Attn Winston: HA New Rules Draft

[Billy]

Blue good luck with that. But it won´t be easy . I think the main reason why this forum is successful is because people can truely feel free. On other forum you are always under the threat of being baned.

[davewe]

I think the main reason why this forum is successful is because people can truely feel free. On other forum you are always under the threat of being baned.

I don't agree (how's that for being respectful). I didn't just stumble onto this forum. I was referred here by a couple of friends from another forum. They told me there was some valuable information but that the forum was highly dysfunctional and the forum owner was a (insert bad word here).

HA has a rep which limits it's success. Imagine how popular this place might become if it were a little less dysfunctional.

Free speech isn't all it's cracked up to be. Would you buy a book for $19.99 that was all f-bombs?

[Billy]

dav it depends. anyway this side is for free and I like sometimes the drama here

[Blue Murder]

Dave may be a moron but he's onto something. That's why GuitarGuy should go ahead and create a new forum.

When I found out about this place via OrientalExpat, everyone said that Winston was many things -- an ingrate, delusional, a chump -- but I chose to give him a shot.

Since I've joined the forum, I've been spammed, trolled, ignored, and constantly degraded at people who I favoured and advocated. Dave's right -- the site may have valuable information, but it ain't shit compared to what it could be if some more work was put into the site.

Free-speech isn't the issue, per-se, it's the state of affairs in general. The spammers, the trolls, the Peter Nolans bringing their AISO drama here. There is a fine line between a free-speecher and a "troll" on a site with a grey area when it comes to modding, but people like Odbo, Zboy and Peter are just out to cause everyone discomfort and ruin virtual communities.

You can see from my most recent topics that I fall into the "quality poster" category. Funny how no one's posted in them, right? Exactly. That suggests that 90% of the members LIKE flame wars and bullshit such as them.

GuitarGuy, if you're reading this, make your own bloody site. Anyone who's sensible enough to beseech Winston to get his act together is someone his site doesn't deserve. If he wants his site to thrive, he should have to do it himself.

[xiongmao]

You can get plugins to stop the spam, maybe Winston's too lazy to implement them lol.

I used to belong to another forum and they went crazy with the banning. I'd hate to see that here.

[MrPeabody]

I wonder how a moderator could even solve the problem. All these troll avatars are being generated by the same psychotic, who probably lives in a mental hospital where he has unlimited time to create dozens of accounts. All of the user names and the posts have the same "look and feel". Furthermore, it is easy to get software to come from any server in the world so you can't just block one IP address. It would take a technical guru to develop a strategy to block him. All of you men who are responding to him are his playmates.

[davewe]

I wonder how a moderator could even solve the problem. All these troll avatars are being generated by the same psychotic, who probably lives in a mental hospital where he has unlimited time to create dozens of accounts. All of the user names and the posts have the same "look and feel". Furthermore, it is easy to get software to come from any server in the world so you can't just block one IP address. It would take a technical guru to develop a strategy to block him. All of you men who are responding to him are his playmates.

If you have clear, consistent forum rules and act quickly you can get a handle on the problem. The problem persists because the problem people know they either won't get banned or it will take Winston months before he decides to do it.

It's like the guy who doesn't pay his rent, knowing that he can play the system for months before he will be evicted.

Set up a strong system with good mods, act quickly and the problems will start to fade. No, you will never eliminate them completely but you will make the forum a better place to visit.

Yes, some guys will dislike the new direction and maybe even leave the forum cause it is no longer "free" but most members will hail Winston and soon the place will be more popular than ever.

Of course if you believe that Winston will ever do the above, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Winston]

#3 and 4 are already in place and implemented. I've gotten rid of a ton of spammers. You guys are complaining too much and being too negative. The spammers are human, not bots, and it isn't easy to block them without manually removing each one.

However, #1 and 2 would put a serious hamper on free speech, and it could also be interpreted subjectively, meaning it could apply to anyone. How can you eliminate disagreements, when they are part of human nature and human relations?

Let's find a middle ground here?

[Winston]

Ok let's suppose I appoint new moderators here, and agree to these rules. What's to prevent innocent people from being banned for subjective reasons? When there is an argument, how do you decide who is the troll? How can you have an objective standard that is not subject to interpretation?

These are the key questions.

[davewe]

Ok let's suppose I appoint new moderators here, and agree to these rules. What's to prevent innocent people from being banned for subjective reasons? When there is an argument, how do you decide who is the troll? How can you have an objective standard that is not subject to interpretation?

These are the key questions.

First, as I previously said there are thousands of forums, some delving with controversial issues that manage to be well modded and respectful and still allow free speech. If you don't know how they do it - ask.

Most of the successful ones use banning as a last resort.

Third, if you clean up the forum obvious trolls will be a hell of a lot less interested. HA won't be as much fun for them.

If you do ban someone, it shouldn't be for subjective reasons. If the rule is clear and someone breaks it regularly enough to require banning, then that won't be for "subjective reasons" and they sure as hell won't be "innocent people."

The real issues under the smoke screen are:

1. You don't want to establish rules. Rules aren't that tough to enforce but they are tough to establish and justify. If you established a rule for example that said "Racist epithets will not be tolerated; the posts will be removed and the poster subject to suspension or banning" - well that's an easy and clear rule to enforce. Trouble is about 5% of the members here love to throw out those epithets and will be pissed that they can't any longer. You will have to decide that such a rule is a good one and worth potentially losing a few members.

