A New User Agreement - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 07:34 AM
 
LadyButler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK... I think I can echo what several have already said:
  • I don't like the "for no good reason" clause. I don't think it's fair and I don't think it promotes a sense of community. If you're banning someone- you know you've got a reason.
  • If I've written something, it's my work. Forever and Ever. Amen. Period. If I write it on Mothering's boards then I'm granting Mothering permission to use my work. : But it's still mine. I can post it elsewhere or publish it in a book. I will gladly grant nonexclusive rights to use my work to Mothering. At least this is how I see it. : : : Of course, I once knew someone who just put a copyright notice in her siggy... I just don't want to resort to that.
  • Along the same lines as the intellectual property issue... if I write something, I should have the right to delete it. I don't understand the thought process behind that rule. The only reason I could see that admin would want to enforce this would be to prove someone had violated U/A. But in reality I think it would only prevent people from correcting their mistakes- including U/A violations. As a mother, I seek to provide ways for my children to realize something is inappropriate and take corrective action themselves rather than "fixing" things for them. In a weird way I think the same applies here. (No... we're not children... but you get the idea.)
  • The idea of an expiration date for accounts is great. I know one community I was involved with had a one month (too short) expiration- but if you were going to be gone longer you just notified an admin that you were "vacationing" for x amount of time. That could get complicated... so 1 or 2 years is probably more efficient.
  • Personally, I do have an ISP based email addy... but there are way too many who don't have access to one. Surely there's a better method to ensure one user account per person. People have distinct posting styles. The trolls and troublemakers would become obvious. I know that if I had two accounts... more than likely the folks who post with me even occasionally would notice similarities.

Anyway... just my $.02. I love Mothering- and want it to be a pleasant and supportive place for everybody. I suppose the key is finding the best balance. No one wants to be bogged down draconian nitpicky rules... and a "guidelineless" place would be misery.
LadyButler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#62 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:54 AM
 
sunset's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'll take the plunge, I am a relative newbie here but not to the magazine.
I wont profess to fully comprehending all the implications of the new UA, but what I do get I agree with a lot of what has been said regarding ISP addresses, non posting membership termination etc.

But about the across the board not advocating spanking/ CIO/circ/etc.
I wouldn't like to see that happen. Personally I would not advocate any of the above, but some people come here not knowing any different, maybe
just maybe their minds can be changed, by hearing what people have to say against those things, also having to go to bat against these things keeps the info, the reasons why fresh, reminds us of why these things should never never be allowed.
I think I have changed a couple of peoples minds about vax with a well honed argument ( learnt here) just as my mind has been changed on other issues by people with an equally good argument.

I think we should let those people who agree with spanking/CIO/circ/ etc say their piece and then hopefully they can hear ours.

Just my two yen.
sunset is offline  
#63 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 12:54 PM
 
aisraeltax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: never never land & CPP
Posts: 5,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i think sunset has a point with an outright prohibition on discussing CIO, spanking, RIC, etc. i would like to see Mothering prohibiting the advocacy of these issues, but at the same time would like to see the flexibility to allow new members to come and learn.

i know that i came here not knowing much about RIC or vax's. if i hadn't been allowed to engage in discussion re: WHY (from my undereducated position), i would have probably been banned within a week or so. I came here SOLELY to find some used cloth diapers for the baby. obviously, i chose to stay and a ton of benefit beyond the cheap diapers i bought.

also, the UA states that this is a place for parents but i see many members (dont know how many, but ive been surprised) that say they are not parents (there are many who are TTC, etc. and possibly others who are here for the NFL but have no children...dont know their particular circumstances but just wanted to point this out.

if you want agreement re: other issues; i agree with the ISP requirement - i dont even know which addy i registered with.

i do understand that MDC needs to have the "catch all" provision that they may ban members for any reason or no reason at all. i would probably suggest a similar contractual phrase. its a provision that merely protects MDC from any recourse if MDC decides to ban a member and doesnt necessarily desire to make their reason public (there may be sensitive political reasons, etc...too numerous to even speculate). I think what many ppl are concerned with is that *they* will be banned for NO reason, when that really isn't what the provision means (legally). It simply means that MDC has the right to ban and doesnt HAVE to state a reason. I think it protects MDC and dont have a problem with it. :

i also agree with the IP issue. i have no problem with MDC using what i write here (for what...i don't know...its pretty useless. ) BUT, the words are MINE and i can do anything with them i want to. they dont become the exclusive property of MDC just b/c i put them here. THey do become property of MDC that MDC can use for whatever purpose they want.


