It's been a cruel, cruel summer...

[Lakepilot]

I read this forum every day. I think it's great. I don't post often because I only post when I think I can make a contribution that others haven't or aren't likely to make. I don't talk just to hear myself talk either.

Censorship doesn't work. I will stop leaving to when moderation turns to censorship, because I won't know what is being censored or how much is being censored. I'm capable (usually) of filtering other peoples posts.

[Argie's Wife]

To those of you who wrote that you have read this forum for years but only have a handful of posts.... well, that's how I started out here, too. I understand what you're saying and respect your opinion. My history is very similar. This forum is a great resource for sharing information - it's part of my "daily news".

On one of the Lobster Pound threads, the owner, Mike, mentions the integrity of this forum and questions how it will be taken seriously if people post inaccurate information. I've paraphrased his comment here, but you get the idea of what he's saying.... And he's got a good point, in my opinion. (Have you ever read the "Rants and Raves" section of Craig's List? Good grief! That's the last thing I'd want to see here!)

I also put myself in the shoes of the business owner who is trying to defend his livelihood because a customer went off half-cocked and then decided to go public with accusations of food poisoning, bad customer service, etc. but have no other history here on the forums anywhere. The mad customer is just using the forum for their own agenda - to get back at the restaurant manager/owner who didn't give in to them.

Is that really fair? It's certainly not ethical.

What I'm suggesting isn't necessarily censorship, as it's more of a "quota" or even a verification method (which some forums - yes, open forums) require for membership. And when did "open forum" mean you can simply spew garbage from your keyboard anytime you wish? I'd like to think this forum has way more class than that (and it does!)

Sometimes censorship is necessary for the protection of the other members of the board - I've seen posts and even whole threads removed from this forum in the past - but it was because someone(s) weren't following the rules. Is that reason to leave - because others can't play nicely? I think not...

Like I've said - I don't expect people to agree or for this to be popular but maybe some safeguard should be in place... who knows? But integrity here is important.

[KellyG]

I have a suggestion. I read the trip advisor forums, and I have hundreds of posts on there, and on that site there is a button on every post that states "report inappropriate post." You click this button when you find something to be inappropriate, giving a reason why it is inappropriate, and then the moderator takes care of removing it. I find that on that forum, someone will sign up and on their first or second post they talk very negative about an establishment. The people that are regular posters, or people that read the forum often, can usually tell that it is someone that just signed up to post negitively. There are others that have read that forum for a long time to get information on their trip and they will sign up to talk about their trip to give back to the boards.

Every person on every forum was new at one point. Does this mean that the person that has a great deal of knowledge about a place should not be able to post because they just found the forum? It kind of reminds me of switching careers. The employer wants someone with experience, but how can the person switching careers get experience if no one will hire them because they have no experience?

[Mr. Moyer]

RI Swap yankee,

You are absolutely correct, we have a difference in opinion. I absolutely feel there is no place for censorship, especially on this forum. I can't imagine that if you feel differently that you will be able to change my mind. I feel the freedom to express one's self is at the core of our nation"s strength. As for the webmaster, removing whole or partial posts, I would disagree with that practice as well.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moyer

...I absolutely feel there is no place for censorship, especially on this forum...I feel the freedom to express one's self is at the core of our nation"s strength. As for the webmaster, removing whole or partial posts, I would disagree with that practice as well...

People need to remember, there are no first ammendment rights guaranteed, implied or granted by the owner of this website.

This website is a private domain, the exclusive property of the "Don". The only individual that has the right to free and total expression, as guaranteed by both the NH and Federal Constitutions is the owner of this property...the "Don".

Anyone that wishes to express their first ammendment rights is free to do so, simply by creating a website of their own.

However, whenever we peruse or post to this particular website we do so clearly as guests of the owner, and are subject completely and only to those thoughts and expressions that the owner wishes to convey through his property.

I like being one of Don's guests, and when I am visiting in his "house", I obey his rules. If I don't like his rules, then I am simply and utterly free to leave his house anytime I wish, just as he is free to show me the door when my welcome has worn out.

It's as simple as that....

Oh, thanks for letting me visit again today, Don!

