(no subject)
Dec. 10th, 2005 09:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Well, the moderator of
davis_square just put the community on approved-posts-only lockdown after a few people offered criticism of her management style. She also deleted several people's comments, and is presently declaring to be close to deleting the community altogether. I consider this behavior a breach of the social contract inherent in any moderated message board's user/admin relationship, and reason enough to just drop the joint and move on elsewhere.
However, it is a useful and friendly LJ-community -- much (more reliable / less idiotic) than, say,
b0st0n -- and I wouldn't want to lose it, nor see it splinter off into wee fragments. Any suggestions from the crossover portion of my f-list on how to follow up on this?
Update:
daerr just pointed out that
davissquare now seems to exist, created by
komos, whom I don't know. I don't know if this person took part in the meta-discussion on the first community since that all got blown away... any insight?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
However, it is a useful and friendly LJ-community -- much (more reliable / less idiotic) than, say,
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
Update:
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 02:17 am (UTC)If we create a new Davis Square community, with competent and active maintainers, but not moderated, it'll automatically get more traffic, and the old one will eventually starve from lack of postings. I know
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 02:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 03:19 am (UTC)For what it's worth, I'm more than happy to hand over the reins to someone who won't turn into a censor every time someone disagrees. It's supposed to be a community, after all.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 09:19 am (UTC)But yay! Glad there's a new one with a good name. I suggest advertising it (behind a cut of course) on d_s once posting is open again. And spread the word until then. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 02:26 am (UTC)Never a good situation. Sorry I don't have any *useful* suggestions. I suppose a note to lj_abuse might be worth a shot...that's a pretty clear case of moderator abuse / power going to one's head.
useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 02:52 am (UTC)I'd say, give it a day or two (or three), see if things calm down. It would, indeed, suck if suddenly there were multiple relevant communities - there are something like 4 Denver communities, only one of which is high traffic, so the choice is either: see the same post 4 times, or chance missing something someone has only posted to one place. Bleah.
If she doesn't want to deal with the occasional fights with the non-moderators, she ought to just hand it over.
She nuked _all_ the comments, dude; I can't see any of them now.
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 02:57 am (UTC)Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 03:09 am (UTC)Bah - correction: obvious rules, except for today's sudden "Posting by approval only, and comments on the preceding post are turned off."
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 03:16 am (UTC)Political stumping has also been made exempt by moderator fiat, but whether this applies to stumping of a slightly more conservative nature remains to be seen.
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 03:25 am (UTC)Yes, I absolutely agree with you that she has been unpredictable and capricious in applying her self-defined rules. Any thoughts on the philosophy for your new community?
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 03:38 am (UTC)I'm not a big fan of SPAM, though, so I do understand the value of such a rule. I believe that if such a rule is put in place, it should apply across the board. Political stumping and non-profit fundraising should be subject to the same strictures as roommate ads.
Still, I would like to see a community develop, and part of that development involved determining how we'll interact. Maybe it'll just be a less capricious environment than
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 04:06 am (UTC)This should avoid the situation where, say, the posting for a Red Cross fundraiser for New Orleans gets deleted, while the Somerville Illuminations tour posting stays up. Both are welcome, ditto roommate posts or offers of spare concert tickets, as long as they're under 20 lines. But a 640x480 image promoting anything gets nuked from orbit.
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 04:17 am (UTC)Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 04:56 am (UTC)Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 05:41 am (UTC)hey, that was me.
I suspect I made the cut (heh) because the entire post was very short. A lot of the posts that get cut will include a enormous_pointless_poster.gif, or people who include copious details are already posted elsewhere. Referring to the URL rather than posting the full details was likely understood to be like unto an LJ cut.
something to consider while moderating your community. (o:
Re: useless suggestion
Date: 2005-12-11 10:31 am (UTC)I rather like
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 02:56 am (UTC)I liked <lj user=davis_square>...
Date: 2005-12-11 03:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 10:31 am (UTC)Yesterday I did register
I'll also offer work as a maintainer!
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 10:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 03:17 pm (UTC)interesting
Date: 2005-12-11 04:30 pm (UTC)