Disappointed - Page 3

TGR is TGR. EpicSki is EpicSki. We are different, but we overlap. We do things differently, and that's ok. If reasonable people will be reasonable, we can resolve most of our differences and continue to expand rather than limit options.

Cirquerider,

There is always a fine line between "valid criticism" and "attack," on Epic, on the internet in general, in the press, and elsewhere. Given that the threads you cited would be deleted for any member, why not just delete them when aimed at the Mods as opposed to making a general rule that participants (the more I hear the less I feel like a member) can't discuss specific moderator comments or actions in public.

A less obvious issue is where should the standards be set to differentiate between valid criticism and attack. By forcing comment on specific moderator action and comments to be out of the public forums there is a tremendous opportunity lost, not only for participants to contribute to policy but also for them to understand the reasoning for policy.

There is a trade off here that is being made. The Mods (and owners of Epic?) have decided it is best for them to maintain this level of protection at the expense of excluding public comment of specific actions. As I am not privy to moderator discussions I certainly can't claim to understand all of your motivations. However, from what has been said here and elsewhere I think this is a big mistake whose costs are far greater than any level of perceived protection for Epic and its Moderators. In fact I think it damages the image of moderators far more than any public discussion of individual moderator actions.

It seems clear that I'm not going to change the mindset of the moderators here so I'm not trying to do that at this point. Like most of the moderators, though, I feel compelled to respond to what I consider to be inadequate reasoning for this policy that exists on Epic. The more I hear of the reasoning the more it sounds like rationalization from a moderator segment that is not able to integrate all sides of the argument (as I look at the issues from my personal value system).

Um, Si...? Have you noticed that we are discussing policy? Most policies are discussed in the open forums before (and often after) they are set. What is not discussed is individual moderator actions, because they are so often misconstrued. PMs are far better for those discussions.

BTW, to be clear, policy discussions are not forbidden by the Guidelines, which I'll reproduce here. In fact, they are "generally welcome!" The continual statements that policy discussions are forbidden is an example of the kind of "say it enough and it will become true" comments that illustrate the points I've been attempting to make. Here is what the Guidelines actually say:

Um, Steve...? Have you noticed that I am specifically talking about the policy which prohibits public discussion of specific moderator comments and actions? I've got the feeling that you just can't see my point. Let's just chalk it up to my lack of communication skills.

In relation to the rationale for said policy that you have just reposted here, I am talking about treating the moderators just like any other member whom I would usually respond to in the public forums, whether I agree or disagree with them.

Fair enough, Si, I believe I see your point. Others seemed to be claiming that policies could not be discussed here, and I was reacting to that.

So, what kind of moderator actions do you think should be publically discussed? Bannings? Time Outs? Editing of a post? Deletion of a post? Deletion of a thread? Moderation of a thread (putting the thread into an invisible state so that it can be discussed by the moderators and administrators)? Closing of a thread? For any of these specific occurrences that you (plural) think should be open to discussion, I would like to understand what you think is gained by arguing a specific action versus simply discussing the policy behind it (which is appropriate).

Not trying to make TGR epic or epic TGR. Just noting a site many are familiar with that largely self-moderates as a community. Purely for discussion purposes regarding more vs less transparency & community decision making.

I am inclined to agree, again, with Si that a certain message is not getting through. I suspect it is a matter of perspective and experience.

That said, transparency begets trust and trust generates both lower key communications (including more casual and laid back questioning and debate) - and greater buy in to community standards. As Si said though, you guys get to set and manage policy as you see fit...

I'm having a very difficult time understanding where we can be much more transparent than we are. Someone needs to help me here. I'd like to understand why our making a request that members and Supporters engage first in private messages to get specific information about an activity is viewed as "secretive" or "opaque". I view it as avoiding metadiscussions that often prove unnecessary after we have those PMs.

I also view it as avoiding the "pile on" that often happens around policy and related discussions, which has happened around this particular topic. It's mild right now, but there are some who are convinced that any moderation is too much, and jump at the chance to beat up on the people who moderate at all. And they are very good at avoiding direct attacks while clearly attacking.

SSH,

I strongly believe and respectfully submit that all thread locking/deletions, bannings and time outs should be explained in the supporter area. You don't pony up $20 to support the site, you have no right to be so informed.

No discussions, explain it and lock it.

That'll do for me....otherwise run your business as you see fit.

I'll just sit back and pick what I like and ignore the rest. Liberal use of the ignore feature has kept me out of trouble for over a year.

Which is nice.

I think that's worth discussing, hrstrat. Question: how would we handle situations that include private communications contributing to the decisions?

Pretty simple, all of the above - most of the time. When personal issues and private communications are the basis for action and need to be off limits to public discussion state it up front. Additionally, if the moderators feel that any of these actions would be inappropriate for public discussion - explain as much about the reasoning as possible without violating privacy.

