humans, don't moderate out the fact that they don't agree with you. The later is what discussion if for.
If MDC truly is a sanctuary of only Fully AP focused folks, the echo chamber will be in full force and there will be no room at the able for the like of me and many many others that benefit from this forum everyday.

I have been warned a number of times in the past and I feel it was for not being crunchy enough. Yet I'm a mom that is loving and wants to learn all the best for my young babies and MDC helps me with that. I hated walking on eggshells.


And I don't think folks are leaving because of the new moderation of result of, I think they are leaving because we are getting thinly veiled adds shoved down our throats, I wish someone would ask us what we think of those "reviews" that take up half the page!
post #207 of 612
I also want to say that I'm very happy that we are having this conversation, and happy with the tone as well. It's a great example of how folks can disagree and still act properly.
post #208 of 612

I voted other because I wasn't even aware that there have been changes in moderation on MDC.  I liked it way back when I started here when it felt a little smaller and people seemed to be thinking of the natural parenting thing.  I loved that I could come here and lean about Kool-aid dying wool and then read a post about how we should consider whether we want to support the Kool-aid industry and stuff like that.  I liked that comments on the boards sparked the racism training sessions from years back.  And I didn't feel the place was unwelcome.  I always supported anyone coming here to learn and post.  I thought everyone deserved to be treated with respect.  

 

More recently I haven't seen the snark but I did see a thread a while back (maybe 6 months ago) that was recommending that a mom spank her kid.  I was saddened to see that parents are allowed to give advice to spank a child on this website.  I even flagged the post and it didn't go away or get addressed.  Come to think of it I don't think I've been back to GD since.  I LOVED it when I, as a non-punitive fairly UP parent was a moderate in that forum.  

 

In my DDC, however, everyone was super great!  We didn't all make the same choices but I loved that it was still a place where we assumed that homebirth was an option, breasfeeding was the goal, cloth diapering was a good choice and thoughtful parenting was respected.  

 

I guess I'm on the side of I'd be OK with heavy moderation of that was the best way to keep MDC a place that is reflects the values of the magazine.  

 

ETA: is this a matter of less moderation or are the guidelines changed?  If it's just moderation what are members to do when guidelines are ignored like in the case of hitting in the GD forum?  

 

 

post #209 of 612

I'm for less moderation and less censorship.  I'm often afraid to post my thoughts.  

post #210 of 612

Another thought - stop deleting or removing threads.  Really.  At all.  EVER.  

post #211 of 612

In general I like having less moderation.  I think there are sub-forums with specific guidelines that may need to be more heavily monitored.  Yes, I am thinking of the UC forum here.  I thinks its awesome for people to post and say things like "I don't think it's a wise choice to UC in THIS situation for THESE reasons", but I don't feel for me that forum is a safe place to examine the risks and benefits of UC because people are so quick to blame, so quick to bring up unrelated issues from other threads.  The UC forum guidelines specifically say "The Unassisted Childbirth (UC) board is a forum of support, respectful requests for information and sharing of ideas and experiences." and I haven't been experiencing that lately.  Obviously some people are going to have some really passionate ideas, but it certainly hasn't been respectful or supportive.  If a sub-forum has those kinds of guidelines posted then they should be upheld.

 

And I don't think threads should be removed.  Locked, maybe, removed, no.

post #212 of 612

 

Quote:
Mothering.com members are required to treat one other with respect and courtesy at all times.

 

The problem with this is that the definition of "respect" appears to vary from person to person.

 

My friend feels disrespected whenever her children voice an opinion that differs from hers, even if they are polite about it.

 

I've seen mamas here react similarly. I'm the first to admit that I am NOT good at being sweet and gentle, but I'm usually civil and don't make it my mission to attack people. People still sometimes manage to take offense at what I say, just because I question, contradict, or disagree with their position.

post #213 of 612

I'm another "other" vote and think that we could find a happy medium.  I think that we need to clearly define what each forum is for and enforce those guidelines.  Since UC seems to be a popular topic, I think it's great to have a UC forum where those who have chosen UC do not have to hide for fear of getting flamed.  However, a forum where the the merits/risks of various birth options could be discussed would be helpful as well.  When I was pregnant and felt attracted to the idea of UC, I did some poking around the UC forum but quickly learned that it was not a place that I could get diverse opinions and objective information because everyone there had to be pro-UC.  I think that there is room to designate certain forums as support only (such as Spirituality) and some as more open to respectful debate (such as Religious Studies).  (FTR, under the previous guidelines, the only post I was ever asked to edit was in the RS forum when I spoke from my own religious bias and was told that I could not imply that somebody might feel a need to justify himself for something that my (and his) religion teaches is sinful but is considered to be protected on this forum.)

