112 replies to this topic

[palango]

good riddance. Will not miss it at all.

[supermom]

So--what happened to the open topics?

And what politics was discussed that got out of hand? Aw-well, poor John--I imagine it's hard to balance this site sometimes.

[Dave Burrell]

So--what happened to the open topics?

it's still there - http://www.tomatopag...php?showforum=5

And what politics was discussed that got out of hand? Aw-well, poor John--I imagine it's hard to balance this site sometimes.

a few folks just couldn't get the political monkey off their back and they were using the forum to spew forth crap 24/7 and go off on either conservatives or libs - it was coming from both parties and it was bringing this forum down making it look like nothing more then a political rant site, that's not what this place was intended to be and now things are back on track

good riddance to the political mayhem, there's hundreds of other political rant sites people can go to to to get their anger on

[Bill Z]

I understand...but don't agree.

Same here.

[Dustyzz]

I understand...but don't agree.

Me too... maybe John can open up political discussions again sometime in the future, and perhaps then it will be a kinder, gentler place because of his use of "THE button".... in the interim, I'll miss it but life will go on.

/dusty

[bookwom]

Wow, must have gotten really nasty - I'm glad I got out of it long ago.

I imagine it became a real headache for the moderators - many of whom are volunteers and have real lives and don't have the time to constantly monitor a forum.

[john]

^ Bookwom, you're spot on. Basically we didn't have time to play babysitter. It wasn't about moderating. It was about people who couldn't control theirselves and felt the need to get on their soapboxes here.

The politics forum will be back. However we'll be quick to delete things that are not adding value to this forum.

[curiousity]

^ Bookwom, you're spot on. Basically we didn't have time to play babysitter. It wasn't about moderating. It was about people who couldn't control theirselves and felt the need to get on their soapboxes here.

The politics forum will be back. However we'll be quick to delete things that are not adding value to this forum.

How does humour get treated in this situation?

Just curious.

[Rich_T]

I really disagree with the decision - not that I will lose any sleep over it. I have only visited the political forum a few times all year. Strangely enough, yesterday afternoon just happened to be such a time. As I went from one page to the next, suddenly - poof! - the entire thread was gone. Freaked me out.

My perspective is this: what Folsom residents think is part of that which makes up Folsom. We do not confine our mental activity to thinking about bridges and street fairs, and should be able to discuss anything at all, as long as we keep out the truly crude stuff. I find it more interesting to know what fellow residents think about a broad variety of topics, whether or not I agree with this or that person, than to only hear what they thought about our sewer system or water meters, for example.

Those who didn't like the politics thread had a very, very easy solution: don't click on it! Those who wanted to see what other Folsom people think, could click. In fact, the only real problem I observed was that there were too few regular contributors, which made things get stale and predictable.

Yes, there are tons of political websites people can choose instead - and I don't visit any of them FWIW -, but where else is the discussion limited to Folsom residents? How else do observers like me know what local people are thinking - even if it may not necessarily be a representative cross section of residents?

But hey, you who set up the site can control it as you see fit. This isn't a "free speech" issue. But I still don't see why banishing political discussion to its own, non-public, section of the website was not sufficient.

[Jolene]

Well, for those of you who don't like the decision, www.folsompolitics.com is available. As is .net, .org, .info, .biz....

You get the idea.

If you've got the time and gumption to put into moderating the volatility of a politics forum, you could help John out by starting your own site?

[Bill Z]

I really disagree with the decision - not that I will lose any sleep over it. I have only visited the political forum a few times all year. Strangely enough, yesterday afternoon just happened to be such a time. As I went from one page to the next, suddenly - poof! - the entire thread was gone. Freaked me out.

My perspective is this: what Folsom residents think is part of that which makes up Folsom. We do not confine our mental activity to thinking about bridges and street fairs, and should be able to discuss anything at all, as long as we keep out the truly crude stuff. I find it more interesting to know what fellow residents think about a broad variety of topics, whether or not I agree with this or that person, than to only hear what they thought about our sewer system or water meters, for example.

