|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
To me, these two vanity posts would be the most difficult to decide upon if I were a moderator.
Tonight, I am officially separated.
Tonight, I am separated, and now I'm truly alone.
My heart breaks for this man, but do his two posts belong here?
400 posted on 02/27/2002 6:16 PM PST by JeanS
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 1
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Send our MOST sincere condolences with a explanation that he needs to be talking to REAL people as opposed to cyber "pals". - then nuke the threads.
401 posted on 02/27/2002 7:12 PM PST by Phil V.
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 400
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
But these are real people. That's why we end up with threads on someone's cat dying. Yeah, I know they're beyond the pale in some respects but though I go in thinking "Hoo boy" sometimes I'm really taken by the Realness of the people on the thread ... many I feel like I know myself though we'll never actually meet.
We've lost FReepers and suffered with those we love as they've lost friends and family. We pray together.
The death of a marriage thread brought out some really incredible posts from a lot of the guys. One of the most truly manly threads I'd read in a while. It was bittersweet but cool to hear men talking of marriage and children for a change.
(Though it's true I feel no need to go read the second installment ... no reason he couldn't have been told to keep it to the one thread. =)
402 posted on 02/27/2002 7:46 PM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 401
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
You're "regular Joe" argument fails simply because it never existed. Original requirements revolved mainly around ones ability to extend an argument without flaming and one's passion for FR and wanting it to succeed. There never was any "regular Joe" requirement.
403 posted on 02/27/2002 7:47 PM PST by Bob J
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 351
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I personally don't see any problem with Network members also being members of the FAB. If Jim believes there is, then I will ask people to make a decision.
I am trying to understand this equation. You suggest I should remain as the FAB Supervisor, but, based on your previous contentions, the fact that I am the Chairman of the FRN should preclude me first from association with the FAB. Particularly, prior to asking FRN BOD members to resign.
404 posted on 02/27/2002 7:54 PM PST by Bob J
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 402
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
It is inconsistent of me. Exactly what I don't like. But you'll just have to forgive my inability to always practice what I preach.
Change is tough on everybody. Objective reason presents certain realities; my heart longs for another.
What I'm arguing is not so different than my urging you a week or two ago to concentrate on "NOTHING BUT .NET"
If it's time to make a go of launching the .Net in earnest, might be wise to hang up a hat or two from the collection of at least 1/2 a dozen or more that you've worn for years and captain the .Net effort with all your energies focused thereon.
A requirement for Regular Joes? Hardly. Some fantastic folks are on this board. I mean that as a compliment and I'm proud to be a Regular Joe myself. We're all Regular Joes where the Forum's concerned, regardless the level of involvement or responsibility or financial support to which we've each decided to commit ourselves.
That's simply not the case where some have taken on the duty of Moderating. (It's out of respect for them, actually, I'm totally uncomfortable with this thread that accustoms all to playing Moderator.)
And it's not the case where you're making a go of what all hope will be most successful professional Network linking the gamut of conservative organizations with interested and committed Regular Joes looking to DO something. I should think that's plenty for the team's plate.
But to date, there's been some bogging down in the past and burdening of everyone with fresh wounds as a result. I attribute this to lack of focus and a living in the past which is only exacerbated by retaining a status quo or some "Old Style" FreeRepublic that doesn't exist anymore.
Also, I should think you all might consider the fact that you're just talking to yourselves over here anymore. If you want to listen to what the "Forum" thinks, it might be best to take a back seat at the very least and let the FAB's voice be primarily that of Forum members with no particular ties save those they've got to the Forum.
If you'll please forgive me for being absolutely honest, I think it would behoove you all to have one "advisory" forum where you listened rather than spoke. My concern is twofold:
That way, Jim, the Moderators and the executive-level officers and board members of both the Forum and the .Net get to hear honest criticism and suggestions from a quarter that's perhaps more objective and certainly more representative of the 'regular Joes' who aren't even FAB members.
It's certainly not my intent to banish the voices of anyone who's commitment and efforts have resulted in their taking on responsibilities, authority or obligations to moderating or the .Net. Rather, it's to preserve the voice of the FAB as Forum advisory board on the assumption that having such a voice is of value to you and others as you pursue your goals.
