Civility open forum

[Rev. Powell]

Given the large amount of flaming lately and a few defections from our little community, I thought it might be time for an open discussion on the question of civility and treating everyone with respect.

For a reminder, here's the relevant section of the Forum Rules:

Rule #1:  Common Courtesy
Please be polite when posting.  Discussing movies is naturally going to lead to conversations with other people who do not agree with your opinion of a film.  One of the great things about that is that neither opinion is wrong, the film simply hit the right chord for one of you and failed to entertain the other.  You do not have to agree with everyone and a good debate is definitely an asset to the community. Flame wars are useless, so rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated.

Notice it's Rule #1, the most important rule of all! (It also quaintly assumes people would be arguing over bad movies, which is never the case, but let's move on).

"Rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated" is a wonderful sentiment, but kind of hard to put into practice.

I personally do not want to be a disciplinarian, for many reasons. One, I'm not sure I have any special authority just by virtue of being the only mod who checks in anymore.

Two, I get the feeling that many people prefer a "hands-off" approach to moderation that maximizes freedom of speech. I have seen forums with lots of crazy rules to abide by, where half the threads get locked. I wouldn't want this place to ever come to that.

And three, it introduces an element of politics. I don't want people petitioning me to ban certain members they don't like, or for people to take sides and form factions.

I think we should all have a culture of civility, politeness, and friendship here. Any suggestions for encouraging that culture, and for what to do when someone breaks the rules. I hope there will be some kind of consensus on what kind of community we all want.

I am thinking maybe I will start locking more threads when they get flame-y, and maybe people would get the picture. It's certainly a less drastic option than starting to ban people. Thoughts?

[Allhallowsday]

I think it is only Andrew's place to decide a member should be "banned". 

I would be hesitant to lock threads if I had such ability.   I believe anyone petitioning a moderator regarding "banning" a member or "locking" a thread may be out of line.  Of course, a member who locks there own thread or requests such seems reasonable. 

Having experienced jaw-dropping insults at this forum, I consider that simply part of the territory, like creative writing.  However, many of the worst insults are veiled behind karma, and may not be readily apparent. 

[RCMerchant]

I agree with Hallows. Locking threads is not the answer.
Of course I have no answer- but locking threads ain't it.

[ER]

Greg, you are probably the smartest, wittiest person in the history of BMDO, and I mean that, and part of me thinks it's cute that years after the site's owner jumped ship on this Mary Celeste of anarachy, you're still playing appointed hall monitor like it's 2010. Good grief, the last chopper has left Saigon, didn't you get the memo?

Civility, yes, that's due when it's due, which is not always in the case of a monster, but talk of locking threads, etc. like this is Catholic school? Please.  You weren't even here for most of a year and this captainless barge chugged along just fine. Be a member, not a nanny.  I'd say your term as sheriff ended a long time ago.

'Sides, I hear Andrew's coming back....soon.

[RCMerchant]

Greg, you are probably the smartest, wittiest person in the history of BMDO, and I mean that, and part of me thinks it's cute that years after the site's owner jumped ship on this Mary Celeste of anarachy, you're still playing appointed hall monitor like it's 2010. Good grief, the last chopper has left Saigon, didn't you get the memo?

Civility, yes, that's due when it's due, which is not always in the case of a monster, but talk of locking threads, etc. like this is Catholic school? Please.  You weren't even here for most of a year and this captainless barge chugged along just fine. Be a member, not a nanny.  I'd say your term as sheriff ended a long time ago.

'Sides, I hear Andrew's coming back....soon.

ER- I call bulls**t.
The REV has fixed this forum when it was down, and I think he's the ONLY good choice since Andrew's departure.
And I don't know where you heard the nonsense that Andrew is coming back.
The only reason you don't like him being mod is you may be the first banned- because you constantly attack Sven.
I don't agree with all Sven's posts either- but throwing rocks doesn't fix anything.
Horses**t.

[Rev. Powell]

Greg, you are probably the smartest, wittiest person in the history of BMDO, and I mean that, and part of me thinks it's cute that years after the site's owner jumped ship on this Mary Celeste of anarachy, you're still playing appointed hall monitor like it's 2010. Good grief, the last chopper has left Saigon, didn't you get the memo?

