Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

For a hobby, this has a lot of the same kind of negative stress as work. I don't quite understand the level of resentment expressed towards the semi-retired or using the pejorative, keyboard campaigners. There are already too many "...freely sharing their lack of knowledge" to exclude an expert source of information. One item that seems to resonate through the various postings is a divergent opinion of what exactly the Authentic Campaigners Forum is or is not supposed to be. Under the title it reads "a website for the authentic Civil War living historian." So that means it is a website for those who do just EBUFU events? That might get lonely. We wouldn't even have Landrum or Wickett included if that were the case. And since Paul is semi-retired he would have no business posting on his own forum? That can't be the case. So if the events you do is not the sole criteria, then what is? Paul gave a fairly good explanation in one of 3,696 previous posts where he laid out some of the terms we use to describe the various levels of obsession and the degree to which the hobby occupies our time and resources.

That said, it certainly does seem that you should have been a Civil War (re)enactor with an interest in "getting it right" at some point in time to post on here. The Civil War Reenactors Forum (Szabo's) already exists, and it does not require that you ever were a (re)enactor, which makes the title somewhat ironic and probably why the various perjorative names like "clown forum" for it persist. Oddly, it also has many of the same members as this forum, some masquerading under different nom de guerres. Not "Sith Lord" Jim Butler though. You know that takes a certain degree of character and agree or disagree with his perspective, that is a very important quality to have. The moderators on here sometimes use their authority to grind a dull axe. This thread shows some of that. Oh well, they're human beings, but they ought to have character enough to explain themselves like Jim Butler would do.

I am reminded of the John Wickett joke about the identity of the 12 truly authentic Civil War (re)enactors. Nobody can agree on who the other eleven are...

[cwpilgrim]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Craig,
You are right about the stress in this hobby (at least this end - I know many on the other end of the hobby that look pretty bad, but they have a hoot getting together nevertheless).
If I did not have so much money tied up into this, honestly, I'd be gone. Take the money and buy a new Telecaster.

This forum has provided me with the information to get involved with this end of the hobby. Without it, I had no where to look at what was needed both in material and knowledge to be more accurate. So, it has provided a much needed service, at least to me.

What I really do like about this forum is the wealth of knowledge available. At least it pointed me in the right direction. True, there have been some tough bones to sort through, but through this forum I have met some great people who are not nearly as arrogant in person as their posts appear. Sometimes the ability to convey the true intent is very limited when reduced to a keyboard. Written communication is the most difficult to me.

Whichever direction Paul and others take regarding this forum and the issues at stake is cool with me. It is still providing a very valuable service, of which I constantly get more than my money's worth.

[rpierson]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

As I understand it, all of this began when someone pointed out that there are more fat people in America now than there were in the 1860's. This led him to further speculate that the age & weight demographic of the hobby just might reflect the country as a whole. This, combined with the fact that most participants are aged 35-65 leads to a simple re-definition of the word "authentic" as it applies to reenactors.

The funny thing is that every one of us are chasing a different dragon when it comes to the ideal authentic event or experience. If one wants to visually "be there" then he/ she is very likely out of luck. Modern intrusions like airplanes not withstanding, the people dressed in olde tymey clothes at any event generally do not look like CW soldiers OR civilians. That is a fact. Much of that is due to weight and age.

Anyway, the people in the hobby that appear to have the most fun seem to approach it as a social club with guns and costumes. They generally involve their families, eat pancakes and sit around the campfire sharing stories from their real lives with others that don't seem to mind that the story's plot takes place at a Led Zepplin concert in the 70's. They are generally a MUCH less judgmental group than "authentics" who may sit around a similar campfire struggling at all to hold a conversation that does not involve a reference to anything but "authentic" topics.

The "authentic" movement has imposed a pretty elaborate set of rules for some things, meanwhile ignoring such sticky and uncomfortable topics as weight and age. People generally impose and support rules that they can easily abide by. I think the membership of this website would enjoy a little more freedom and less restrictions as we all seek a slightly less judgmental way to spend our free time. I hope this doesn't fall into the category of "who cares anyway", but rather the category of "If it ain't fun, make it fun, or quit."

