Sigh.... I thought that if I stayed out of here for most of the day, perhaps things would begin to cool down. But apparently not. I read up to the point where I had someone get downright rude to me personally, and gave them a vacation from this site because of it.
But let me go back some and address some issues brought up.
CMLReptiles said:
Um, Rich....
Gintha_CS: Just bashing your head in with a 2 X 4 =P
That's not a problem? Taking action against that is "playing games with people"?
I'm pretty sure 9 out of 10 people take death threats a lot more seriously than a "GTFO" from a chat room. But no, you're right...Joe saying "dis is da cron sankie chat room gtfo" was FAR worse than somebody telling Hana they were gonna bash her head in with a 2 x 4
Sorry, but I saw it differently. See that character string at the end of that comment? ie "=P". That is a standard internet smilie signifying someone sticking their tongue out, like this...
It is VERY commonly used to make something said seem less abusive, much like would be done in person to person discussions where facial expressions would be used instead. THAT is how I took that. It was NOT a threat at all from how I read it, and I see that sort of thing ALL of the time. Perhaps not everyone recognized it for what it signified, but it was pretty obvious to me then, as it is now.
~slither~ said:
I've only read little snippets of this thread here and there, and tbvh that was enough. Can't EVERYONE just say, 'I think this has gone on long enough, lets act like adults and drop it'.
I think the answer is simple, if you want to use chat, use it, if not then don't. Let Rich decide if it's being used enough and if not let him hand it over to whatever this other site is.
Seems simple enough to me, and I'm sure there's people reading this and thinking, 'what the hells it got to do with him?', well in short, nothing. I just thought I would point out the obvious.
I didn't think such a helpfull, welcoming, and mostly close-knit community would or could let a thing like this disrupt the site, and in some cases be a tar on some people's reputations. Just my 02.
:shrugs: Me neither. I thought my objective would have been pretty plain. I don't want to see that sort of conflict. Of course, my desire seems to have created one of it's own, but still, the POINT of this thread definitely needed to be stated.
hana said:
Oh sorry, my mistake..
I had no clue that I was a petty person, thanks for the insight!
There you go putting words into my mouth again. It was the reporting of that incident that appeared petty to me. Now just so THIS doesn't get misunderstood as well, I am using the term "petty" defined as thus:
of little or no importance or consequence: petty grievances.
I have seen MUCH worse MANY times and it really didn't mean anything but some people having an internet argument. Two days later and it is forgotten by everyone. I see absolutely no reason for me to get into the middle of every one of those thrown at me.
hana said:
And no, there was no troll, but I never said she was. Perhaps a little thought before you write would come in handy.
When your actions directly effect someone else then yes, you do need to be acountable for your actions.
Ah yes. I see. Let's hold that thought.
hana said:
I can handle chat banter with the best of them, but if that's your argument, then this entire thread is moot, because you have just negated your original point.
I just happen to disagree. My original point is still very much valid and not in the least negated. YOUR reported chat log and the one copied here recently are nowhere near even in the same league.
hana said:
But, I'm done with this thread you rectum faced pygme.
Now let's bring that thought forward that we put on hold. Surely you believe you should be held accountable for your own actions, don't you? Because I certainly do. Sorry, but I don't believe that is warranted, and I really can't see why I should allow people using this site to direct such comments at me. Nothing personal, but I have to maintain a precedent about such things. You are welcome to come back in seven days (I am assuming you will find a way to get around this 7 day ban.) and hopefully you will be less inclined to throw around such derogatory name calling in the future.
hana said:
Don't take it too personal, it's just a bit of banter after all..
No problem. Don't take the temporary ban personal. Just my way of bantering back at you..
Drizzt80 said:
Unfortunately, it's NOT about chat. I originally (mistakenly) thought it was about chat too. Some would have you believe it's not a vindictive attitude towards Rich, but then turn around and say things elsewhere that are different (Talk about two faced and 'holier than thou' PS. If the shoe fits, wear it.).