[Mr. Moyer]

Skip,

I usually find your posts very informative. I never said that my rights were being infringed upon due to 1st amendmant protection. I simply said that this is where our nation derives it's strength. I also try to instill this in my open family discussions, as well as in my business. I feel that this is why I have been successful and have been open to quaility feedback, solicited and unsolicited. I realize that the webmaster Don, can do whatever he would like since it is his forum, but I am also free to disagree with it as well. We have no protection here as we don't on many website and forums. I just personally feel to stifle any discussion (whether it is through censorship or not), is in poor judgement and will leave this forum weaker in the long run.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moyer

...I just personally feel to stifle any discussion (whether it is through censorship or not), is in poor judgement and will leave this forum weaker in the long run...

Thank you for the kind words...

But I will respectfully bow out of this thread as it is clearly starting to deviate, with the following observation:

As a long time member and clear supporter of this site and it's webmaster, with close ties to many other long time members, I clearly point to the "speed limit thread" as a clear and perfect example as to why Don has to carefully control and fairly and consistently moderate discussion on this site, to keep the site's mission within Don's original vision.

I think Don has clearly censored posts in the past, including (deservedly)some of my own, and has at times found it necessary to stifle discussion.

His ability to do so, and do it in a fair manner, is clearly one of the reasons that this site remains so succesful, has grown so large and remains a credible, important and powerful Lake Winnipesaukee region resource.

'Nuff said by me....

Thanks Don!

Skip

[angela4design]

This is interesting... but IMHO, that's why we have the number of posts a user has contributed VISIBLE. So, we can "consider the source". I think that a user with many posts holds more credibility than a 'newbie', as they have more experience posting, and probably also hold good intentions of supporting our local lifestyles, even if reviews reflect a diappointing experience at a restaurant, perse.

I can see the point, some newbies just pull the pin and throw it in, and the forums explode with debate.

Bottom line for me... with experience comes credibility. We can see how many posts they have... It's up to us to 'take it for what it's worth'. It's just good judgement. just my 2 cents

[sa meredith]

This might work..
I have read in the past that Don reads every post...and I'm pretty sure no new account is open until he reviews the information (I think).
So, although it would be more work for him, perhaps Don would consider having every new memeber on moderation, until say 10/12 posts. Meaning he would have to clear their first 12 posts, before anyone could view them. If someone is just looking to make trouble, it would be a much longer process for them, and they would have to come up with 12 reasonable/meaningful posts.

[ironhorsetim]

I came on this site to vent on a situation and went about it the wrong way, It was removed and I have been on moderation since then (which I totally desrved) I might add. Don's job is not an easy one he has to weed out the truths or falsehoods and he basis his decisions on what he thinks is best for this forum. I've found that sometimes what we are trying to say may not come across the right way or we might not have the knowledge or resources to go along with our comments, that's when the moderation comes in. It's easy to come on here and throw in a comment or two but it's facts that people want to read and not just false accusations. Sometimes things turn out to be true, sometimes not, sometimes people come on and pretend to be people they are not for instance ..say a guy comes on and say's he found the best shoestore in the region, cheap prices great service and so on and he ends up being the owner, you never really know. We depend on the moderator to help us through, and he will....my point being if we all use common sense and good judgment we will know what to listen to or what to toss out in the trash....thats my 2 cents...if I may

[Seeker]

I was one of those whose initial post was a very negative review of a very popular (to some) restaurant. I had been reading the forum for some time and had friends rave about this establishment for years. We finally went and had poor food and poorer service with exorbitant prices. It was then that I decided to actually join the forum. Some took me to task over my comments but others, interestingly, confirmed similar experiences.

From what I am now reading this restaurant read the reviews and I have seen no negative comments lately.

Maybe it takes an experience like that or a run in with a Captain Bonehead to get someone motivated enough to post.

Obviously I don't agree with a requirement of X# of posts in order to post in the review or any other forums.

Seeker

[Rose]

Originally Posted by angela4design

I think that a user with many posts holds more credibility than a 'newbie'...

Many moons ago, when the forum had a different format, my husband made his first and last post. If I remember correctly, he provided information on GPS, which was relatively new at the time. He ended his post with a light-hearted comment. A user with many posts critiqued his post, saying it was very credible until the last comment. My husband, having lots of experience posting in the ne.weather newsgroup but eventually stopping because of the divisive nature there, decided that he wasn't going to waste his time posting here if that was the type of BS he'd have to put up with.

