Hi Movieman,
Actually, if you read the documentation you will see that the Administrator can give that power to anyone for specific forums by setting some bits in their profile. For a short while, the CAs tried it out. It was interesting to see how level-headed people would deal with an offensive thread for a while then suddenly crack and lose their temper as the flames continued. You can read the sig on this post ( http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread?thread=9271#75158 ) for vaio's take on this subject.

As a result of this historical experience, I heartily agree with your point here:
Since CAs are unpaid volunteers, the 'person' is nelsoc, who is 'answerable' to bbover3, who writes his efficiency reports.

This means that we do not maintain 24*7 hours of censorship on the WCG forum. nelsoc looks it over 5 times a week in the morning, though we can send a note during the day. I think that we can live with a weak censorship regime like this one at the moment. If the situation deteriorates, then we can easily tighten up.

I appreciate the measures you've taken.
The remaining issue I see is that someone can still come in, post vile comments and they stay here.
We had evidence of this last night. The thread was closed but the vile post remains.
This is what these people want, to see those comments sit on the forum.
This is what gives them pleasure.
Take that away and you take away their motivation and pleasure.
Closing the thread also gives them pleasure.
They have essentially shut down any discussion on the orginal subject.
On any forum I've ever attended, had someone used the words that have been directed at me in the past 2 months, their accounts and IP's would have been banned permanently.
I think what you need to see is that not only do you have to act to stop these measures, you have to step down and hard to send the message that these types of actions will not be allowed at all and say so pubicly in very strong words.
This should be a place of discussion, some friendly banter and disemination of information to the members, not a battlefield.
I agree that you've taken steps,and they are good ones.
I just think you need to go further to eliminate the loopholes.
Thanks for your time.

The problem with ignoring the issue is the people in question are then seen as "legitimised" by the people who read the forum.
The other problem is that to sit back and allow posting like the ones we're talking about sends what kind of message to the people that come to this forum?
They see it as a battlefield and that takes credibility away from the project itself.
When you have a cancer, you cut it out, before it spreads.
I agree with your last paragraph but block an account, ban an IP,public statement to them in response to a vile post that this will not be allowed it sends a message that is heard and seen by all.
I'm not talking about taking sides in any issues either, just stop the flame wars.
Discussion and debate even if heated can solve issues, it's the name calling and personal attacks that serve no purpose except to increase ones blood pressure.
Thanks for reading.

Maybe you should go back into the archives and read how several of our distinguished CA's distinguished themselves prior to loosing power to close threads and edit.


THERE ARE ONLY 2 CA's of the present crew that I think are impartial. Several others have shown their true colours in the past. If you want to go back to the "old " days... so be it, but remeber YOU asked for it.

May I offer some context - at least as much as I understand it? I derive this from two sayings I have always found useful - there is no such thing as a one-sided coin - pointing a finger at another requires that you point three at yourself.

With respect to the admins, their first priority has to be boarding new projects and ensuring the smooth operation of existing projects. If they fall short on either, WCG risks losing its existing base of crunchers. It would also adversely impact the reputation and perception of WCG as a DC project (See posts a year or so back about how grid.org was being run - or at least how they were percieved).

Second, they address enhancements to the project that expand its potential base of crunchers (Supporting BOINC, MACs, etc)

Third, they address enhancements that expand the "experience" of existing crunchers.

Fourth, they support communications (aka the forums) among their base of crunchers. While the forums are not the "official" support process between the admins and us crunchers, the admins do utilize this avenue. To the extent possible, they also maintain "civility" on the forums.

As I understand it, WCG is a non-profit venture. What I would expect that means in reality for the admins is that they do not lack for work to do even before they get to the third item above. Under normal circumstances, I fully expect that they are spread quite thinly. Still, I believe that they have proven responsive to the extent that circumstances have permitted. When we break the forum rules here, engage in flame wars and behave in a less than civil manner, the time and effort that requires from them takes away from work higher on the priority list. The forums are not moderated (in the sense that posts are previewed before appearing) and I would hope that we as the "user community" can refrain from demonstrating a need for that. We have to first behave and then secondly police ourselves as a community. To the extent that the CA's can provide answers and direction to common topics in these forums, that is of benefit to the WCG admins. As volunteers, they are accountable like most volunteers in any non-profit organization. Unless one proves to be problematic enough that the admins have to "dismiss" them, the admins don't really have many options for discipline. There's no pay to dock, no raise to deny, no promotion to withhold. You can suggest, recommend, advise, display your displeasure but there's little real options between doing nothing and dismissal. As a CA, one accepts a role of leadership within our user community and should expect to be held, and hold themselves, to a higher standard. They ought to be their own greatest critic and should remove themself from that role if they cannot meet this higher standard.

If anything, the extent to which the admins have to "intervene" in threads in these forums defines us as a user community. The need for them to be active in these forums is determined by us so if that need is high, we are responsible for that.

I would suggest that it is not enough to follow the defined rules for these forums. We need to strive to be cognizant that we are a highly diverse and fluid community. WCG is oriented to be a "load and forget" commitment. For a user who successfully begins crunching without problem, they have no real need to participate in these forums. They may choose to anyway as a means of further contributing to the community. The result is that the vast majority of folks rarely post here and even fewer participant on an ongoing basis. Also, it seems that one of the basic characteristics of any forum is that far more people choose to read but not participate (lurk) than those who do. The result of that is that any one of us can have a much greater impact on these forums and how they, and the WCG as a whole, will be perceived by others.

If I may suggest:

1) I should acknowledge the diversity and fluidity of our forum community. The customs, values and perspectives of others will most likely differ from my own and I owe those the proper degree of respect.

2) I should grant others the benefit of the doubt first, accuse last.

3) When presuming the failure of others to behave in kind, I will respond with instruction and enlightenment, not in kind.

4) I have an obligation as a member of this community to utilize existing reporting processes when another member of it fails to acknowldge the above in their continued behavior.

5) I should acknowledge that these forums are not intended as an official support mechanism. When I feel a matter requires a response from the admins, I should utilize the proper process (contact us). To the extent that the admins can utilize these forums for such purposes, that is to our advantage but is not their obligation.

A forum community is an exercise in compromise adnd mutual respect. There will always be ways in which some feel things could be done better. As for myself, I choose to believe that the admins have proven themselves to be responsive to this community to the extent that their higher priorities allow. I doubt that they feel that there is not room for improvement. It is clear that there are those of us that would agree with them on that.