Given the way I've been treated (to the point of being accused of operating on "bad information" as if I were somehow in the loop or would stoop to that sort of conspiratorial nonsense) it's possible I'm dead wrong and anyone who does voice a disagreement around here is simply no longer welcome and a "threat" of some sort.
I sure hope not.
Best regards, Bob.
405 posted on 02/28/2002 5:52 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 404
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I think it would behoove you all to have one "advisory" forum where you listened rather than spoke
I nominate you.
406 posted on 02/28/2002 8:19 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 405
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Well, against my better judgment, I went and read the entire "Born of Free Republic" thread. (I cannot for the life of me understand why it's still on the boards.)
I have a couple of questions:
Would that "alternative board" be his and Dio's "secret place", the "LF"?Are you also a member of that site or do folks just feed you information therefrom on which you base comments such as this one?
Is it possible, given the 400-posts worth of rancor evidenced herein, that "jumpy" .Net members probably should forego Moderating duties in the interest of preserving the integrity of the Moderator function?If I were a betting man (and I'm not), I'd lay money on the fact that the Moderator who opined re: CFR is "probably" the .Net member. This is precisely the overlap and muddying of entities and roles that I'm arguing against.
As was made very clear not so long ago when FAB business was strewn about the Forum, everyone knows good and well that she was a FAB member.Can she not speak to both simultaneously or, as her post suggests, is it best to wear either the one hat or the other so as to clearly define these distinct organizations?
407 posted on 02/28/2002 9:13 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 405
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Wrong. Diotima has a post that says she doesn't speak FOR the forum but she will answer questions about the Network.
Please produce any evidence you have to contrary before you misrepresent me any further.
408 posted on 02/28/2002 9:36 AM PST by diotima
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 407
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
It's Arator's board, the LibertyForum.
409 posted on 02/28/2002 9:42 AM PST by AppyPappy
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 407
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
It's not Arator's Board. He is a participant there, and I think a moderator.
410 posted on 02/28/2002 9:46 AM PST by diotima
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 409
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I am not a member of the LF, I have not been invited and I have never posted there.
I don't understand why you insist on dredging up these past issues. You have been making allegations and statements that are simply rubbish. In a private FReepmail, I told you that you had been the recipient of bad information. I'll state it again, you are getting bad information from which you come here and make false statements and erroneous assumptions to put the FRN in the worst possible light. I've wanted to set the record straight on many of these comments, but Jim asked ALL of us to put the events of the past couple of weeks behind us and move on. I will continue to observe that request and I would ask FRN members to do likewise.
411 posted on 02/28/2002 10:05 AM PST by Bob J
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 407
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
. . . despoiled by the airing of affairs, decisions and private business . . .
But, I have not had any affairs.
:-(
Serious:
I disagree. Those in positions of management still need to feel the pulse of the membership. I think the "Inner Circle" has enough brain calls to know what can and cannot be posted to a FAB thread. If they don't, they should be removed from both management and FAB.
But that is a call for Jim to make, no one else.
412 posted on 02/28/2002 10:09 AM PST by Mr_Magoo
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 350
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
brain calls = brain cells
Sheeesh!
Need more coffee.
413 posted on 02/28/2002 10:22 AM PST by Mr_Magoo
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 412
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I'll state it again, you are getting bad information from which you come here and make false statements and erroneous assumptions to put the FRN in the worst possible light. I've wanted to set the record straight on many of these comments, but Jim asked ALL of us to put the events of the past couple of weeks behind us and move on. I will continue to observe that request and I would ask FRN members to do likewise.
Good grief. I "AM" getting bad information? I am making "FALSE" statements? And all of this is in an effort to destroy the FRN?
Pretty strong accusations, Bob. Do these stand of their own accord based on your position here or do you need explain yourself, provide some proof or challenge me on those comments you believe I've predicated on information supplied to me?
Particularly coming from someone who clearly is relying on the "feeding" of information to make statements about posters and other sites on the open Forum. C'mon Bob, be rational for a moment and understand your hypocrisy (if not "projection") here.
I'm offering my honest opinion on what I'm seeing and what I've read as posted by you and others. I have indeed tried to steer as clear as possible from those events and conversations that have been erased for the good of the FRN despite these events having been predicated specifically on the desires and decisions of the FRN.
You guys are just getting started and we're all rooting for you. I can see where you're getting a pass on the professionalism here at first. I don't think that's going to last forever and everyone's going to be cool with "moving on" each time you screw up.