When I sarcastically congratulated the "experienced" poster for chasing my husband away (he hasn't even read it since), this poster proceeded to question my husband's manhood because I stood up for my husband instead of him standing up for himself. Luckily, several other posters got on and basically shouted this guy down. I don't know if he continues to post...if he does it's under a different user name. I do know that I don't want anyone who is relatively new to be pushed off because they feel like they're providing an informative post and get grief for it. And perhaps some of them don't follow up because, like my husband, they feel they'll probably get more grief if they continue.

Like Skip, I'm going to bow out of this thread, and perhaps the forum for a while. When I find that my informative to contentious post ratio going down, it's time to give it a rest for a while.

[Argie's Wife]

Rose.... Skip.... and others....

The heart of this thread isn't to create a "big brother" or some utopian forum with lots of censorship but to look at the integrity of the information we're putting out here in cyberspace. The heart of it is to examine what can be done on a personal or collective level. I am very sorry that you feel you can't be a part of this thread.

I sincerely hope that you weren't offended by my initial post and my counter posts and at the same time, I also hope that others posting on this thread will be considerate in their responses. It is my experience that communication on a forum, in writing, is flat - you can't see my face or hear my voice and know that I'm discussing this as an angry person or as a friendly person. There's a lot missing from communication via this medium, I'm afraid.

I honestly take this as a solid debate of the issue and I'm not bothered by people not agreeing with me. IN NO WAY am I saying my idea or notion is the answer - not at all. Some of you posting against the idea have given some good input as well - certainly food for thought.

Peace.

[SAMIAM]

Now,now,everybody.....no need for anyone to leave.Sometimes conversations get "spirited".....I haven't seen a lot that were downright nasty.As long as there are two people left on the planet,there will be disagreements over something and that is fine as long as they are not insulting or disrespectful.

[Mr. V]

It would be best to moderate ALL posts from ALL posters. All of my posts are moderated. After awhile, this muzzle starts to feel normal.

[kthy66]

Originally Posted by Mr. V

It would be best to moderate ALL posts from ALL posters. All of my posts are moderated. After awhile, this muzzle starts to feel normal.

I too am on perpetual muzzle and Ill admit it is with just cause.. i was a brat and got on a rant and Don gave me a well deserved time out.

but back on track.. to expect Don to moderate every post is a bit much.. The expectation is that we will act like adults and post pertinent and factual information regarding restaurants or anything else on these forum... Yeh there are some of us that get out of hand but like anything else we have to use our own judgement and decide for ourselves what information we absorb and what we disregard.

[webmaster]

Originally Posted by kthy66

i was a brat and got on a rant and Don gave me a well deserved time out.

Ah...Kathy, your response to my "time out" was an assault on the site, contact form and many emails just like the one below.

"Brat" is not what I was thinking at the time .

On 7/10/08, kathy **** wrote:

Your site sucks!
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI, NAZI,
NAZI, NAZI

[Pineedles]

I've never put anyone on ignore before but I am totally blown away by this. The Nazis were and still are a stain on humanity. To equate them with anyone else other than other genocidal murderers is tatamount to either complete ignorance of what the Nazi's did, or well.... I just can't think of any other reason. Very sad.

[kthy66]

Originally Posted by webmaster

Ah...Kathy, your response to my "time out" was an assault on the site, contact form and many emails just like the one below.

"Brat" is not what I was thinking at the time .

I absolutely positively did not write that..
and I know you will not allow this post to go in the forum so I guess your accusation will stay there for all to see.

[kthy66]

Originally Posted by webmaster

Ah...Kathy, your response to my "time out" was an assault on the site, contact form and many emails just like the one below.

"Brat" is not what I was thinking at the time .

Ok my bad. I know who sent that crap. Now I know why. I thought I was being moderated for my comments regarding ****, which were out of line as well.
I just spoke with the culprit. It wont happen again. My sincerest apologies for being out of line and allowing that to happen. A young impressionable member of my family heard my frustration with my posts being removed and decided it was there place to take matters into their own hands.
Kat

[HAHLY]

Yikes! And to think that all I did to earn a "double secret probation" was to use Mr C's wifi connection.