Here are what I am beginning to perceive as the issues:
1. Rich asked EVERYONE to behave in chat. Some took exception to that.
2. Some feel Rich is cowtowing to the "trolls" while ignoring the CS.com members. Which is still really a chat issue.
3. Some are angry that Rich added increased banner ads to the site and therefore are boycotting the site. Sorry, but I don't boycott a good restuarant because I have to look at advertisements when I pee.
3b. Some feel their $25 contribution should more than cover the revenue from banner ads to cover server maintenance etc.
4. Some feel Rich should be listening to only them because they have a shiny medallion.
5. Some are comparing the CS.com environment to KS.com . . . Show me one instance where Rich has censored anyone's opinion on this site (obviously, words that aren't volatile or offensive).
Petty, childish behavior on both sides of the issue. My initial involvement in this thread was solely defending Rich's assertion that the chat behavior displayed was inappropriate and indefensible. I was unaware these other petty issues had created such a horrendous environment to participate in. It's been stated numerous times to the affect that it's not about 'getting back at Rich', but the words and actions displayed would indicate otherwise.
Too bad, now there's three cornsnake communities developing. With the track record, there will one day be four because someone will become offended and abused at the 'new' place and create their own new place. So be it I guess. The community survived the KS.com to CS.com switch . . . heck, Don and Kathy participate readily at both sites. Unfortunately will they now have to participate in 3 to stay on top of things?! :shrugs:
D80
Interesting. I think I have covered the issues concerning my stance about what took place in the chat room. It appears there are more issues being brought up that need addressing...
2. Some feel Rich is cowtowing to the "trolls" while ignoring the CS.com members. Which is still really a chat issue.
Obviously no one has asked all the FC members (referred to as "trolls" here) who I banned because of their behavior. And no one has talked to the moderator in the chat from FC who I removed from his duties after an incident I felt was inappropriate. The feeling I get is that I am expected to automatically side with CS.com members, regardless of their own behavior. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way.
3. Some are angry that Rich added increased banner ads to the site and therefore are boycotting the site.
Really? Boycotting this site because of the Google ads? Well gee, someone directed me to a site that had a little hate fest going on about me and this site, and what did I find also on the site. Yep, GOOGLE ads! But too bad that thread is gone. Interesting reading.....
OK, I'm done laughing now, so let me explain some things. These Google ads you see are going to be pretty much on nearly every webpage you go to. Most people pretty much ignore them, and to be perfectly honest, so did I. I had them set up on many of my own websites, and pretty much didn't pay much attention to them. The way they work is by mining the webpage they appear on and attempt to bring forth paid advertisements that will be pertinent to the subject matter on the webpage. The theory here is that if such items are being displayed on a webpage, there is likely an audience interested in possible products and services at least loosely related to that subject matter. Yeah, sometimes it doesn't work so well. Now the mechanics of this all is that advertisers pay to have those ads in the queue waiting to be displayed somewhere. They pay by the click on that ad and bid on the frequency they will show up. Google gets paid directly by them based on the number of clicks and the bidded amount in force when the click took place. The website owners where those ads appear get a piece of this pie. I never have figured out exactly how the percentage is determined, but I assume it is a small percentage of what the advertiser has to pay. Of course, Google, gets the lion's share of that money. The webpage owner gets some money for allowing the advertising to appear. And the advertiser hopefully has his/her ads displayed on a webpage that is kind of a targeted market.
Following me? Well yes, I did get a check from Google every now and again. Never was really very much, and came at such widely scattered intervals that I just figured it was a nice bonus for really very little effort on my part. But not enough to get worked up over. My programmer contacted me a year or two ago and asked me about those Google ads, and I just laughed and said I didn't think much about them, simply because of the reasons mentioned above. He wrote back laughing his ass off, because MOST other webmasters live and breath the Google ads and consider that their most lucrative method of earning money from their websites. And that was the end of it, for then.
Then, I guess it was a month to two months ago, my programmer contacted me again asking about the Google ads and wanted to know if I would like him to work on them and hopefully produce substantially more money off of them. Heck, at that time, I was still in my busy season, so I just gave him the OK without really thinking about it much. Heck, what did I have to lose?