The "Born of Free Republic" thread is still standing. I strongly suggest you petition to have that deleted too. It is not a flattering thread in the least and raises more questions than it answers.
414 posted on 02/28/2002 10:41 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 411
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I think the "Inner Circle" has enough brain calls to know what can and cannot be posted to a FAB thread
Or a Forum thread. The record of deletions of late speaks for itself.
Regards, Mr. Magoo. It's been a while and trust you and yours are well.
415 posted on 02/28/2002 10:43 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 412
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
It's not Arator's Board. He is a participant there, and I think a moderator.
How do you know?
416 posted on 02/28/2002 10:43 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 410
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Thanks ... exactly the clarification for which I was looking.
Perhaps you understand better now why I'm hopeful that this FAB Forum could be a place where folks primarily speak solely for the Forum as a rule.
If there's one thing that stands out on that thread, it's the siege mentality of the .Net folks. They're "jumpy", ready for trouble, scanning other forums ("not AF") for the criticism of Jim they'll take as their own even if Jim's made it clear he has NOTHING to do with the Net.
Additionally, there is your troubling statement here on the FAB that "we HAD" to do the Connie thing. I can only imagine (particularly given the reaction of many FAB to that incident) that you slipped up and were speaking for the .Net on the FAB at that moment.
It happens. It's perfectly natural and exactly the reason I'm making my suggestion that the delineation between organizations be made perfectly clear not only to maintain the integrity -- particularly of your Professional organization -- but also as a measure of protection for executive-level decisions and confidences of the Moderators, the Forum and the Net.
Meaning absolutely no offense or disrespect ... I was astounded by the rustling of papers on that thread. I thought there were a couple posts where you, Bob J and ReaganGirl in particular acquitted yourselves well but it's crystal clear to anyone reading the thread that you've still good deal of preparatory work ahead of you.
It's also my understanding that membership is free for the first year only. May I respectfully suggest that you drive this home (as an effort to involve as many folks as possible from the get-go) by touting the "join now while it's free" angle?
Clearly, funds, dues, budget and such are on the minds of those considering membership, much less financial support. I think it's important you're up front from the get-go and do not so much concentrate on the "it's free!" aspect of joining the .Net.
Some might feel they've been the victim of a bait and switch otherwise. As you no doubt understand well by now, it's not like it takes much to ruffle the feathers of some only too anxious to make mountains out of molehills. The last thing you want is some mass exodus of folks the moment they realize it's going to cost them to stay on board.
417 posted on 02/28/2002 10:44 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 408
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
How do I know what? I am friends with Arator as everyone well knows. He doesn't own the board.
He told me he is a moderator. What exactly are you trying to find out. Just state it.
418 posted on 02/28/2002 10:46 AM PST by diotima
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 416
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
BTW - I will continue to speak on matters concerning the FAB.
There is nothing I know of keeping FAB members from coming here and speaking their minds due to intimidation by FRN members. None have communicated such via FReepmail to me and as far as I know, Jim has not received any. Two FAB members have left in the last 2 weeks, but they had both resigned a couple months ago for different reasons and were just reminding me to remove them. Consequently, I find your comments about "intimidation" confusing. If any FAB members feel this way I think they should speak out here or via FReepmail to myself or Jim.
419 posted on 02/28/2002 10:48 AM PST by Bob J
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 405
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
What exactly are you trying to find out. Just state it.
I did state it. I asked how you knew who was participating and who was a Moderator.
I also copied Bob J's quote in here specifically. I appreciate the way he notes the other site is "not an AF-site" but his mentioning of criticism of Jim is troubling.
Why? Well, it's not simply for the reason that he's speaking with authority on information he could only have gotten secondhand, but also because such criticisms at other sites -- AF or otherwise -- have way more play than they should here.
I've argued this before and I'll argue it again that we'd all be better served by concentrating on our own backyard instead of letting those cancerous sorts who've "moved on" continue to needle us from afar. Who cares what they think?
It's particularly depressing to see the likes of the FRN leadership calling folks AF-ers for simply asking legitimate questions on what anyone might have expected (particularly from your repeated requests that folks ask you anything) was a thread posted specifically FOR the asking of ALL SORTS of questions by all and sundry.
420 posted on 02/28/2002 10:53 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 418
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I suppose this is why women love soap operas.