Those who didn't like the politics thread had a very, very easy solution: don't click on it! Those who wanted to see what other Folsom people think, could click. In fact, the only real problem I observed was that there were too few regular contributors, which made things get stale and predictable.

Yes, there are tons of political websites people can choose instead - and I don't visit any of them FWIW -, but where else is the discussion limited to Folsom residents? How else do observers like me know what local people are thinking - even if it may not necessarily be a representative cross section of residents?

But hey, you who set up the site can control it as you see fit. This isn't a "free speech" issue. But I still don't see why banishing political discussion to its own, non-public, section of the website was not sufficient.

while I agree with you, I also believe I see john's motives.
he said he's banished 2 that he felt were the worst when it came to negativity (and my presumption, personal attacks). And I think the one month moratorium is a message to the rest of those that were regulars on the politics to keep it civil when it re-opens. my guess why he purged the entire history in that section is so when it opens back up, it is a fresh start and not a chance for everyone to jump back on the old topics and start back where they left off.

this is just my interpretation, I obviously can't speak for john's motives.

[Rich_T]

while I agree with you, I also believe I see john's motives.
he said he's banished 2 that he felt were the worst when it came to negativity (and my presumption, personal attacks). And I think the one month moratorium is a message to the rest of those that were regulars on the politics to keep it civil when it re-opens. my guess why he purged the entire history in that section is so when it opens back up, it is a fresh start and not a chance for everyone to jump back on the old topics and start back where they left off.

this is just my interpretation, I obviously can't speak for john's motives.

Makes sense, Bill. Upon closer scrunity, I now realize that (1) the forum had degenerated too often into "ad hominem" attacks that required tiresome moderation, (2) the forum will eventually re-open, with better behavior expected, and (3) there is apparently at least one other site for Folsomites to talk politics (see Jolene's link - though it didn't open for me just now).

That'll work.

[Jolene]

Makes sense, Bill. Upon closer scrunity, I now realize that (1) the forum had degenerated too often into "ad hominem" attacks that required tiresome moderation, (2) the forum will eventually re-open, with better behavior expected, and (3) there is apparently at least one other site for Folsomites to talk politics (see Jolene's link - though it didn't open for me just now).

That'll work.

Oh, my link wasn't to indicate that it was already out there, but to indicate that the URL is available, so can be started at any point.

[bordercolliefan]

I really disagree with the decision - not that I will lose any sleep over it. I have only visited the political forum a few times all year. Strangely enough, yesterday afternoon just happened to be such a time. As I went from one page to the next, suddenly - poof! - the entire thread was gone. Freaked me out.

My perspective is this: what Folsom residents think is part of that which makes up Folsom. We do not confine our mental activity to thinking about bridges and street fairs, and should be able to discuss anything at all, as long as we keep out the truly crude stuff. I find it more interesting to know what fellow residents think about a broad variety of topics, whether or not I agree with this or that person, than to only hear what they thought about our sewer system or water meters, for example.

I agree with RichT. There is only so much that can be said about barking dogs, pooping dogs, and what restaurant makes the best burritos. It's good for all of us to broaden our perspectives and think about issues of nation-wide and worldwide significance.

That said, I did get frustrated with political posters who posted incessantly in every thread. Folsom Frog Guy (even though I often agreed with him) was a major offender. I'm sure there were others, on both sides of the spectrum. I would like to have discussions of politics, but have people exercise some self-control to post occasionally on issues of particular interest to them-- not to blitz every topic on the board multiple times a day.

I can't say I saw negativity or rudeness... but I guess others did. My bigger concern was just the daily volume spewing from a few chronic posters.

[Rich_T]

Oh, my link wasn't to indicate that it was already out there, but to indicate that the URL is available, so can be started at any point.

oh