 

I do think that we need to reduce our tolerance for flame wars in this community.  I'm all for respectful debate, but when I'm looking for information, and I have to dig through 15 pages of name calling to read 10 posts that actually explain what I'm looking for, that's ridiculous.  Sure, there are different definitions of respect, but I'm sure that we can come up with some clearly defined guidelines.  No name-calling, attacking a person's character (ideas fine, but characters are off limits), or cursing directed at another member.  Preserve the nature of each sub-forum.  No pro-spank threads in the GD forum, I don't want to hear your low-fat dogma in my TF forum (but feel free to talk about it in the Healthy Eating forum), debate vaxes in the vax forum instead of the I'm not vaxing forum, and let us talk about our commonly-held religious biases (abortion, homosexuality, gender issues, circumcision, even discipline practices) in clearly-defined religious support threads.  Absolutely, I want to trust people to act like adults here.  It's just that online, a few people sometimes come into a thread, and they post the same sort of name-calling over and over and over again and clog the thread with their posts, creating a very hostile environment.

post #214 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by ursusarctos View Post




I'd like to respectfully respond to this. I think what gets on the nerves of UCers when anti-UCers come to the UC forum with their "don't UC, it's dangerous" message is precisely what I bolded and italicized: the idea that some stranger, who really has no idea why someone has decided to UC, feels that they need to SAVE the mothers from their own unwise decision,




I want to respond to this. In all my years of lurking on the UC forum, I have very rarely seen anyone come on there with a blanket "You people shouldn't UC. Ever!" attitude.

What I have seen is people - midwives sometimes, folks with a lot of knowledge - responding to individual women, individual situations. I've seen these people say, "Hey, with the xyz condition you describe mama, and with your prior history, UC might not be the safest choice for you." Those are the kind of posts that have been yanked. That's the kinds of input that gets shot down by a volley of "Don't listen to the evil medical conspiracy! Trust your instincts, Mama!"

I don't think it's right.
 


You know, I very rarely saw that either until quite recently. And I also rarely (never?) saw respectful advice not to UC in a particular situation censored. I admit that I haven't read every single thread over the years, and I've been gone for months at a time sometimes. I might have missed a lot. But I have seen many threads with conflicting advice from different people when someone has asked "should I UC in this situation" and, if it was posted in a respectful tone, it hasn't been moderated. The "trust your instincts, in your situation I wouldn't worry" people have as much right to their opinion as the "I think this situation sounds bad for a UC" people and I have seen both types of posts coexisting in the same thread, often. The problem arises when the thread degenerates into random people with no sympathy for UC coming in and posting unkind, unhelpful comments or turning the direction of the thread into discussion of the safety of UC in general, which has happened a lot lately. I think respectful advice not to UC in X situation (often given by other UCers!) is well tolerated by the vast majority of people on that forum (yes, I know there have been exceptions), whereas respectful advice that "I would still UC in that situation because of XYZ" is often shot down by outsiders nowadays. It seems that that is a dissenting opinion that many other adults won't tolerate, despite all the talk of how we need to relax and let others have their dissenting opinions.

 

APToddlerMama, I think you were referring to my post. I did not say that all the people on the UC board have done soul-searching and research. I said that they most likely have (based on my interaction with UCers and the fact that choosing UC is so unacceptable in most of society), and that it is naive and patronizing for some random person to assume that telling them (often rudely) their decision is wrong is going to change their mind about UC. Even if someone has neither soul-searched nor researched, a nasty or condescending comment is still not going to keep them from UCing.

 

I think it's perfectly acceptable for someone to come to the UC forum, see some info about birth that they know is wrong, and politely point that out, out of genuine care for mothers and babies. Or respectfully share negative experiences to add perspective. Or politely ask a poster if she has thought of X, Y, or Z if she seems uninformed. And then leave it at that if the other posters choose not to listen. I am sorry to hear that that kind of thing has been censored. It's very different to come in and rant against UC in general, or shame a mother for not knowing better or choosing to go with a different source of knowledge or do something you consider risky, or say "well this bad thing happened to me and therefore X is always unsafe and you are irresponsible and must only care about your experience." Those things are not doing anyone any good. There is a good deal of talk about respect going on here. I think what many UCers are complaining about is the great lack of respect that some posters show in the UC forum for UCers as autonomous human beings with the ability and right to make their own decisions about life and death issues.