-Randall Pierson

[robert-m]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Well, honestly. I am all for doing everything I can for a great impression. Not going to lie. I am 24 years of age, just on the aged side of the ideal age for a solder of the time frame. I'm a bigger fellow, but I am by no means fat, there is a difference. FAT means your to damn lazy to get off you butt and move what you have grown over the time of your life. BIG means your in shape, and can do everything that you set out to do. I WILL not sacrifice my health to achieve the greatest impression, sorry not going to happen. And all the research that I've done on my family, and the history of my for barres it's rather clear. NONE of my ancestors were of the lean and small stature "so called small and skinny, that everyone believes that solders are thought to have been" My father is the shortest man in my family tree and he is 6 foot even. I am 6 foot 3... The same height as my G_G_G grandfather, who fought with the 19th KY Calvary. And not to say that there are plenty of records stating the fact that some regiments had plenty of men over the 6 foot height mark. So please do go on about everyone being short and small in frame.I have not been asked to loose weight nor turned away from an event. And I have been to quit a few events, and most of those being with the people that are in the original topic pissing contest, taking the original message and taking it out of context , because someone was honest, and open with how they felt. Yes there are some people that are way to big for this hobby in general. YES I put the mainstream world and the authentic world together.... THIS IS ONE HOBBY WITH DIFFERENT SIDES. WE are all adults, and some of us are acting like the school kids that I teach every freaking day of the week... Grow up and stop being like a middle or high school kid cause the teacher didn't give you the back seat in the class room. And people are wondering why our hobby is growing smaller and smaller everyday. Crap like this goes farther in making the hobby dwindle and why people stop coming to events.

[john duffer]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

deleted by poster

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

That comment about weight on that earlier post is what started this crap storm? Hard to believe.

[desotobob]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

"Can't we just all get along", or "What we have here is failure to communicate".

OK, this may be a little long winded. But, I have had similar arguments today with my Cowboy friends. I belong to this Forum as well as CW Reenactors. I have found a lot of valuable information on both. I have had some excellent purchases I have made on this forum, and a quilted hat that gets a lot of comments - positive, I might add. I hope I am progressive and try to be, but as such, being older, I won't do EBUFU as Federal. Since there is documentation, I have no problem being old and Confederate. I do a lot of Civilian, and feel fortunate enough to have been invited to Westville this year.
My wife and I go to Renaissance Faires, have enjoyed Cowby Action Shooting and really enjoy CW reenacting. Over the years we have seen Ren Faires turn into the battle of the Orcs and Fairies against the true Rennies. We have seen Cowboy shooting go from a fantasy shooting game to a competitive heavy sport that is heavy to the big targets and fast shooting. (We are not fast, but we have fun). I have seen the CW hobby devolve into the Us vs. Them and then the Us vs. Them within the Us. The hobby needs to have all sides involved. My wife and I are History majors, and History is not getting out to the real world. It is up to US, whether Progressive, Campaigner, or even GASP Mainstream to try and get the History out to the country at large. I agree with other posters that there are Moderators on this Forum that have much knowledge to impart, whether they have attended an EBUFU or even an event in the near past. I attend as many events as I can. Sometimes a tragedy of a friend keeps me from culminating the attendance. But, I tried.
Having moderated on another type of Forum for a few years, it can be a thankless job. But it is a needed job, and can be fruitful for both moderator and subscriber. I personally thank the Moderators for their work and effort to promote the hobby.

And now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

.

The "authentic" movement has imposed a pretty elaborate set of rules for some things, meanwhile ignoring such sticky and uncomfortable topics as weight and age. People generally impose and support rules that they can easily abide by. I think the membership of this website would enjoy a little more freedom and less restrictions as we all seek a slightly less judgmental way to spend our free time. I hope this doesn't fall into the category of "who cares anyway", but rather the category of "If it ain't fun, make it fun, or quit."

-Randall Pierson

Campaigners Manifesto Numero 9.

I maintain myself in a physical condition that allows me to portray Civil War soldiers with realism. I keep my weight at a level that honestly represents men living on period soldier food and performing period soldier duties.

