Limit-pushing

[Bob Hartig]

We can argue and deplore and make our points till the cows come home, or at least find cheap lodging, and in the process miss a very important point, namely, Stormtrack is Tim's house, and he sets the rules. Someone has to, and it's always a hell of a lot easier to whine about them than it is to maintain them.

How about someone saying something good about this forum for a change, such as how great it is that it exists in the first place--a site devoted to severe weather, where people who love storms can connect, and learn, and grow. Wasn't that David Hoadley's original vision, which got this whole thing started decades ago? For everyone here who has a vision for what this forum ought to be, recognize that Tim has a vision for it, too, and that's what sets the tone. I suspect that it's truer to Hoadley's legacy than most of ours, and my hat is off to Tim and the mods for doing their best to carry it off when the thanks are few and the criticisms are many.

 

[Steve Miller]

Effective today, there are three topics that are categorically prohibited on Stormtrack: sex, religion, and politics. This is something we should have done from the very start since they're never discussed in polite company and we are very much a professional, quality-oriented forum.

We've fielded a pretty good pile of complaints about the "boobies" thread. We are not trying to make this a virtuous, Puritan sanctuary, but we do try to set a higher threshold of quality on this forum and things like "blow jobs" and indirect references to sexual acts really do not belong here and have no bearing on our primary reason for existing: meteorological discussion. Those threads are too controversial for mixed company and would be better left for Facebook and other social networking forums.

Tim

You said "blow jobs" and "sexual acts" in your post about all this BS. What do you want to bet that no one will report your post...
Why don't you just close the Bar and Grill and make this a weather-only forum then? It makes no sense to have an area for general discussion where general discussion is hardly possible. I'm not saying we can't have general discussion without talking about sex, religion & politics but no matter what the subject, people will complain. Hell, I'll bet there are 5 or more reports about the "ban game" just because it was a popular thread and annoyed some.
At what point do you stop regulating and start accommodating?

Do you guys plan to address any of the other topics discussed in this thread or just users making reference to blow jobs?

 

[Steve Miller]

We can argue and deplore and make our points till the cows come home, or at least find cheap lodging, and in the process miss a very important point, namely, Stormtrack is Tim's house, and he sets the rules. Someone has to, and it's always a hell of a lot easier to whine about them than it is to maintain them.

I disagree. Without the masses, this site is nothing. It's a forum. It is wholly made up of us users as contributors. We create the content and we keep it running. Therefore, a dictation is hardly welcomed by all.
The whole issue, affecting 1,851 active members of this forum is due to a handful of people who can't muster up the resistance to look in threads that are clearly not for them.
I will make my example again that I did in a now "missing" thread.
If I am flipping through my guide on the TV and see a program I think I would absolutely hate, I don't immediately start watching said program and then call the cable company to complain that I was subjected to it.

For a forum that restricts politics and religion, it sure is influenced by a lot of politics and religion...

 

[Dan Robinson]

Are you all kidding me? We're talking about two threads here that were farther over the top than anything that's been posted here for years! I can't believe how much drama that complaining about two of the more 'out there' threads in the history of this forum caused.

Everyone acts like all posts in the B&G section are threatened. Take a quick read of all the topics in there. Is this really a huge problem to have one or two threads a year get called out and deleted?

 

[Steve Miller]

Are you all kidding me? We're talking about two threads here that were farther over the top than anything that's been posted here for years! I can't believe how much drama that complaining about two of the more 'out there' threads in the history of this forum caused.

Everyone acts like all posts in the B&G section are threatened. Take a quick read of all the topics in there. Is this really a huge problem to have one or two threads a year get called out and deleted?

That's not the big deal, at least to me. the big deal to me is new rules and regs for the entire membership based on the complaints of a fraction of this group.
Dan, I agree with the vulgar threads being removed. The Boobies thread is funny. Once James K got PO'd, that's when the other threads started and that was his personal vendetta in order to mess with the mods. Those were removed and the world should have once again been right. But no, the "fraction" pushed for more rules, more regulations.
I guess I'm just sick of every aspect of everything we do being monitored to appease those who can't resist clicking on a link.
Time to be strong and resist the temptation...

 

[cdcollura]

Good day all,

I have taken a back-seat from storm track and will just watch.

Duke it out, figure it out, agree / dis-agree ... I'll wait until 2010 and when the smoke clears and we all will be chasing again.