As far as "talking about MDC" on other places, i think feels alot like Big Brother. i will put my neck on the chopping block and confess that i belong to another board (private, restricted) of ppl met here and sometimes i will post an issue on MDC and then post there also, with the statement that "i posted this on MDC...but wanted to see what you guys thought". sometimes i will provide those guys a link. Sometimes, if one of us asks a question re: parenting on the other board, one of us will provide a link to MDC that answers our questions. What is wrong with this? MDC does not host Due Date Clubs for very long and sometimes these groups become close and want to discuss teh same stuff they did while on MDC and linking/talking about MDC is part of how they communicate. I hope i dont get banned for that, since this is the place i go to for support, advice and parenting advice. If I couldnt come here, I really don't know what i would do. :

those are my .2...it always takes me a long time to give them!
aisraeltax is offline  
#64 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 02:47 PM
 
hakeber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bogota, Colombia
Posts: 3,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
  1. I am confused by number 10.

    Does that mean that administrators cannot delete my posts without consultation, because then I fully agree with that clause. I think un-warned deleting at the hands of mods and admins deplorable and should be reigned in immediately if not sooner.

    On the other hand, if it means I cannot delete my OWN work...well, unless you disable the editing process (for the love of god please don't do THAT, I am a useless typist and I need three read-throughs on average before I get it right), the point becomes moot; one can edit and re-arrange their words as they please, and you really can't ask someone to simply leave words out there that they regret saying...for goodness sake, even in a face to face argument people can verbally take things back!

  2. Add my name to the list of those who disagree with the any-or-no-reason banning policy. I am very sorry, to be blunt, but that is far too Napoleon, and the next thing we know the pigs will be sleeping in beds and wearing glasses while we mere beasts rest on the hay. Makes me uneasy at best.

  3. I think the theory of what happens on the board stays off PUBLIC spaces to be fine, however, if a memeber here is a part of a PRIVATE discussion group, we really can't regulate that, and it's not fair to ask them to...HOWEVER, that means there MUST be a space for such ranting HERE that won't be considered aganst the UA or attacking the mods or admin...a place where memebers can freely RANT and B*TCH about run-ins they have here, with members, mods or admin...that way they won't need the blogs etc, and they can just let it out totally judgement free. ETA: perhaps they could have the reply option disabled in these threads, or only the OP could post replies...or maybe it could be a forum where only comments of support are allowed.

    The kitchen Table is a great space to DISCUSS issues, but perhaps we also need something like the Kicthen Sink, where the dishes get smashed and people just let it all out, totally free from the fear of being banned, then discussion at other boards wouldn't have to be an issue, because they'd have their safe ranting/venting space right here.

    What do you think?

  4. I need to know also how the ISP thing will affect current members...are you going to be deleting members without ISP e-mails? That should thin herd, but I don't think that's fair. Sometimes, especially at a board of this size...we just have to deal with the odd double registration/troll...especially if you want a community that is as diverse and fun as this one is.

  5. I also have to agree that what I write is ultimately mine. You may be able to use it, delete it, edit it at your will, but make no mistake it's MINE.


Additionally, is there a clear discription somewhere, that I have missed of what a moderator's rights and responsibilities are? It would be nice for members to know just how far their duties extend, so that we can better defend ourselves when refuting an accusation or demand

Thank you.

Rebekah - mom to Ben 03/05 and Emily 01/10, a peace educator, and a veg*n and wife to Jamie.
hakeber is online now  
#65 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 02:47 PM
 
Clarinet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I know we're not supposed to reply twice, but I'm sure no one will read this if I post it on my original post.

Please, at least skim the no spanking in the UA thread. (FORGET IT. THE THREAD HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM PUBLIC VIEW) The general concensus of those of us that would like it added isn't that people who spank aren't welcome to MDC, nor that discussion of spanking habits combined with requests to change parental behaviour aren't welcome to MDC, just that saying SPANKING IS GREAT, I LIKE IT, MY KIDS ARE BETTER BECAUSE I HIT THEM, AND I'LL CONTINUE TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WORKS should not be allowed.

Thank you....stepping down now....

Clarinet is offline  
#66 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 03:31 PM
 
member's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,872
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't care for the words: Parents or Parents To Be in the opening. Many, many people have found MM and MDC because they are active in children's lives and want to know more about forming attachments, etc. I would prefer to see it be stated a bit more boardly, something about family or advocates. Something. Some of us are parents to be... but it take a while due to complications with TTCing, etc. I find it to be a bit insensitive.

I would like to see stronger statements about CIO, spanking, and circ in all of the fora. Anyone can log onto any mainstream parenting site and debate these issues... and there's still plenty to debate within these issues while saying they are not okay via MDC philosophy.

I echo MT about the legal concerns of stating that one does not have access to delete a post when mods/adminstrators do. The very nature of the subject matter leans in the direction of sharing very personal information and I have more than once edited or deleted a post because of oversharing.

I don't get the ISP thing. I say better to revoke membership after a term of non-participation.
member is offline  
#67 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 06:35 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 22,548
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
I like Selu's family advocates suggestion.

