Why are threads deleted?

[Doug Garson]

Looks like another interesting thread with lots of excellent posts has been deleted (again on climate change). While I agree there were some posts that deserved to be edited or deleted and posters that deserved to be warned or given a time out, why delete the entire thread? The majority of the posts were well within the forum guidelines (or else the thread wouldn't have lasted so long )and many contained excellent arguments with links to informative articles or else it wouldn't have attracted so many posters.

Why not delete or edit the offending posts, warn the offenders(maybe suspend them for a week or more if they are repeat offenders), freeze the thread for a few days to let people calm down and the reopen with a warning? A lot of effort by posters to research and communicate their points of view went into their posts and deserves to be left up.

[eugene thomas]

kind of way all social meadia is. them in charge can control conversation.

[Mike Henderson]

Too often those threads devolve into a small group of people arguing with each other. When that happens, the thread should be closed - most other people are not interested.

Mike

[Doug Garson]

Too often those threads devolve into a small group of people arguing with each other. When that happens, the thread should be closed - most other people are not interested.

Mike
Don't disagree that happens still why delete? Why not do as I suggested? If most people aren't interested they can ignore the thread. Nobody is interested in all the threads.

[Stan Calow]

I'll venture a reason that I've seen happen on other forums: arguing in threads drives away new participants, who mostly came for woodworking info. Not saying I haven't done it myself.

[Jim Matthews]

I'll venture a reason that I've seen happen on other forums: arguing in threads drives away new participants...

Yep. This killed Woodnet.

[Tony Joyce]

If it ain't woodworking I'm out, don't need the drama of politics. Can get plenty of that elsewhere.

Tony

[Doug Garson]

If it ain't woodworking I'm out, don't need the drama of politics. Can get plenty of that elsewhere.

Tony
Then why can't you just ignore the threads that don't interest you? Some of us enjoy a good debate, chance to learn something about important topics. I don't consider climate change or Covid19 to be political they are life issues. Yes some people politicize them and their posts should be deleted not entire threads containing thoughtful polite conversations. I've stopped looking at hundreds of threads that didn't interest me, never once considered leaving the forum, seeing interesting threads deleted does.
Course this ain't woodworking so I guess your out. :rolleyes:

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Doug, threads are typically not deleted but rather moved to the Moderator's Forum which removes them from public viewing. Keith has been called to provide evidence in at least one legal case and maybe more. That being said, when the value of the information within a thread doesn't warrant the amount of "moderating" required then it's often moved to the Moderator's forum. Keep in mind, the moderators are all invited volunteers.

[Jebediah Eckert]

I'll venture a reason that I've seen happen on other forums: arguing in threads drives away new participants, who mostly came for woodworking info. Not saying I haven't done it myself.

THis above 100%.

The only heated arguing allowed should be limited to sharpening.........

[Mark Rainey]

I agree with Doug. A respected forum member posted an insightful and intelligent explanation of health care industry dynamics in a heath care thread, and shortly thereafter the thread was shut down. I am not sure he has posted since.

[Ronald Blue]

If it ain't woodworking I'm out, don't need the drama of politics. Can get plenty of that elsewhere.

Tony

Exactly!!! Some of the posts had political overtone. This is Sawmill Creek not Politic Creek. The off topic forum is generally good but sometimes the subject takes off in a downward spiral. That and some replies in what I saw were almost personal attacks. Unfortunately respectful disagreement seems to be something that's disappearing. I did comment on at least once but steered clear of the the main topic.

[Doug Garson]

Doug, threads are typically not deleted but rather moved to the Moderator's Forum which removes them from public viewing. Keith has been called to provide evidence in at least one legal case and maybe more. That being said, when the value of the information within a thread doesn't warrant the amount of "moderating" required then it's often moved to the Moderator's forum. Keep in mind, the moderators are all invited volunteers.
Thanks Ken, do they ever get moved back so the valuable info they contain is available again?

[Mel Fulks]

You've seen the old films where the mad scientist causes a lot of trouble and the village people have to run him out
with pitch forks and torches? Well, we don't need that here.

[Tony Joyce]

Then why can't you just ignore the threads that don't interest you?

Typical reaction, I'm supposed to leave, because I don't want to see these threads, but you do.

[Mel Fulks]

Doug, when I see that a valuable thread is about to end I start writin' it down on archival parchment ...with acid free
indelible ink. Then I donate them to the Smithsonian. But that's just me...

[Jim Matthews]

Typical reaction, I'm supposed to leave, because I don't want to see these threads, but you do.

Hold the phone...

I have no interest in approaches that require expensive equipment and therefore never haunt those sub forums.