 

post #215 of 612

I'm glad for the forum.   I've had questions and MDC has been a big part of my parenting journey for the last 10 years.  When DD1 (age 10) was born, I really was into the "Baby Whisperer" and her theories.  Then I found MDC.  I had a different username back then (and have long since forgot it and recreated my account 6 years ago--so this is my account.  I have no recollection of the original username or password and no access to the email account that created it.)  Honestly, I have vacillated in parenting theories before I was comfortable in my own skin.  I've learned a lot, and educated, polite discourse is always welcome.  I've had many questions to people as to the hows and whys...an example:  once I asked on the unschooling forum what the difference was between unschooling and educational neglect.  The ladies there had many helpful things to say, and explained to me that particular educational philosophy, rather than shutting me down or screaming that I wasn't "being supportive".  Had they done that, or I had gotten a warning, I would have been turned off.  As it is, I find it intriguing and I think DD1 would do well with that educational philosophy (DS is autistic and needs adult-directed learning or he'd be content to not learn).  UC also intrigues me.  However, DH is not comfortable with that (and i had my last baby 2 years ago...).  When people have questions or problems, it is always nice to be able to help them.  In particular, one thread about a lady who wanted to quit nursing and pump and bottle feed--here, the ladies of the board were able to say "this may be the issue, and it is fixable" (several issues possible--all can be fixed).  On a mainstream board like BBC, the advice might have been "go ahead and switch to pumping or even formula.  You tried.  It did not work."  That reminded me of when DD1 was a baby and I was all ready to give up nursing her at 2-4 weeks old.  The advice I got was so helpful and I nursed her for 19 months.  I did mother-led wean.  In fact, all my kids were weaned cold-turkey, but that is neither here nor there and is in the past.  (Though, had I not deployed to Haiti, the 2 year old might very well still be nursing, rather than having been weaned at 9 months--then I did not have the time nor energy to relactate and try to get her back onto the breast).  Also, MDC is a big reason why my DS is intact.  I was always uncomfortable with the idea of it, but DH insisted it be done.  TBH, I vacillated between doing it and not doing it.  It was like I'd taken the red pill, but still wanted to please DH.  I was still undecided at DS's birth.  (DH was deployed)  He left the hospital intact, my reasoning was I wanted to get nursing established, then I'd have it done.  I made appointments and cancelled them.  Then DH returned.  It has been a non-issue since.  I've gone on unaccompanied overseas tours with which DH would have had ample opportunity to circ DS, but I don't think it is that important to him.

post #216 of 612

When I needed support from this board the most, I felt as though I could rely on it the least, in particular due to the "fun" people had with their snarky responses. I do not believe that there is ever any cause for snark or foul language, or for that matter for fear-mongering or shaming language here. Yes, I use snark and cuss in real life and online with people I know IRL, when it is appropriate for the situation, but you can never be even somewhat sure of how someone you don't know IRL will respond to such things and left to their own devices, the masses will forget that and need to be reminded, especially because one bad apple does indeed spoil the whole bunch. In other words, it's a chain reaction, and I can only see it getting worse over time.

 

I followed my sister to these boards because her experience over several years was one of support and genuine caring, moderated for rudeness and insensitivity, as well as fear-mongering, which is sometimes cleverly disguised as "dissenting opinions" that we should, in some opinions, deal with, so that we will be better parents, and presumably be better able to handle conflict. I disagree with this opinion. Particularly in pregnancy, but also into motherhood, there is a huge difference between learning all the information one needs to make a good decision, and exposing oneself to an excess of fear and shame, as is lately perpetrated on these boards, and an additional reason why I spend less time here when I do not feel especially resilient. 

 

Many of us have spent considerable time attempting to counteract the culture of fear and shame that prevails in mainstream medicine and parenting models, only to come to what we thought to be a safe-haven and find more of the same. In my opinion, while not there yet, these forums are on their way to becoming just like all the others out there. I am lucky. I live in an area of the world and of my country that is supportive of the original MDC principles, but I know many women who do not have that luxury and rely on a supportive community for their AP and home birth values because they can't find it anywhere else... and I know many who sought support here, but disappeared. I recommend that MDC, rather than taking a poll, search their membership and do a detailed account and analysis of who has posted what, where, and when and let that information guide their choices about future moderation.