Boring, boring, boring..............zzzzzzzzzzz
421 posted on 02/28/2002 10:53 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 417
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
"It's also my understanding that membership is free for the first year only. May I respectfully suggest that you drive this home (as an effort to involve as many folks as possible from the get-go) by touting the "join now while it's free" angle?"
" I think it's important you're up front from the get-go and do not so much concentrate on the "it's free!" aspect of joining the .Net."
I doubt I'm the not the only one confused by these back to back statements.
Askel5, as you suggested several times, let's keep FAB discussions centered around Forum business. I appreciate your suggestions about the FRN, but let's reserve those for email or the FRN board.
422 posted on 02/28/2002 10:54 AM PST by Bob J
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 417
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
As a member of FAB one doesn't speak FOR the forum. We provide advice here. Jim can take it or leave it.
People know my role in the Network they can ask me questions about it if they want. If people want to ask me "why were they banned", "why was my thead pulled", "why are vanities allowed," "Why did Jim do this," I answer that I don't know I have no official capacity on FR and I don't make decisions.
I am not going to continue to get into this with you. You have misrepresented my statements, and despite Jim's input on this matter you still want to continue beating this horse.
423 posted on 02/28/2002 10:56 AM PST by diotima
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 417
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I hereby offer the following suggestion to the FAB - all arguments and petty squabbles about absolutely nothing shoud be restricted to the main forum proper (as has always been the case).
424 posted on 02/28/2002 10:59 AM PST by Senator Pardek
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Bob ... it's really not that complicated.
Based on FReepmails and certain posts of a few weeks ago, I myself figured we'd lost some FAB members over the recent dust-up. It was my hope that -- as part of putting this whole thing behind us -- the FAB would simply be informed who (if anyone) had left and that would be that. No opening up of the wound as it occurred to folks that so-and-so was no longer around and no putting you on the spot to explain the whys and wherefores.
I think failure to disclose both the bad with the good is always a mistake ... particularly in a venue such as this where we actually DO rely on each other's opinions and the resignation of a FAB member is of moment for that reason.
And it only drags out the inevitable where it's a given that this or that person's abandoning ship will have real consequences for or affect on others.
So, if that's the issue on which you're basing my receipt of "bad information", rest assured the reason I broached it to you in private is EXACTLY that it was my own surmising aloud about my worries and wondering about how best to staunch the bleeding of the whole affair.
425 posted on 02/28/2002 11:00 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 419
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Askel5, as you suggested several times, let's keep FAB discussions centered around Forum business.
Your presence on the Forum makes it Forum business.
You have disrupted the Forum more than once strictly courtesy of FRN business. You expect the FAB to support your causes as well as your use of the Forum to unveil and promote the FRN.
If you want me to address these things on the Forum, I'm more than happy to do so.
Otherwise, the Forum is clearly subservient to the Net and has no voice to offer criticism of the manner in which the Forum is used to promote the Net or carry out Net duties.
That seems unfair.
426 posted on 02/28/2002 11:06 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 422
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I second your emotion. All in favor, say Eye!
427 posted on 02/28/2002 11:07 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 424
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I misunderstood your statements, perhaps, but did not misrepresent them. That's the primary reason I flagged you to the post for your explanation of same. Thanks again for clearing that up for me.
We may differ somewhat in our approach to the FAB. I do try to put myself in the position of your average Forum participant or lurker and strive to keep my personal regard for, trust in, and loyalty to Jim or Bob or others from unduly influencing my opinions. (For those are exactly the reasons I'm speaking up this way ... I've been here a long time and have a tremendous loyalty to the place, I've been waiting for years for the Net to take shape and I'm truly concerned about both endeavors.)
Conversely, as a FAB, I do feel quite comfortable in offering some insight as to why a thread or poster may or may not have been deleted. Rules are rules. I point to them with all confidence that the Moderators are enforcing same. Likewise, and more importantly, this place is Jim's Private Property. He can do with it what he wishes and -- for the most part -- I think he's been a remarkable testament to patience and forgiveness over the years. If a FAB can't stand up for the rules AND Jim's judgment on the open Forum, how can we expect others to?
428 posted on 02/28/2002 11:22 AM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 423
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I find your comments about "intimidation" confusing. If any FAB members feel this way I think they should speak out here or via FReepmail to myself or Jim.
