|
1980. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 4:00:57 AM wabb- I don't remember you ever being so infuriated. What, specific post(s) of Jexster's set you off? 1981. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:02:22 AM I have neither admitted nor denied with your characterizations of Jex's activities but rather said that they don't bother me nearly as much as they do you and a couple of others. May I suggest also that his contributions to the political thread in comments, links to serious links such as those of Juan Cole and others, cartoons, etc. have far exceeded those of anyone else. I wonder if you have ever bothered to look at any of them? I don't recall ever seeing a single post from you on the Politics Thread. If someone asked me what your political views are I wouldn't be able to hazard a guess. [It's possible my memory is failing. If so, I apologise.]
And, as I said, I don't think its fair to attribute, as you seem to be doing, the Mote's decline, as you characterize it, to Jexter. I admire your faithful work on the Sports Thread but I am constrained to point out that it does not inspire a great deal of participation compared to the rich variety of comment on the Politics Thread. 1982. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:15:24 AM I will agree in the interest of comity that occasionally when searching for the wheat among the chaff of Jex's quotes, when he's in his manic posting phase, like the proverbial boy digging into a pile of horse shit and commenting, "There's gotta be a pony in here somewhere!" 1983. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:19:40 AM Further, without Jex and the Wizard of Whimsy, the Politics Thread would be dull indeed. They are both sources of lots of solid input and humor for that thread. What is spam to one may be gems to someone else. 1984. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 5:12:47 AM " it does not inspire a great deal of participation compared to the rich variety of comment on the Politics Thread"
Wabbit knows every thread in this forum inside and out and has been an integral part of its function from its inception. She consistently monitors all the threads. Your reduction of that role to this statement about the sports thread is beyond comprehension. But it's irrelevant to the outcome of this issue in any case.
Wiz--back in the International thread, for the most part, but I'll let her speak more to the specifics, tho she referred to them early in this discussion. 1985. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 6:09:10 AM Arky, I am aware and appreciative of Wabbit's contributions to The Mote. BTW, contrary to her comment, I was an early participant in the Fray using the moniker NarbyNorbert, as I recall. We did have more "heavy duty" serious contributors back then. And I wish we could attract more today. But it doesn't seem to be happening. 1986. vonKreedon - 12/5/2008 6:57:19 AM Right, it doesn't seem to be happening and the fact that so many of us who used to post in politics and such have implicated Jex's serial spamming as one of the reasons for our loss of interest in participating might lead you to consider that Jex is a large reason for the lack of serious contributors. 1987. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 7:43:09 AM I've learned to ignore most of jexster's many methods of slander and it's likely that I missed yet another of his outrageous insults; but my curiosity is now peaked because wabb's pique peaked. I don't think jexster means to be unkind--though he often is.
I'll check out the thread, but I bet I'll still miss it.
1988. alistairconnor - 12/5/2008 10:43:25 AM I've stood aside from this discussion because my opinion is probably an outlier, and I wouldn't want people to give it any particular weight.
But here it is anyway : I am of the opinion that Jex has mellowed over the years. I enjoy discussing stuff with him, I find him an invaluable news feed, and I even find nearly all of his humour funny, including the professed antisemitism and racism.
OK, not the India stuff.
On the other hand, I completely agree with Wabbit and I'm 100% behind her.
And the more I think about it, the more I think that his perverse dedication to shitting in his own nest is designed to keep the site small. And that pisses me off, because the only thing that keeps us from having frequent erudite discussions here, as of old, is critical mass.
I have always been a pragmatist with respect to forum moderation. Remember, I'm a European, we don't have free speech over here anyway.
So I volunteer to be Jexster's personal censor. I generally check in several times a day, and I'll just delete stuff that I deem likely to be considered offensive or disruptive.
How about that? 1989. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 3:26:51 PM That's an absolutely crazy idea. The Mote don't need no stinkin' personal censors. 1990. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 3:42:49 PM What "India stuff?" 1991. vonKreedon - 12/5/2008 5:11:38 PM To dispute my own argument, the population of the Mote seems to have been very stable over the last several years and Jex obviously has a constituency that contains a significant percentage of that stable population. Any actions to rein in Jex's noise-to-content ratio is likely to displease and perhaps drive away Jex and his constituency, while any migration back to the Mote by those driven out by Jex is uncertain and likely to be slow. So the current population of the Mote should carefully examine the expected cost-benefit to them in taking action to rein in Jex. 1992. judithathome - 12/5/2008 9:36:05 PM the only thing that keeps us from having frequent erudite discussions here, as of old, is critical mass.
I disagree...of course critical mass would be good but it will be difficult if not impossible to achieve. I've invited several people over here and their reasons for not staying is the format...as 3i3b mentioned, there is no way to stay current in a discussion, the lack of HTML shortcuts drives everyone mad, and the "no edit" fuction drives peole batty. Plus, no search engine.
All other sites have these fuctions...shortcut HTML, edit, page left where you last posted, search function...and people who come here as new posters feel like it's stepping back in time not to have those offered.
Sorry but that's the feedback I've had from nearly everyone I've steered over here.
1993. judithathome - 12/5/2008 9:37:11 PM Case in point: no edit fuction..."their reasons for not staying ARE...." 1994. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 10:04:52 PM Here's one developed by my youngest son which has all the bells and whistles. Participants are automatically emailed when someone replies to a published page or a comment they make in a forum. However, I still prefer the Mote because I get the feeling that I'm among friends rather than a forum with 10 million participants. The Mote needs a few more participants, but not a huge number more. I hope concerned and some of the others will return and that we will see more of VK.
About HubPages 1995. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 10:42:43 PM Another thought--I occasionally look in on other discussion forums, and most of them contain a much higher crapola ratio than does The Mote. The level of discussion on many of the popular forums is pretty low. Perhaps I haven't seen the best ones. The ones I've seen aren't very impressive. This includes Slate which attracts a lot of participants most of whom sound like not very bright high school students, religious whackjobs and the like. Name calling and "flaming" is common. I haven't noticed any trolling on Slate. But I have seen complaints of it on another forum. 1996. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 11:16:21 PM HubPages forums 1997. jexster - 12/5/2008 11:36:09 PM 
1998. jexster - 12/5/2008 11:37:28 PM AC and Capn Dirty can kiss Wabbit's ass
 1999. jexster - 12/5/2008 11:38:35 PM Wonkers gets a cut for those Hub Pages...
I say
LET EM ALL FAIL
|