I think what can and cannot be discussed here needs to be spelled out more clearly. From the user agreement as written, I can tell that sex and criticism of the UA and moderation will not be tolerated, but some of us also know there are other discussions that will not be tolerated, like those surrounding abortion or gay rights issues, and the different parenting related things can be tricky too. Others who join may not know that, and it leads to arguing and hard feelings. It would just be easier all around if MDC's pro- and anti- beliefs were spelled out quite clearly and potential new users had to agree before their membership was processed.

What are the consequences for the numerous members already registered who did not use an ISP based account to register? Or who registered under an ISP but no longer have that ISP and access through a different ISP? Is the concern for people having multiple accounts, or for being able to track someone who does something illegal, or what? I think that needs to be spelled out too. I like the idea of deleting users who have never posted or who haven't posted in several years. That would help to free up some new user names if nothing else.

I can understand MDC not wanting members to go on a deleting spree, taking everything with them if they decide to leave. Clearly people are going to edit posts and remove personal information if they think they've shared too much. I will share photos, but then go back and edit out the URL at a later date. I don't necessarily have a problem with wanting to preserve discussions without too much being taken away, but this works both ways and I know moderators have deleted large numbers of postings in the past. I know that users and all their posts have been deleted per the request of that user. I can't tell from the user agreement if that will be permitted anymore or not. My concern is that it just be fair all around.

Quote:
8. Do not post to discuss the statements or behavior of a member or members on the board, or to criticize another discussion on the boards. Such issues should be directed to the member, moderator or administrator privately and not made a subject of potentially defaming discussion in a thread.
I think this needs to be reworded to be more specific. For example, you could make it a requirement that when one joins this board that one agrees not to copy the words of others from this board and post them on another board. Some people may not honor that, but I believe some would. I think expecting people not to have opinions on some of the ideas expressed at MDC, especially if conversations on certain topics will not be hosted, is going too far. Because certain topics or words are not allowed here, and because threads get pulled right in the middle of people responding to them, I can easily see a case where a spillover conversation might be taken elsewhere if people want a franker, more in-depth discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avonlea
POST # 102 Not every person can afford to pay for AOL, for instance. Someof us have to make do with what we've got. Does this mean we lose out on the resource and knowledge and information of MDC as well ? How is that welcoming or fair or community minded of us ?
I wasn't even sure if AOL would count as an ISP unless you were using dial-up. I mean, what if you have an ISP through your cable modem and you use an AOL address to register, but you don't use it as an ISP? I believe that was my situation when I registered, but it's been so long I'm not even sure. I have no clue what my e-mail address is for my cable modem ISP and I have no clue how to access it, to tell you the truth. I think I registered with a POP e-mail address that I don't have anymore.

Quote:
To the quoted poster, I would love to know what sites do what you are describing with IP addresses. That doesn't make any sense to me as most ISPs use dynamic IPs, which means they change everytime the user logs in. Is this supposed to be a security measure? Because that's not going to work. I don't even know what you would do with this information if you even had the right information? Block all subscribers that use Comcast email for example? Because that's all you'd be able to do.
I was curious about that too. I've seen this before, but I wasn't sure of the purpose. I guess it's so that there is a record of the IP at a time a specific point was made, and if need be, who had the lease of that IP number at that point in time might be a record kept by the ISP who assigned it. So if someone posted child pornography or something, I guess they could trace it back.
Viola is offline  
#68 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 07:45 PM
 
mandib50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: my own reality
Posts: 4,698
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
This must be applied for with an ISP-based email address.
i do not like this rule either. i think far too many women will be excluded from participating on MDC because they do not have access to an ISP address or they may require for safety reasons to post where they do not have an ISP based email. what about all the members who signed up without using an ISP-based email address?

Quote:
1. Do not post in a disrespectful, defamatory, adversarial, baiting, harassing, offensive, insultingly sarcastic or otherwise improper manner, toward a member or other individual, including casting of suspicion upon a person, invasion of privacy, humiliation, demeaning criticism, name-calling, personal attack, or in any way which violates the law.
while i agree with the intent of this rule, it may be difficult to define offensive or improper manner. what is offensive to one person may not be offensive to someone else.

Quote:
Discussions of a sexual nature should be within the realm of topics inherent to Mothering discussions such as sex after delivery, sex and the family bed, etc.
maybe i'm the lone voice on this one but i fail to see how you can separate sexuality in general from being a mother. i think it would be cool to see these kinds of discussions, which can certainly take place without profanity or sexual expliciteness.

Quote:
o We reserve the right to delete any message or to remove the registration and membership of any individual at any time for any or no reason whatsoever.
i think this is really ridiculous ... you can remove someone for no reason? huh?
seems kinda juvenile to me :

Midwifery student , Mama to my 4 amazing kids. treehugger.gif

mandib50 is offline  
#69 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 07:57 PM
 
MamaAllNatural's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nearest chair with *ONE* nursling!
Posts: 6,882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I do not understand the ISP issue. I'm just computer illiterate like that.

