What's a "Closed" Thread?

Jay Honeck said:
Agreed. That's enough to kill ANY thread.

Although I've waded delicately back into rec.aviation this evening, and He Who Must Not Be Named has been no-where to be found. Maybe he is finally gone?
Click to expand...

After over a decade? Not likely mate, I think he started the group for his own entertainment....
 
Jay Honeck said:
Thanks for taking the time to answer. You've got a tough row to hoe, as moderator.

(I still think you're effed in the head for closing the thread, but it's your sandbox.... :wink2:)

As for contributions, how does one kick in? Got a PayPal account?
Click to expand...
I'm not particularly interested in recovering my money - I've gained a lot of friends and knowledge through this community and don't mind giving back.

Jay Honeck said:
Just curious: What are the ongoing expenses of this site? This user interface is a common, commercially-available one that is used on many chat boards -- so that explains your up-front costs. (I presume you had to purchase the software?)
Click to expand...
The forum software is certainly the cheap part. I can't say what we've paid for sure over the years but a couple hundred dollars. We also threw down about $500 for the chat. I've got a bit of time into developing some custom things , etc.

Jay Honeck said:
As a reference point, my total expense for maintaining two, unlimited bandwidth commercial websites is $9.95/month... (I do my own HTML.)
Click to expand...
Those solutions are fine for a website without much traffic but fall on their face as soon as they get any real quantity of load. PoA is hosted on a dedicated server - which is why the site is so damn fast compared to some other forums out there. If you were to purchase such a server you'd be looking at over $100 per month unmanaged. If you needed it to be managed by someone like Jason or I you'd be paying about five times that. We've managed to greatly reduce that cost since Jason and I are in the business of hosted web applications.

To put things into perspective, a $10 a month web host would run several hundred websites on the same hardware that is dedicated to Pilots of America.

POA's hosting history is kind of lengthy. It started off on sub $50 a month web hosting and moved around between several solutions with members often complaining about load issues. About two years ago the hosting was handed off to me and the issues were resolved but the monthly costs weren't cheap. Jason and I sat down and worked out a solution that eliminates the monthly operational costs while providing a very nice home for PoA.

Pictures of the machine PoA lives on:
2.jpg


3.jpg


Jay Honeck said:
See "Two Wheeled Texans" for an identical interface that incorporates paid advertising in an unobtrusive way. The ads help to defray your costs, and are actually quite valuable for users in a special-interest site (like motorcycles and airplanes).
Click to expand...
We have no interest in ever advertising on this site and doing so goes against the core concept that built this community into what it is.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
After over a decade? Not likely mate, I think he started the group for his own entertainment....
Click to expand...

BtheB hasn't been around for over a decade -- at least not on rec.aviation.piloting. He popped on the scene rather abruptly around 2008, and quickly drove away almost every regular user. :cryin:
 
Jay Honeck said:
BtheB hasn't been around for over a decade -- at least not on rec.aviation.piloting. He popped on the scene rather abruptly around 2008, and quickly drove away almost every regular user. :cryin:
Click to expand...

He most likely was a regular who picked up an altar ego to say the things he couldn't say with his public ego.
 
Arbiter419 said:
You don't pay the bills to keep this board alive though...
Click to expand...

I couldn't find the slot to stuff coins into. :D Besides, when it comes to contributing to the delinquency of forum moderators I've already paid some dues:

I've moderated (and co-moderated - and still moderate!) the Usenet newsgroups sci.nanotech, sci.physics.plasma, misc.business.consulting, misc.business.moderated, misc.business.marketing.moderated, and misc.entrepreneurs.moderated. I've been moderating Usenet newsgroup forums for about ten years. I wrote about 4000 lines of Python code to allow remote co-moderators to perform their duties in a collaborative manner with as simple a GUI as I could afford the time. I made the code open source.