How is this different?

[Doug Garson]

Typical reaction, I'm supposed to leave, because I don't want to see these threads, but you do.
I don't follow your logic. Nobody is asking anybody to leave. Follow the threads that interest you, ignore those that don't.

[Frederick Skelly]

Friends, please remember that our Moderators do this for free, and in addition to their regular day jobs. In my opinion, their good work is what makes this such a pleasant place to hang out. I feel like they do their best to edit threads, But if they delete a thread sometimes, maybe that was the most expedient fix. It really didnt hurt anything, did it?

Fred

[Doug Garson]

Friends, please remember that our Moderators do this for free, and in addition to their regular day jobs. In my opinion, their good work is what makes this such a pleasant place to hang out. I feel like they do their best to edit threads, But if they delete a thread sometimes, maybe that was the most expedient fix. It really didnt hurt anything, did it?

Fred
I agree the mods do a good job but deleting an entire thread which dozens of people posted thoughtful, polite, useful posts in and dozens more read and learned from without posting because a couple of people were out of line is punishing the majority for the sins of the few. Warn the offenders, delete their posts, suspend them and then ban them if necessary so the rest of us can share our ideas and enjoy the give and take.

[Matt Day]

Those threads spiral, people choose sides, there are pages and pages of posts, it gets ugly. Moderators shouldn’t have to spend lots of time on on thread that only a few are super interested in. I’d suggest if you wanted to continue the debate, ask for people’s contact info and take it off SMC. Or look for another forum or Facebook group specific to those types of discussions. Stick around here for woodworking.

[Michael Weber]

Doug, when I see that a valuable thread is about to end I start writin' it down on archival parchment ...with acid free
indelible ink. Then I donate them to the Smithsonian. But that's just me... lol but I like sarcasm. I had a Medicare question thread deleted recently after many posts. No explanation. I assume it got testy. I was disappointed but understood. Life goes on. Can’t be easy running anything with people involved:(. I greatly appreciate the lack of conflict in an otherwise conflicted online world. It’s a safe haven for me. Appreciate the intelligence level and there are some fascinating characters here.

[John K Jordan]

Doug,

I don't remember the thread you refer to.

Individual posts and threads are moved or deleted if they violate the Terms of Service, link at the bottom of the page, or here: https://sawmillcreek.org/terms.php
Perhaps review it and see if there might have been posts or discussions that were prohibited.

Things like discussions of politics, religion, foul language, and personal attacks on others are triggers as are reports by members (the little triangle at the bottom of each post). The volunteer moderators try to keep this a pleasant, family-friendly place. Offenders may have their posts removed or edited and are sometimes warned or gently reminded of the rules, but in rare occasions some get angry and hostile and switch to attacking the moderator.

As for editing threads to remove just the violations I don't know who has enough extra time to study each post and do the precision surgery that might be needed to clean up long threads that had degenerated. Could the climate change thread have been one of those?

JKJ


Looks like another interesting thread with lots of excellent posts has been deleted (again on climate change). While I agree there were some posts that deserved to be edited or deleted and posters that deserved to be warned or given a time out, why delete the entire thread? The majority of the posts were well within the forum guidelines (or else the thread wouldn't have lasted so long )and many contained excellent arguments with links to informative articles or else it wouldn't have attracted so many posters.

Why not delete or edit the offending posts, warn the offenders(maybe suspend them for a week or more if they are repeat offenders), freeze the thread for a few days to let people calm down and the reopen with a warning? A lot of effort by posters to research and communicate their points of view went into their posts and deserves to be left up.

[Frank Pratt]

I know the thread you're referring to & read most of it, but didn't participate. I can imagine that it would be quite a job to go through each post, assign it a "nasty" score, and then decide which ones to delete & which to keep. There were many posts that contained good info, but were maybe not as mannerly as they could have been.

So it's a shame that all that good info had to go in the bin, but I do understand why it did. The problem starts when one of the trolls posts & then other members, who have been posting excellent information, respond by taking off the gloves.

So to keep it from happening again remember the old rule "DON'T FEED THE TROLLS"​

[Doug Garson]

Or how about suspend the trolls for a week first offence, month second offence and ban them the third time so the rest of us can have a civilized discussion. Yes it was the climate change debate.

[Kev Williams]

One man's "thoughtful and useful" opinion may be another man's "what an affront to my intelligence" opinion and yet another man's "how dumb is that?" opinion. The opinions ran off the rails in this thread LONG ago- the problem was when the 'secondary' opinions, which were tissue-thinly veiled insults, became more and more frequent...

So how does a moderator, with his/her own opinions, judge which posts to keep and which posts to throw? Doing that inevitably will lead to angry "why did MY post get deleted and not HIS??" followup posts.