I am a total soup sandwich and have always stayed in my lane as I am historically unrepresentative in form. But I can't EVER recall, personally or reading posted testimony of refused participation at any event on account of it. Quite the opposite, I have always been encouraged. Hell, I am disliked by many of my former "friends" because of it. My point being weight and age have never been disqualifying features, save for self-disqualification or limitation.

The rules are laid out. The goal is time travel-like representation. I am not the type to want the rules changed or exceptions made for me or just go on and force myself into situation which runs against their grain.

I have always viewed it as not meeting the provisions of the "Manifesto" (and I have lost a good 40-50 lbs and kept it off). Its hard soemtimes when see things I would like to do and feel I am otherwise pretty well-suited for, however, my Butt-hurt-ed-ness Meter remains low on this and I focus on events where I can be relatively repressentative in my impression and still be "history heavy".

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[Phil McBride]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

This is just a fascinating thread. Likely useless, but danged fascinating. I’ve read several messages that I too would like to add, “I agree with what he wrote.” I think the most intriguing part of this thread is that I’m still not very sure just what it’s all about. Something about moderators, a nice word for censors in other settings. It may be that this whole thread is more about coming to grips with the medium itself – an internet open forum – than it is about the whether moderators still actually attend campaign events. Let’s face it: the internet has changed the dynamics of all organizations. People, all sorts of people, can now safely voice their opinions and criticisms from the safety of a keyboard at home.

Keeping that in mind, credible “authentic campaigners” are by our own definition active in the field, eschewing a passive or casual approach to our hobby. I’ll read with respect anything John Duffer writes because I served in his company at TAG back in 2003, and he was an aggressive, creative, and committed leader at that immersive event. I’ll read with respect anything that Tom Yearby writes because he organized and led two of the finest campaign events in the entire history of our hobby. I could go on, but you get my point. I’ll read anything, but I’ll respect the words of those who have been leading our hobby from out in front. However, credibility has a real short shelf life, and those who quit the field for any reason, be it age, disability, interest, finances, family life, are soon forgotten as new guys take their place.

So does any of this matter in the matter of AC Forum moderators? Does being an internet forum censor require active status as a campaign reenactor? Personally, I don’t see much of a connection. Using a red pen to line out inappropriate content based on a clearly defined set of forum rules seems pretty straight forward. I don’t see where it’s needed for a moderator-censor to spend several weekends a year marching around in a Civil War uniform to be able to fairly enforce the rules of the AC Forum. Now, if moderator-censors see their role as not just deleting irrelevant content, but instead consider themselves to be “keepers of the holy flame” who should “educate” and even scold offenders…well, that leaves me shaking my head and wondering when my hobby became a religion for some otherwise bright guys.

But that line of thought leads back to the medium itself. The internet encourages random erratic input. That’s the point of it – it’s real hard to censor input on the internet. Most internet forum censors don’t have the luxury of previewing content before it’s out there for the world to read. The immediacy of the medium encourages individual rants and quirky messages. So, should forums with national, even international, readers like the AC Forum require would-be posters to apply for admission before they can post? Send in your hobby resume for approval before your thoughts are deemed worthy of our protected internet space? Seems to me the present method is better than that one.

Phil McBride

[RCR001]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

I am a big guy. As was my father, grandfather and great grand father before me. Fact is I'd make two of Shelby's men. I'm twice their age too.

When I was the size and age of the authentic campaigners, I was a Jumpmaster Captain in the 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment. I neither had the time nor the where-with-all to participate in this activity.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, growing up Southern in a town full of dang'd Yankees was tough. We didn't play Rebels and Yanks when I was a kid. My grandpa wouldn't hear of it. The arse whoopin' was still to fresh in his mind and he didn't want any of us kids to get hurt for good. He'd roll over in his grave if he heard some of the things I've said about Lincoln and the invaders. Not because he was afraid of some silly Internut Moderator censoring his free speech or banning him from some silly forum. He was afraid they'd burn down his barn or run off all of his livestock.

I've got nothing but respect for modern day Authentic Campaigners. They want to do it right and I appreciate their attention to detail and effort.

