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 17  

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 #321 of 612

*takingnotes* I'd like to hear some sources too. I am working on putting together history curriculum for DD and I want to make sure I'm not missing anything.

post #322 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by oaktreemama View Post

 

 

Uh I don't even know what to say to this. Do you have some kind of secret Illuminati tome or something? Something that the major (and minor) historians I have read (women's studies, aboriginal studies, Native American studies, Innuit studies, African studies, etc) have missed? Because I am sorry but this is exactly the argument conspiracy theorists use to back up their conspiracy theories about the modern and ancient world.

 

To each their own though.


To each her own. There are plenty of brilliant people out there with wonderful research that will never see the insides of a university. Our world is rich with really solid information and tangible evidence that challenges the official story of our planet and people, but that's okay, I'll enjoy my books and you'll enjoy yours and I have no hard feelings and am not at all rolling my eyes or scoffing at you.

However, you just said the magic words that officially shut down my interest in any discussion. The very second someone says"conspiracy theory" I'm out. It just never seems to go well for me past that point. redface.gif
post #323 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post





Being frank when discussing your feelings does not give you the right to attack, abuse, namecall and harass members or this website. Those are the members who will have their accounts closed and I make no apologies for that. 

 

We will be looking more closely at threads. You say we allow them to devolve wildy. You assume that we are aware and let them devolve. We have asked members to report threads of issue. We act on reports. Obviously that is not working. And obviously some members abuse the lighter moderation approach we have taken and work directly to "devolve" discussions even to the point of driving new members away. An example which will also earn some member's the loss of their accounts: http://www.mothering.com/community/forum/thread/1317712/should-i-have-sex-with-my-ex-advice-please



 

Mommel please see the bolded above.  Those members were not banned because of that sex thread linked above, but before that thread was addressed.  They were banned because they called MDC out and demanded an apology on threads that have been since removed.  They were banned because they were trying to hold MDC accountable for its actions.  Stridently.  And they ruffled some feathers.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mommel View Post




Did you see the posts these women made on that thread? I really do not think that they were banned for coming out against MDC moderation issues. The posts were horrible and nasty and after PMing with the OP newbie of that thread (which I felt compelled to do given her treatment there), I remain horrified at their insensitive and, quite frankly, nasty responses to her question. She is young and new (not to mention newly and unexpectedly single) and was in a lot of pain. While the answer to her question may have seemed obvious to some and the question seemed troll-like to others, not one of those women took the time to ask her directly what she was after. Instead they made assumptions and made things worse for her. I'm sorry, but that type of posting is what really makes me sick to my stomach. The OP was the one who was reduced to terror about ever asking a vulnerable question again.

 

IMHO, this is a prime example where moderation was exactly what it should have been. I am not terrified to post here and I give plenty of dissenting opinions, but I won't ridicule or belittle people to do it. And if I come off that way to someone, I try to apologize for it and re-phrase my stance to be nicer and/or more clear about my stance on the issue, separating it out from the person behind the issue. People who don't, or for whatever reason can't, do that, should be moderated accordingly.



 

post #324 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by AverysMomma View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by oaktreemama View Post

I did read your whole post AM and I think it is naive at best and shows that maybe you haven't read much history. Human history has shown time and again that the strong will always steal from the weak unless there is some kind of counterbalance, i.e. "government."

 

Ideas like your are best debated in the safety of a classroom because as a political or social philosophy it fails on many many levels.

 

Human history has never been safe, it has never been pleasant and it has never been some peaceful oasis. There are NO good old days. They don't exist.

 

What we can hope for and strive for is balance. But that won't happen if it is a free for all.

 

 




My ideas are not being conveyed properly, this is not your fault. You're not understanding what I'm saying or where I'm coming from at all and again I am certain that it is my technique in conveyance and not your ability to comprehend which is the culprit. I'm not suggesting what you think I am at all and yes that would be incredibly naive. For the record, if everything you know about world history you learned in a classroom in a major university in this country, it is my belief that you are far from properly educated on modern history, the written history of this world and particularly when it comes to the omitted materials and archeological findings which support a far different picture of ancient civilization and the roots of the modern day construct we live in. the people of this thread have been so kind in ignoring my hijacking, thank you and my apologies.