So I have many years of first-hand experience with moderation being a "thankless volunteer" position. But I got to learn things, like how to quickly remove thousands of messages sent to my e-mail address from a poster showing me just what he thought of my attempts at diplomatic rejection of one of his posts. (This back when my connection was much slower and e-mail client software unable to cope with such a flood.)

After browsing both a number of older and more recent POA threads, and comparing them to the thread that was just shut down, it is my opinion that either the moderation criteria is inconsistently applied or not well formulated.

On the one hand I think the moderators seem to have a light hand (good,) but I think they erred in this case by not first posting a request to the thread that people should, if not kiss and make up, demonstrate a bit more self-restraint lest the admins have to shut the thread down. I think that, ideally, specifics should be given as much as possible and time permits.

I always made it my personal goal to discuss moderation decisions as publicly as possible. I do not understand why a moderator should take the heat for acceding to those who are insulted or upset by emotional disagreements while simultaneously protecting the identity of those individuals. It does those individuals no favors with respect to learning how to cope with such social aspects.

(The Usenet newsgroup software was set up such that each post had to be reviewed for approval or rejection - and rejections were as specific as we could make without undo time investment. We'd say "If you can remove sentence X, your post would be approved," or whatever was appropriate. We had canned responses and templates for certain common rejection classes, though.)
 
jesse said:
I'm not particularly interested in recovering my money - I've gained a lot of friends and knowledge through this community and don't mind giving back.
Click to expand...

I assume one problem with accepting donations at this point would be further dilution of control and decision making, even if indirectly?

(A pity so many have adopted vBulletin; perhaps because it was one of the first? Looks like there are now a large number of options to choose from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software )
 
Jim Logajan said:
I assume one problem with accepting donations at this point would be further dilution of control and decision making, even if indirectly?

(A pity so many have adopted vBulletin; perhaps because it was one of the first? Looks like there are now a large number of options to choose from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software )
Click to expand...

Not at all.. I'm sure I could paypal a few bucks in Jesse's direction without him or I having some sense of undue influence imposed by the donation..
 
Henning said:
??? What's wrong w/ vBulletin? I think it's the best featured of all the ones I've come across, probably an opinion share by others.
Click to expand...

And a MILLION times better than the newsgroups. I like the moderation. It will never achieve the honorability of AVSIG, however.

If you don't like it here....go to the purple board. But stop whining Jay!
 
Jim Logajan said:
I assume one problem with accepting donations at this point would be further dilution of control and decision making, even if indirectly?
Click to expand...

Then there's the "ownership" questions...morally, if not legally. Someone who contributes money to help keep a site going may well tend to feel some entitlement. And that gives you more grief.

I've been on both sides. I moderate a Yahoo group, and have had guys desubscribe just because I mentioned that I *would* reject posts that violated what I felt were clearly-stated, reasonable standards.

On the other hand, I've had posts deleted on other boards. The last one rankled a bit, but it *is* the moderator's board and I acknowledge their right to be arbitrary.

(my post consisted of five words: "There's an ap for that." I thought it was pretty funny...in context...but the context might have made the taste a bit questionable.....)

Ron Wanttaja
 
Jay Honeck said:
II don't know if (as Dan suggests) the moderators thought they were "doing me a favor" by cutting that thread off at the knees, but that's not even remotely the case. I've seen threads banished to the "Spin Zone" before, when they crossed some invisible line -- but I've never seen one summarily executed like this one.

Very strange, indeed. Very disappointing.
Click to expand...

If you could somehow read through the thread objectively, you'd find that it was slowly devolving into romper room. Sure, it's fun sometimes, but feelings get bruised and soon people find other reasons not to like each other and then what do we have?

Internet boards naturally (i.e. without outside interference) devolve (thermodynamics and entropy and all that).

Only by careful husbanding does a garden grow and thrive.

Sometimes you pull up what you though was a weed but was in fact a volunteer tomato from the year before. Oh well. It happens.
 
Was there anything in your manuals at all those other places on the topic of "and if it ain't broke, don't fix it?"

