The phrase "Hey guys, take it to Fratching" is pissing me off.

[Boozy]

So just to get things straight, this ISN'T the place to discuss potentially volitile or "hot-button" issues?

Fratching is definitely the right place for that.

I think BlaqueKatt was trying to say that we don't usually "fight" about those issues. Most people talk about them calmly and reasonably. She's drawing a distinction between debate and fighting.

Arguments aren't a problem here either, so long as they don't get personal.

I have no problem with MODS doing a fratching warning, I know that the MODS see more than we do and have insights we don't.
Now though, when other members start with the fratching warning (I might make an exception if it is an OP asking people not to take it to fratching territory because they don't want the thread closed), then it is irritating.

That kind of thing can bother the mods, too.

Especially if the "helpful" person involved didn't bother to report the thread, so the mods don't know to keep an eye on it.

We recognize when someone's heart's in the right place, but I don't think people realize that their "warnings" go ignored. A moderator's warning at least has a chance of being heeded.

[Greenday]

Lately, such warnings seem (from this side of the screen anyway) to be showing up BEFORE there's any degeneration in the conversation, when it's still apparently polite, and cordial and all those involved are maintaining a high level of civility in their conversation.

Generally when the mods do that, I feel it's because it's a topic that will result in fighting and flaming. So instead of waiting for that to happen resulting in bad blood, people quitting, and such, it's better off to just say "Take it to Fratching" before the guns and knives start coming out.

[Kimmik]

Why?
I see nothing that's "PM worthy" about his comment at all.
He was correcting a false notion about which site was directing the member to fratching.

I think he was talking about asking what the other forums are.

[Hobbs]

I run four total

Rapscallion

Oh wow. You sir are a lot more patient than I. Um, then may I ask...why not link those to CS or here? Or are they totally unrelated?

Why?
I see nothing that's "PM worthy" about his comment at all.
He was correcting a false notion about which site was directing the member to fratching.

I think he was talking about asking what the other forums are.

Yes I was Kimmik. I think I got the perfect gift in mind for Ree this X-mas.

[guywithashovel]

I don't post much on CS anymore, but on the times I have posted there, I've noticed that it is quite different than it was when I posted there regularly. Looking back now, I actually think the board is better managed now. Back then, contentious subjects like politics and religion were discouraged, but they were allowed if they pertained to an SC story. Sometimes people would post stories ranting about SCs littering their stores with religious pamphlets or pestering them with their political views, and that was okay. I always thought that was kind of strange, but I didn't say anything since I wasn't a mod and it wasn't my place to say anything.

I'm also glad that they now let people blow off steam about work without allowing others to rake them over the coals about it. Back when I worked retail and posted regularly, I got tired of having to defend myself every other time I posted a work story. It was usually just someone being contrary, too. For example, one time I posted a story about a truck driver who jumped all over me because his truck wasn't being unloaded fast enough, and I had to defend myself from someone lecturing me about how hard the lives of truck drivers are and I should have excused the abuse because of that. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be someone's whipping boy because he has a difficult job. Besides, it's very disheartening to have to put up with that on a site that invites people to vent about work.

[smileyeagle1021]

guywithashovel, I am in that choir you are preaching to. I don't post as often on CS because it does seem a lot like I have to defend myself because I work in an unpopular profession(damn those deaf people who want to be able to conduct business with hearing people, why can't they just stay in the shadows where they belong )
That said, now I'll actually debate you
I don't understand how allowing stories about people littering stores with religious pamphlets or pestering about political views is something contentious and has to be kept off of CS. It is possible to criticize an act committed by one person without criticizing the group that person belongs to (I know, pot meet kettle). When you post about the Jehovah's Witness who leaves Watchtower pamphlets all over the store and how it makes the store look like a mess and takes time to clean up and distracts you from paying customers, you are making no judgement on the religion, just the action of that individual (which really, anything we post on CS is ultimately a judgement of that individual, we have deemed them to be a sucky customer/coworker/manager/whatever). Likewise, someone posting about the Gay liberation front activist who sits next to you on the bus, spits on your Bible, and tells you to convert to homosexuality or die, you are not making any statements about homosexuals, but about a person who was extremely rude to you. Now in both cases it is possible to jump from individual to group or characteristic, but that does not mean that it necassirly must make that jump. I have a few threads about pushy missionaries who won't take no for an answer, and to my knowledge none of them has been closed down because it has turned into a debate about the validity of Mormonism/JW/Whatever religion.

[RavenStarr]

Why?
I see nothing that's "PM worthy" about his comment at all.
He was correcting a false notion about which site was directing the member to fratching.

I think he was probably trying not to hijack the thread. I would have said the same thing as Hobbs. I don't see the point of your comment.

[blas87]

I really hate when people nitpick at one another as to why they bothered posting something or "Failing to see the suck" Fratch style, nitpicking or making comments about how the post or comment is not necessary.

To me, it's not necessary if it's a personal attack or if someone took the debate the wrong way and it's getting sidetracked and making an example of a person, like "I don't see why it's necessary to point out where JoeMember works" but I don't think anyone deserves to have to read that their posts were not necessary when they are not breaking any rules or insulting others.