Wow...I too am like dizzy.gif over this one.  But then what would I know being a historian afterall (and married to an historian to boot).

 

FWW most of what I know of the past comes from primary sources actually.  I must have missed the ones where everyone got along.  But then I study the middle ages...where nobody got along with anybody lol.

 

post #325 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chamomile Girl View Post




Wow...I too am like dizzy.gif over this one.  But then what would I know being a historian afterall (and married to an historian to boot).

 

FWW most of what I know of the past comes from primary sources actually.  I must have missed the ones where everyone got along.  But then I study the middle ages...where nobody got along with anybody lol.

 



It's like a trainwreck within a trainwreck.

post #326 of 612

I'm a little confused.  I only have a few posts, and at first, I could post without any problem.  I made a post in the Welcome forum, the Gentle Discipline forum and the Family Safety forum.  Then later, when I tried to reply to a thread in the Gentle Discipline forum, I got a message saying something like, "Because you are new, your posts are being held for review".  I didn't receive anything like that message when I posted replies before ...? 

 

Is it the practice here to review every post made by new members before they show up on the board, and maybe my first few posts somehow got in under the radar?

post #327 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post





As I posted up thread, I'd like to see MDC stick to the core AP/NFL stuff of GD, intactivism, vax questioning, UC, natural birth, BFing and HSing while allowing diversity of opinion on political, social issues and religious beliefs on subjects like abortion, sexuality ( including homosexuality, polyamory and chastity) and gender issues while requiring civility from BOTH sides. 

 

 




I don't think it's possible to civily express certain beliefs - when you're talking about something like sexual orientation, you're discussing something at the very core of human beings who post in this community.



I think it's fine to talk about sexuality. 

 

Acceptable:

"I am gay.  My partner and I both breastfeed our daughter."

"That's lovely.  I am straight, but I wish my husband could share the load!"

 

Unacceptable:

"I am gay.  My partner and I both breastfeed our daughter."

"Being gay is wrong, mmmkay?  Jesus says."

 

That's a breach of UA, and I don't think you can say that something someone just is is wrong while also being "civil."

post #328 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by jezebelle View Post





I think it's fine to talk about sexuality. 

 

Acceptable:

"I am gay.  My partner and I both breastfeed our daughter."

"That's lovely.  I am straight, but I wish my husband could share the load!"

 

Unacceptable:

"I am gay.  My partner and I both breastfeed our daughter."

"Being gay is wrong, mmmkay?  Jesus says."

 

That's a breach of UA, and I don't think you can say that something someone just is is wrong while also being "civil."


Thank you.
post #329 of 612

Not totally following this thread, but mdc is dying right along with the death of the Magazine. We have lost our safe haven. I have been a member for 7 years and I am newly pregnant. you used to be able to go to a very active board to talk about things, now this is gone. you know what, I go the Baby Center. Theres still naturally minded mama's there and Its not slow and over dramatic like it is here.

 

RIP Mothering.

post #330 of 612

Less regulation is better.  Especially in regards to sleep training and other practices.  We need to be able to discuss various parenting styles and choices and share what has worked and not. 

post #331 of 612
I voted more but should have voted other. There has to be a middle ground. It was overmoderated before. Ridiculously so. That said, I have no interest in Mothering turning into Babycenter. I don't like snark here or bitchiness. I keep seeing "we're all adults" thrown out as a reason for less moderation but that's just not true. Adults on the internet are quite capable of acting like bratty and often venomous teenagers and I'd rather not revisit highschool thank you very much.
post #332 of 612

Right now y'all are probably being slightly too lax, but honestly it's a great change after the Stalin-esque quality this site has had for a while.  I would be posting a lot more if the site redesign weren't so buggy and frustrating.  It's just not worth logging in when 50%+ of the time I try to write a long post it doesn't work.  I'm not really interested in interacting with a site that increases my frustration level.  I get enough of that from my kids. :P

post #333 of 612

My ideal UA would be something like this:

 

- don't post to advocate or defend cio, harsh sleep training, physical punishment, elective cesarean section, routine infant medical circumcision, or mandatory vaccinations. Don't post to advocate formula feeding (because it obviously is sometimes defendable).