Well, I wasn't real keen on having those Google ads at the top of the pages, but heck, I DID tell him to go ahead and work his magic. What the heck, I could always have him remove it later on if it didn't work very well.
"Work very well..." Hah! He sends me an email a couple of weeks later asking me if I had checked the stats on the Google page. Nope, didn't even think about it. So I did..... Well, you could have knocked me over with a feather! Whatever he had done was now earning me not just twice what it was before, but FIVE (5) times that amount each day! Now, I may be stupid about some things, but when I see results like that, do you really think I should tell him, "No, roll it all back. I don't like it."? Well, sorry, but I just can't bring myself to shoot and butcher such a cash cow.
Which brings us to this item:
3b. Some feel their $25 contribution should more than cover the revenue from banner ads to cover server maintenance etc.
Sorry, but no. The contributions from this site don't even hold a candle to what those Google ads are bringing in. Even if they were even, I don't think many people would give up a respectable source of income without a dramatic overpowering reason. And quite frankly, a few people getting perturbed enough about the ads to boycott this site, just is not "overpowering to me". I am not sure what their issues are over them, but if they favor a more socialist form of civilization, I wish them well.
Let me be frank here. I'm 56 years old. My wife is, well, just slightly younger than myself.
Few of you are even close to this age, but let me tell you, the physical demands of my SerpenCo business are getting to be more than my wife and I can handle. Even with hired help, which is a chore in itself, I can see the writing on the wall that WE will not have that income forever. A single extended stint in the hospital for either one of us would put SerpenCo out of business. It would be EXTREMELY stupid of my to not plan ahead to try to have an alternate means of putting food on the table if something like that happens. Now just so happens that I have been fortunate enough to set up some websites that are bringing in a modest income. It's nothing we could make a living off, by any stretch of the imagination, but if it will allow me to cut back SerpenCo enough that it is easier on us to maintain, and the website income can make up a small portion of the difference, well, I just can't imagine anyone thinking it would be stupid to not at least TRY to do that. So that is what I am doing.
If people want to get themselves all worked up into a lather over some Google ads on this site, well, if the choice is for me to substantially cut back the income producing potential of what I am trying to do in order to soothe their bruised eyes, or to tell them they can either suck it up and try to live with it, or move on to some other site which will quite likely do the same thing in short order, guess which one I
HAVE to choose?
4. Some feel Rich should be listening to only them because they have a shiny medallion.
Yeah, right. I'm sure THAT would go over well with the non-contributors.
Seriously, I do really appreciate all the contributors here, but I just cannot give preferential treatment based on those contributions. If you will all remember, I set up the paid contributions just on a lark one day, thinking what the heck, a guy created some medallions for paid memberships over on FaunaClassifieds, and on a whim after he was finished, I asked him to make up one for CornSnakes.com. Honestly, I didn't think very many would pay for it, and actually,when you consider there are over 8,000 registered members here (over 1,000 have never completed the registration process), I guess I was right. A fair number, no doubt, but not overwhelmingly so. Right at the moment, there are 165 contributors and personal forum owners. So what's that, something like two (2) percent of the members are contributors here? Seriously folks, I hope no one (even myself) thinks I am making a lot of money here. And yeah, 64 members have decided to not renew. What will those figures be like next year? :shrugs: Certainly not enough to make ends meet if things go wrong for me healthwise....
Mary-Beth said:
I have to ask, who has said that this is a horrendous environment? Some have said that they feel ignored and uncomfortable here, if you don't then good for you. Would you expect someone to hang around here when they feel that way, or go to a place where they're comfortable?
Who is trying to get back at Rich? People who don't want to post on Rich's sites are now getting back at him if they post anywhere else? :shrugs:
Ignored? In what way? Because someone may claim something that I disagree with and therefore I am not accepting their point of view?