When you, Bob, send cryptic messages based on FReepmails not sent to you, it does lend an air of intimidation and suspicion of the confidentiality of FReepmail.
Recently, not only was a FAB thread posted on the late(wink, wink) AFWAA site, but so was a FReepmail. Somehow you were able to figure out who sent the FReepmail (it was posted without the sender's screen name) and let her know that you knew it was her by a cryptic message you gave her to pass on to me.
Given that, and the Connie massacre and other recent thuggish behavior by the Network honchos, there is cause to believe that some folks feel intimidated by the atmosphere right now.
429 posted on 02/28/2002 11:30 AM PST by kristinn
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 419
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
thuggish
thuggish? Aren't we being a bit hyperbolic here?
You'd think hanging out with Eschoir would warrant some thuggish intimidation for me but NOOOOOOO!! I guess I don't rate.
430 posted on 02/28/2002 12:13 PM PST by AppyPappy
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 429
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Kristinn, there was no Connie massacre. Connie did herself in. She was speaking for herself. She accused every person on that thread of lieing. She accused BadJoe of mishandling the funds. She accused me of lieing about the invoices. She accused every person on her advance team to Arkansas of lieing about their findings. The purpose of my infamous Ball thread was to show the FAB that I had told Connie of the impending Ball shortfalls before they even happened. And that I had long ago told her the amounts of the receipts and costs. I was not lieing. And BadJoe did not mishandle the funds. I was not trying to run down Connie, but I cannot allow this crap to go on. Connie obviously no longer has the best interests of Free Republic at heart so I deleted her account. Period.
And now once more and I hope for the last time. The Arkansas event and the FRN Cruise were not in competition. I cancelled the Arkansas event because Free Republic was not in a position to accept any more financial risk! We were tapped out!
The Cruise was not a Free Republic event. It was a FRN event! FRN is not part of Free Republic. Free Republic absorbed exactly ZERO financial exposure for the Cruise. I have no say over the events put on by FRN or any other independent chapter or organization.
Furthermore, I told Connie and the FAB that if they wanted to do an Arkansas event, they could do it as a chapter or regional chapter event and I would have no problem with that as long as Free Republic, LLC is not the entity responsible for the costs.
Free Republic, LLC is NOT going to sign any more contracts or be responsible for any more bills until and unless we get it up and running on some sort of solid financial footing. And that's a fact.
So please drop the crap about Arkansas vs the Cruise. It was not one or the other.
431 posted on 02/28/2002 12:17 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 429
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I was under the impression that Arkansas and the Cruise were competing events. Thanks for clearing that up.
432 posted on 02/28/2002 12:39 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 431
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I should say that my above post was not intended to be strictly for Kristinn. There are still people on this board who do not understand or refuse to understand my reasoning for cancelling the Free Republic National Convention in Arkansas. It was not Arkansas, per se. I cancelled the idea of having a National Convention anywhere!
433 posted on 02/28/2002 1:52 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 431
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
My comment had nothing to do with past disputes. It had to do with the current atmosphere of intimidation created by the Network honchos on the FAB and the Forum.
434 posted on 02/28/2002 2:41 PM PST by kristinn
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 433
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
A good call, IMHO.
The March for Justice, House Manager's Rally and Treason Rallies and such may also be a part of the past, the "Old Style" FR.
The Net -- with a professional staff for destination management and the ability to garner sponsorship -- is far better suited to staging cruises, rallies and other more spontaneous gatherings for fundraising, fun or sheer activism purposes. Shunting this activity their way can only be a win:win.
Rather than obligating you or the Forum to hold the bag financially, perhaps your blessing of FReeper get-togethers in the future will consist merely of letting whatever group stages the event plug it on the Forum, maybe use the words "[...] of FreeRepublic.com" behind their names and perhaps entice you to attend as best they can with free air, lodging and transportation ... thereby upping their turnout tenfold.
(I know that hearing you say a few words to the Florida Chapter was part of the buzz of attending their opening in lieu of the Bloodhound roast I couldn't make for love nor money that year.)
435 posted on 02/28/2002 2:41 PM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 433
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
"Given that, and the Connie massacre and other recent thuggish behavior by the Network honchos, there is cause to believe that some folks feel intimidated by the atmosphere right now.
Your rant set off my rant.
