suggestions please

[whattodo]

Thanks for your input, luckily I am not trolling whatever that means, I posted in two places because I am new here and did not understand the 50 posts thing before seen, I apologize profusely for that, as I now see that both posts were posted. I have decided to ask him about this on his return before making a decision.
Once again I do appreciate your comment.

[JackTX]

Does calling someone a suspected troll actually do anything? I'm not sure I see an upside and the downside is looking like a bully and probably sending a new member away permanently. I'm assuming of course that there are mods on this forum that can handle trolls...

[Hardheaded1]

In the case of the recent orgy thread, calling the OP on it led to others comparing two back-to-back posts that had glaring contradiction, and saying so. The application of reason is not bullying.

Cynicism is not bullying. It is expressing doubt. And the grounds for the assumption were cited, which were just prior to the current poster. Being skeptical about the veracity of anyone's posting isn't a matter of bullying or intimidation. No one was solicited to so anything untoward to the OP.

As for moderation, if there had been a reportable violation, it would have been reported As it is, there was only a double posting.

I still remain skeptical. The OP posts urgently enough to repeat his posting, and about a matter that is a huge event, but then doesn't return to comment for three days. Where did the urgency go?

The OP raises another anomaly with the site, that it blocks quite randomly the posts made by a newbie, in this case, a new thread, presumably the first thread the OP made. It would seem the greater threat isn't the expressed skepticism, but the default programming that treats a new poster as if he indeed were a troll, holding hostage random posts until 50 are reached. I experienced it myself.

Apologies to Whattodo, as it is a damnable program and it does lead to double posts. Sorry it was misunderstood as being too much like Unsure17's bogus account of his orgy.

[JackTX]

In the case of the recent orgy thread, calling the OP on it led to others comparing two back-to-back posts that had glaring contradiction, and saying so. The application of reason is not bullying.

Cynicism is not bullying. It is expressing doubt. And the grounds for the assumption were cited, which were just prior to the current poster. Being skeptical about the veracity of anyone's posting isn't a matter of bullying or intimidation. No one was solicited to so anything untoward to the OP.

As for moderation, if there had been a reportable violation, it would have been reported As it is, there was only a double posting.

I still remain skeptical. The OP posts urgently enough to repeat his posting, and about a matter that is a huge event, but then doesn't return to comment for three days. Where did the urgency go?

The OP raises another anomaly with the site, that it blocks quite randomly the posts made by a newbie, in this case, a new thread, presumably the first thread the OP made. It would seem the greater threat isn't the expressed skepticism, but the default programming that treats a new poster as if he indeed were a troll, holding hostage random posts until 50 are reached. I experienced it myself.

Apologies to Whattodo, as it is a damnable program and it does lead to double posts. Sorry it was misunderstood as being too much like Unsure17's bogus account of his orgy.

yes, i experienced the 50 post thing and it was painful. but i understand its intent and it probably does help with actual trolls.

i think my point still stands though. cynicism in such a painful moment would be a terrible way to be greeted by a new member when asking for advice. maybe some of those with good investigative skills should work together continually and advise mods on potential people discreetly?

[Hardheaded1]

So, we're skipping over the issue of EVERY new member being treated systematically with hostility and suspicion, and hindered in posting said painful personal events, and focusing on the questioning that followed a suspect post, made suspect by a username that defies staying on the forum, and an irrational absence? If you think about it, the OP doesn't give any indication of participating in the forum in any ongoing way. Is he forever going to just be the guy who posted about his cheating BF? His username implies that. Looks like a drive-by participation, now doesn't it?

My cynicism was explicit, not veiled nor indirect. Simply explaining the irregularities would have been simple.

Your approach may have been to notify THE mod or not, but mine was to simply post the doubt in the thread where the suspect posting was. Your approach DID amplify the veracity question and place it centerstage again instead of the OP's stated topic. That doesn't look too much like an abundance of sensitivity from the bleachers.

[JackTX]

So, we're skipping over the issue of EVERY new member being treated systematically with hostility and suspicion, and hindered in posting said painful personal events

I don't equate the software's anti-spam logic to treatment by humans.

If you think about it, the OP doesn't give any indication of participating in the forum in any ongoing way. Is he forever going to just be the guy who posted about his cheating BF? His username implies that. Looks like a drive-by participation, now doesn't it?

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not going to be less nice/helpful/etc. to people who post here just one time.

Your approach DID amplify the veracity question and place it centerstage again instead of the OP's stated topic.

I disagree.

That doesn't look too much like an abundance of sensitivity from the bleachers.

Now you're just snarking me :p

[Hardheaded1]

It wasn't snarkiness, but another perspective on the effect of posts on the OP.

To your point about automated rudeness, it is nonetheless rude. It is cold comfort to find systematic effrontery when joining a website's membership. Guilty until proven innocent has a decidedly chilling effect as a Welcome Wagon, and it's not conducive to garnering new members. Let a newbie encounter that roulette wheel of "gotcha" from the software, and it is more than likely that many don't stick it out. Apartheid wasn't any more forgivable than very personal racism. Systematic exclusion is systematic exclusion.

[JackTX]

To your point about automated rudeness, it is nonetheless rude. It is cold comfort to find systematic effrontery when joining a website's membership. Guilty until proven innocent has a decidedly chilling effect as a Welcome Wagon, and it's not conducive to garnering new members. Let a newbie encounter that roulette wheel of "gotcha" from the software, and it is more than likely that many don't stick it out. Apartheid wasn't any more forgivable than very personal racism. Systematic exclusion is systematic exclusion.

I understand what you're saying. I noticed every little restriction because I'm a forum guy.

Of course, only the admin can decide to tweak the configuration here. I'm not sure how detrimental the restrictions are to new users but if someone thinks it's significant they should probably make a suggestion post/PM. He does listen.

Cheers and I'm out of this one because OP is probably over both of us at this point :p

[whattodo]

Once again I Thank you all for your input.
It does not matter how old one is, you are never to old to learn.
Thank You again
BG (Whattodo).

[LEANDRONJ]

Thanks for your input, luckily I am not trolling whatever that means, I posted in two places because I am new here and did not understand the 50 posts thing before seen, I apologize profusely for that, as I now see that both posts were posted. I have decided to ask him about this on his return before making a decision.
Once again I do appreciate your comment.

Dear Whattodo I never doubted it you for a second! I know how difficult is to assimilate any kind of advise from anyone during this very painful circumstances! I am truly sorry and hope that in due time you will eventually heal! good people always due!!