In another thread, several players suggested and show interest in having a "forum committee" of player that would help enforce the forum guidelines. Having such a group in place would alleviate some of the load that the BoD is carrying right now, giving us more time to focus on other projects and open communication with the players.
The original suggestion was for 3 to 5 forum users to be objective and communicate whether or not some posts are in violation of the guidelines voted on.
***This is NOT set in stone. It has NOT been voted on by the BoD. I'm merely starting this thread to see if there is any more interest in this idea***
If you would be interested and willing to help out with forum moderation, please let us know by responding in this thread.
Please try to keep your comments limited to "constructive criticism" rather than "bashing".
The toughest part of the process is being objective. Looking at the rule as black and white and pointing out violations as they apply. Once you've deemed something a violation, a precedent has been set and every instance that is identical to it must be considered a violation as well. It takes a lot of consideration and time to think about all of the issues.
Deeming something a violation isn't as easy as 1, 2, 3, as some people may think.
mike sidebottom Wrote:
> im interested; keith does that mean you are as
I think your idea is a great one! The BOD needs more time to work on things to move the SN forward instead of having to focus on childish behavior (mine included). I do not think I would be a good person for this type of position. As it has been pointed out by a currant BOD member my opinions do not mean anything because I quit the BOD. Good Luck!!!
"Dillon Gourley [ PM ] [ Ignore User ]
Re: Minutes 2/16/11
February 17, 2011 12:01PM Registered: 3 years ago
Hey Keith, kind of hard to respect your opinion, coming from a SN BoD quitter that is.
Terry, and to anyone else, what makes you think you can break profanity guidelines and nothing happen? One guy already got banned over the word what makes you think we won't ban another? From what I hear Terry is a great guy but you have to go by the guidelines. Kinda hard for anyone to argue them when they are in black in white, at least in these two instances."
Keith "Sunshine" B
Hmmm....where have I heard this before. Oh yeah, in that PM I sent Leslie and the rest of the BoD except Gilly back in November:
Re: New low for the BoD
From: Sarcastic Sam
We may have met at the SNPC in Little Rock, but I am not sure either. I appreciate what you're trying to accomplish despite my own disrespectful remarks towards some of your efforts.
Anyway, please read the last page of the LA Open thread. Actually, you might want to read the last two or three pages to see a prime example of a thread that needed to be moved into the private discussion a while ago.
If you don't know the reason why the Private Discussion was created and why it is so valuable, it is so that when things get too heated among people, or accusations that can't be proven get thrown around, a moderator can move the thread there so that 1. the participants will hopefully realize someone in authority doesn't approve of the discussion, and 2. the gloves can really come off and everyone can really say what they mean, and hopefully get it out of their system, and 3, no one can say that their "free speech was taken away".
Once Kittrell left, and threads stayed on the main page, that's when the devolution of the forum, and the SN in fact, began. Honestly, it's gotten so bad that I can not solicit sponsors for the SNAC anymore as few want to be associated with drugs and violence.
The real turn for the worst was when Mobz started the thread about boycotting Blue Angel because some dopeheads got tossed out of there for getting so wasted they lost their bag of weed and the military staff found it the next morning. Sidebottom actually did very well to get them out of there with just a ban and they're very lucky they weren't arrested. Anyway if you recall the thread Kevin of course jumped on Sidebottom quite a bit, and Kevin wasn't there and didn't know what he was talking about as usual. Sidebottom should be getting thanked, but he's not. Just like Kevin ought to be thanking me for getting City Park installed, but instead he's trying to get people riled up to beat me up for daring to open up a discussion about a rules call.
So, let me offer this to you. I don't really want to quit as the host of the 2011 SNAC, but looking at how badly this place has stumbled, it's to the point where I am risking my personal reputation being associated with the SN. If you get Kevin (who was not elected) removed from the BoD for his repeated disgraces, I will volunteer to take his place, and I will further volunteer to help monitor the forum and move disgraceful posts/threads into Private Discussion. I believe Kevin's term ends right after the SNAC, and that's as long as I'll stay on, but if you've heard that I run great events (and I do) and want to clean up the SN, I'm ready.
I already spoke to Jim O about this and he seemed to agree Kevin needs to go. Perhaps no one has the courage to take him on, but I do. If you need me to be the one who takes the heat, I say bring it on. But before you do anything, you should take away any admin powers that Kevin might have. He doesn't have the best interests of the SN in mind, and it's possible he'll destroy the website and all the tournament results and other records of the series if he's challenged.
I'll send copies of this to the other BoD members. I hope you'll see the light.
Ring a bell Justin? Probably not. By the way, does your nose hurt from Kevin leading you around by it all the time?