436 posted on 02/28/2002 2:47 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 434
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
My rants on deck. What is with all this hyperbole about massacres and thuggery?
437 posted on 02/28/2002 3:53 PM PST by AppyPappy
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 436
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Thar be pirates nearby, aye, matey. That's why.
438 posted on 02/28/2002 4:14 PM PST by MrConfettiMan
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 437
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
From Reply #420: Who cares what [the AFers] think?
I agree. I guess I sort of consider it a badge of honor that I've never visited any of the anti-FR sites.
Where do you guys find the time to do all this surfing? Don't any of you have jobs? Families?
From Reply #426: Otherwise, the Forum is clearly subservient to the Net and has no voice to offer criticism of the manner in which the Forum is used to promote the Net or carry out Net duties. That seems unfair.
FWIW, I understand--or at least I think I understand--the point you're trying to make and I agree with it.
Askel5, I happen to think you're raising some important issues on this thread. Issues that should be discussed now while the structural changes occuring in the world of "all things Free Republic" are fresh. Issues that, should they be swept under the rug or simply ignored, will fester and stew until they bubble over into future problems somewhere down the road.
439 posted on 02/28/2002 4:38 PM PST by MrConfettiMan
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 420
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Have stayed away for a good while since many thought I was a bad boy for stating my opinions too strongly or something along those lines.
Guess I didn't miss much. :)
Anyway, God bless y'all...........and let's drop this crap and get back to business. LOTS of ideas percolating in my skull. Bob, we'll be in touch soon.
BTW.............FR rocks. Don't listen to any who say otherwise.
440 posted on 02/28/2002 5:21 PM PST by RightOnline
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 431
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I think it's a great idea to have the FR Network running any future events. It will allow us to keep FreeRepublic out of the red, they can do an analysis of the profitability prior to any event and put in safeguards to make sure the site doesn't incur any financial liability.
Whether we were involved in the lawsuit or not it just makes sense to have one group who will have a pre-event procedure set up. It's not only more feasible financially, but they will soon gain an expertice at running these events.
Sound thinking IMHO
441 posted on 02/28/2002 5:42 PM PST by McGavin999
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 431
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Given that this site is funded by donations and is the original source of the activism, interest, education and chapters which the .Net has assumed and is proferring to other conservative causes I should think that .Net officers would wish to err on the side of complete integrity and avoid at all costs the appearance of exercising undue influence over the Forum.
Would that be sort of like campaign finance reform for FreeRepublic? All posters are equal, except some should not be heard? Sorry Askel5, but the people who are members of the FAB and the people who are members of the Net all have a right to be heard. We start putting restrictions on who can post what then we sort of take the "Free" out of FreeRepublic.
We're all human, anyone who is intimidated by someone merely because of their position just doesn't belong here. I was landed on quite hard by someone here so I quietly left for awhile until I could think it through. I'm not willing to give up my right to speak my mind and I don't see why we would expect it of anyone else.
Besides, now we have this slick new "Moderator" thing and we can have our own nasty slips removed. :o)
442 posted on 02/28/2002 5:59 PM PST by McGavin999
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 360
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Besides, now we have this slick new "Moderator" thing and we can have our own nasty slips removed. :o)
Humph.
I do understand your point, believe me.
But I'm uncomfortable with the "democracy" model if only because -- where the Forum is concerned -- I consider and will glad defend it anywhere, anytime as an patriarchal authoritarian instition situated squarely on Private Property. =)
I've always considered the FAB a "peer-review" sort of board that makes offers counsel when asked as well as brings disputes or suggestions to the Leadership for review.
So, where all voices compete on an equal playing field in the more "democratic" Forum at large, it seems tenets of justice might better apply here among the Counselors at Large. Just as some jurors are excluded in voir dire or a judge who's got some connection to a defendant or plaintiff recuses himself, I'm just looking for the most impartial voice possible in order to preserve the distinctions between those of real leadership positions and those who are not empowered with or Burdened By the authority or responsibility to which they've obligated themselves.
The concern is twofold:
(1) I feel that's the best way to give executive-level folks an honest reaction or pulse of the Forum that could be valuable in detecting and averting real problems. If the FAB's primarily leadership voices advising (or concurring with) leadership voices, we're missing the Man on the Street's insights. Such as, "Hey ... the Emperor's NAKED!" Could save us some embarrassment before we parade what seems a Great Idea in here down the streets of the Forum.