I think the issue of deleting posts has to do with when posters have left and deleted *all* of their posts leaving so many threads w/o relevant info and kind of confusing. I don't know...I think it was just one poster and it was a personal issue between admin and her. I can really see both sides. I don't know if that should really be a board-wide rule but I do remember this rule was here at least a year ago. It seems like a lot of people don't feel good about it. Because I feel it's about really deleting all your posts in that way I've never felt that it was much of an issue for me personally. Maybe this can be excluded altogether? It seems like it's just one of those fine print things...you know, the things they say so fast on the radio you couldn't make it out even if you tried. It will probably never apply.

I think it would be really nice and feel a lot safer for many of us here if there could be a part in the "What we are about" section (I think that's what it's called) that could say we are a community where we welcome and cherish people of all colors, ethnicities, and sexual orientation. That doesn't sound like what I'm trying to get out...I'm sure someone can come up with something better to where it's clear that MDC is a place where all people are accepted and welcomed and valued equally. It should be a clear message so that people who are homophobic or racist will know that that is one of Mothering's values before they consider signing up. I have always been under the impression it is one of Peggy's values. I think it would make some of us feel a bit safer as well.


ETA: I think the only appropriate time where it's MDC's business at all what is being said about MDC in other places is when it brings trolls. That's usually an issue though of people posting threads here about other websites (like mainstream boards) and that has really been addressed. Otherwise that seems really weird to even entertain the thought of spys and always looking out for whos saying what about MDC. Seems kind of self centered...you know, like when people always think someone's talking about them. It would be like the online version of Love You Forever. :


*ETA: I am also confused...I'm seeing posts quoted and I can't find them in the thread. Are these from another thread? If so, please point me to it.

*Edited again...sticking to the 1 post rule: Re: post #71. Girl, we have btdt so many times it isn't even funny. You are not alone. MANY of us wish we could discuss sex and we have tried and tried to talk it out and come to an agreement but have gotten nowhere. I agree w/you. It's important. MDC takes the stance that we can go talk about that somewhere else and that it is not something they want to host. It has also been stated that MDC wants to remain "family friendly" but that has been highly debated. Well, this is the only place I post. I still want to be able to talk about it. Even if there were rules about it, or if there was a separate forum for it, that would work for me.

Oh, and I agree there should be actual reasons for people getting banned. It should be clear cut and should be due to rules. I think maybe that would be okay for an obvious troll. Like, say they only have a few posts and they're all obviously about something weird or they obviously only came here to rile things up. Otherwise, woah, that feels very not right that you could just ban me right now for no reason and no one would ever know what happened, kwim? There needs to be a clear pollicy. Like the warnings and whatever it is...three strikes your out. But not just for nothing, at all.
MamaAllNatural is offline  
#70 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:01 PM
 
Fishie Kisses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Palmdale, CA
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's somewhat redundant because it seems to be a general consensus, but here goes. I DO pay for my internet through an ISP, but I do NOT have an ISP e-mail and even if I id, I prefer my Yahoo and Hotmail accounts. I do not think it would be fair AT ALL to be excluded for this reason, although I do somewhat understand the idea behind it.

I also think that the Parents and Parents to be is not completely fair. Granted this is MOTHERING dot commune, I am a step-mother but do not have any of my own. We are TTC. What if I had no step-children? Would I be unwelcome until we were actually expecting? The TTC threads have become a lifeline for me as of late.

Finally, I agree that spanking should not be advocated, but I don't think that people should be banned for their beliefs....I realize that this is not yet in there but there has been much discussion. I agree with a previous poster who said that we simply cannot say things like "I beat my children and I don't have any intentions of stopping."

Just my 2 cents, but I figured I could join the bandwagon.
Fishie Kisses is offline  
#71 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:02 PM
 
PGNPORTLAND's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
-please don't do that ISP thing. I don't understand what it is and I don't know if I have one and if it costs money to have one than I'll be a goner and I luuuuuuv MDC so don't do that to me okay?

-I think we should be able to discuss sex/sexuality here. It's what got most of us here and it's an important issue.

-I don't think you can tell people what to talk about or not talk about in other places on the internet. you only make the rules for MDC.

In general, I don't like any rules that say which topics can and cannot be discussed. I don't like censorship. I think there are threads that are for support and threads that are for debate and they should be seperate.
PGNPORTLAND is offline  
#72 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:07 PM
 
wonderwahine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: wi fi didnt do it!
Posts: 9,295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
ISP

In one sense I can see the sense in banning non-ISP e-mail addresses. On other boards I've been on, trolls have been pretty much eliminated that way, since trolls, by their very nature, tend to use a system whereby they can't be tracked.
I agree this may be good for eliminating trolls, but I have used the same hotmail address for nearly 9yrs now, and I don't have an ISP address, my husband does. Does that mean I would have to sign up again under my husbands ISP e-mail address?
wonderwahine is offline  
#73 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:08 PM
Banned
 
Delacroix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,565
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PGNPORTLAND
In general, I don't like any rules that say which topics can and cannot be discussed. I don't like censorship. I think there are threads that are for support and threads that are for debate and they should be seperate.