Jim Logajan said:
I couldn't find the slot to stuff coins into. :D Besides, when it comes to contributing to the delinquency of forum moderators I've already paid some dues:

I've moderated (and co-moderated - and still moderate!) the Usenet newsgroups sci.nanotech, sci.physics.plasma, misc.business.consulting, misc.business.moderated, misc.business.marketing.moderated, and misc.entrepreneurs.moderated. I've been moderating Usenet newsgroup forums for about ten years. I wrote about 4000 lines of Python code to allow remote co-moderators to perform their duties in a collaborative manner with as simple a GUI as I could afford the time. I made the code open source.

So I have many years of first-hand experience with moderation being a "thankless volunteer" position. But I got to learn things, like how to quickly remove thousands of messages sent to my e-mail address from a poster showing me just what he thought of my attempts at diplomatic rejection of one of his posts. (This back when my connection was much slower and e-mail client software unable to cope with such a flood.)

After browsing both a number of older and more recent POA threads, and comparing them to the thread that was just shut down, it is my opinion that either the moderation criteria is inconsistently applied or not well formulated.

On the one hand I think the moderators seem to have a light hand (good,) but I think they erred in this case by not first posting a request to the thread that people should, if not kiss and make up, demonstrate a bit more self-restraint lest the admins have to shut the thread down. I think that, ideally, specifics should be given as much as possible and time permits.

I always made it my personal goal to discuss moderation decisions as publicly as possible. I do not understand why a moderator should take the heat for acceding to those who are insulted or upset by emotional disagreements while simultaneously protecting the identity of those individuals. It does those individuals no favors with respect to learning how to cope with such social aspects.

(The Usenet newsgroup software was set up such that each post had to be reviewed for approval or rejection - and rejections were as specific as we could make without undo time investment. We'd say "If you can remove sentence X, your post would be approved," or whatever was appropriate. We had canned responses and templates for certain common rejection classes, though.)
Click to expand...
 
jesse said:
It has been. I've contributed about $2,060 out-of-pocket and recovered about $1,320 of that. We've taken contributions from members to cover some software and a new server a year or two ago. Rack space, bandwidth, and power is provided for free by a certain anonymous corporation.

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28186

Adam and Spike have contributed a great deal of time to cover legal issues and to establish the non-profit that owns Pilots of America. The billable rate of that time greatly exceeds any contributions I've made.


Threads have been closed over the years when the Management Council has decided that they are contributing negatively to our community and nothing positive is likely to come of it. We generally always contact the OP of the thread when this is done but since we all have full time jobs it doesn't always happen immediately. I'm sorry that you disagree with our actions but over the years I feel we've made some pretty good decisions that have built a great community. There is often a "larger picture" that is private and cannot be seen. I hope that you're able to accept our decision and continue to be a member of our community.


There are times where the thread just needs to be closed. We don't edit posts and removing posts will often be interperted as biased moderation. Closing the entire thread down is balanced and was the action taken by the Management Council.
Click to expand...
Jesse- thank you and the other MC for your time and money.

I honestly wouldn't mind if the anonymous corporation put a discreet line some place that read "POA powered by ... Corp". I would use them if I had a need for that service based on my experiences on this board (very little down time).
 
Thanks to the MC for a great job. (Even though you have shut down two of my threads.)
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Jesse- thank you and the other MC for your time and money.

I honestly wouldn't mind if the anonymous corporation put a discreet line some place that read "POA powered by ... Corp". I would use them if I had a need for that service based on my experiences on this board (very little down time).
Click to expand...

I think they remain anonymous because they don't know of their sponsorship....:eek::eek::ihih: (JK) :cornut:
 
Henning said:
I just reviewed the last 3 pages of that thread and think I found the offending post, someone mentioned Bertie the Bunyip...
Click to expand...

murphey said:
shhhhhh....Please do not mention He Who Must Not Be Named by name....
Click to expand...

Jay Honeck said:
Agreed. That's enough to kill ANY thread.