BTW, thanks, Don, for letting me off the hook after 3 years. Now, would you please let GTO off too? He's really not such a bad guy.

[webmaster]

Originally Posted by kthy66

I thought I was being moderated for my comments regarding ****

Apology accepted but since you again tried to post the same comment that started all this I guess I have to continue the moderation .

Sorry for the hijack. Please get back to the comments related to restaurant reviews.

[kthy66]

Originally Posted by webmaster

Apology accepted but since you again tried to post the same comment that started all this I guess I have to continue the moderation .

Sorry for the hijack. Please get back to the comments related to restaurant reviews.

I couldnt figure out how to PM you so I posted it to the forum knowing you would get it because i was moderated.. UGH! I cant win

[Waterbaby]

I have found this thread very interesting, with a lot of good input. I agree with some points made, and disagree with others. Personally, the way I handle things (for lack of a better way to say it) is when I see someone with relatively few posts slamming an establishment or complaining about something, I click on their name and look at other posts they have made. If that person is routinely slamming and/or complaining, I choose to ignore any further posts from him/her. Does that mean I give more weight to people with a high post count? Apparantly so. I don't even know what my own post count is, I would guess it's not as high as I think it is because I quite often compose a post and feel I am not as eloquent in it as I am when talking, so I just plain don't post it. As Argie's Wife said (and I paraphrase here), this is a flat medium and intonations and facial expressions do not play a part in what one is saying.

On another note, Don does do a fabulous job -- I cannot even imagine hosting a website like this, and moderating same all by his onesies............I sure couldn't do it! And I doubt a lot of other people could, either.

[VtSteve]

SA brought up the most valid points. It hasn't been that big a problem with most posts, only on a couple of threads. When I read such negative posts, of course, it gives me pause. But I'm quite familiar with boards, so I like to investigate.

On many reviews, things were found to be true, and some didn't like the fact that a place they frequent was not perfect. Some posters have commented on positive changes, maybe as a result of the negativity, maybe just a coincidence. Possibly, a drop in business doe sit.

I've been online for some sixteen years now. By and large, including professional reviews, I've mostly been disappointed by the positive ones with no cons to point out at all. Beware the rose colored glasses. Also, beware the troll with an axe to grind.

PS: I'm still on course to visit the Lobster Pound, and something tells me it's a great place to hang out and eat.

[chipj29]

I think the best course of action when you read a negative review is to wait. I will use the Waldo Peppers thread as an example. Someone posted a pretty negative review, and right away the guy/girl who wrote it got pounded on. Turns out the review was backed up by subsequent negative reviews.
Personally I would never not visit a place based on one single bad review. If there were multiple bad reviews, then I might not go.

Read the review threads as a whole, rather than in bits and pieces. It is a lot easier to form an opinion on multiple posts, rather than just one. Of course, the best opinion is formed by your own personal experience...

[Happy Gourmand]

Argie's Wife,
Let's get to the meat of this discussion. Is it your opinion that a poster's opinion is of no value based solely on the number of posts he/she has posted?
My opinion is that the term FORUM indicates that opinions from ALL are considered and discussed. Is it your opinion that those of us who have not reached the "maturity" of 25 posts have no valid input into the discussions and questions that are brought forth in this FORUM? Should we all have to embrace your opinions in order to be taken seriously here?
I have hardly ever read anything so ludicrous on this or any other FORUM. Perhaps you are suggesting that before one is allowed to post that he/she complete a questionnaire to make certain that their opinions are in total agreement with those who are more "experienced" on that particular forum?
I have read many of your posts in the past, and have generally opined that you are of sound mind and generally a reasonable person.
Your more recent postings cause me to rethink that opinion.
But hey, I don't have 25 posts yet, so i guess it doesn't matter.

[sa meredith]

Phantom Gourmand...
That's bit strong of a response, no?
I mean, a 25 post limit may not seem like a good idea to you, but, really, I think anyone would have to be blind to at least not see Argie's Wife point a little bit.
New posters have jumped in, with the intention of never coming back. That is indeed a fact. The first (or second) post could, in reality, be anything.
It could contain lies, swears, pornography...anything. She (Argie's Wife) is clearly a reasonable person. I did not see her post as an attack on you...in fact, I sort of agree with "the spirt" of her post...Although I don't think the one hit wonders have been a huge problem.
Let's play nice....