I agree. Emphatically.
Delacroix is offline  
#74 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:18 PM
 
BathrobeGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The rural foothills of N Colorado
Posts: 5,524
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would like to see something specifically about racist comments. I wouldn't want to see all posts dealing with racism snuffed out (like if a mom was dealing with it URL, dealing with racist family, etc.) but racist remarks I would like to be specifically banned with its own anti-racist comments designation, not just covered by the broader "no personal attacks."

I don't like the ISP linked email rule... because it would wholly exclude those parents who truly can not afford to have Internet access and that seems very elitist. I'm sure, as a community, we don't want to make anything a requirement that causes a member undue financial hardship just to participate.

I wonder if there should be something about what a "Granola Ambassador" is, what a moderator is and what an administrator is and what their individual functions and roles are on the boards.

Edited to add: I would like to see a board where we can talk about sex issues...it is such an important issue for many of us. My understanding is that it the family filters would screen MDC out and not allow access, therefore we would not be family friendly board? What if that forum was invisible, like the TP and TAO or by password only like Surviving Abuse is?

I would also like sexual orientation bashing added as something that is specifically banned. To me, that would mean MDC doesn't host any anti-gay, lesbian, transgendered, etc. talk not just personal attacks.

I wonder about the "posts belong to MDC rule" when it comes to the Writer's forum. The idea that a person would no longer "own" their work will discourage people from making submissions and that would be very sad. How does the magazine cover this? Does the magazine own an article/story once it is submitted or does the original author retain ownership even after publication? That might answer this question for me, what the norm is...

Eden yikes.gif, working on a PhD in Education mama to Laurelleshamrocksmile.gif (16), Orijoy.gif (6), Yarrowfaint.gif (4) and Linusfly-by-nursing1.gif (1) partner to Brice. 
BathrobeGoddess is offline  
#75 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:27 PM
 
mrzmeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: outside over there
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ITA with many of the PPs as well.

Specifically:

- I don't think mods should be able to ban anyone for any reason. There should be specifically stated rules which can lead to a ban, or, simply, "a gross violation of the UA". I would support 'easy' bans for new members, perhaps under 50 posts, who may be trolls, but I think that a more rigid system should be put in place for those who are long-time members. Perhaps, for example, all bans of members with more than 200 posts have to be put before the Kitchen Table? Something of that nature would be much more reasonable IMO.

- I think the proposed rule requiring ISP email addys is an all around bad idea and unquestionably classist.

- I think an attempt to censor the web beyond MDC by outlawing certain posts on other sites is a horrible idea and way outside the bounds of reason.

- I think that MDC should not own the rights to posts, and I think that members should be allowed to delete their own posts.

For some background...what has happened to precipitate such a reworking of the UA?
mrzmeg is offline  
#76 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:43 PM
 
mama-a-llama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,055
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not much new to say. But I was interested in this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna
I also think there should be some type of "protection" for the expression of minority views--not views that go against MDC or ap/nfl, but just views that are different from those of a majority of members. It seems like a lot of hostile personal disagreement goes unchecked on some threads where a minority viewpoint is being expressed.
Could you give an example, Brigianna? And how would such protection be implemented?
mama-a-llama is offline  
#77 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:46 PM
 
MCatLvrMom2A&X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: With Vin Diesel ;) YUMMMM
Posts: 14,210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The ISP issue could knock me off as well I use hotmail for here because the ISP I use for getting on the net didnt even provide email access until a few months ago. It was thru my local phone company and they didnt see a need to add email to it since so many places have free email. I also use another computer to come here and that one may not have the same ISP not sure about how that works.

Will we get a chance to change the information before we loose our post count? Or will we have to start all over again? Another thing to my whole name would be displayed in the email should I use my ISP I am not comfy with that at all. I would be devistated to loose mdc over this and I would hate to loose the others who would also loose the ability to come here. Please give some reassurance that that wont happen.


I dont like the wording of removing a user for no reason either that just sounds wrong.