Most logical action to take: Dump the whole batch.

Of course, all this is just my opinion ;)

[Doug Garson]

I agree dump the whole batch of trolls so reasonable people can share ideas. But that's just my opinion.

[Mel Fulks]

"Most logical action to take: Dump the whole batch."

Yep. It's like when some salt gets spilled into the sugar. You are too busy to separate it and your
wife just flat refuses.

[Matt Day]

Or how about suspend the trolls for a week first offence, month second offence and ban them the third time so the rest of us can have a civilized discussion. Yes it was the climate change debate.

Think about the work and monitoring that would take from a moderator.

[Keith Outten]

Threads that are being considered for removal are moved to our Moderators Forum and there is a group discussion to decide the appropriate action. This procedure has served us well for many years. We generally find that if one of us fails to understand a comment or misinterpret intent the majority will catch the error, our first obligation is to save every thread if possible.

During the course of a conversation we do edit posts when necessary, up to a point. If things just get out of hand and we feel that we cannot keep up or that one of more people fail to heed our warnings the thread is removed for group consideration. At the same time we may very well be receiving complaints that add to our task evaluating the issue. Last but not least we do not have unlimited time to dedicate to saving a thread and we have to consider if any legal issues might cause problems such as a legal challenge from a lawyer or a warrant from a judge. Private messages involving complaints will often be received by one or all of us, email from an outside source generally comes directly to me and I share the contents of those communications with the group.

Removing someone's access here is even more complex a decision with one exception, the final decision is mine alone.

[Jim Becker]

I will add to Keith's comments that the moderation staff has never been under any obligation to explain any necessary action taken with threads or posts. We don't do it and we're not about to start now. Even though every one of us is an individual with our own opinions, when it comes to moderation of this site...which we do voluntarily and it's a lot of work...we try really hard to follow the rules/TOS in doing so. Everyone agreed to that TOS when they signed up, too. In many of the recent threads that got to a point that they were no longer manageable, there was actually a lot of restraint because the topics are relevant in this trying time and there's an understanding that many folks need to discuss things to work through it for themselves...including those of us watching over things. They wouldn't have lasted as long as they did otherwise. What doesn't work, however...is disrespect, abuse and denigration of fellow community members. That's pretty much why anything gets deleted from view around here most of the time... ;)

[Doug Garson]

So, Keith and Jim, if members are breaking the TOS are they being suspended or banned? Seems that would be a more effective way of stopping the unwanted behavior. If their goal was to disrupt the conversations it seems deleting the entire thread achieves their goal.

[Scott Donley]

I always thought that if one has a problem with moderation of a post or thread it was not to be debated in the open forum but done by PM, am I wrong ?

[Doug Garson]

I always thought that if one has a problem with moderation of a post or thread it was not to be debated in the open forum but done by PM, am I wrong ?
Why would you want that discussion behind closed doors? I was hoping this thread might highlight that a lot of people were disappointed when threads get deleted, it seems that is not the case.

[Jim Becker]

So, Keith and Jim, if members are breaking the TOS are they being suspended or banned? Seems that would be a more effective way of stopping the unwanted behavior. If their goal was to disrupt the conversations it seems deleting the entire thread achieves their goal.
I will not comment on specifics, but yes that is a scenario that happens but there is certainly an effort to avoid that. People do come and go...and for a few, the "go" is accelerated by repeated behavior inappropriate for the community.

In a community like this, one should always consider what the "golden rule" teaches us when diving into contentious topics. There is none among us who cannot endeavor to express themselves without, well...being a jerk.

[Jim Becker]

I always thought that if one has a problem with moderation of a post or thread it was not to be debated in the open forum but done by PM, am I wrong ?

That is our rule. Anyone who has an issue with something about moderation should always, always, always address that privately with Keith or the moderators. Anyone having an issue with a specific post should use the "report post" function (click on the little triangle with the exclamation point in it at the bottom of the post) and provide an explanation for the concern. (But do not expect a response unless there's a question about it back to you)
-----

Doug, this thread is not an example of that because your basic question (paraphrased) about "why does this happen" isn't about a specific instance.

[Bernie Kopfer]

The very title is “ off topic forum”. Off topic might be understood to mean off the topic of direct talk about wood and woodworking but about things that might interest woodworkers. After all wood workers are human aren’t they? ever so often a Off Topic catches my attention and sometimes I learn something nd sometimes lm merely entertained. Topics about, cars, computers, latest local weather, and such are not wood related, but often of human activities we all might participate in.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... were tissue-thinly veiled insults,...