You left out the part where you complained about everything that ever got tossed into the Private forum before JK left. You also left out the part where you have said that your own post deserved to go there. We know you are a smart enough guy that you don't post without thinking so that can only leave one to believe that you were purposely sabotaging threads and trying to get them tanked into the private forum. This was evident before but basically your comments have made it crystal clear that was your intention in the past.
You are taking a fair amount of liberty in how you are recalling what part I took in the BAP fiasco. I simply fought for their right for free speech... something you claim to want to see more of in this very post.
What happened to your stance on the forum when Keith complained he couldn't get sponsors to come look on here when you were berating every step he made while on the board (do we see a pattern?) You kept saying that this forum had nothing to do with sponsors... but this is the first thing you cry about when you think it will help you get your way? Seems fishy. Which Kernan was wrong? This reminds me of The Daily Show when they do "old McCain vs new McCain".
BTW, let me get this straight... you give Dillon and I all sorts of grief for not being "properly elected" even though it was procedure that was set up many years before we came along and here you are suggesting something that has NEVER been done before and just appointing you to a position that you were suggested that you run for but declined. How would you be such a legitimate board member if you were to get on in such a manner? Would you have then used one of your personalities to fight with yourself. You have had a problem with every board that has ever existed so to stay consistent you would have to hate yourself (Yes, humorous, I know).
But really... please explain to me, what post I have made that would keep you from sending a potential SNAC sponsor here? I'm sure if you have any we could easily find 5 of yours that would probably be considered worse if not equally as bad.
I like the fact that you tried to play on their fears. I'm a computer professional and I build/repair computers and websites for a living. Imagine how bad it would look if I were to take your childish approach for being "kicked off" the board. EVEN IF it was strictly for self preservation, I would think even you could see how I wouldn't be that foolish. Now granted, your are just ridiculous to even try to attribute something so preposterous to my character. But I do find it rather revealing that that was what YOU thought of.
Never ONCE said you should get beat up
.. Though the fact that you don't know the definition of altercation doesn't stop you from spreading (and probably, believing) lies. Though you did ask me to find someone that you could PAY to beat up Victor... How ironic.
The discussions I've had with Jim were private and I will just keep them that way... but I will say this much... I think you are barking up the wrong tree there. Granted, you are running out of trees as I'm sure you are realizing, if this post is any judgment of that.
BTW, does it bother you that we the board are actually a cohesive unit and are getting along now? Divide and conquer didn't work. Oh, and for the record, my new signature I've been sporting was put there about this little PM that went around and your recent antics with SNACs. It just seems like your goal. *gasp* is it possible that you really aren't that deep?
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
Sarcastic Sam Wrote:
> Ring a bell Justin? Probably not.
It does actually. However, I couldn't warrant starting a coup and removing a board member who gives SO much time to listening to players and offering open communication, even if that means that you would be offering your services for forum moderation. When he's been counted on to do something, he gets it done. I've also seen him take responsibility for his oversights.
Kevin and I don't always see eye-to-eye, but I respect him a great deal. He gives a lot of time to expressing his viewpoint and trying to understand where some players are coming from, given that they approach him in an appropriate way. He often takes the role of "devil's advocate" in the board meeting to allow us all to see multiple sides of an issue.
Honestly, in my personal opinion, you'd be hard-pressed to find a board member who dedicates more time and puts up with more flack than Kevin. He has a very open and sometimes brash personality, which causes bitter reactions between him and other players. However, when it comes down to the meetings, he's sticking up for those players and their views.
> By the way, does
> your nose hurt from Kevin leading you around by it
> all the time?
Nope. It feels just fine! Thanks for asking! That's so kind of you!
Now, if you all don't mind, let's try to get this thread back on track! Sorry for the drift!
I do not apologize for attempting to divide legitimate BoD members from those who finished dead last in the elections.
While the rest of disc golf continues to grow at a fast rate, despite the economy that poor Justin blames, SN tournament revenue has fallen substantially and from the looks of it will continue to decline as giligan & Justin run off more Tds with their incompetence.
Sarcastic Sam Wrote:
> despite the economy that poor Justin
I'm so glad to see that you're getting caught up on things that were discussed while you were out! Quick question though: Are you referring to my being "poor" from an economic or pity stance? Either way, I don't need it. Thanks though! What I'm lacking in riches, I'm making up for in spirit! I couldn't be happier right now in my life, my family, and my career. I do appreciate your concern!
Also, I want to help you because you're actually misquoting me. These were my exact words: "My tournament participation is very limited due to financial issues." [www.sndg.org] I'm truly and honestly sorry that my using the word "my" mislead you to believe that I was blaming the economy on everyone else's tournament attendance. I can only speak for myself and was doing just that. I'll try to be more conscious of this in the future so that my messages are more transparent.