 

Bottom line? I would pay real money regularly to have a place where MDC values are the only ones supported and discussed here... with a few forums set aside for "dissenting opinions" or other mainstream ideas not usually supported by MDC. I can go anywhere else on the internet to get a different opinion, but I chose MDC for the specific values it (used to) represent.

post #217 of 612

Damn I've missed a lot. I don't get out on this site much, and the moderation is 100% the cause of that. How ironic that my first "trip" out in months would be about that topic!

First of all, I have no idea what most of this is about but I love the idea of less moderation. I'm an old timer here and this used to be a really nice place to be. Yes, we had some debates and differences and drama... all forums do, but overall we were a pretty good community. It started getting nuts around 5 years ago, and the train to hell hasn't stopped since. I can tell you some spectacular stories (and give you some hilariously ridiculous screencaps) of some serious mod power tripping. I once got all the way up to the top with some serious concerns only to be DIRECTLY INSULTED multiple times by top mods. At which point I just dissolved into tears and gave it all up except for my DDC. It was pretty disgusting. Even repeated emails to have issues taken to the Kitchen Table were completely ignored. It's pretty obvious how certain members get flagged and then followed around, warned for everything under the sun from use of sarcasm to light swearing (ie. damn) until the mods finally rack up enough points to ban them. ANYTHING that gets us away from that is good. Very, VERY good.

Also, the fact that we're (apparently, as I haven't noticed, nor ventured outside my DDC) getting a lot of snark is to be expected. As another poster pointed out, this is backlash against years of disgustingly underhanded and sadistic moderating. We're all like teenagers just waiting to rebel... of course this was going to happen. If you have everyone on a two inch choke chain and then let it all go and walk away... what the hell do you think is going to happen next?
I'd risk sounding like a paranoid freak and say maybe some people wanted it to happen. Now all the core users will cry out for mercy from the snark and we'll all have to be "rescued" by heavy moderation again, this time oh-so-thankful for it. It'll die down in a bit.
Somehow, millions of other forums manage to survive pretty well without this kind of heavy-handedness. We can do it, too. :-P

On the UC argument: can we please have a discussion about UC without throwing the dead babies card around? Dead babies! Dead babies! Did you know about the DEAD BABIES?
Ok, so I actually have one of those dead babies - and I was a UCer. So that grants automatic immunity from your dead baby argument... either that or I become one of the people that you're talking about, which is probably the real case. Even though my dead baby had nothing to do with a UC (he was actually born by completely unnecessary and coerced cesarean section after a UP, and his death had more to do with his genetic abnormality than my lack of ultrasounds).
My point in this is that UC detractors love to use the "UCers kill their babies" argument without any citation except for a vague, "I saw it, I swear". While UC crazies love to say it never happens for any reason because we have magical trust and that's more valuable than unicorn blood is to Voldemort. The truth is somewhere in the middle: shit happens, babies die. More often than not we can't do a damn thing about it, but people love to speculate and point fingers. If there are no doctors involved to sue, point fingers at the mom, because that makes sense, right?
Stillbirths in first world countries like ours are largely unexplained and unpreventable (seriously, go up to your local hospital and talk to the social workers on the maternity floor and ask for statistics - i work with NILMDTS and almost all my cases are stillbirths. All except ONE in the last 4.5 years have been unexplained and unpreventable) and they happen everywhere: home, hospital, your bathroom, in the car on the side of the road...
I do not believe that the UC forum here is "responsible" for babies' deaths. I feel confident saying, "not even one". If someone's child died due to shitty advice they received from anonymous faces on a forum... well, uh, I have to question that parent's ability to parent, you know? If an entire forum told me to throw my child off a bridge, I still wouldn't do it. However, I doubt that happened. It's speculation, and it's blind. The truth is you have no idea what "could have" been, so even if it makes you feel better to blame it on UCers or the UC forum as a whole, it's probably not true.

FTR, I've had two UPs, one UC, and two midwife attended births (including my most recent, two weeks ago). I loved my UC, it was freaking awesome, but I would never advocate UCs. For any reason. At all. It's too serious a commitment to throw around arbitrarily. I do advocate for safe (and available!) birth choices though. :)

Alright, enough of that.  What were we talking about again? Oh yeah, moderation!