The restraint evident in your description is commendable, and a couple of orders of magnitude better than mine.

I put the 'insults' on Ignore list after the death of a family member was merely an 'anecdote' and another member was called 'Gomer'*. It helps tremendously.

[Ole Anderson]

Most forums have an off topic area. By definition the one on the Creek should contain only topics not related to wood working. If you don't want to wade through non-woodworking topics, just don't visit that sub-forum. But I agree, just delete inappropriate content and notify the poster, don't delete the whole thread. But it is not my sandbox.

[Jim Becker]

Off-Topic, in general, is for things that don't fit into the other defined areas of the forum community. But there are some topics that are verboten per the TOS and decent community behavior is expected. Regrettably both have to be enforced from time to time.

[Keith Outten]

Removing threads is not our preference. However sometimes the number of problem posts or how frequent they are created exceeds our ability to maintain a thread. Secondly a thread can lose continuity when posts are removed so the conversation can become impossible to follow. When these situations occur it is best to remove an entire thread.

Note that we do not have a Moderator for every forum here. Most Moderators review multiple forums daily and we all help cover other peoples forums when they are on vacation, sick or extremely busy on a day job. Our Moderators cover a lot of ground every day so the job can take a considerable amount of time.

[Brian Elfert]

I will add to Keith's comments that the moderation staff has never been under any obligation to explain any necessary action taken with threads or posts. We don't do it and we're not about to start now. Even though every one of us is an individual with our own opinions, when it comes to moderation of this site...which we do voluntarily and it's a lot of work...we try really hard to follow the rules/TOS in doing so. Everyone agreed to that TOS when they signed up, too. In many of the recent threads that got to a point that they were no longer manageable, there was actually a lot of restraint because the topics are relevant in this trying time and there's an understanding that many folks need to discuss things to work through it for themselves...including those of us watching over things. They wouldn't have lasted as long as they did otherwise. What doesn't work, however...is disrespect, abuse and denigration of fellow community members. That's pretty much why anything gets deleted from view around here most of the time... ;)

I absolutely HATE not knowing why a thread I started was deleted. Was it the title of the topic, my initial post, or a reply to the thread that triggered the deletion? I want to know if it was what I wrote that triggered the issue, or something someone else wrote. Often the thread is gone before I can see if someone else wrote something that triggered the deletion.

At times, it seems that something as innocuous as stating "Congress passed a law" can be taken as political and deleted. If I write "Congress passed a law requiring seat belts" that is a fact, not a political opinion.

[Jim Matthews]

If I write "Congress passed a law requiring seat belts" that is a fact, not a political opinion.

That's to the point.

If a broad, unsubstantiated claim is made - a challenge to produce citations and verifications isn't an insult.

Those that persist in bloviating about topics without responding to challenges are effectively spamming.

Onus Probandi

[Doug Dawson]

Those that persist in bloviating about topics without responding to challenges are effectively spamming.


Do you have a citation for that? Stand and deliver! :^b

[Frederick Skelly]

Just an aside......
As soon as I saw the topic, I felt that the Climate Change thread was ultimately doomed. I was only surprised that it took so long. There are some topics that just get heated - no matter how well intended and polite the original post was. For example, someone posted a perfectly reasonable question in the "Mailbox thread" - now standby and see how long it takes for one or more veiled political comments to roll in.

I've seen the Moderators try hard to manage threads that go crazy. They do the best they can and do it for free. Thanks Mods!

Fred

[John Terefenko]

I laugh how many times it is said here that moderators do not get paid and do it for free. All sites are basically moderated for free. Go back to why they were started for in the first place. This is a large site and I always believed too many forums here that are just not needed and could be consolidated but that is a topic for another day. Certain topics are taboo in most sites and people should know this by now. Moderators do the best they can but I do agree if a topic is taken down then in its place a reason why should be stated. Not hard to do. I moderated a scrollsawing site for many years and always did that if a topic got unruly.

[Rob Damon]

Do the offenders get notified that they are the ones who crossed the line. I posted a couple of times to the thread and would hate to think it was my post that shut it down.

Is it safe to assume that if we did not get an notification from management that we were at least within the bounds of what is acceptable for posting?

Otherwise how do we know we are the offender or not. I don't recall personally attacking anyone or saying anything political.

I agree with Fred. It is pretty obvious which posts are doomed to be shutdown and removed, so why not just shut them down after the first posting. Why let them linger and fester until they exploded when it is pretty obvious they will ultimately end up that way?