I've got contempt for several Forum Moderators. Not just here, but other forums as well. They set themselves up as judge, jury and executioners if you ask me. They take loosely defined guidelines and pervert them with their own set of preconceived notions and agendas and frustrate, confuse and intimidate anyone and everyone that don't agree / conform to their views on things. Some of them are Holier than Thou ....................s. I know its a thankless job and I wouldn't do it. I think we could all do with a whole lot less of it. IMHO. But then again, nobody's ever cared much about my humble opinion, and Lord knows, I'm wrong as often as I am right.

I say lighten up boys. Give each other a break. The real authentic campaigners are looking down on us and our silly little Internut disputes and laughing. They want us to get out there on the field in droves with wool around our neck and horses under our feet. To have gun smoke in our nostrils and tears in our eyes. They aren't worried that we're too old or too fat or if we got all our teeth. Neither should we.

[Old-South]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

My 2 cents.
By the time this thread runs it's course I have said my peace, I will be looked at differently by those who only know me on this forum. My friends will see my point for what it is worth.

We should be all striving to improve our impression. The caveat of this is that we all progress at different levels and speeds. Constrained by both finalcial and geographical limits. In our different levels of progression we participate in the same events. I have just recently taken the plunge into the progressive arena and I love it. I have not been shunned or looked down apon by anyone in the flesh. I went to the Westville work weekend last year. I brought the best duds(and alcohol) I had for the eveing's festivities. A lot of the clothing was NOT to campaigner standards but no one said a negative word. Quite the opposite. The "field" seems to be the exact opposite of the forum. So herein lies the question

HOW CAN WE MAKE THE FORUM NORE LIKE THE FIELD?

I think we can figure this out.
For me. I think the manifesto should be simplified and be more general. This crap rule # 9 can be the first one to be tossed. Other than age, I have been told that I fit the mold pretty well so it does not apply to me anyway. Throw everything else out except #s 1, 10 and 18 and try that. Then, moderators, CHILL OUT.
Sorry Double P, don't take this personally. That was a well written piece but I think it should be a little more general. My opinion. Not an attack. Still Friends?

[Hawke_Man]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

First time back here in months.

My brief experience here was that unless you are in a clique then you aren’t anything. People can jump all over you if they are friends with the mods but if you question them or defend yourself you get a nice little suspension.


Personally I think they need some new blood in here. As I read through the posts I see MR. Kindred and Mr. Schmidt are 2 sore points. Perhaps they should step down for the good of site. If they have something to add they can do it as regular forum members. Nowhere does it say they have to be a mod to contribute. Make those people who are listed as mods step up or ask them to resign and find others to do the job.

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

You know, I keep seeing a lot of comments about "suspension" this and "suspension" that... every single suspension and "time-out" that happens on this site is talked about by the entire moderating panel. It is *never* the decision of one individual, or even six individuals--ever. I can only think of one suspension that happened on a first-time complaint, and that was for a really graphic porn-troll, not a regular, participating member. Member alerts, infractions, suspensions, etc are always handled by multiple moderators (behind the scenes), and then one person is either assigned or volunteers to handle any actions decided by the group.

(Sorry, Paul... I'll not type more on the thread. Just wanted to correct a misapprehension of how such things are handled.)

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Here is a classic example:

I just posted this in response to the lack of research and OR's and it was just deleted w/ zero explanation with 5 minutes

I was a very regular primary, annotated research poster but was discouraged from posting primary material by a celebrity moderator and haven't done so, save for PM's in months. It is all who you are and what you are posting I reckon.

The deepest cut would be to discredit a man's posted primary research publically with primary research, at least where I come from, still.

It ties into moderating rules versus being a gatekeeper of the history as keenly alluded to in the mod / member thread

Look at some of the posts in that thread. This is crazy.


edited...I sure got a PM

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[JimKindred]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Here is a classic example:

I just posted this in response to the lack of research and OR's and it was just deleted w/ zero explanation with 5 minutes



Look at some of the posts in that thread. This is crazy.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

It takes a couple of minutes to write the PM explaining why the post was removed from that thread and to suggest to you again as I did last night that if you have a complaint about a moderator, not me this time, to voice your complaint to one of the administrators such as Paul or Justin. Check your PMs and you will find the explanation you are complaining about not receiving.

Paul and Justin were included on the PM to make them aware of the situation.