2. As was previously said, you seem to crave the drama. This site is your business. Most businesses want their customers and employees treated really well. Only you know what you really want.

3. Stop pretending that HA is a place of high intellectual truth and discourse. It ain't. Most guys here are interested in traveling or expatting to other countries and are particularly interested in the women in those countries. This high and mighty "we're intellectuals here at HA" is nonsense. Once you get away from that mantra it will be easy to acknowledge that the alleged intellectual spammers here are more spammer than intellectual.

[odbo]

[Winston]

Ok let's suppose I appoint new moderators here, and agree to these rules. What's to prevent innocent people from being banned for subjective reasons? When there is an argument, how do you decide who is the troll? How can you have an objective standard that is not subject to interpretation?

These are the key questions.

First, as I previously said there are thousands of forums, some delving with controversial issues that manage to be well modded and respectful and still allow free speech. If you don't know how they do it - ask.

Most of the successful ones use banning as a last resort.

Third, if you clean up the forum obvious trolls will be a hell of a lot less interested. HA won't be as much fun for them.

If you do ban someone, it shouldn't be for subjective reasons. If the rule is clear and someone breaks it regularly enough to require banning, then that won't be for "subjective reasons" and they sure as hell won't be "innocent people."

The real issues under the smoke screen are:

1. You don't want to establish rules. Rules aren't that tough to enforce but they are tough to establish and justify. If you established a rule for example that said "Racist epithets will not be tolerated; the posts will be removed and the poster subject to suspension or banning" - well that's an easy and clear rule to enforce. Trouble is about 5% of the members here love to throw out those epithets and will be pissed that they can't any longer. You will have to decide that such a rule is a good one and worth potentially losing a few members.

2. As was previously said, you seem to crave the drama. This site is your business. Most businesses want their customers and employees treated really well. Only you know what you really want.

3. Stop pretending that HA is a place of high intellectual truth and discourse. It ain't. Most guys here are interested in traveling or expatting to other countries and are particularly interested in the women in those countries. This high and mighty "we're intellectuals here at HA" is nonsense. Once you get away from that mantra it will be easy to acknowledge that the alleged intellectual spammers here are more spammer than intellectual.

Racial epithets are an objective violation that could be determined. Yes. However, some of your other rules like "no arguing and no disagreeing" are very subjective and subject to abuse. For example, every poster can claim that everyone who disagrees with him is a troll and in violation of this rule. See what I mean? It's too vague and could apply to anyone.

I'm not pretending anything. There are a lot of intellectual posts, topics, threads and articles in this forum. That is true. Many of the posts here contain deep observations, and deep observations constitute intellectual content. Therefore, your statement is illogical.

I crave a little drama, but that's not the reason for my being lax here. The reason is my belief in the principles of free speech and libertarianism.

Can you understand this and stop trying to misconstrue me or misportray me?

Have you watched Star Trek The Next Generation? In the series, Data always says things that are totally logical. Well that's what I'm doing too. If Data were running this forum, it'd be no different than the way I'm running it.

[Winston]

You guys also have to be realistic here. In a free speech/libertarian forum, you can't expect every topic and poster to be to your liking. It doesn't work that way. In a free speech forum, there will be topics you love, topics you hate and topics you don't care about. It goes with the territory. Those of you who expect to have every topic be to your liking are not being mature or realistic.

In a free speech forum, you got to learn to take the good with the bad. Otherwise, we introduce censorship and control, and this forum no longer has the appeal of free speech and truth. Think about it. Look at the big picture. There is no perfect win-win solution to everything.

[Billy]

Hail Winston

Am I really teh only one who thinks that Winston is right? I really think many here are very immature and have no idea what free speech means. This is a forum without pc. Of course everybody will get disgusted to some point. But as Winston said the good only comes with the bad. Yes I know life is a bitch.

dav, tell me which forum are you talking about? I want to know a forum with free speech. I know only Puahate. lol.

[Winston]

I asked my friend Walt Goodridge about this issue of free speech vs. forum moderation in my forum. Here was his take on it, which he posted in his blog.

http://www.jamaicaninchina.com/?p=1863

In my opinion, people have misinterpreted the concept of free speech.

1. Just because speech is "free," doesn't mean anyone is
interested in what you have to say.

2. Just because speech is "free," doesn't mean
you need to share, or share it in an offensive way.
While our society has accepted lewdness and crassness as simply
an expression of "free speech," I believe there are still commonly accepted practices of civil
interaction, that I, personally feel are necessary to enforce to
avoid devolving as humans.

3. But, most importantly, As far as the American model is concerned,
"free speech" simply means there are no laws on the books that will be used
to punish you. HOWEVER, freedom of speech does NOT
mean you have freedom from consequences. The universe
is governed by the law of cause and effect. Just because
you are legally protected, doesn't mean there are no consequences
to your behavior.

On a spiritual level, free speech is not free of consequences.
Negative energy breeds itself and,
as one of your posters predicts, bad behavior will ultimately
have negative effect on the Happier Abroad site.

On a practical, day-to-day level, free speech is not free of consequences.
People will react, respond and there are consequences.
Oprah had the freedom to say on her show that everyone
should become vegetarian. There were consequences.
She was sued by the meat lobby.

Rush Limbaugh had the freedom to say on his show
what he did about Sandra Fluke, etc..etc..you get my point

That's my opinion. Ban 'em all!!!

(I think I'll post this on my blog!)

Walt