[Jon Grider]

IMO, discussion is the primary goal of any thread. If I'm not interested in a thread about special tools for guitar building or CNC tooling or whatever, I'll ignore. We all can do the same, ignore, stay silent or participate in any thread. The number of posts in any thread indicates its relevance to the most members, and some of the most relevant threads are deleted. If someone is sensitive to differing ideas or sometimes disparaging comments, the OFF TOPIC forum may not be their best forum option here. Another woodworking site had the "basement" where the members could bang it out over controversial subjects. It was widely used and you knew political discussion was a "gloves off" affair going in. If you have thin skin, avoid the basement. If you want to talk about cleaning sawblades, Woodworking Tools would be the forum to go to.

Disagreements are part of interesting discussion, be it about router bits or best toilet brand, or health care. We have many forums here, and I don't care if someone disagrees with me, even if it gets a little hostile. The Mods should not have to serve as referees in the Off Topic forum, participants should realize their feelings may be hurt if they choose to participate. I think any thread should be allowed to run its course unless all out threatening behavior occurs, and then members should flag it. Just my thoughts, I know they don't agree with TOS. I just think the level of participation should be the biggest factor in determining thread deletion. I expect disagreements with family, friends, co-workers, and SMC members. No sweat. I may disagree with you on health care but agree with you on the best method to make a mortise. At the end of the day, we all benefit from the opportunity to hear different perspectives. I choose not to lose any sleep over someone else's opinion.

[Jim Becker]

I agree with Fred. It is pretty obvious which posts are doomed to be shutdown and removed, so why not just shut them down after the first posting. Why let them linger and fester until they exploded when it is pretty obvious they will ultimately end up that way?


Well, because "hope springs eternal"? ;) Some threads have lasted a long time when folks "behave nicely"...or the number of edits required remains small. The goal here isn't to immediately shut down non-prohibited topics within the community, so no, just because folks can get wide eyed and predict something is going to go south isn't a good reason to shut something down before there's an actual reason to do so.

[Doug Garson]

Jim, do the mods have the ability to block someone from a thread (temporarily or permanently)if their post violates the TOS so the rest of us can continue the discussion? This would also serve as a warning to them that they were out of bounds.
I agree with Jon, maybe we should just be a little more tolerant of others in the off topic thread and suck it up, you always have the option to ignore a thread if it offends you.

[Rob Damon]

Jim, to my original question. I am an old f@rt and get ornery sometimes without knowing it, I know that.

Since you didn't answer my question "Was it Me?", I will assume I had some part in it, thus will stay away from the "off topic forum" in the future.

[Jim Becker]

Doug, no. The forum software does not support that.

Ron, no idea.

[Bruce Page]

Jim, to my original question. I am an old f@rt and get ornery sometimes without knowing it, I know that.

Since you didn't answer my question "Was it Me?", I will assume I had some part in it, thus will stay away from the "off topic forum" in the future.

Rob, from one old f@rt to another, your 4 posts were not an issue.

[Erik Loza]

I was a Moderator on the Minimax Owner's Group and also a Mod, then Admin, on a V-Bulletin group to do with car modding for several years. Haven't done either for some time but here are some thoughts and observations. Some have already been mentioned by others:

-It's not necessarily a thankless job but there are periods of time where it seems that way, since you are volunteering your time.
-It is easier to bin a whole thread than to go through and delete nasty posts. No Mod or Admin has the time for that.
-It is impossible to make every member happy 100% of the time. No matter how you run the forum, someone will always take issue with one thing or another.
-There is substantially more work that happens in the background, keeping out spammers and bots, than the public sees or probably understands.
-Allowing troublemakers to stay will derail your whole group and drive away peaceful members. Unfortunately, troublemakers rarely seemed to respond to things like time-outs or warnings/infractions. As soon as they came back, they started right in again and often, doubled-down, since they had a chip on their shoulder for being given a time-out. The only permanent solution was removing them from the group.

All this being said, could there be value in sub-forum for political talk? In the car forum I administrated, once we got rid of the bullies and trolls, members who otherwise followed the rules (predominantly in their 20's) still wanted a place to blow off steam. There was a long conversation among us Mods and Admins in the background. The conclusion we all came to was that by giving these guys a sub-forum, it actually kept them out of the general population and reduced the amount of time we spent having to do things like issues warnings/infractions or binning posts. There were rules, of course: No call-outs/insults/threats/personal attacks, no nudity/porn, no gore/violence images, but this sub-forum was otherwise open to pretty much any topic. It did require strong management at first but after a while, kind of ran itself and most importantly, kept things more peaceful in the general forums. Just some food for thought and thanks again to the whole SMC team for all the great work you do.

Erik

[Jim Becker]

Since the TOS prohibits political and religious discussion explicitly, there can be no sub-forum for the same and honestly, we just don't need that here. There are good places "out there" for folks to slap each other up-side their face on these things already.

