I am really not happy that the last thread on I posted on on this subforum was closed simply because the administrator did not agree with me. An administrator should not be able to close a thread just for because he/she does not agree. Disagreeing with or ignoring my comments is OK. But closing a thread just because I do not see eye to eye with all of the rules and policies on the forum is really very unprofessional. This is a forum for feedback, so I think it only fitting that we should be allowed to send actual feedback. This means talking discussing things like policies, because that's what feedback about the site actually is. If the administrators are not going to accept this, I suggest they delete the feedback forum completely because this policy renders it entirely pointless. In fact, while you're at it, you should get rid of the entire website, because writingforums is supposed to about critiquing and receiving critiques. In fact, I fully expect this thread to be closed less than a day after I post it. However, I feel it is my duty to present you with this feedback for as long as it will remain undeleted.
You don't think you're whining just a little? I went back and read that thread. Cogito can be a little rough/harsh at times, but what he said was right. It is a feedback thread, so you give ideas about changes. The idea was rejected, so the thread was closed. There really isn't anything else to it. If the admins don't want to change things, then they won't change things. We aren't paying customers or investors, or anything, so they don't really have a responsibility to heed our every whim. They set rules, we abide by them, we all enjoy writing, reviewing, critiquing, discussing, debating.
I understand you aren't happy but after reading the thread I think that it was only closed because the thread had wandered totally off topic. From talking about a historical short story sub forum to whether debates are appropriate within review forums. That seems like a good reason to lock a thread to me...
Agreed. Also, keep in mind that while some people may think adding an area for fiction, allowing links for music, or any of the other suggestions made in this area are a great idea, there are others who have been around for much longer and seen how such ideas have panned out in the past. You may think Cog is just shrugging off the idea to add to the review section of the site, but chances are he's seen such ideas implemented before and knows that they will most likely not work.
Yes, I'm whining; there's no denying it. But I'm not whining because my suggestion was ignored. It peeves me that the thread was closed only because the administrator disagrees with me. If the suggestion had been merely ignored or rejected, I wouldn't really have cared. But it was actually closed, which prevents further discussion on the topic of having a historical fiction subforum. In any case, we're not allowed to debate. That's the whole point of the argument. What's more, we're not even allowed to discuss anything related to the topic at all, even if it is relevant to the discussion. I don't appreciate any type of censorship, no matter how petty it may seem. I want my say in things, even in something as simple as a writing forum, and though I will tolerate it being rejected or ignored, I am not happy with it being silenced. I over-reacted, yes; I am a bit hotheated at times. But I still stand by my opinion that closing a post for that reason is not very respectful.
To DisFanJet, I would like to point out that research is relevant to historical fiction. Most of historical fiction is about research, so having a discussion about the topics and the research behind historical fiction writing is something that ought to be allowed. In any case, I'll bet if I had made a nice compliment about how great this site was that wasn't really related to the topic at all, it would have been tolerated. But since I gave a critique that was not agreed with, it was closed. To hiddennovelist, I would like to reiterate that I am angry that the post was closed, not that my actual suggestion was rejected.
But the post was closed because it had gone off topic...so I don't see what there is to complain about. It just seems childish to start a new thread to complain about your post being closed. Why not just PM Cog about it and explain how you feel instead? Seems like that would get you further.
I have already PM-ed Cog. I received a reply that told me to "drop it." This naturally annoyed me more, so I posted this thread. I grant that it is childish. I still assert that the post was not off-topic because in the case of talking about historical fiction, content and research are relevant topics. I just don't think anyone was interested in hearing what I have to say, which, as I have stated, bothers me.
I have already PM-ed Cog. I received a reply that told me to "drop it." [How about you take his advice. His not a mod for this site for nothing.] This naturally annoyed me more, so I posted this thread. I grant that it is childish. I still assert that the post was not off-topic because in the case of talking about historical fiction, content and research are relevant topics. I just don't think anyone was interested in hearing what I have to say, which, as I have stated, bothers me. (On the idea of the original issue) ----------- If nobody was interested, then it says alot about having this certain sub-forum. Why create such an area which would be used by so few people. It would just mean more work for specific mods, which could be better well spent. Image if everyone wanted that little thing, that was nothing major, nothing minor, just a little bit of freedom. Imagine....we'd have a million little things that do nothing but take up space and time of others. FYI i remember this specific post. I listened. But thought nothing of it.
By nobody being interested, I meant nobody who actually had the power to do anything about it was interested. If you'll notice, I didn't actually start that thread, so clearly someone else was at least somewhat interested in why there is no place for historical fiction on this site. As I have said, it's not so much the fact that my suggestion was rejected that bothers me, it's the fact that the thread was closed just because it was disagreed with. I get it, we can't all be accommodated. But at the very least, shouldn't our opinions be listened to respectfully? Furthermore, I listened to Cogito; I have not talked about whether we should be allowed to debate content in our reviews at all or whether we should have a historical fiction forum. If you'll notice, this thread is limited to whether or not the previous thread should have been closed. Your opinion is clearly not the same as mine, so I will respect that you disagree. I will not close the thread or anything simply because our opinions are not the same.
