A quick word on "Overwhelmingly Negative Influences"

[Losty]

No!  Come ON!  Ya'll are about to see a grown-ass pregnant woman throw a fucking temper tantrum.  Everybody STOP LEAVING, this is ridiculous.  I'm too hormonal for this shit right now.  Kevin, don't give that ass clown the satisfaction of running you off, PLEASE.  I just found out Rob is leaving; then I have to come here and see this.  If everyone just runs off, then we as the COMMUNITY are letting the inmates run the asylum.  You know he'd be jerking off right now if he could see the upheaval he's caused.  Can we just fucking NOT?  

This has been my only point in this ongoing discussion -- that "overwhleming negative influence" is a lot more than simply spinning a thread out of whack; it also includes causing great members to take a powder.

Those running the forum have decided it's worth it. Let us hope they're right.

I don't really know what this is supposed to mean. Those who leave have decided it's worth it or necessary for them to leave over this. Staff hasn't asked anyone to leave but who are we to not respect someone's decision to take a break or leave the forum if it's what they believe is right for them?

We are not responsible for people leaving over Drich. Not everyone who left left because of Drich. I see a lot of people making a lot of assumptions about staff, staff opinion, staff decisions, what the actual situations are/were, and how the forum is run in general.

What I've learned since becoming staff is that one of things most prided on is fairness. Let's all make a rule where if at least 3 liked (very subjective term) members threaten to leave over one disliked (also highly subjective) member then we will ban the person running off good members. I'll give the forum a good 3 weeks before Tibbers and his ball Wilson are here filling threads all by themselves.

I'm split on the issue in that I entirely understand the emotional aspect on a personal level. There are a few people I'd be glad to see go myself and it pains me to see anyone leave over Drich because I really care about this community. But on a logical level it makes no sense to ban people over someone else's decision to leave. Furthermore you're wrong to believe everyone who left left over the ONI thing or Drich or even wanting someone banned.

I don't like being associated with your posts about the staff deciding it's worth it for good members to leave, namely because it's not remotely reflective of the actual situation. We don't want people to leave over this. What we want is for people to see that not too long ago everyone was up in arms over losing a bit of freedom of speech and because this forum was founded on exactly that we all got together and spent a lot of time and effort trying to make this place better for everyone. In making a decision to ONI Drich for saying horrible things that upset a lot of good members we would be spitting on the free speech everyone just asked us for and we would be setting a precedent that would require us to ban everyone who pisses people off. It would ruin the forum.

[Thumpalumpacus]

No, it wouldn't; and it's not irrational.

I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who's moderated a freethought forum myself, where free expression was a cherished value. The rational computation was, for us, do they add more interest than they add repulsive influence? You get to keep one member at the expense of losing four (so far as my count goes). How much free speech are you gaining? How much are you losing?

I am not blaming Staff for the exits the individual members have chosen for themselves. But I am saying that policy plays a role in it. You can take my words at value or not as you see fit.

I never said everyone left over ONI, but I know for a fact that at least two left specifically over the mishandling of Drich's bullshit. They're welcome to announce themselves to the forum, if they care to come back at all.

No matter the good intentions of you Staffers, the fact is that this policy is causing great members to leave. I'm not asking that someone be banned for religious beliefs, I'm not asking for someone to be banned for pissing off the Staff. I'm asking that the standard of "overwhelming negative influence" be assessed in accordance with the adjective the Staff itself has used: overwhelming. Chasing members off is also an influence. If you're okay with that, great. I'm just saying that it may not be in the best interests of the forum to run down that track.

Do a cost/benefit analysis of the way this "rule" is implemented, and assign value to how it has affected the forum. If at that point y'all still decide he should yammer on at the expense of contributions from others who give us much more richness, that's your decision, and so be it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

<double-post edited>

[Shell B]

A few people are mad. Not overwhelming at all. I'll also be very surprised if anyone stays gone. Most haven't even actually left, though rob did intimate that he would be "back" if staff implements the rules he wants. I wonder how they would feel about having him on staff after that bit of my way or the highway. In all likelihood, he'll cool off and stay/come back (if he leaves).

[account_inactive]

You get to keep one member at the expense of losing four

The forum would probably lose a lot more than that if the staff started to restrict freedom of speech.

[LadyForCamus]

Can I be blunt and ask, is Rob's exit over this situation we are discussing currently? Or something else?

[Tiberius]

@thump: My problem is that this member isn't "chasing" members off. The members are leaving on their own accord.

Also, what happens when people start threatening to leave because they don't like member X, Y, or Z? Do we ban X, Y, and Z, even if they haven't broken any rules, just because some people don't like them? Sorry, but that doesn't sound fair.

[Tiberius]

Can I be blunt and ask, is Rob's exit over this situation we are discussing currently? Or something else?

Pretty sure its a combination of two situations, including the one we're discussing.

[Shell B]

Can I be blunt and ask, is Rob's exit over this situation we are discussing currently? Or something else?

I'm pretty sure it's over a personal situation that shouldn't have been forum business anyway, but that was aired a bit in another thread. He expressed similar sentiments there before he left. As far as I know, that situation's a non-issue for the forum.

[LadyForCamus]

Gotcha; thanks guys.