[Jim Matthews]

Since the TOS prohibits political and religious discussion explicitly, there can be no sub-forum for the same and honestly, we just don't need that here. There are good places "out there" for folks to slap each other up-side their face on these things already.


Religion and Politics

All members shall abstain from engaging in religious or political debate.

Going forward, will all clearly partisan political posts be excised, or will the entire thread be terminated? Too many otherwise healthy fora have been shuttered when they were forced to tolerate "Fair and Balanced" opinions at the expense of facts.

There are a select few that insist on bringing that here.

Woodnet did not ban users that erected an echo chamber there, quite the opposite.

Look at Woodnet today.

That could be SMC.

[Lee DeRaud]

All members shall abstain from engaging in religious or political debate.One issue is that currently (and by that I mean "this century", not "this election season") the overlap of religion, politics, and economics is very nearly 100% for most people.

I was amazed the climate change thread lasted as long as it did: IMHO, it bounced hard off that clause of the TOS well before the post count got to triple digits.

[Anuj Prateek]

I'll venture a reason that I've seen happen on other forums: arguing in threads drives away new participants, who mostly came for woodworking info. Not saying I haven't done it myself.

+ 1000

IMPO, such discussion start going away from logic and rational too quickly.

[Scott Winners]

I agree with Doug. A respected forum member posted an insightful and intelligent explanation of health care industry dynamics in a heath care thread, and shortly thereafter the thread was shut down. I am not sure he has posted since.

I am not sure I am any respected, insightful or intelligent, but I am a practicing medical professional. In one of the many COVID threads here I did, umm, get out my big hammer and let loose a little bit. I promptly reported myself to the moderators and that particular thread was shut down the next morning when I logged back in.

On the one hand I have a public duty to correct health misinformation when I see it, on the other hand I am only licensed to practice as a Registered Nurse in Alaska and this website does have a TOS incorporated in the registration process.

I do not post much because I am not wordworking much lately, and I don't have much of anything to add to the knowledgeable wisdom all y'all are sharing freely in the woodworking sections routinely. I mostly come here to see what is new in the "time for some levity" thread. I pulled 12 hours today, put two of my guys in quarantine after picking their nose for them in full on extra in ET movie PPE, and was only able to release one from a quarantine I stuck him in last week. I have about five hours of charting to do tonight that isn't getting done tonight because I just came off a brutal weekend of call. Local to me our infection rate has tripled in the last two weeks (from 11 to 33 per 100k population) and 60% of the cases ever diagnosed around here were sick today.

If you don't have anything better to do tomorrow, please go find some amusing pictures for me to see in the levity thread. I am looking at minimum 14 hours tomorrow, plus carrying over the 5 hours of charting I am not doing tonight.

Might have been some other poster, I am not commonly described as respected or insightful. I am just a grumpy old nurse trying to keep my sheep out of harms way. I got grumpy in CAPS if anyone is running low.

[Doug Garson]

I'll venture a reason that I've seen happen on other forums: arguing in threads drives away new participants, who mostly came for woodworking info. Not saying I haven't done it myself.
I really struggle with the logic of this idea. If you really are interested in woodworking, why would you quit a forum with tons of valuable content related to woodworking just because a subforum titled "Off Topic" contains posts that are argumentative? Why are you even looking there if all you are interested in is woodworking? All you have to do, and I've said this before, is ignore the threads that you find offensive or not interesting.

[Mel Fulks]

I really struggle with the logic of this idea. If you really are interested in woodworking, why would you quit a forum with tons of valuable content related to woodworking just because a subforum titled "Off Topic" contains posts that are argumentative? Why are you even looking there if all you are interested in is woodworking? All you have to do, and I've said this before, is ignore the threads that you find offensive or not interesting.


I agree with Doug. It's like watching a chorus line. You just pick out your favorite and look at her ...or two
or three of them. That's why it's chorus girlS instead of chorus girl.

[Jim Matthews]

,...but I am a practicing medical professional. In one of the many COVID threads here I did, umm, get out my big hammer and let loose a little bit.

On the one hand I have a public duty to correct health misinformation when I see it, on the other hand I am only licensed to practice as a Registered Nurse in Alaska and this website does have a TOS incorporated in the registration process.



We value input from people who actually know what they're talking about. You're not cranky, you're outraged. Please continue to tell it like it is.

Jim from the Other coast

[Jim Becker]

I really struggle with the logic of this idea. If you really are interested in woodworking, why would you quit a forum with tons of valuable content related to woodworking just because a subforum titled "Off Topic" contains posts that are argumentative? Why are you even looking there if all you are interested in is woodworking? All you have to do, and I've said this before, is ignore the threads that you find offensive or not interesting.

