greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK this is not Phil bashing but I ran across this type of comment a lot of times in the past and feel compelled to address it not as someone who has been a moderator but rather as an EO member.
One thing I do get offended by is the idea that this is not a true open forum and must have a name to reflect such. Offended may be a misplaced word to some but it seems to fit this. Open forum is the right term, it is not a membership only forum (meaning having only a qualified or paying membership population) as many are, it is not a coffee clutch situation (thank God) but it is the nearest thing to a true forum and a true community.
One situation that many do forget that Phil has reminded us is that EO is owned by someone and it is indeed a for-profit venture, but what Phil didn’t mention is that it is no good unless people are willing to be involved. Advertisers will not pay to advertise unless there is some activity which attracts visitors and members and if it is one of these has some ‘soap operatic’ feel to some of the posts and threads, the better.
When you start trying to make it easier to moderate, you get to the point that post will get mundane and rather boring. So for one who may think that agreement and similar standards outside of the common sense rules we all follow, there is a danger of real C word, censorship. It gets boring when we don’t have some differing opinions and some times true discourse. When it gets boring, people just drop off and don’t return.
Now to the purpose of EO, I think Phil has it wrong, I think that if you ask the mods what the purpose would is, they would all agree that EO is here to help people. And it really does. I think negativity is part of learning, as is disagreement within a community. Here is the point, helping someone can be to the point of calling one out or having a group of people tell the poster that they are wrong.
The last thing I am going to point out is this rose color glasses thing that some should be understood that this is not a bad thing. I mean that Phil has been successful relative to his situation and for many it is a goal that is visible to set entering the industry, which is a good thing. For others, it is no where near a goal that can be met or even approached because Phil’s situation is unique. But trying to say that one’s situation will work for all is like saying those horrible cookie-cutter houses are beautiful (ok, maybe that it is a bad analogy?).
Just for the record, I do not believe any member is better than another. I mean that everyone who posts, adds to the value of the forum at large.
One thing I do get offended by is the idea that this is not a true open forum and must have a name to reflect such. Offended may be a misplaced word to some but it seems to fit this. Open forum is the right term, it is not a membership only forum (meaning having only a qualified or paying membership population) as many are, it is not a coffee clutch situation (thank God) but it is the nearest thing to a true forum and a true community.
One situation that many do forget that Phil has reminded us is that EO is owned by someone and it is indeed a for-profit venture, but what Phil didn’t mention is that it is no good unless people are willing to be involved. Advertisers will not pay to advertise unless there is some activity which attracts visitors and members and if it is one of these has some ‘soap operatic’ feel to some of the posts and threads, the better.
When you start trying to make it easier to moderate, you get to the point that post will get mundane and rather boring. So for one who may think that agreement and similar standards outside of the common sense rules we all follow, there is a danger of real C word, censorship. It gets boring when we don’t have some differing opinions and some times true discourse. When it gets boring, people just drop off and don’t return.
Now to the purpose of EO, I think Phil has it wrong, I think that if you ask the mods what the purpose would is, they would all agree that EO is here to help people. And it really does. I think negativity is part of learning, as is disagreement within a community. Here is the point, helping someone can be to the point of calling one out or having a group of people tell the poster that they are wrong.
The last thing I am going to point out is this rose color glasses thing that some should be understood that this is not a bad thing. I mean that Phil has been successful relative to his situation and for many it is a goal that is visible to set entering the industry, which is a good thing. For others, it is no where near a goal that can be met or even approached because Phil’s situation is unique. But trying to say that one’s situation will work for all is like saying those horrible cookie-cutter houses are beautiful (ok, maybe that it is a bad analogy?).
Just for the record, I do not believe any member is better than another. I mean that everyone who posts, adds to the value of the forum at large.