Having threads being closed, has been an issue for quiet a few people for quiet a few years. it's nothing new. If you hang around, look about, you'll notice it happens often. It's hard for me to say it, and have you understand, but it's not personal. Its just the way this place is run.
I never said it was new. I said it was unfair, and I stand by that comment. Whether or not it is personal, it is not a good way to handle things, especially disagreements. That is my critique. Take it as you wish.
The problem is, sometimes it is personal. There are justified reasons for closing some threads, some justified reasons for the deletion of posts and even wholesale deletion of threads. I have not been here long, but I have had contact with some otherswho have been persecuted, and have had their threads deleted, while others of a similar nature are left to stand. Some of the rules are bad and encourage moderator censorship. Sometimes mods get it into their heads that TSA-like intrusion is not only necessary, but a joy. Some are unable to handle any kind of conflict, and are even worse when they have been shown to be in the wrong. Daniel, the owner of the site, is absent and has been for quite some time. There is no one watching the watchmen.
Wow... "That night a forest grew..." Okay, first off I agree with Cogito's closing of the thread entirely. It started as a suggestion for a subforum, and it was fairly promptly explained why that wasn't practical. It then started to turn into a debate (argument) on what was and wasn't reviewing. It was therefore off topic, and was closed on those grounds. In a more general response, the rules on this forum serve a purpose. There are many other writing-based forums which aren't as regulated (which you're welcome to go to, but that's not my point here) and they have quite a different atmosphere, and generally speaking end up very chaotic. The rules here are the way they are, and are enforced the way they are, to maintain this site as primarily one for discussion and workshopping of fiction, non-fiction and poetry. If threads are closed or deleted, this is not because of "personal" reasons, but because they contravene the rules, or are likely to contravene the rules if not dealt with.
Also, you aren't really even reading what we're saying are you? We keep saying, its not because you disagreed (don't consider yourself so important, it'll take you a long way) it's because the thread went off topic (the guys with 2000, 4000, 11000 post agree, we been here long enough to see what is and isn't on topic) and the original idea had already been rejected. At that point, it was a sort of mercy kill. The whole point of the thread is to convince the admins and mods, and they weren't convinced. Case closed. And with that, I follow Cogito's lead and drop out of this children's squabble.
My concern here is that this is a glorious place for the old timers, but us new users are easily put off by the attitudes and aparrent inconsistencies. I am on other forums, and you have not seen disorganised until you have been on /b/ but even then they have mostly sensible moderation. Here, it is more like living in a facist state with thought police and a cleansing department. Just watch out for the Soylent Green.
The apparent "inconstancies" are easily alleviated by the slight investment of time needed to review and understand the forum rules. The rules are the rules. There has been no bait and switch.
A moderator defending the actions of another moderator is hardly surprising. After all, there is no one making sure the Moderators are fair and balanced. We only have their word that they are. We have no way to know if their actions are fair, and we have no recourse when we disagree. Yes I have read the site rules as posted https://www.writingforums.org/showthread.php?p=101625#post101625 here, and it is this line, which reads "We reserve the right to ban or terminate any user at any time for any reason." that is ripe for abuse. You don't like my avatar? Banned. You don't like how I use a comma? Banned. This removes any recourse or room for complaints. Do you disagree? I did not note anything regarding deletion of posts or threads. Does this mean then that this is in breach of the rules, or is there another set of rules somewhere else? Edit: And here we go, under another link, why is there no central, agreeing rulebook? https://www.writingforums.org/misc.php?do=showrules Again, a line which reads "The owners of Writing Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason." Again, no recourse or grievance procedure.
Sasha, check it out. You are under no obligation to stay. The internet is wide and open to free travel. Thanks, BTW, for making me say something as cold and unfeeling as that. I'm the softie of the mod squad, ask anyone. Wrey
What is better, leaving, or staying around, hoping and trying to make it better? If everyone who was displeased left, then this site would never improve. Instead, look at the flaws and remedy them, and not with gloss paint or behavior modification of the masses. The enforcement of rules and the actions of the few powerful people are what is in question. Do you quell the riot like China or Burma with tanks or do you enact meaningful change.
No, Sasha. What is best is to have a level of expectation that is appropriate to the dynamic. You have made a mountain of a mole hill and I think it would be of value to view the vast number of members who are happily interacting with one another in the mode that the forum espouses. I was a member long before I became a mod, and I had my actions checked once or twice as well. Even as a mod, my actions are subject to the check of the other mods. That is why there is more than one.
Sigh..... Sasha, read your terms and conditions for everything you're signed up for or own. They all reserve that same right. Facebook and myspace can delete your pages at any time, sony can delete everything on your psp/ps3 during updates, other forums reserve the same rights.
And just because the forum rules state that they can ban a member for any reason doesn't mean they abuse that power, either. Like Wrey said, this whole thread is making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are always going to be people who complain about the way they were treated, but remember that there are two sides to every story. A member may say "oh, this happened to me, the mods did this and this" but the mods may have seen quite another thing going on...to only listen to one side of the story and use that to throw a hissy fit about something that you weren't involved in seems a little bit silly.
But occasionally because we should do a thing means that... we should. And in this case, the conversation has gone on long enough. CLOSED
