Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

[Outrider]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

I cant think of anything original to say that would sum up my thoughts on the matter any better than what Mr Grim said.

"Ultimately this is a web site for Civil War Progressive Reenactors who want to put history first. Academics and historic site staff all have a place here. But in the end if you have left the hobby being a moderator here is like being an AYSO referee at a Little League game. I have seen the locks get put on threads just before a something might be accomplished, farbisms allowed and the person calling it out reprimanded. Most of the complaints against moderators seem to be about one specific moderator.
I would recommend moderators have a term limit, with part new and part experienced "

[JimKindred]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

For those of you who may not know, this is the post that caused an individual to attack a moderator resulting in this thread - http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/...828#post186828

See any offensive statement in it or anything that is not true or anything that having been to a recent event would have changed the opinion expressed? I do not believe you will. The post was made as a member of the forum not as a moderator. Any one of you could have made the post in question, do you feel it justifies a verbal attack?

[Jim of The SRR]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Jim,

You miss the point entirely. But, you miss it because you are no longer part of the reenacting community. What I am upset over is the constant preaching, posting and lording over by NON-reenactor moderators on this forum. YES, we do need moderators. But, the mods should stick to policing the site and not chiming in to give their advice on every single thread. This applies to the non-reenacting moderators. Mr. Schmidt in particular admits he is no longer a CW reenactor, but he seems to have something to say on every thread. Frankly, I take that as insulting. If I went over to the Bowling Forum right now and started lecturing them on proper bowling technique and how they shoudl organize a league, do you really feel I have that right? The same goes for frequent posters who are NOT part of the ACTIVE reenacting community. I am not talking about WHAT part of the reenacting community either. You have that wrong as well Mr. Kindred. Now people can come over and post all they want, but if they are no longer a reenactor, don't you think people will get tired of their diatribes on every subject related to OUR hobby? The last straw for me was NON-reenactors commenting on the current status of our hobby (as it related to numbers). How the frack are they even in the loop to make a an opinion on that? Heck they are actually part of the problem.
And the Focus Group...that is a toothless committee. That group answers to the same overbearing, NON-reenacting moderators as before. Personally, I believe this forum has run its course. It carries some 'TicketMaster' status as far as events and selling gear, but that is about it. The bottom line is that NON-reenactor moderators rule this forum and control its direction. I believe that is wrong. Mods who do not reenact should stick to policing the forums and keep their comments in regards to OUR hobby to themselves. When say OUR hobby...I mean ALL of the hobby (from farbs to hardcores).
No need to make any special rules for me. I did not ask for this discussion either. Put me back in time out. I take responsibility for my comments. But, the NON-reenactor mods also need to be able to take some harsh criticism when they feel the need to preach to reenactors about our hobby that the do not contribute to nor are part of. I have to get back to working on an event now.
Thanks for the opportunity to open this up for some frank and honest discussion.

Jim Butler

[AndrewGrim]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

My term limit idea would be a two year term, then a year off before serving another term. If you are no longer part of this community you probably won’t come back just to moderate a forum.

That link shows the problem, a moderator saying “We will never be 100% correct so why try.” This is a clear violation of the no farbism rule. Sitting on an internet forum will not fix the state of the hobby, participating in better events, or helping put them on will.
I am glad Mr. Calloway has started this thread; at least it shows he still cares for this end of the hobby.

[JimKindred]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

That link shows the problem, a moderator saying “We will never be 100% correct so why try.” This is a clear violation of the no farbism rule.

Andrew,

I do not see such a comment in his post, what I do see is a discussion about how modern body types different from body types of the period. Nothing new about that. Could you point out exactly where the statement you reference is in the post?

[AndrewGrim]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Historically speaking, "reenactors" look like average Modern people who demographically happen to be NUG- present in far greater numbers of far older, heavier, larger, grayer/balder, an din some segments more female than their CW average soldier counter parts.

To say that CW soldiers (and civilians) reflected the same demographics as Modern Reenactors stretches that they "looked average" for their Time, Region, Ethnicity, and Socio-economic Class is the same "look" now because Reenactors are "average" Modern Folks.

IMHO in a fantasy hobby such as reenacting, anyone of any age, size, and to some extent physical condition can carve out a niche that an actual Civil War soldier could not. And like it or not, since the Government is not providing "discounted" uniforms and gear, the locations to use them, or the "free time commitment" we tend to find many folks between 35 and say 65 who are established, have disposable income and free time, and are willing to use both for a hobby. And the closer some get to say 65the larger, heavier, grayer/balder, "out of shape" they tend to be as compared to an actual CW soldier.

This to me is part of the same argument as not using real bullets or not getting real disieses

[john duffer]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Well, sadly, I think this has run it's course and become the battle of the Jim's rather than a discussion . I was going to comment that I thought the actual spark of this thread was the " Attacks on Moderators " thread (last edited at 2:33) rather than the attendence at events thread but I misread the former which I thought mentioned Mr. Butler by name and was more negative than the present iteration.

Jim B. - Bless your heart, hush. You could be the definition of 'the man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client'.

Jim K. - Methinks he doth protest too much. Oddly, about 33% of the replies here on this problems with AC moderators thread are from you. For the record, my only problem with you (and the AC by coincidence) was not related to Mr Butler but to a total double standard on what was appropriate to post on a thread from me versus you.