 
SAHMlady.gifread.giflovin' trekkie.giffan intactivist.gifwinner.jpg to loveeyes.gifenergy.gifDD 10/00 & superhero.gifmoon.gifDS 10/04 ribbonpb.gifIf your ds is intact, keep him safe, visit the Case Against Circ forumnocirc.gifCirc, a personal choice, Your sonsyes.gifbrokenheart.gif11/98brokenheart.gif6/99ribbonbrown.gifanti-tobaccoribbonyellow.gifThyroid cancer survivor. With cat.gif& goldfish.gif & (Boxer)dog2.gif wishing 4 whale.gif&ribbonwhite.gifsigncirc1.gifselectivevax.gifdelayedvax.gif

MCatLvrMom2A&X is offline  
#78 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 08:48 PM
 
kungfumoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The ISP email only is a bad idea.
I would have to leave.
I'm sure many of us would be unable to comply with that rule.
I only have a yahoo email.
I would be so so sad to have to leave.
kungfumoose is offline  
#79 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 09:04 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: raising the revolution
Posts: 4,315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wow, I am not down with the "property of Mothering" clause. I agree with a previous poster --

Quote:
If I've written something, it's my work. Forever and Ever. Amen. Period. If I write it on Mothering's boards then I'm granting Mothering permission to use my work. But it's still mine. I can post it elsewhere or publish it in a book. I will gladly grant nonexclusive rights to use my work to Mothering. At least this is how I see it. Of course, I once knew someone who just put a copyright notice in her siggy... I just don't want to resort to that.
Also, at the risk of *criticizing* MDC, which is a community I do love -- I have to say that the UA seems really nit picky and seems to censor a whole lot of discussions. I find it so odd that we can't discuss sex. How the heck does anyone think we became *mothers* to post on mothering? Well most of us anyway. I find that rule to be really odd and frankly, a bit 1957ish --- Yes, I can understand keeping it tasteful -- I don't want to hear explicit description of how one's partner *loved* them last night for spits and giggles... but I have seen posts in parents as partners deleted for really benign sexual references ---

Also, the ISP thing. I think it is kind of of lame. I mean, can't we all spot a troll from a mile away? I mean, usually they break one of the rules of the UA in their first or second post anyway and could be done away with easily.

I just think it is really nit picky and rigid for a community of adults. Yes, I am all for putting in anything which legally protects MDC and also anything which communicates a need for respect among posters, and of clauses which spell out in clear, plain language what MDC stands for -- but being able to delete posts at a mod's whim and not being allowed to post anything which may be deemed offensive to someone somewhere at some time is too much imo.

It saddens me that the UA seems so rigid in some areas, yet on the issues of taking a firm, public, clear stance against things like circumcision and violence against children seems to waiver in an unsettling way.

Otherwise, I love MDC and the people here
captain crunchy is offline  
#80 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 09:28 PM
 
charmander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Latteland
Posts: 2,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PGNPORTLAND
-please don't do that ISP thing. I don't understand what it is and I don't know if I have one and if it costs money to have one than I'll be a goner and I luuuuuuv MDC so don't do that to me okay?

-I think we should be able to discuss sex/sexuality here. It's what got most of us here and it's an important issue.

-I don't think you can tell people what to talk about or not talk about in other places on the internet. you only make the rules for MDC.

In general, I don't like any rules that say which topics can and cannot be discussed. I don't like censorship. I think there are threads that are for support and threads that are for debate and they should be seperate.
I agree with all of this, especially the last paragraph (my bolding).
charmander is offline  
#81 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:07 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 31,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Why is there no mention of not advocating spanking, non-religious circumcision, CIO, or racism like we've all been asking?
Yes I think those need to be spelled out and can we add homophobic, biphobic and transphobic statements to the list. I know we had an issue of this recently and while I am happy the matter was handled, we might avoid it altogether if they were spelled out more clearly.

just wanted to be clear that I am requesting that homophobic ect *see above* statements be added to the list of things NOT to be advocated. IE, no postings implying or supporting hate against GLBTQ people

I generally agree with what has been previously posted regarding the problems with ISP based email addresses required, and the problems regarding not allowing deletions of posts and your claims of "owning" our posts.

I think that what is considered to be off topic for a forum needs to be more clearly defined (preferrably with memberships input) and the results of doing so. I think we should allow for general venting for means of support in TAO regardless if the topic possibly could be posted elsewhere. As almost all topics could probably be posted elsewhere as it is.

I think we need more information regarding the Kitchen Table. It sounds good or at least a step in the right direction, but I don't really understand it's true purpose. As it stands now the membership is very limited in constructive ways of dealing with conflicts with the admins and mods.

The contacting of mods and the admin leaves alot to be desired in real conflict resolution. It seems to be actually limited to just being convinced that the rule is justified and one is expected to abide by it with no real possibility of working a solution that is acceptable to the membership and the admin and mods. We are effectivly silenced. By being told to pm someone, and threads started to dialogue on the issues sit in Q&S forum moderation sometimes allowed to see the light of day, sometimes not, if they are posted often locked immediately effectively silencing any real discussion.

So I think we need to a real way for the membership to be heard. Because forcing discussion to pm makes it very difficult to dialogue with the whole membership about issues that effect us all.

