Suggestions for Improvement?

[southsidemom]

wvhsparent said:

After an appeal by the other MODs Stone is reinstated....with a very short leash

Short leash? Again, very distasteful. We are adults and not children. You are simply an administrator/moderator of this site and should not post a statement like this as if you are the God of what can and cannot be said by her, me or anyone elses for that matter. Lighten up please.

[bob]

southsidemom said:

Now that we have cleared the air, I await more information on date/time for get together so I can voice my suggestions face to face since I do stand behind what I say/feel.

Unless it gets in the way of your golf game.

[southsidemom]

archwinsome said:

southsidemom said:

I have an afternoon kindergartener and have plans for lunch today at 2 with the gals. Sorry. Gotta plan that Memorial Day bbq menu. Pose some other dates times between 1 and 3 and I may be available if not a golf day.

Tomorrow, 1ish.

Headed to buy all the food for 2 parties this weekend. How about we hook up with you and whoever is interested at Buffulo Wild Wings or Texas Roadhouse on a Sunday night (not as crowded)? Planning a couple golf outings over the 6 weeks so schedule is pretty jammed on weekend, but I may be able to squeeze this in. I truly want to share my suggestions. Stone says she may come too, but her husband says he has too much going on professionally to give this one more minute of his time.

[bob]

southsidemom said:

Short leash? Again, very distasteful. We are adults and not children. You are simply an administrator/moderator of this site and should not post a statement like this as if you are the God of what can and cannot be said by her, me or anyone elses for that matter. Lighten up please.

ROTFLMAO.

[southsidemom]

bob said:

southsidemom said:

Now that we have cleared the air, I await more information on date/time for get together so I can voice my suggestions face to face since I do stand behind what I say/feel.

Unless it gets in the way of your golf game.

I don't get the comment.

[southsidemom]

bob said:

southsidemom said:

Short leash? Again, very distasteful. We are adults and not children. You are simply an administrator/moderator of this site and should not post a statement like this as if you are the God of what can and cannot be said by her, me or anyone elses for that matter. Lighten up please.

ROTFLMAO.

That makes 2 of us ;D

[Arch]

Good, 16 hours later there is now an understanding of exactly what a 'mod' is.

From mentioning about being a reader back in mid april I found that a little odd to have forgotten since their role and duties have been in a lot of other threads, even the newspaper article that was referenced in previous posts.

[bob]

1) You were demanding to meet people face to face so you can AIR your thoughts. When faced with two options you have excuses like golf.

2) ROTLMAO was intended because of the contradiction of your post. You complain about the short leash post but then tell them to lighten up.

[doctorwho]

southsidemom said:

wvhsparent said:

After an appeal by the other MODs Stone is reinstated....with a very short leash

Short leash? Again, very distasteful. We are adults and not children. You are simply an administrator/moderator of this site and should not post a statement like this as if you are the God of what can and cannot be said by her, me or anyone elses for that matter. Lighten up please.

Did I miss something ? The moderators of this board DO control the flow of what they feel is correct for the entire board membership - not any one individual. If an individual wants complete freedom to say whatever they want - then they need to start their own discussion boards. It's what keeps this board from becoming a free for all.

By being a member of this virtual community we cede that authority to them, if we don't like it, it's our choice to participate or not

[southsidemom]

archwinsome said:

Good, 16 hours later there is now an understanding of exactly what a 'mod' is.

From mentioning about being a reader back in mid april I found that a little odd to have forgotten since their role and duties have been in a lot of other threads, even the newspaper article that was referenced in previous posts.

I don't know why you would find that odd. Thanks to the explanation that was made (which was not quite considerate) I am savvy on terms used on this site. Don't assume that users are engrossed with the "operations" of how this site works with administrative logistics. If a person does not know or forgets, then they simply don't know. Not a crime or should be questioned. Again, why must comments seem to be analyzed so deeply when one may challenge another persons statements. No response necessary because we are going on to new things.....atleast I thought so.

Face to face is a good idea because hiding behind screen names and postings prohibits us from truly knowing what a person is truly about. I bet that when we all meet, some will be surprised to learn who others are and say, "Hmmmm, I know her from ____ and he/she is actuallu a nice gal/guy." It is possible....

[Arch]

southsidemom said:

archwinsome said:

Good, 16 hours later there is now an understanding of exactly what a 'mod' is.

From mentioning about being a reader back in mid april I found that a little odd to have forgotten since their role and duties have been in a lot of other threads, even the newspaper article that was referenced in previous posts.

I don't know why you would find that odd. Thanks to the explanation that was made (which was not quite considerate) I am savvy on terms used on this site. Don't assume that users are engrossed with the "operations" of how this site works with administrative logistics. If a person does not know or forgets, then they simply don't know. Not a crime or should be questioned. Again, why must comments seem to be analyzed so deeply when one may challenge another persons statements. No response necessary because we are going on to new things.....atleast I thought so.

Face to face is a good idea because hiding behind screen names and postings prohibits us from truly knowing what a person is truly about. I bet that when we all meet, some will be surprised to learn who others are and say, "Hmmmm, I know her from ____ and he/she is actuallu a nice gal/guy." It is possible....

I'd say you've been just as guilty of what you are preaching others to not do.

Oh, wait: "This is Naperville, and people talk"

Do we have a date for 1ish tomorrow? Pick the place.

[southsidemom]

doctorwho said:

southsidemom said:

Short leash? Again, very distasteful. We are adults and not children. You are simply an administrator/moderator of this site and should not post a statement like this as if you are the God of what can and cannot be said by her, me or anyone elses for that matter. Lighten up please.

Did I miss something ? The moderators of this board DO control the flow of what they feel is correct for the entire board membership - not any one individual. If an individual wants complete freedom to say whatever they want - then they need to start their own discussion boards.

By being a member of this virtual community we cede that authority to them, if we don't like it, we leave....

True, but as the moderator you felt the need to ban someone and others may not have. As you stated, this was as decision solely made on your part. Perhaps you should have consulted others before doing so. Now what has happened is that you banned his wife (who posted nothing and had discussion with her spouse which is normal between married couples), others may have felt that was not warranted to ban them, you reactivate it, and expect them to rejoin the discussion feeling good about the administration of this board. Just admit that you banning her was inappropriate and move on. Maybe even send her an apology. Now that would be a nice thing to do if I were the administrator.

[Arch]

SSM, DrW did not ban anyone to my knowledge.

He's not even a moderator from what I can see.

[bob]

wvhsparent said:

FYI - I banned spousestonethrow.
He would have been fine with all but the last sentence IMHO. While I disagree with his analysis of the archives. He is entitled to his opinion. His last sentence I took as an attack on ED which for some odd reason he has some fascination on ED's well being. He was warned once before.

Southsidemom.. I PM'd you my email address if he wishes he can appeal to me why I should let him back. They probably both got banned as they used the same email address to register.

See, if she would have used another e-mail address she would not caught up by her husband e-mail address.

[southsidemom]

bob said:

1) You were demanding to meet people face to face so you can AIR your thoughts. When faced with two options you have excuses like golf.

2) ROTLMAO was intended because of the contradiction of your post. You complain about the short leash post but then tell them to lighten up.

Make excuses? Demanding to meet? Now you must be crazy if you think I would change my plans at the last minute for this. When I have a commitment, I honor it and if you can't understand that then it is your problem and not mine. How about I pose some dates (that allow me to plan my schedule)? I will get back to you.

Out the door to drop off my little one....afternoon kindergarten carpooling calls.....