 

[James Langford]

That's not the big deal, at least to me. the big deal to me is new rules and regs for the entire membership based on the complaints of a fraction of this group.
Dan, I agree with the vulgar threads being removed. The Boobies thread is funny. Once James K got PO'd, that's when the other threads started and that was his personal vendetta in order to mess with the mods. Those were removed and the world should have once again been right. But no, the "fraction" pushed for more rules, more regulations.
I guess I'm just sick of every aspect of everything we do being monitored to appease those who can't resist clicking on a link.
Time to be strong and resist the temptation...

My comments here were also related specifically to the 2 threads that were far over the top of anything else I've seen here in the last few years. Any of the pushing that I think Dan and I did were directly in response to those 2 threads, which were still here when this thread started.

 

[Robert Dewey]

I'm not offended either way... if the thread remained, good, people were enjoying it. If that type of discussion is banned, oh well, that's what I have facebook for

 

[Robert Dewey]

I guess I'm just sick of every aspect of everything we do being monitored to appease those who can't resist clicking on a link. Time to be strong and resist the temptation...

I agree, how hard is it to resist the temptation to click through? My feeling is that there is a very, very small minority of people who can't do that (and thus get offended because they don't have the personal power to look away). My guess? Probably 4-5 people, some / most of which you can probably guess.

 

[Chris Allington]

Do you guys plan to address any of the other topics discussed in this thread or just users making reference to blow jobs?

So much other stuff has been mentioned here... I also find it kinda of sad that it boils down to one thread were talking about now.

 

[Chad Berryhill]

My comments here were also related specifically to the 2 threads that were far over the top of anything else I've seen here in the last few years. Any of the pushing that I think Dan and I did were directly in response to those 2 threads, which were still here when this thread started.

If you referring to my post, why didn't you contact me in a pm ? I would of been more than happy to discuss my post and probably removed them, since you all took that much offense to them.

You know, I go into B & G to laugh and cut up with everyone else. A quick pm probably would have taken care of the problem; instead we have a huge drawn out drama thread, and new rules being posted.

Let's try communicating a little, before anybody runs straight to a mod.

 

[Bob Hartig]

Good day all,

I have taken a back-seat from storm track and will just watch.

Duke it out, figure it out, agree / dis-agree ... I'll wait until 2010 and when the smoke clears and we all will be chasing again.

I'm with you on that. I realize that at this point, I'm just feeding into a mess in which everyone is out to win and everyone in some way loses. To continue doing so just makes me part of the problem. See y'all elsewhere in a more positive context.

 

[Jason Bolt]

Are you all kidding me? We're talking about two threads here that were farther over the top than anything that's been posted here for years! I can't believe how much drama that complaining about two of the more 'out there' threads in the history of this forum caused.

Everyone acts like all posts in the B&G section are threatened. Take a quick read of all the topics in there. Is this really a huge problem to have one or two threads a year get called out and deleted?

IF YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING DON'T READ IT!!!

WHAT A HARD CONCEPT!!!

 

[David Wolfson]

There's a level of innuendo that spices up "polite conversation" all the time. That's not discussing sex, IMO, and it's pretty common even on the public airwaves. Examples are the original "Boobies" post and various posts portraying this or that meteorological chart resembling some body part or other.

Similarly, statements of personal political or religious beliefs providing some context for what someone says are common and quite useful in "polite conversation." Now, admittedly, I'm on the liberal side and consider myself pretty strongly pro-civil liberties. ...............................

There are posts where someone says they're a christian, or jew, or wiccan or whatever; and, therefore .... Statements like those also provide context in "polite conversation".

What I think we are being asked to avoid are discussions centered around the innuendo or debating statements of personal belief and ethic. This is a fact- and evidence-based forum.

 

[James Langford]

If you referring to my post, why didn't you contact me in a pm ? I would of been more than happy to discuss my post and probably removed them, since you all took that much offense to them.

You know, I go into B & G to laugh and cut up with everyone else. A quick pm probably would have taken care of the problem; instead we have a huge drawn out drama thread, and new rules being posted.

Let's try communicating a little, before anybody runs straight to a mod.

Hi Chad,

No, it wasn't directed at you or really any person it all. Just the overall impression of those 2 threads being out of control and over the top.

Anyway, like Bob said, it's time to bow out of this discussion. Maybe back to weather? Some good chances of storms headed to North Texas today, so I need to get ready.