Edit to add: That was not directed at any particular member(s), it's always been a pet hate of mine on this site, part of the reason I have stopped making my own threads and only adding to others or my old ones.

[MadMike]

I don't understand how allowing stories about people littering stores with religious pamphlets or pestering about political views is something contentious and has to be kept off of CS.

If I saw something like that posted, I'd probably leave it alone, because as you said, it's about sucky behavior, not about the religion. The fact that the offender is part of a certain religion isn't really important. What I might do is warn people ahead of time to focus on the sucky behavior, and not make it about the religion. And of course, if people start doing it anyway, then there may be warnings, infractions, deleted posts, etc. And if too many people pollute the thread, then it would ultimately get shut down.

[telecom_goddess]

I run four total

Rapscallion

And they would be??

[Rapscallion]

And they would be??

Hither and thither.

Actually, these two are obvious. The Devil's Panties forum as well, since that's the first forum I started - it had been run by an A-Team afficionado who'd split from another fan forum for the same preference and ran it as a sub-forum. Was on phpBB for many a moon until it moved here onto VB. Used to be a busy week we got three posts - in the week, that is. These days it's a minor riot, especially around DragonCon.

The fourth gets about four posts a week on a good week and is an extremely minor gaming clan I'm part of. We're looking for a unifying game and not finding it right now.

Rapscallion

[Kaylyn]

Know what pisses me off? When I post a rant about my manager in the "Sucky Customers" section and it gets moved to "Morons in Management." </sarcasm>

It's basically the same thing, really. Once upon a time (somewhere around 2002ish?) the "Fratching" section went by a different name ("Hot Topics", I think?) and was a separate section on the "Customers Suck" forums. Oh, yes, I'm a very long-time lurker. Back then I actually worked in retail and had more to say; then I completely forgot about the site for years. Back then, if debates heated up in the regular forums, it was a simple matter to split off the topics and move them to the appropriate forum.

Now, we have Fratching. It is a separate board entirely. I always wondered why, but this thread explains it. I assume it's because the owner uses it as the hot-button-issue forum for the four boards he manages, and links to it on the main page of the other forums. CS probably just has the higher concentration of members due to its size. Mods can't move posts to this forum because it's in a separate domain, therefore they rely on the members to moderate themselves in that regard. Thus, the warnings and such.

Some people just get their hackles raised a lot easier than others and would prefer to stay away from the fratching. If it's located in a specific area or on a specific board, they can choose to not read it. If it pops up in a thread they're interested in and they choose to reply, they may not be able to help themselves turning it into a flamefest. And the mods have seen this happen over and over again, and know the warning signs, and choose to act in advance rather than too late.

I personally love the system, and think this board works well for the most part. It's rare to see intelligent debate on the internet that doesn't devolve into flamefests. There's hundreds of sites I could visit if I wanted to see MOAR FIGHT.

[Sage Blackthorn]

Fratching is definitely the right place for that.

I think BlaqueKatt was trying to say that we don't usually "fight" about those issues. Most people talk about them calmly and reasonably. She's drawing a distinction between debate and fighting.

Arguments aren't a problem here either, so long as they don't get personal.

Ok, so this IS where contentious and potentially contious subjects should be discussed. Ya'll had me confused for a bit there.

That kind of thing can bother the mods, too.

Especially if the "helpful" person involved didn't bother to report the thread, so the mods don't know to keep an eye on it.

We recognize when someone's heart's in the right place, but I don't think people realize that their "warnings" go ignored. A moderator's warning at least has a chance of being heeded.

Generally when the mods do that, I feel it's because it's a topic that will result in fighting and flaming. So instead of waiting for that to happen resulting in bad blood, people quitting, and such, it's better off to just say "Take it to Fratching" before the guns and knives start coming out.

(In Answer to both Boozy and Greenday)
Ya see, that's the thing. This person IS NOT CURRENTLY a Moderator on that forum. I've been informed that Raps and the other Mods there trust this person's judgement. If this is the case I think they SHOULD be officially made a Moderator if they are trusted to issue warnings. Thus avoiding the whole Official vs. Un-Official Moderator problem.

I frequent a number of message forums, and I've been talking with people this way for approxiamtely 28 years. I've seen a number of problems arise from situations like this simply because a goodly portion of any forum's membership will take offense at warnings issued from a general member while they will accept a warning from an Admin or Mod or if they don't like it they will leave the forum. While when a warning is given by a general member without any such authority granted to them, fights start. As you say, an Admin's or Mod's warning carries greater weight behind it and they are vested not only with the forum owner's trust, but their authority as well. Such boundaries help to avoid problems. The forum owner/Admin. is in charge. The Mod's are his/her Police force and enforce the Owner's policies. When regular forum members start issuing warnings, I've noticed it tend to piss off the other forum members who immediately beging to think "Who the hell are you to tell me what I can and can't talk about on a public message forum?" They seem to take offense at the presumption that somone at the same level they are, an equel as it were, should attempt to exert any authority or power over them.