[JimKindred]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

This to me is part of the same argument as not using real bullets or not getting real disieses

I think you are missing his point, are you the same body shape and weight of the average person in the Civil War period? I doubt it because few can be because the physical conditon of Americans is so much different than it was in the 1860s. You look out on the field the average people you see are not the same type body shape as those from the Civil War and there really is not any thing practical that can be done about it. If we apply your standard to reenactors would you or many of your friends still be able to participate?

[paulcalloway]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

I would prefer this NOT be a battle of the Jim's.

And Jim K - I'm reminding you again that I don't want mods to dominate this discussion. Let others say their peace.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

As a fat guy who is as "history heavy" as the next guy (or at least tried pretty hard) but minds his lane and respects the handful of historically representative events (EBUFU) as the pinnacle of the living history community for exactly what they are (matter of fact I love to witness them as a spectator when the opportunity allows it)......to bring it back to moderation...... any discussion of body type, age, fitness or suitability for "duty" gets deleted or edited.

I can't think of a thread where anyone has set or applied such standards, restricted participation or negatively attacked another here about it and don't think it should or would be tolerated if it were.


CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[joey12thga]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Here’s my nickel worth.

A few years back the AC was THE place to share/learn/grow within the hobby. It hasn’t been like that in a while now. It’s like the Facebook of reenacting without the fun and Farmville. The only thing one is guaranteed to get when they come here is talked down to by some clown who hasn’t put the wool on in years (keyboard Kampaigner) or another joker who has never been to a progressive event but saw an AAR once and is now an expert (L33T FARB).

In the circles I run AC is referred to as the “A$$-hat Collection” or the “Civil War Craigslist” and many of the people I know that attend events rarely if ever get on here for various reasons. I have to suffer through because a few of the “EFUBU” event Organizers post regularly on here and so I have to be the one to spread the info to my Mess. Let me tell you, it’s no fun job. I use to read every thread trying to increase my knowledge and now I just pass them all over cause they all end up being the same old song and dance. Instead I cruise the Event listing and Buy/Sell/Trade forum. I for one ask event organizers that I plan on attending to start Yahoo groups to save the time and effort of even logging in here and to keep out the Trolls.

The “AC” label that people use to strive to get for the vendors or their event is really just an afterthought now. I buy from Vendors who are not on here, some who offer way better quality and attend events that have never been brought up on here which have given me way more than many of the "AC approved" events.

So there ya go. I am no personailty in the hobby. I am just some guy who tries to do it right.

[Spinster]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

Well Thank You Paul

I was wondering if the community was going to get to say their peace and be listened to. Like I said--the issue is there, and has been for some time. This simply brought it to a head.

Thank you Mrs Crabb as well. One does tire of the head patting doesn't one? And even when we stand up on our short little hind legs, it simply makes the tops of our heads easier to pat.

Event organizers, especially those putting on something besides a powder burner, have learned to keep their mouths shut.

[jessejames70]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

not a problem with moderators, but I do have a comment since this is an open discussion. I know you should use the search option before asking questions, but I would guess that most don't. That being said, a lot of times that is one of the first replies to hit and is usually very short and along the lines of "use the search function before asking a question" this comes across as being a put-down to the person asking the question and may prevent them from posting again. This person may have vast knowledge in an area that is yet to be discussed and treating them poorly may strip everyone of that knowledge. Another thought I had is that I assume (yes I know what that breaks down to :) ) is that there are new members joining almost daily. I know when I joined the forum I didn't go through every past post to see if there was something I could contribute. So maybe for some of those quick posters, just lighten up a bit. You don't know who joined this morning. Thanks for listening to my ramble.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

When The Watchdog Vol 1-15 back issues were available the posts offering those were deleted--just disappeared off the face of the earth like they never happened--nobody ever told me they were removing them or why. Todd Watts is not an approved vendor. I can sell a Todd Watts de-farbed musket on here no problem. Some guys here bitched that they missed out on a collection of writing about the material culture of the 1860s the likes of which will not be seen again. That's the way I learned the original post had been taken down. The Watchdog back issues were gone in about 48 hrs so the only guys who lost out on that were the members here. Ironically, the guys most likely to benefit from the collection of material.

Wouldn't a PM or email, which in the situation here the moderator equivalent of signing your name to your posts, be more or less common courtesy? I thought
it looked kind of cowardly. It happened recently (again) on another thread, and I sort of figured out why--but an explanation would have been appreciated.
Having said that, I am reminded of what Paul Calloway told me once about how he could make a fortune if he sold a cream that made peoples skin thicker.
Maybe we could all take a step back and consider that. And for the mods part, nut-up and be a man. Take the high road for a change. It's part of the price of
being in a leadership position.

[CJDaley]

Re: Open Discussion about Moderating / Membership Disagreements

A thought about Keyboard Campaigners....just because George Lucas has only directed 6 movies in his career and none since 2005....is his talent as a movie maker diminished? No.

I think our mods have a combined experience equal to 100 years or more in the hobby, just because family or health issues keep them from marching and camping with us, doesn't mean their knowledge of the hobby or the 1860s is diminished.

As a former moderator for my old reenacting group's forum (with less than 30 members vs. the thousands here), I can say it's a shitty job. No pay, long hours, hate mail and thankless work.

I don't agree with what some of the moderators have written here, but it's their house and their rules. You don't like it? Build your own virtual house and invite 5,000 guests and see how quickly the house party turns into a riot.