Because it reflects on the entire community. The TOS was constructed to encourage a family friendly place for woodworkers to gather and discuss woodworking and related in a beneficial and respectful manner. If one area, even though it's not woodworking focused, isn't felt to be friendly, it can and does make people feel unwelcome and can influence whether one joins or remains participative.

[Stan Calow]

I think they're doing a very fair job here in allowing some discussion, but keeping it civil. They don't have to do that at all. I'm on two other non-woodworking forums where interesting and knowledgable discussion regularly turned to arguing then to hate and insults. Always its been about politics and religion. So now some topics are forbidden and removed before they start. Forums like this live and die on attracting and keeping new members (hoping they become contributors) and nothing turns new people off more than finding a nest of contentious arguments and insults on things not related to the mission of the forum. Then you see forums die when they shrink to a bunch of regulars talking past each other. I agree there has been a lot of interesting information and opinions on these topics here, because there's so much intelligence and experience among the membership.

[Keith Outten]

Our Terms of Service are not just a long list of rules, they are a promise that everyone makes to each other and that includes our Staff.

We have considered removing our Off-Topic Forum many times over the years. Every time the subject comes up we decide once more that we need a place for people to discuss a variety of topics simply because we establish many friends here and most of the time we feel comfortable with their advice. So if someone needs advice about a truck or insurance its best that we maintain a place where they feel comfortable receiving guidance from friends who in many situations are professionals in their industry. From the Off-Topic Forum many times conversations move to private messaging and possibly email so information can be shared privately. This is a very beneficial source of valuable information.

We are deep into our 18th year online so we are doing some things right. I know the The Creek is not perfect in any respect but that has never been a goal here. We simply try our best to provide a friendly place for everyone to share. I should remind everyone that our Moderators are Members here first. They were chosen not because of their expertise, its their compassion for this Community and willingness to serve that makes them so valuable here.

Thanks for all of the positive comments and constructive criticisms. That's how we learn, grow and improve.

[Doug Garson]

I agree there has been a lot of interesting information and opinions on these topics here, because there's so much intelligence and experience among the membership.
This is the reason I started this thread, I don't like to see all that lost just because one or two people can't follow the TOS. I would prefer the offenders posts get deleted, they get a suspension or if appropriate banned and the interesting information remain.

[Jim Becker]

Doug, we do try to do things that way, but honestly, there sometimes is a storm of bad behavior and it's just not worth the time and effort edit a thread post by post, especially given the amount of quoting that also has to be checked and handled. We have to pick our battles when it comes to administering a thread. That's reality, unfortunately.

[Doug Garson]

Don't disagree Jim, it appears that maybe you don't have the tools to efficiently weed out the bad actors so your left no choice but to toss the whole thread.

[Doug Garson]

Jim, I wonder if it would be more effective and efficient, rather than editing the offending posts, what if you cut and pasted them into a PM (and deleted them from the thread) and sent the PM to the offending poster with the message that it is not in accordance with the TOS and leaving it to them to edit and repost or leave deleted? Seems that would be less work for the mods and put the work on the poster to correct his post. At your discretion, you could spell out why it violates the TOS or leave it to the poster to figure it out. You could perhaps help them by giving a link to the TOS. If they repost without fixing it just repeat until they do or just delete the post.

[Steve Demuth]

Our Terms of Service are not just a long list of rules, they are a promise that everyone makes to each other and that includes our Staff.

We have considered removing our Off-Topic Forum many times over the years. Every time the subject comes up we decide once more that we need a place for people to discuss a variety of topics simply because we establish many friends here and most of the time we feel comfortable with their advice. So if someone needs advice about a truck or insurance its best that we maintain a place where they feel comfortable receiving guidance from friends who in many situations are professionals in their industry. From the Off-Topic Forum many times conversations move to private messaging and possibly email so information can be shared privately. This is a very beneficial source of valuable information.

We are deep into our 18th year online so we are doing some things right. I know the The Creek is not perfect in any respect but that has never been a goal here. We simply try our best to provide a friendly place for everyone to share. I should remind everyone that our Moderators are Members here first. They were chosen not because of their expertise, its their compassion for this Community and willingness to serve that makes them so valuable here.

Thanks for all of the positive comments and constructive criticisms. That's how we learn, grow and improve.

As one who posted quite a few times on the thread that lead us to this discussion, let me add just a couple of things:

1. I very much appreciate the work done by the moderators overall, and the fact that for the most part this is a very civil, intelligent, and helpful place to visit. Double thanks to the staff, and at least one thanks to all the members who make that work.