And honestly I can't really blame them. In discussing this particular issue I've had to examine why I was so annoyed and found that was the source of my own frustration was a non-Admin/Mod issuing a warning on a dicussion that was remaing polite and cordial. Now in this particular case, I've been told that the subject under discussion had resulted in a blow in the past before I became a member, and so I was unaware of it. So I have a better understanding of why the warning was given: The person obviously wanted to avoid another blow up. Personally I still disagree with the practive of pre-emptive strikes like this on principal. I don't think that the reason of "It MIGHT turn into a flame war" is a good reason to shut down a discussion before it HAS turned sour. I think it does a disservice to the forum members, and quite frankly to me seems to display a low opinion of those in the discussion. It's as if the person issuing the warning is saying "I don't trust you people to conduct yourselves in an adult manner on this subject."

Now when the small indicators start to show up, and everyone can see for themselves that the discusison is going south, that is the time to intervene and not before. We're not psychic, we can't tell the future with any certainty and you cannot in essence convict someone of something they haven't done yet just because they might do it. Also, how else is a person to learn what subjects that they should avoid for their own benefit if they are never exposed to them and learn how to deal with them. I know that there are some subjects that for whatever reason just irrationally and illogically piss me off at my core. Those are the subjects that I've learned to avoid until such time as I've been able to examine why I have such an un-thinking hatred of one side or the other. Most of the time, it goes back to prejudices I was programmed with as a child before I aquired reason. But, had I never been exposed to those subject, I never would've recognized my own prejudice and been able to resolve it.

On a side note, I've also seen over the years how easy it is to misinterpret someone's words on a forum for the simple fact that posters often use ambiguous terms that can have multiple meanings. The problem is compounded by the fact that one poster may be in America while the other may be in Europe, or Russia, Or Japan, or South Africa and they are viewing what's being said through an entirely different cultural lens. On top of that, you miss out of the subtle nuances of body language when communicating in text. The invention of Emoticons has helped to moderate this a bit, but they aren't perfect and some people fail to use them. There's a world of difference between seeing "You're an ass" and "You're an ass ". That little smiley makes all the difference between an insult that will start a fight and a joke between friends. English is such a bizzarely vague language to begin with, sometimes I wonder why forums never evolved to have Latin or some other more precise language as their default.......except that more people seem to speak english than most other languages (barring Chinese, but having a population of over 1 billion tends to skew the data a bit. And English to the best of my knowledge is the current International Business Language....although I was told that French is the current International Diplomaic Language too.....so go figure).

[MadMike]

When regular forum members start issuing warnings, I've noticed it tend to piss off the other forum members who immediately beging to think "Who the hell are you to tell me what I can and can't talk about on a public message forum?" They seem to take offense at the presumption that somone at the same level they are, an equel as it were, should attempt to exert any authority or power over them.

If it makes you feel any better, it pisses off the moderating team as well, when someone decides to "play moderator" like that. Years ago on CS, we had some newbie show up and berated one of the long-time members for posting a story were the employee was the sucky one and not the customer, saying "this site is for posting about sucky customers only."

Since this was before we started moderating new users, everyone saw it and several people commented on it. I stepped in and publicly asked him just who he thought he was, as he wasn't a moderator, and wasn't even a member into maybe a day ago. I then pointed out that we do allow sucky employee stories, and told him to "leave the moderating to those who have actually been appointed to do so."

He didn't last very long after that. Not because we banned him, but because he quickly made a lot of enemies, including pretty much the entire moderating team. Everyone pretty much ignored him (not replying to his posts or threads), and he eventually quit posting.

[Rapscallion]

It's basically the same thing, really. Once upon a time (somewhere around 2002ish?) the "Fratching" section went by a different name ("Hot Topics", I think?) and was a separate section on the "Customers Suck" forums. Oh, yes, I'm a very long-time lurker. Back then I actually worked in retail and had more to say; then I completely forgot about the site for years. Back then, if debates heated up in the regular forums, it was a simple matter to split off the topics and move them to the appropriate forum.

Ah yes, A View On - later aviewon.com if memory serves.

Now, we have Fratching. It is a separate board entirely. I always wondered why, but this thread explains it. I assume it's because the owner uses it as the hot-button-issue forum for the four boards he manages, and links to it on the main page of the other forums.

The main reason for a completely separate URL is to effectively put a wall between the two sites. Back when it was part of CS.com, even when you told people to keep it within the subforum, things would spill out. Bad feelings worked their way out to harm other threads.

CS probably just has the higher concentration of members due to its size. Mods can't move posts to this forum because it's in a separate domain, therefore they rely on the members to moderate themselves in that regard. Thus, the warnings and such.

The interesting issue is that a greater size causes many more permutations of noses to be put out of joint.

I personally love the system, and think this board works well for the most part. It's rare to see intelligent debate on the internet that doesn't devolve into flamefests. There's hundreds of sites I could visit if I wanted to see MOAR FIGHT.

You can thank Boozy specifically for that one. The moderating team as a whole do a fantastic job here and on the other forums, but on here Boozy stands out as the ultimate in dousing fires and getting stuck in on any potential trouble spots.

Rapscallion