I can't disagree more strongly about the rule limiting expression of MDC members off site. First off I take issue with the need of admins and moderators to control members actions off board. And even if that was somehow acceptable, how exactly would one prove who said what? Even if you got another boards admin to agree to share ISP info from the poster in question, we have already had cases here of people sharing ISPs with other members. Even if their wasn't an ethical problem with attempting to be the virtual CIA of the internet.

ITA with PP saying we should be able to discuss sex here. It's an integral part of family life and usually what got most of here in the first place. There is a place in family discussion of sexual topics outside of sex during pregnancy and Bfing.

I'll come back later and finish, need to gather my thoughts more.
Arduinna is offline  
#82 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:13 PM
 
moonfirefaery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 2,994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the new UA is perfect.
And we haven't ALL been asking for censorship of certain issues.

fambedsingle2.gif Heather, 25, single mom to Corbin, 5, and Orin, 3  uc.jpg  delayedvax.gif  nocirc.gif
Oh how I miss the days of femalesling.GIF  nak.gifcd.gif  
moonfirefaery is offline  
#83 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:24 PM
 
DreamsInDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I would love to see a sitewide, firm stance against advocating CIO, spanking and RIC. Definitely would love to see those issues added to the UA.
I love the kitchen table idea. Hopefully it will help to streamline the conflict resolution process.
I am a little sad that MDC would have a UA that states they can delete a post or membership for any or no reason. I'd really like the "no reason" part to be eliminated.
I can understand why they would want posts to be deleted only under certain circumstances. Have you ever read a thread called "*" and the text is "*" and there are a bunch of frantic replies from concerned mamas and anyone who had not read the thread before would have no idea what was going on. I think if a thread or post needs to be deleted, a mod would take care of it if it really needed to be removed.
If I think of anything more, I'll come back and edit later.
DreamsInDigital is offline  
#84 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:39 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with a lot of PP's.

* I think the "for no good reason" clause is simply a catch all for something the administrators can't put into any other category but do find innapropriate. I think this should be their right. Sometimes things aren't cut and dry but may obviously be wrong.

* I forgot my previous username / password / email address combo, I think it went to an email address I can no longer access. So I for one have a username out there taking up space that should be deleted. I think if someone hasn't posted within a year, it is fair to say they probably aren't coming back, and if they are it won't really hurt them that much to start with a new username. (it is some version of Kelly K btw, if any admin wants to find and delete it! )

* I think making no circ disc across the board would be disrespectful towards some in our community who circ for religious reasons and may want to discuss them on the religious board, for instance.

* I have no doubt that Mothering would never use the "property of" clause in an unethical way, but it does create some issues, especially with boards such as the writing one. If someone wrote a short story there, that went on to be published, would they have to worry about legal issues with Mothering?

* Just wanted to add that MDC is one of the best moderated boards I have seen. With all the things we gripe about, it is still a hundred times better than anywhere else. Mod's are generally very on top of issues and I do appreciatte the consistency.
pumpkinsmama is offline  
#85 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:48 PM
 
Calm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Illusion
Posts: 3,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with the the board-wide advocacy stuff and pretty much everything covered.

Many places IRL have a "removal without reason" policy (esp nightclubs ). It is put in place to cover a company's butt. It means the person can have recourse, but at the end of the day, if you are in the too hard basket, they don't have to explain anything to anybody and point blankly at the rule.

Personally, I'm glad it's out in the open. At least it will be discussed now. I've known many posters get banned and even lose their pm facility so they can't tell their friends. AND they are not allowed to post a goodbye thread or even mention they have been banned or take issue with being banned. They are just banned. So there are lots of people who are banned and the community can't "learn" from the experience or vent about it or heal. We just lose a friend.

I would like to make a suggestion, which pertains to the rules so that's why I'll put it here. It would be great to have an MDC healing forum, a locked one that the public cannot see. Then there is no embarrassment for MDC for being called out and discussed by members. All well functioning corporations have a vent place or session. It helps heal the community. We can't just bottle up how we feel if we feel something unfair has happened. It only creates an undercurrent of unease, sarcasm, innuendo and then a breaking point where one or more members explode and lose their memberships. (which is rife here and has been for a while now) Lack of healing/venting isn't conducive to NFL. We can call out members, but we can't call out those with power. Our only vent outlet is a PM. A one on one thing where things can be hidden. I like full disclosure. It is only fair.

If a rule is in place for deletion without reason, then a forum MUST be created for complaints and discussion between members/friends and/or the powers-that-be (but not nec the powers-that-be, most of the healing would be done between the members).

If this had happened earlier, a whole mass of offshoot message boards may not have been created with the very purpose of venting about MDC and healing from what they feel is unfair treatment. The choice seems to be the internet full of rage at MDC or MDC self-containing it and having a chance to manage it themselves.

Quote:
7. Do not post to excessively debate or criticize the MDC User Agreement, or to otherwise discuss the moderators, administrators, or their actions. Constructive criticism and questions for purposes of clarification are best addressed directly to the moderator or administrator by private message or personal e-mail. If this is not successful, see Recourse (highlight).
The bold should say "only" not "best". There is no other option. Which is one of the many reasons for my suggestion.