[Happy Gourmand]

Maybe my response was a bit strong. I apologize to all concerned.
I do, however, stand by the part where I feel that censorship for "new" forum members seems inappropriate. This is after all a FORUM where all opinions should be accepted as just that...opinions. As a reasonably intelligent individual,(some may not agree ) I think it is pretty easy to weed out those who post with intended malice. I don't feel that one should ever be judged based on the number of posts they may or may not have posted. This rings of censorship at any level and I strongly disagree that it should be condoned. Our webmaster does an impeccable and thankless job of moderating this forum. As it is his, we must all either abide by the rules and regulations he sets forth or move on.
It wasn't really my intent to attack anybody, but as I reread my post, I can understand how it was taken that way. Again, I apologize.

[Waterbaby]

Originally Posted by The Phantom Gourmand

Argie's Wife,
Let's get to the meat of this discussion. Is it your opinion that a poster's opinion is of no value based solely on the number of posts he/she has posted?
My opinion is that the term FORUM indicates that opinions from ALL are considered and discussed. Is it your opinion that those of us who have not reached the "maturity" of 25 posts have no valid input into the discussions and questions that are brought forth in this FORUM? Should we all have to embrace your opinions in order to be taken seriously here?
I have hardly ever read anything so ludicrous on this or any other FORUM. Perhaps you are suggesting that before one is allowed to post that he/she complete a questionnaire to make certain that their opinions are in total agreement with those who are more "experienced" on that particular forum?
I have read many of your posts in the past, and have generally opined that you are of sound mind and generally a reasonable person.
Your more recent postings cause me to rethink that opinion.
But hey, I don't have 25 posts yet, so i guess it doesn't matter.

Sorry, Phantom, I think you need to calm a bit............. I think Argie's Wife was just throwing out a suggestion, trying to calm things down a bit and possibly eliminate some of the people who jump in with a very nasty review/post and make this thread a little more pleasant to read for the rest of us -- and I use that term loosely, by "us" I mean those people (members and non-members, posters and non-posters alike) who read the thread for criticques on restaurants. Of course, I'm not "in her head" as the saying goes, nor do I know her personally, so I can only guess what she was thinking. Personally, I appreciated her suggestion and gave my own input to this thread, i.e. I look at recent posts by new posters (and old, as a matter of fact, if their usually positive posts seem to have taken a turn to the nasty side) and decide if I think their posts have merit.

At any rate, I'm rambling, and I still think you need to calm down a bit. 'Nuff said, it's just my opinion.

AND, has anyone ever noticed that this is one of the most contentious threads on this forum? Where someone can post their opinion on a restaurant and get attacked for voicing their opinion?

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Waterbaby

Sorry, Phantom, I think you need to calm a bit............. I think Argie's Wife was just throwing out a suggestion, trying to calm things down a bit and possibly eliminate some of the people who jump in with a very nasty review/post and make this thread a little more pleasant to read for the rest of us -- and I use that term loosely, by "us" I mean those people (members and non-members, posters and non-posters alike) who read the thread for criticques on restaurants. Of course, I'm not "in her head" as the saying goes, nor do I know her personally, so I can only guess what she was thinking. Personally, I appreciated her suggestion and gave my own input to this thread, i.e. I look at recent posts by new posters (and old, as a matter of fact, if their usually positive posts seem to have taken a turn to the nasty side) and decide if I think their posts have merit.

At any rate, I'm rambling, and I still think you need to calm down a bit. 'Nuff said, it's just my opinion.

AND, has anyone ever noticed that this is one of the most contentious threads on this forum? Where someone can post their opinion on a restaurant and get attacked for voicing their opinion?

WB, PG already apologized for that post.

I think it is important for all of us to read our posts a second time before hitting submit, whether it is a rant about a restaurant, about speed limits etc. It is easy to hide behind computers and the anonimity of the 'net.

As it has already been said above- one poor review will not stop me from checking a place out but a bunch will, I always look at post counts, and I usually check past posts when a negative review is posted. Please be cognizant that resaurants live and die by their reputation and reviews. Try to be fair and not only post the bad that you experience but also the good. It seems to be human nature to talk about the bad more than the good.

Happy eating!