I wanted to add on the subject of specialty forums like the UC forums, or the Circumcision or Extended breastfeeding forum and whatnot... those are specifically in place to be support and positive discussion, which means the posts are biased heavily in that direction. That doesn't mean that dissent is banned, but it does mean that it's lightly discouraged. This isn't the case for all of MDC, obviously, but support forums for issues that are often heavily under fire is a GOOD idea to try and keep offensive debates (such as the one we're having here, about UC, and all those crazy DEAD BABIES!!11!1one) as few as possible.
On that note: I also strongly support the idea of a debate forum to discuss issues. I think that would be awesome! I also think it would be awesome if such a forum had guidelines (not rules, mind you, but guidelines! Important distinction there!) about debating to help people not get out of control. Things like no personal insults or bringing family/personal life into the argument (ie. trolling someone's blog for fodder). And most importantly being able to back up your statements with facts, citations, research, etc as it saves TONS of time and probably pages upon pages of angry flame wars and speculation.

 

In cases where a mod needed to step in and tone things down, I think they should do it IN PUBLIC WHERE EVERYONE CAN SEE, as this would help prevent the mod power-tripping that we all know and love so much. And by love I mean hate. Fiery, passionate, foaming-at-the-mouth hate.

A simple mod note that says, "Okay [you silly user, you] tone that down. That was inappropriate" can do WONDERS to slow the freight train to hell in a flame war. And it'll work 100x better to have that in public where other people can see and absorb it, rather than have it done in private where arguments are just encouraged and other users don't see anything happening other than a few posts being edited or spontaneously disappearing (while still being referenced by others, and never really resolved...which only keeps the cycle going).

 


Anyway, I think debate and freedom is a good thing. Mods should be around, but they should not be playing the power trips they are now. It's bad, bad juju.

post #218 of 612

I am surprised to learn that minimal moderation actually exists here!

 

As soon as I expressed my opinion (on a forum outside of where I regularly post), just because it was pro vaccination, my post was removed. 

 

I thought that it was OK to have an opinion about something and express it without being censored, and where I come from  (Australia) not only is my opinion the most popularly held one, but also we believe in freedom of speech, so I was pretty shocked.

 

So I am sad to say I don't feel safe to express my opinions here anymore.

post #219 of 612
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by clutterwarrior View Post

I am surprised to learn that minimal moderation actually exists here!

 

As soon as I expressed my opinion (on a forum outside of where I regularly post), just because it was pro vaccination, my post was removed. 

 

I thought that it was OK to have an opinion about something and express it without being censored, and where I come from  (Australia) not only is my opinion the most popularly held one, but also we believe in freedom of speech, so I was pretty shocked.

 

So I am sad to say I don't feel safe to express my opinions here anymore.


Can you link me to the thread you posted that to? I've searched all of your posts and cannot find a post that was removed. 

 

post #220 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsFortune View Post

Another thought - stop deleting or removing threads.  Really.  At all.  EVER.  

 

I agree completely. It is so frustrating to go back through old posts & see a subject that sounds interesting/informative & find it's been removed. The one exception is if the original poster asks for the thread to be removed.
 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by littleteapot View Post
In cases where a mod needed to step in and tone things down, I think they should do it IN PUBLIC WHERE EVERYONE CAN SEE, as this would help prevent the mod power-tripping that we all know and love so much. And by love I mean hate. Fiery, passionate, foaming-at-the-mouth hate.

A simple mod note that says, "Okay [you silly user, you] tone that down. That was inappropriate" can do WONDERS to slow the freight train to hell in a flame war. And it'll work 100x better to have that in public where other people can see and absorb it, rather than have it done in private where arguments are just encouraged and other users don't see anything happening other than a few posts being edited or spontaneously disappearing (while still being referenced by others, and never really resolved...which only keeps the cycle going).

 


Anyway, I think debate and freedom is a good thing. Mods should be around, but they should not be playing the power trips they are now. It's bad, bad juju.


I agree with this too.

 

I'm one of those "older" members, although I'm more of a reader than a poster most of the time. The extreme moderation was awful. I know of several people who stopped coming here because they were tired of being treated like children. I once got a warning, and had my thread deleted, because I started a thread directing people to a post created by a newbie in another thread. The other thread was barely viewed, the new poster was in a desperate situation and I figured I'd try to get some more people to see her post. It was more than a bit frustrating. I actually stopped coming here for about a year after that.

 

There should be moderation to make sure there aren't posters promoting things which are against the core values of the site as well as protecting people from personal attacks.

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Site Help
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Welcome to Mothering! › Site Help › Moderation of MDC - What do you think?