Although I've waded delicately back into rec.aviation this evening, and He Who Must Not Be Named has been no-where to be found. Maybe he is finally gone?
Click to expand...

r.a.p. had BtB as HWMNBN, but POA had it's very own HWMNBN for some time... and I will not invoke that name ... but every once in a while I do wonder how our intrepid birdman turned out.
 
gkainz said:
but POA had it's very own HWMNBN for some time... and I will not invoke that name ... but every once in a while I do wonder how our intrepid birdman turned out.
Click to expand...

Two words: Summit Helicopters
 
Ehhh, sometimes MC shuts something too early, other times too late, on average I say it's just right.

It is absolutely impossible for them to please 100% of the members, 100% of the time, and it's not worth the effort and aggravation to try.

Again -- moderating is, or can be, a major hassle. MAJOR. If they want to shut something to avoid dealing with the BS, so be it. It's not like they're Chinese censors or something.

"we don't like where this is going, and we don't feel like dealing with the fallout" That's probably the decision process in a nutshell. I can't argue with it.

If you don't like it, there is an easy and inexpensive option known as "not visiting the site."

:thumbsup:
 
It doesn't bother me either way. It is up to the moderator to referee these threads.This is just a forum. It is not real life. Nothing here is so important that I'm going to get upset about it. POA is a nice place to visit, I participate in Spin Zone as well, and I'm not going somewhere else just because some moderator decided to close a thread. Jay's tread wasn't going anywhere anyway, so what the heck. Time to move on.
 
Last edited:
WOW....... For once it is not me who is getting the iggy for my ' different' point of view... :dunno::dunno:

Now... what happened to the car ???????

and don't make me call Bertie or Mxmaniac to get the answer. :hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:

Thanks Jay for taking the heat off me ,, I owe ya a cold one buddy.

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com
 
dmccormack said:
Internet boards naturally (i.e. without outside interference) devolve (thermodynamics and entropy and all that).

Only by careful husbanding does a garden grow and thrive.
Click to expand...

Not true! I post on an unmoderated board and a certian dynamic evolves. The board will eventually become self-regulating, with peer-pressure becoming the dominant controlling force.

I could futher expand on this concept on how it applies to politics, but then I'd have to take it to the SZ. :wink2:
 
Capt.Crash'n'Burn said:
Not true! I post on an unmoderated board and a certian dynamic evolves. The board will eventually become self-regulating, with peer-pressure becoming the dominant controlling force.

I could futher expand on this concept on how it applies to politics, but then I'd have to take it to the SZ. :wink2:
Click to expand...

Well, the "dynamic" is it becomes more and more self-selected. Outsiders remain so, insiders bask in the glow of insideness.

nuttin new
 
dmccormack said:
Well, the "dynamic" is it becomes more and more self-selected. Outsiders remain so, insiders bask in the glow of insideness.

nuttin new
Click to expand...

No, "outsiders" come in all the time, the ones that stay are the ones that "fit in" with the established members.
 
Capt.Crash'n'Burn said:
No, "outsiders" come in all the time, the ones that stay are the ones that "fit in" with the established members.
Click to expand...


I don't know which board you're running, but wide open, unmoderated newsgroups have been destroyed by internet creeps who get off being vile anonymously.

Sure, some boards survive because they are hard to find, require burdensome membership routines, or don't permit anonymous accounts.

But internet newsgroups were fine a long time ago -- not so much anymore.
 
I agree that the moderators have every right to limit the discussion, especially when it ends up in a "hang-em-high-non-stop-whining" session. There is a lesson to be learned here Jay. I like the Southern gentleman's advice.........hush.
 
Allowing flame wars to erupt can have some entertainment value, if you're into that sort of thing.
 
Unfortunately, our merry moderators are human beans. I have no doubt that I could perform the moderator function as well if not better than those currently doing so. However, it has the seemly odor of work, to which I am deathly allergic. I will therefore happily live in the dictatorship of our moderators, at least until they tick me off so bad I leave. Given the generally even-handed nature of stewardship, that is likely to take quite some time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top