Uncomfortable? Well yeah, certainly some might feel that way in the chat, but that is probably balanced out by the others who seem to enjoy what I saw going on in there. So when I requested that it stop, just who did that make feel uncomfortable?
People come and go on sites all the time. That's just the way it is. Heck, I have registered on many different sites for many different topic material. Some I only visit once in a blue moon. Others I visit daily. That's just the way it is. Doesn't bother me in the least if it happens here.
carol said:
Sucked in to clarify....
Well for the record, the only thing I agree with is # 2. Although I can understand Rich's apprehension to listen to some chat users/cornsnake members, I just feel that apprehension has spread to all of us like a big blanket. That may not be true, but it's definitely how I feel I'm being treated. That is what is so disappointing to me. Because of a small group of people acting immature, now there is no possibility of believing there are any members here that have integrity.
Sounds like a lot of reading between the lines, filling in things that really aren't there. Try using quotes from me in context, please. A person could get the impression that you are purposely trying to enflame this issue....
carol said:
When you hint that there is no one on this site capable of being a good mod beside yourself, people will get the idea that you think you are superior. I don't get that idea. I think a few people's actions has you scared to death of trusting people, which on one side sounds reasonable. On the other side I think there are many, many members out there that have proven over years that they are trust worthy and I hate to see them and their work be treated with complete disregard. So it's not about chat, it's about the implications that we are ALL bound to behave in the same way as those who participated in that transcript.
Again, you are making up your own interpretation of my words, based on nothing more than speculation.
But let me run a scenario by you, Carol. Suppose that YOU were the moderator in the chat, and that chat log snippet had been going on while you were "on duty". What would you have done? Obviously some CS members had gone way beyond what most people would consider civil. Matter of fact, some people would say that some of them were downright rude. So you, as moderator, really need to do something. But what choices do you have? Here's some poor schmuck from FC who is being jumped all over by CS members, many of which may be your past and present customers, or perhaps future ones. Are you going to kick them off for their behavior and thereby possibly lose their business because of it? And sorry, you can't convince me that such thoughts will not go through your head. Like it or not, even if it is inadvertant, you WILL be biased in your decisions.
With that in mind, just browse through the threads on this site. Take note of how many have websites of thier own, possible either in "business" or hoping to be so sometime in the future. Many might possibly be considering buying animals from you. Are you REALLY going to risk pissing off those future customers just because they might be taking part in a razing of someone else from FC, who you would consider a lesser risk of being a potential customer?
THOSE are the kinds of things I need to consider when talk of assigning a moderator comes up. That and much more. Yes, I do read threads here, and yes I have seen some members being somewhat less than civil to other members. It is nowhere near as simple as some people here would like to believe. I've been through this before and gotten my toes thoroughly fried because of it. For me to NOT be reluctant to do that again would border on being insane.
As for the statement about everyone here BOUND to act in a manner similar to the chat incident, obviously that is not true. But I don't know who has that as only a potential and who is absolutely rock solid stable without a chance of (1) letting the modest powers of being a mod go to their head, (2) not being biased based on WHO is saying what, rather than WHAT is being said by anyone, and (3) being spooked at the possibility of damaging their own business based on what they HAVE to do in order to be effective as a mod.
I am certainly glad that most everyone here thinks that is a simple decision for me to make.
carol said:
Servers are expensive and this site uses a lot of space. I don't think there is a killing to be made of this site. The money issue just isn't there for me. I feel a lot of the members contributions lie in how long we sat in here answering everyones questions and discussing topics so this would be the place to go for cornsnake learning. Rich donated many hours, but so did a lot of other people. He could not have got this site off the ground trying to reply to posts all on his own. In fact he stated in the beginning his motivation for making this site was to get some of the work load off his back. When people emailed him questions about cornsnakes, he could point them to the friendly forum where there is always someone to take the time Rich didn't have to spend replying.