Quote:
8. Do not post to discuss the statements or behavior of a member or members on the board, or to criticize another discussion on the boards. Such issues should be directed to the member, moderator or administrator privately and not made a subject of potentially defaming discussion in a thread.
Pretty much the only thing we do is discuss the statements of a member of the board. What does this rule mean exactly? Was that meant to say criticize? Cos we also criticize what other members say. It's part of a normal discussion.

Addition:
The overall expectation of "compliance" is irritating (hence more reason for a forum to vent in). It is put into pm's to members when they have an issue - comply with a mod. Comply with their interpretation of a post. Why this is inherently wrong is because making a judgment call on a word or an entire post is subjective, too subjective to end with "comply" as the result to recourse.

I also caution that the spirituality and religious studies forums are filled with majority religions - heavily Christ religions and fundamental ones with the odd pagan or general spiritual thread. It wasn't always like that, not that biased anyway. I think MDC needs to look at why, because as I've seen it happen, they've come down too hard on those with an opposing opinion and members have left in disgust (or been banned). It's being discussed around and outside MDC that there is some kind of takeover going on, a kind of historically familiar erradication of sorts(hey, thought you'd want to know). Things being called "offensive" that are not - again, subjective removal of people or their words. Seemingly to placate those who have always and still do have the majority and the power and the ease of religious expression.


ADDITION:

In the interests of not starting a new post, Mackenzie, can you clarify what you mean by:
Quote:
I do not want to see issues like spaking, RIC etc....lumped together with issues like racism and heterocentrism. While I think non-violence and mutilation are VERY important, I DO NOT want to see unchangeable, non-choice based VERY sensetive issues devalued, even a little because they CANNOT afford it.
because I think Ard was trying to place value on them, not devalue them.

Hunger is political.  Wherever there is widespread hunger, it is because people with guns are preventing other people from bringing in food.  
Calm is offline  
#86 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 10:56 PM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't have an ISP email address. My husband works from home, on the net, and I have simply "tapped" into his connection with my wireless card. I don't have access to company ISP email addresses. I use a gmail account. If that rule is enforced I will be leaving MDC I guess, because I can't afford to pay for a sepperate internet conection just to access one website.

I think that rule stinks.

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
#87 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 11:01 PM
 
Mackenzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: wandering...
Posts: 2,572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna
Yes I think those need to be spelled out and can we add homophobic, biphobic and transphobic statements to the list. .

I do not want to see issues like spaking, RIC etc....lumped together with issues like racism and heterocentrism. While I think non-violence and mutilation are VERY important, I DO NOT want to see unchangeable, non-choice based VERY sensetive issues devalued, even a little because they CANNOT afford it.

This is a tree on fire with love, but it's still scary since most people think love only looks like one thing instead of the whole world. *
Mackenzie is offline  
#88 of 271 Old 09-01-2006, 11:34 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
looks good to me
but I too am confused about erasure - or deleting things on a post
for instance in the last month someone replied that a word I used to them and the members of their household was just obscene slang- so I used a different wording and erased the original word- in response no mod wrote to me I just didn't want to be offensive-- this is alright isn't it or not?
mwherbs is offline  
#89 of 271 Old 09-02-2006, 12:11 AM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Adding another vote against the ISP specific thing. When I started coming to MDC, I was 16, had just had my first ds and was way too broke to buy a computer to get the Internet. I would stop at the library with him almost every day after work to check email and read on MDC. In a large way, it made me the parent I am and I would hate to see other broke people miss out on that.

Also, while the UA says that we are AP and NFL specific, I think it would help to have a short paragraph outlining what exactly that means.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
14yo ds   11yo dd  9yo ds and 7yo ds and 2yo ds  
phathui5 is online now  
#90 of 271 Old 09-02-2006, 12:35 AM
 
momma2finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Driftless Region of Iowa, on a beautiful little farm.
Posts: 658
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
I love MDC, and am glad it's been around this last year of my life. Much of my parenting ideas have come from MDC's forums.

I'm not close with any one member here or IRL, I'm not a senior member, and I don't post every day. But I AM a member here and would like to say that I think the environment here at MDC has become (for lack of a better word) strained. I don't notice it the single parenting sub-forum as much as I do throughout the rest of the board...but is this really how we want to be? Sometimes I don't even sign on because of some of nasty things I've seen people write back and forth have made me really sad.

Maybe I was just really niave when I joined, but too many of us have said mean things to and about each other here.

All that being said, I hope that I will be able to stay a member, as I don't have an ISP. I also hope that anyone making an effort to be a posting member at a NFL forum would NEVER want to treat anyone disrespectfully, especially a fellow member.

Thanks for hearing me out.
Peace

momma2finn is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off