2. It does seem that the tools available to the moderators are rather limited. It should at least be possible for moderators to easily conclude that the last 3 or 5 or so posts in a thread took it off the rails, easily delete those, and close and freeze the thread, without removing it. Likewise, I think some user tools would help too. Like an automated chance to edit a flagged post to get it in line with the TOS, and, believe it or not, a non-anonymous LIKE and DISLIKE button and counter. Expressing yourself by agreeing with a respectful statement of a case often is sufficient, and means the "too emphatic" disagreement or agreement never gets written.

3. Please preserve the off topic forum. I am continually impressed with the knowledge and thoughtfulness I find there when we get on to a complex topic. On the one hand, this is a community whose primary commonality is a relationship to woodworking, but on the other, it is a window into the thinking and knowledge of many people I would otherwise never get the privilege of learning from. That includes some people who clearly see the world through a very different lens than I do, and some others with whom I share more, but who have much to offer that I would not otherwise run across. Does Global Warming belong in a woodworkers forum? Maybe - trees matter to woodworkers, and they are part of what is at stake. But even if your answer is no, it does belong in a community of thoughtful people looking for answers - and we're that too.

[Jim Becker]

Jim, I wonder if it would be more effective and efficient, rather than editing the offending posts, what if you cut and pasted them into a PM (and deleted them from the thread) and sent the PM to the offending poster with the message that it is not in accordance with the TOS and leaving it to them to edit and repost or leave deleted? Seems that would be less work for the mods and put the work on the poster to correct his post. At your discretion, you could spell out why it violates the TOS or leave it to the poster to figure it out. You could perhaps help them by giving a link to the TOS. If they repost without fixing it just repeat until they do or just delete the post.

Think about how well that would actually work, not to mention the time/work involved..."generally speaking" the offenders know what they are doing and by agreeing to the TOS when one signs up for the site, there's an expectation that folks have reviewed the rules that they agreed to follow.

So no, it would not be more effective and efficient to take it on that way. it's even been tried from time to time.

[Doug Garson]

Think about how well that would actually work, not to mention the time/work involved..."generally speaking" the offenders know what they are doing and by agreeing to the TOS when one signs up for the site, there's an expectation that folks have reviewed the rules that they agreed to follow.

So no, it would not be more effective and efficient to take it on that way. it's even been tried from time to time.

Jim, I thought throwing the work of editing the post to meet the TOS back on the poster would be less work than doing the editing for them but you have the first hand experience not me so I guess I'll have to accept you response.

[Frank Pratt]

This is a thread that needs to be locked down. Same stuff just keeps getting repeated.

[Doug Garson]

This is a thread that needs to be locked down. Same stuff just keeps getting repeated.
I politely disagree, the idea that putting the work of editing the post to meet the TOS on the poster instead of the moderator is new and the feedback that it has been tried and doesn't work is also new. Feel free to ignore the thread if you think it's repetitive. If anyone else has ideas on how to help the mods and keep interesting threads from going off the rails they should be welcomed.

[Steve Demuth]

This is a thread that needs to be locked down. Same stuff just keeps getting repeated.

If we started locking or deleting repetitive threads, there wouldn't be much left here. Most actual woodworking questions get a perfectly viable answer within the first two responses. We then repeat ourselves for another 10 or 20 or 30 posts.

Unless it's about a Sawstop, in which case it'll be 300 posts ;-)

[Jim Becker]

Jim, I thought throwing the work of editing the post to meet the TOS back on the poster would be less work than doing the editing for them but you have the first hand experience not me so I guess I'll have to accept you response.

Actually more work that way, Doug...and you'll have to trust me on that.

[Lee DeRaud]

If we started locking or deleting repetitive threads, there wouldn't be much left here. Most actual woodworking questions get a perfectly viable answer within the first two responses. We then repeat ourselves for another 10 or 20 or 30 posts.And even then, most such threads repeat every year or so.

Including this one. :)

[Doug Garson]

Actually more work that way, Doug...and you'll have to trust me on that.
OK Jim, as long as your not selling any bridges. :D

[Alex Zeller]

While I have posted in a couple I would rather if there wasn't an "off topic" section on this forum. As much as people try not to politics will always enter into the discussion. On other forums I belong to they have those sections private like the Lumber Yard but you have to opt in to gain access and it's more hidden (nothing would show up on the "Hottest Threads") from view by anyone who didn't request access. Even then it's very moderated and threads are locked down very quickly. I'm sure most come here for woodworking related information. Loosing the non-related stuff most likely wouldn't drive anyone to leave.