My main point is that you should strive to have it all open to public discussion and closed only when warranted - but with as much explanation as possible.

As an example, in one recent case that got my ire up a moderator (whose contributions I generally appreciate and enjoy) closed a thread he/she had been participating in - one in which he/she had been criticized in a civil manner for his/her point of view. By any standards I know of, this had appearances of conflict of interest. Additionally, the reasons stated for closing the thread showed what I considered to be clear lack of objectivity. I think there was a lot to be learned from public discussion of this situation but that was not allowed to happen. Additionally, the PM's I exchanged on this closure did nothing to provide any further illumination (except for the policy of not discussing specific moderator actions in public). Now if there were other reasons for closing the thread, no one reading it would never know. For me it left the impression of inappropriate action and biased behavior on the part of the moderator team. I think that public discussion of this closure could have changed that.

When the communication is reasonable, Si, what you ask is reasonable and appropriate. The challenge is that in virtually every circumstance since I became involved in moderation, they quickly degrade into accusations. In those situations, moderators and administrators are put on the defensive and the best they can hope to find is a cease-fire.

Believe me when I say that I prefer to be completely open about everything. Really! I have nothing to hide and would prefer to let everything be in the open. The problem is that many people--especially when shrouded by Internet anonymity--become very accusatory and aggressive, and by virtue of volume overwhelm reasonable truth. This has resulted in a number of occasions of throwing up our hands and either avoiding the conversation or stopping it cold.

Unfortunately, this was virtually always the result of the kinds of conversations that you'd like to see happen. If we could somehow avoid that, I would be more than open to doing this.

situations that include private communication? with the permission of the participants, of course.

How a thread like the geek thread in the supporters area? that way a thread wouldn't need to be created for each action.

By jove, I think hes got it.

x3

I knew I always liked you. In a purely professional way, of course.

Sounds like "Ask a Mod". Where have I heard that before? :

You know, I LIKE this website, and I really, really like what I have gained from it over the years. Whether or not I agree with everything the board of moderators has done isn't a factor. I rarely agree 100% with anyone, anyway.

If I didn't like this privately owned site, I wouldn't be here. Free speech is a phony issue. If you're so hot and bothered about it, start your own damned web site. Your a$$ isn't glued to the chair here. This is a private place. If you don't like the rules and their enforcement, GO AWAY.

"Commercial website"?! Give me a break. Is it run on a business model? I certainly hope so. Is it run for the purpose of making a buck? uh, I think not.

Moderators, you're not perfect and don't claim to be. Please do take into consideration the reactions of those who have stated their disagreements and other points of view. Please continue to think and grow, as you have. And THANK YOU for your volunteer efforts to do a job that is, in many respects, thankless.

I knew there was a reason I truly love this guy. The voice of reason once again!

My hat is off to the esteemed gentleman from Vt!

My "mantra" used to be that it's AC's site and we are in his living room. His house, his rules.

Same still goes.

Paula's Inn has a few beds open. :

wow.... i think you guys spend too much time on the internet and not enough skiing.

just to clear some things up:
a moderator did PM me about pulling my ad and i PM'ed him back. we went back and forth on several things including post counts etc. i explained i was an active member on other sites such as TGR, telemarktips etc. and not just some shmoe treating EpicSki like craigslist. but i was told to become an active member here and maybe in a month, my post could be resurrected. we ended it with my frustration that at the moderator's decision... ie not any policy guideline etc. that my post might be resurrected in a month. i think i mentioned something about being a USSCA level 1 coach... and really not feeling the love to contribute to a place like this. again, this was out of frustration.

it was after these string of PMs and out of my initial frustration that i posted my little rant at TGR. i definitely didn't know i was going to strike such a cord and a touchy subject between the 2 sites. and until i read this thread, i honestly forgot where i picked up the skis.

in any case, i am over this whole thing. i still have the skis... and am now rethinking about selling them. i have offered to the Moderator to delete my thread at TGR and put this behind me. honestly, i could careless about this crap, forum policies, bickering etc. i should be in bed since i have to head up to the mountain tomorrow and take my 4 y/o skiing with her coach.

BTW, one reason for my low post count here vs. TGR is that i have always enjoyed the laidback nature of TGR. also, i am not a big fan of trying to discuss extremely technical aspects of skiing thru writing on websites. i am much better at discussing things thru demo or "hands on". overall i have just enjoyed the vibe from TGR vs here.... and there is only so much time in a day i can afford to waste on skiing websites.

True dat.

I apologise for the errors in my previous post.

Thanks, chili. I appreciate your dropping in and commenting on this, and I'm glad that things look brighter today. I hope that you'll find time to drop in and comment on some of these things once in a while, but I know a number of folks who feel as you do... and most are exceptional teachers and coaches.