Agreed. And I have never said nor thought otherwise.
carol said:
We were all glad to help, we were having a great time, but obviously none of it moved us up in the respect ladder. It's just not right that a lot of good people that have proved themselves over the years are thought to be more immature than a random group of people. Just because a few of their peers lost their cool. Instead of my thoughts getting acknowledged I just got turned in a circular argument. I guess there is no reason to make sure we stick around, we have years of knowledge in searchable type, so we really are disposable at this point.
Respect? You feel that THIS is the criteria being used in a decision to pick a moderator? Carol, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you have not only never had to run a site where you had to pick a moderator, but have also never been a moderator yourself. Otherwise I seriously doubt you would think about it in the manner that you are doing so.
And how so that your thoughts were "never acknowledged"? I certainly do hope you don't expect me to be able to respond to absolutely every single statement and question in every single post in this thread? While it may certainly be feasible if I decide to do nothing else for the next week, it really isn't practical. Heck, I seriously doubt you realize how much time out of my day just this ONE post is taking from me.
carol said:
So when you've spent years and an untold number of hours with your peers to make a place successful, it's a little rough to take that dozens of you get judged by the behavior of a handful. I'm not spiteful, more like heart broken. I'm not leaving in a huff, I won't stop contributing to the site and I'm not angry, I am frustrated. I'm just having a hard time putting my heart into things here like I used to.
Why are you taking this so personal? You make it sound like you have engaged in this conversation solely with the expectation that you would be offered the job of moderator. Does anyone even remember what this thread was started for in order to address?
carol said:
As far as cornsnake communities, you've got the wool over your eyes. Not long ago, the CA people got together for a cornsnake BBQ, and were our own community. Tied together by different places, but not everyone there was a cornsnake.com member. It was a group of people meeting to talk about what they wanted where they wanted. Nothing wrong or spiteful about that. There are WAY more than 3 or 4, I'm sure you could count dozens of little corn communities of people who have become good friends, live close by, have the same morph interest, etc. Going to more than one place does not mean you are betraying one. Katie went and took pics of Mike's snakes without all of us, what an elitist! I hope you shared every pic with everyone here! (Sorry Mike and Katie).
Some of us have become friends here. You can call that a clique. You can say that's being an elitist. Surely there are many people in your town you are friendly with, but not all of them are your close friends, so you are an elitist as well by those standards. If you met a good friend at a restaurant are you bound for life to ONLY go to that restaurant with them? If you said "no" then you are an elitist by your standards. Would it be wrong to invite your friend to "your house" for dinner? There are a lot of people you'd shake hands with and say "Have a great day!", but you only trust a few to bear hug and say "I had a bad day."
I don't agree with a lot of things that have been said by my friends, and I'm sure they don't agree with some of my points either. I'm sure they all think I'm silly right now, not giving up hope that people will see it's not about spite. But contrary to popular belief, they don't dictate my actions. One thing we all agree on is we don't like being judged together, we are independent people. A handful have proven to be capable of getting very nasty, but so many more have proven capable of being fair and working for the better of the site. When that gets thrown out, some of us just need to take a break. In fact some of us should take a break, cause it's getting ugly and it really doesn't help.
I'm no longer interested in getting anyone to change their mind, but Brent it bothers me to see you judge with the same blanket judgement that is the issue. Well it's my issue anyway.
Well, this appears to need a repeat of things I have already said, but I don't think it is necessary. Members here going to another site and post does not bother me. It's just par for the course. I would be astonished if no one did. heck, when I go to some of the sites I frequent, I may post the same question on all of them just so I can get as many replies as possible to cover as many bases as possible. There may only be ONE person on one site (which one, I don't know) who has the answer I need.
But as for people boycotting this site because I happen to disagree with their mannerisms and have requested it cease, or they are otherwise incensed over my making a sound (in my opinion) business decision about this site, well, that just appears to be childish and immature to me. But in all honesty, if that is the way those people feel, then I wish them well. I'm sure they think they will find or make the ultimate Utopian site that will fullfill all their dreams, but something tells me that is just not going to happen. But really, I do wish them well on their quest.
Darn, better make a PART 2 of this or the server is going to yelp BIG TIME when I try to submit it..