(2) I really would rather not use the FAB as a means to unduly prejudice us in favor of those with power or responsibility. We wouldn't be here if we didn't support them. That's a given. I don't think it's for us to know all the details of how or why they do what they do.
I can't help being extremely uncomfortable with the idea of FAB exercising -- even by proxy -- the Moderator's position. And I think we could be of far greater service to FRN and Forum leadership if we were more a sounding board than adjunct Sales Team whose balking at an idea is construed as some sort of disloyalty or subversive dissent and grounds for mistrust or castigation.
That's certainly not what I'm about. I have some trepidation. I've voiced it. Why? Because I do care, very deeply, and wish to raise what doubts I have now lest they become raging disasters later.
Best regards, McGavin999.
(I really do have a life ... high time I got back to it, I suppose ... =)
443 posted on 02/28/2002 7:30 PM PST by Askel5
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 442
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Hi folks. Just wanted to thank you for starting a thread to help FAB members understand the dynamics of the moderator's role.
If any of you are so inclined, I'd enjoy a second thread on the subject. Perhaps one of you would like to start one. It might be a good idea to post a note asking people to only address the topic of the thread as well.
Thanks for the good work you are all doing.
444 posted on 03/01/2002 10:53 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 1
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
You don't like the thread < /disappointed>
445 posted on 03/01/2002 11:35 AM PST by AppyPappy
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 444
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Hey, how's it going?
446 posted on 03/01/2002 1:15 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 445
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
suck up ;-)
447 posted on 03/01/2002 1:23 PM PST by Registered
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 444
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
ROAOOTF LMAO
;)
448 posted on 03/01/2002 1:36 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 447
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
ROAOOTF
Okay, I gotta ask....
449 posted on 03/01/2002 2:59 PM PST by Lazamataz
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 448
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
We're not ignoring you, we're just a little short handed this evening.
Red
450 posted on 03/01/2002 3:02 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 444
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
What? You didn't find my last comment in #442 about the moderators pertinent? ;o)
451 posted on 03/01/2002 3:24 PM PST by McGavin999
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 444
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Oh sure... LOL
If you guys have time and would like to do it, I'm all for it at your convenience.
I figured you guys were busy. And I am patient... <<<(and a sometimes liar...) Heh heh heh
D1
452 posted on 03/01/2002 4:26 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 450
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
(R)OLLING
(O)VER
(A)ND
(O)VER
(O)N
(T)HE
(F)LOOR
It just sounded a little more colorful than rolling on the floor... ( but then when you get right down to it, rolling does pretty much denote over and over doesn't it)(Going back to my room...)
453 posted on 03/01/2002 4:29 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 449
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
As a matter of fact I did like that. The problem is I sometimes feel like the proverbial back slapper posting hundreds of "I agree" statements all over the forum per evening.
454 posted on 03/01/2002 4:32 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 451
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
I'd enjoy a second thread on the subject. Perhaps one of you would like to start one.
Great idea, Ron; hopefully on a slow night when the Freepathon is over? It was really fun to try to make the calls.
455 posted on 03/01/2002 8:00 PM PST by WillaJohns
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 444
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
That's probably a good idea Willa. I should have considered that we're in the middle of another great Freepathon right now. Thanks for the note.
456 posted on 03/01/2002 8:11 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 455
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
"Anyone who defends Lee, Davis and anyone who took up arms against the best government yet devised to defend slavery, of all things IS a cretin, traitor or dishonest. This is personal attacks. This poster needs to be banned from this board for his slanderous attacks."
I think most readers are intelligent enough to see that a poster who simply calls names is not to be taken seriously. Those who take offense should hone their debating skills. The complainant above needs a mommy and a daddy. The source of his complaint didn't call him or her "a cretin, traitor or dishonest", he called a group those things. The compalinant needs to defend the group of thought to which he or she belongs instead of crying to the nearest moderator.
Of course if the name calling were directed at the complainant by name, it would be a personal attack. I like the idea of FAB assistance to make these judgements. It would make the FAB someting more than just a parallel forum. 
457 posted on 03/07/2002 6:02 AM PST by William Terrell
[
Post Reply
| Private Reply
| To 10
| View Replies
| Report Abuse
]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Browse
| Search
| Topics
| Post Article
| My Comments
]