Civility, yes, that's due when it's due, which is not always in the case of a monster, but talk of locking threads, etc. like this is Catholic school? Please.  You weren't even here for most of a year and this captainless barge chugged along just fine. Be a member, not a nanny.  I'd say your term as sheriff ended a long time ago.

'Sides, I hear Andrew's coming back....soon.

ER- I call bulls**t.
The REV has fixed this forum when it was down, and I think he's the ONLY good choice since Andrew's departure.
And I don't know where you heard the nonsense that Andrew is coming back.
The only reason you don't like him being mod is you may be the first banned- because you constantly attack Sven.
I don't agree with all Sven's posts either- but throwing rocks doesn't fix anything.
Horses**t.

Thanks RC, but I didn't fix anything, and in fact I can't.

And no, I wasn't thinking of banning anyone---and the only types of bans I would ever consider are short term ones, like 24 hours to a week. No one here right now deserves a permanent ban. And locking a few threads would be less drastic.

So, so far every seems to favor the hands-off approach. Fine with me. Just try to remember the point is to have fun!

[RCMerchant]

Rev never said he was gonna BAN anyone. Just lock threads when a flame war starts.
Because this is BAD MOVIES- we talk about movies remember?
Not a blog about politics or religion.
Sven posts about movies. When's the last time you did?
The real ONLY thing I have with Sven is his refusal to type a paragraph I can actually read without a Captain Video decoder ring.
ER- I'm actually glad your back. Talk more about BAD movies, fer Satan's sake!

[Allhallowsday]

...
Sven posts about movies. When's the last time you did?
...

Yesterday!   

http://youtu.be/Y3Uvlm7N-As

http://youtu.be/U8lX9UVUTgk 

[Olivia Bauer]

Yeah, toxicity gets kinda out of hand here.

I really like this place but I get bummed out when threads suddenly devolve into a massive p**sing contest.

I don't think anyone deserves to be permanently banned, but I think temporary bans will work fine for just getting the message across.
Nothing over a week, though. I'd PREFER if nobody got banned at all though and everyone just got along.

[RCMerchant]

...
Sven posts about movies. When's the last time you did?
...

Yesterday!   

http://youtu.be/Y3Uvlm7N-As

http://youtu.be/U8lX9UVUTgk 

I know you do! Your a Monster Kid!

[Gabriel Knight]

As long I can still insult garbage movies with perfect score in IMDb, all will be fine.

[Trevor]

Given the large amount of flaming lately and a few defections from our little community, I thought it might be time for an open discussion on the question of civility and treating everyone with respect.

For a reminder, here's the relevant section of the Forum Rules:

Rule #1:  Common Courtesy
Please be polite when posting.  Discussing movies is naturally going to lead to conversations with other people who do not agree with your opinion of a film.  One of the great things about that is that neither opinion is wrong, the film simply hit the right chord for one of you and failed to entertain the other.  You do not have to agree with everyone and a good debate is definitely an asset to the community. Flame wars are useless, so rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated.

Notice it's Rule #1, the most important rule of all! (It also quaintly assumes people would be arguing over bad movies, which is never the case, but let's move on).

"Rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated" is a wonderful sentiment, but kind of hard to put into practice.

I personally do not want to be a disciplinarian, for many reasons. One, I'm not sure I have any special authority just by virtue of being the only mod who checks in anymore.

Two, I get the feeling that many people prefer a "hands-off" approach to moderation that maximizes freedom of speech. I have seen forums with lots of crazy rules to abide by, where half the threads get locked. I wouldn't want this place to ever come to that.

And three, it introduces an element of politics. I don't want people petitioning me to ban certain members they don't like, or for people to take sides and form factions.

I think we should all have a culture of civility, politeness, and friendship here. Any suggestions for encouraging that culture, and for what to do when someone breaks the rules. I hope there will be some kind of consensus on what kind of community we all want.

I am thinking maybe I will start locking more threads when they get flame-y, and maybe people would get the picture. It's certainly a less drastic option than starting to ban people. Thoughts?

I'm one of the old members here and I feel that there are certain members who don't exercise restraint when they post: we should argue about the technical merits of films like Manos and about the pro-South African stance of films like Lethal Weapon 2, not politics or anything like that. At times, this site - my home - comes off like the Soapbox on the IMDB message boards and that makes me go 

I'm all for civility and courtesy:if you feel the need to go after someone, there is the PM for that.