CS posts full of OP ew suck.

[HYHYBT]

Sure, pretend the extremes are the only possibilities.

[MrsEclipse]

Sure, pretend the extremes are the only possibilities.

We're not really pretending. We've already seen it tends to work out like that on CS.

[Canarr]

Yes, between the extremes, there'll be lots of grey areas. But that doesn't make it easier to mod, it makes it more difficult. Because, unless you put down a clear rule - like the FTSTS rule - and enforce it strictly and fairly, you'll always have people complain. "Why was my post deleted???? What HE wrote was much worse!" - "No, due to this, this and this reason, we felt the other post was acceptable and yours wasn't." - "WAAAAAH! You're just doing that because you don't like me!"

And yes, you'll have that every. single. time. Because all people are - to some extent - self-centered twits with no ability to look outside their own box.

[Peppergirl]

Sure, pretend the extremes are the only possibilities.

To whom are you referring here?

[NateSean]

I'll chime in and say that I've only ever had one thread shut down because people were too busy arguing over whether or not I had the right to refuse an alcohol sale. That was a few years ago, but I still get wary whenever I know I'm about to post something that will spark a debate.

It's not my intention to gain noteriety or "Vinegar Boy Status", I just want someone else to understand what happened to me and why it upset me. The reason I do this is because more people here are supportive of me than many of the people I meet in real life, who almost always have an justifying excuse for the kinds of behavior I've dealt with from both coworkers and customers.

With a majority of CS.com there are only a handul of posters I read regularly and even fewer that I actually comment on. When someone tells me about an irate customer I assume it was the result of following a company policy that may not make sense to the customer or to myself, but the OP had to follow regardless. If the OP seems to be embellishing but doesn't directly violate any of the other CS policies I hit the back button.

Seems easier than letting the post in question take up space in my mind for free.

[blas87]

You aren't alone. I think a lot of people post less or heavily make notes and warnings so that people don't immediately start hopping on the OP (even with FTSTS rules, people still skirt around it) about what they SHOULD have done or COULD have done or why it's ok that their brother's girlfriend's uncle never has to prepay for his gas.

Some people come to just vent, and get lectures and instructions on how to file a police report, sue, go to HR, or file a harrassment complaint.

[guywithashovel]

As for the stories that seem suspicious (ones where the SC gets owned, gets hauled away in handcuffs, it's found out that the SC had serious criminal charges against them, etc.), some of them aren't totally unheard of. Granted, if you get several stories that all seem to follow the same basic formula, hackles should go up. But when I worked at Wal-Mart, there were a few times when we caught shoplifters and found out they had charges against them in other states, and subsequently, they were extradited out. Granted, the stories of them being caught weren't nearly as glamorous as some of the SC ownage stories on CS.

About FTSTS, what always annoyed me was when I posted a work story, and one of the forum favorites came along and pulled a "fail to see the suck" in one way or another, and then suddenly everyone else who responded to the thread was echoing what that member said, clearly just to be agreeable with one of the Queen Bees or Alpha Males.

[blas87]

That's why Raps and the mods described it as a "herd mentality" to the nay-sayers who didn't like the FTSTS rule. There's a certain amount of who's who on CS, and there's definetly a following trend of several members, so it's only natural someone's followers will also hop in with their unwanted armchair expert advice or "This is what you did wrong" written diahrrea.

[HYHYBT]

I know this will be taken the wrong way, but here goes anyway:

Whatever the effects per case, the FTSTS rule and whatever the one is that means you can't openly say a story is false (I think I'm remembering rightly that there is such a thing; if not, there's something far too close) *over time* has transformed CS from a trustworthy place into an untrustworthy one. Banning criticism does that. It used to be that I could depend on very nearly all the stories to be essentially true, and that if someone didn't believe that people really acted in suchandsuch way I could feel confident pointing them there to see for themselves. But not allowing people to challenge stories on their questionable points (whether it's truthfulness or degree of suck) means, not only that people don't get the chance to correct or explain better, but also that there are enough now that it *encourages* those who visit to adopt the "bunch of whiners who should remember they're lucky to have a job" mindset. It also encourages more of the sort who really do just like to make a big deal over nothing or to tell tall tales to stop in and fill the place up. Ultimately, it may make the place exactly what customers (in the negative sense) would expect it to be. That's the choice you've made, partly in the obviously hopeless search for a list of rules so long and comprehensive that there's no need for judgment calls or complaints.

Which leaves me a question: what *changed* to make this supposedly necessary when it hadn't been for the first maybe ten years?

[blas87]

If you think someone's story is BS, that's why you report it or send a PM to Raps or one of the mods that you think it's fabricated. Even if nothing comes of it other than them taking a look at it and thanking you for their concern, at least it shows you did your part.

FTSTS is blatant criticism, not constructive, and I think GK had a very good metaphor for that.

Besides, let one or two people play armchair expert and explain where you went wrong, then everyone will. People already skirt around the rules enough by "correcting" others and finding ways to show what could have been done differently.

If anyone thinks CS is just a bunch of "whiners" because no one is allowed to tell them they are, then they can go somewhere where its a free for all and everyone (including mods and admin) will openly bash anyone for any reason. Raps and the mods want everyone to feel welcome to post. Obviously, in the past while, there's been a lot of problems with people who feel they shouldn't or can't post because they fear their post being ripped apart or misunderstood by people who just want to find reasons as to why the customer/other person wasn't the problem.

[Rapscallion]

Thanks, Blas.

I like to think of it as the football violence that plagued the UK in yesteryear. The standard fans who turned up to watch football were forced away by all the thugs who turned up to fight each other - they didn't really support the teams, but instead arranged to meet for fights at certain games.

I don't want to see people forced away from the board.

Rapscallion

[Canarr]

I understand the reasoning behind the FTSTS rule, and acknowledge why Raps and the Mods believe it to be the lesser of two evils. But, for the reasons that HYHYBT pointed out, it's still an evil, even if it's lesser than the other.

An environment where there's no criticism, only yaysayers and encouragers (enablers?) is not a particularly healthy one. I realize that, when coming to vent about a stressful day on the job, no one wants to read a dozen posts of "Well, you could've done this and that better...". But reading the - sometimes - load of well-intended advice along the lines of, "You should sue/call the police/report them to HR/whatever" is hardly more helpful. And the FTSTS rule makes it hard to be the voice of reason in such a situation.

[Ree]

Well, people are always free to seek out those message boards that allow the kind of feedback that is, apparently, being oppressed at CS.

We must be doing something right, though.

Threads: 82,182, Posts: 978,690, Members: 5,418, Active Members: 1,238

[HYHYBT]

We must be doing something right, though.

And nobody here has said otherwise.

(I'd still love to know what *changed* that made that rule necessary when it, obviously, was unnecessary before.)

[Ree]

And nobody here has said otherwise.

Are you kidding me?
You've been ranting since the thread started about the changes at CS and how they have a negative impact on the place.
How on earth is that in any way saying that we are doing it right?

You can't have it both ways.

You can't say we're doing it right when you have repeatedly told us how we are doing it wrong.

Well, I guess you can, and I'm sure you will justify it, but it all seems rather contradictory.