 

- no namecalling or personal attacks

 

- no racism, homophobia, sexism, etc etc.

 

I am personally not bothered by the snark and cursing, and would be fine with a board that allowed sex talk.

 

"Do not defend spanking" would still allow people to post that they spank but want to stop, or to post that "I was spanked and I'm fine" as long as they make it clear that it doesn't make spanking ok.

 

post #334 of 612

Oh, and I agree with the recommendations that you post to threads with the reason other posts were removed. I understand the thinking behind not wanting to call people out, but really, if they posted within the UA in the first place it wouldn't be an issue.

post #335 of 612

I think MDC needs to add to their UA that you won't be able to discuss/debate anything that has been posted/printed previously if you disagree with the side the Mothering promoted.

post #336 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chamomile Girl View Post

Mommel please see the bolded above.  Those members were not banned because of that sex thread linked above, but before that thread was addressed.  They were banned because they called MDC out and demanded an apology on threads that have been since removed.  They were banned because they were trying to hold MDC accountable for its actions.  Stridently.  And they ruffled some feathers.


My apologies for the confusion. I was referring to the action taken (if any) against members who posted in that particular thread. It was unclear to me which members were being referred to in the post that I quoted. With all these sidebars going on, I'm starting to get a little dizzy. Even so, I stand by what I said regarding the particular posts on that particular thread. Thanks for pointing out that I was referring to the wrong set of "those posters".

 

I have heard of members being banned for speaking out on MDC issues, but I cannot speak to it specifically, because my experience has not been one of intimidation or harassment by moderators. In fact, is has been quite the opposite. In fact, on one occasion, because of this hearsay, I assumed that a thread I posted on had been deleted for that reason, but when I PMed the mod directly to inquire about it, I found out it was just moved elsewhere into a different (and more appropriate) forum. I never once felt threatened or harassed, so I can see how if members felt that way they would want to discuss it, but demanding an apology seems a bit... I don't know... demanding? I mean, what's the point in that? I know I don't take well to people demanding things of me AT ALL... so I just can't see how that's productive in the least.

 

 

post #337 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicianDad View Post

I think MDC needs to add to their UA that you won't be able to discuss/debate anything that has been posted/printed previously if you disagree with the side the Mothering promoted.

And also that mods will examine admittedly otherwise interesting discussions in order to determine the intent and sincerity of the posters and shut them down if they don't pass the. . .smell?. . .test..
post #338 of 612
Thread Starter 

When it's Trolls trying to wreck havoc just because they want to take advantage of a tense discussion atmosphere about other issues - yes, I will stop their threads. We're not going to have discussions for their dramatic purposes under their pretenses.

post #339 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post

When it's Trolls trying to wreck havoc just because they want to take advantage of a tense discussion atmosphere about other issues - yes, I will stop their threads. We're not going to have discussions for their dramatic purposes under their pretenses.



Please define "trolls."  Right now.  Because it looks an awful lot like your definition of "troll" is "dissenter."

 

post #340 of 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post

When it's Trolls trying to wreck havoc just because they want to take advantage of a tense discussion atmosphere about other issues - yes, I will stop their threads. We're not going to have discussions for their dramatic purposes under their pretenses.


Honest question here (really, no havoc wreaking intended) - is there a time limit on this? Is the topic of the thread you just closed indefinitely verboten here now? Is there anyway to reintroduce the topic here in a way that would be acceptable to the administration? Because I do think it's something that deserves the attention of the NFL community.
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?