There is still a thread on here offering the Squads. If you want to sell them, I hope you do.

I always think it's interesting to come to review these type of threads and try to distill the finer points ...

I am not really interested in voicing my personal opinion regarding the work the moderator's do ... and, there are a few ideas that came out of this discussion that interest me.

1. From what I read there is a trend of "delete first, discuss later" ... and, it seems like some members are concerned about that. I have done a lot of mgt. coaching and corportate training ... one of my stock phrases is "as you treat one, all expect to be treated". Perhaps the discussion here (and all of the previous ones) stems from individual's concerns about being "policed" ... which leads me to the idea of "Epicski Community" ...

2. The discussion around *what* this site is all about seems confusing (maybe just to me) because:
- the site is privately owned and has "commercial" activities (like the ESAs)
- the site is moderated by a fairly large team of volunteers
- how were the moderators chosen? was it political?
- the word "community" is always used on this site ... community is roughly defined as a group who live in the same locality/observing the same rules (government)

If epicskis membership continues to grow by leaps and bounds, the "community" becomes more of a city than the hamlet it once was ... dissenting voices are expected as everyone cannot share exactly the same set of ideas/values.

On a personal note, I joined epicski years ago (an instructor friend told me about it) when it was a place where I could go to pick the brains of a group of tenured ski professionals. It was interesting and challenging. I have not frequented the site in the last 1.5 years because growth has dilluted what I perceive to be the value of this site. There are still some gems to be found, but it takes a lot of wading through the sh*t to get there.

As an owner or moderator of this site, it might be interesting to poll the membership about
- when they joined the site
- why they joined the site
- what keeps them coming back
- what they like the most
- what they like the least

My guess is that the responses will vary greatly based upon the tenure of the member.

Just my 14 cents.
kiersten

Interesting observations, klkaye...

Actually, we don't "delete first", we "moderate first." We'll put a post or thread into moderation when it's been reported or there is reason to be concerned about the content. We do this exceedingly rarely (other than SPAM, which is immediately deleted).

"Community" in the general Internet sense is different (some call it Web 2.0). Web communities are formed around affinity, for EpicSki that being skiing. That said, I think your analogy is quite accurate.

Now, that's a thoughtful post, including the part I've sculpted out, above.

I'll see your 14 cents and raise you a dollar:

Lars was member number 43 (I think), Pierre was member number 44, and I was member number 45. Without question, EpicSki is not what it once was. In fact, as I look at my son starting the spring semester at University of Vermont, he's definitely not the same kid he was in middle school. That's ok. It happens. Things change. Me? I'm still happy here, and I still love my son.

Now, if I were in a business seeking something in particular - oh, say, money or something like that - I sure would be interested in what people want to buy from me. Like, if I owned a pub, say, and I wanted to maximize (gotta love the ize) customer visits, I really would be interested in what y'all want. On the other hand, if I owned a pub that was doing, for example, ok enough for me, and if I wanted that pub to be THIS rather than THAT, I'd also care about MY OWN desires.

This IS, after all, a truly privately owned and controlled site. Some people have decided that their time, effort and investment of capital is worthy of this web site. What other people want is VERY OBVIOUSLY important, in their view, as is what THEY THEMSELVES want.

If you liked my pub better in the old days when it was up-and-coming, and you don't like it so much now, THAT'S OK WITH ME!!! It's a free country! You don't like it now? You're free to go elsewhere - or, of you choose, NOwhere.

Just to be clear, it's FINE - REALLY - that you folks voice your views. It's ALSO fine that your views may, or MAY NOT coincide with the wishes of the owners.

A word about the "volunteer moderators": In the "old days", it was AC who was the creator and sole owner of this website. There WAS no "board of moderators". He was IT. Period. End of sentence. It was easy to know who "did it" - because it was AC!

The idea of having a BOARD of moderators is a fairly new wrinkle. There is NOT "just one" person, and so the dynamics of the process are different. These volunteers are in the process of learning and developing the criteria and procedures by which they will moderate this web site. It's understandable that (a) they won't always do what they, in hindsight, wish they's done and (b) no matter WHAT they do, someone, somehow, will not like it. It is also clear that working AS A GROUP takes a lot more coordination than working solo.

Good night, and good luck. (Can't you just see the cigarette smoke? Of course, I don't smoke, but maybe just for affect . . .: )

Thanks Steve. It occurs to me ... if that's how it seemed to me, might others have seen it that way, too?

kiersten

As long as this topic is still on top, and started with the concern for a post in the swap forum, I'd like to point out that the swap guidelines have been discussed, changed and posted. Many opinions were expressed here and we tried to accommodate the best compromise we could. Be glad to talk about it with anyone who remains concerned, but it would be appreciated if we could turn the page and start a new thread to do so.

Good call Oboe. Seems to me it belongs on the "About Us" page.