normal working methods

Recently, Josh posted a thread asking M56 et al to stop "attacking" other members. Fair enough. I assume he did it in order to bering the forum back to normal working conditions. But, to me, his action of openly posting such a request was an incitement to allow even more disruption on this forum. Josh, by his actions, actually opened the flood gates for members to attack each other on this forum, in so doing creating even more disruption that before.

I can't see the logic behind that. Josh's action seems to defeat its object. I also have never seen a forum or moderator which will allows such attacks to take place. I know of no other language forum that allows its members to discuss another member openly. The normal action of a good moderator is to contact the "offenders" by email or create a thread which reminds everyone of the rules of the forum without naming names.

Josh's action is the wrong way to go if one wants to create less disruption to a forum.

My ten cents worth.

Guest,

Only problem with your argument: There is virtually no normal way of privately contacting any member. There are no _true_ usernames or log-ins, etc. How do you regularly expect to find half the members' e-mail addresses?

beneficii, please note the "or create" in my sentence above and here, repeated.

><The normal action of a good moderator is to contact the "offenders" by email or create a thread which reminds everyone of the rules of the forum without naming names. >>

M56 and his incarnations were creating a lot more disruption to the forum. And Josh had to take a firm action on this whole issue. It is just that other two moderators are timid and behave like goody-goody. I think you should appreciate the fact that Josh is not one of them and is acting properly and letting people know in their face that they can no longer start flame wars at their free will and yes the moderation exists on the forum. Most garbage gets deleted because of his active moderation.

<It is just that other two moderators are timid and behave like goody-goody.>

Isn't that comment a flame in itself? How can you criticise other users and then be so rude yourself? Please keep such comments off this site.

This is a different forum and I like it. I even like the members of the little language academy, they're amusing.

1 cent.

My 100 cents worth, this site is full of shadow projecting and self-denial. There are many here, apart from M56 and "friends", who love to begin and participate in flame wars, but the same people love to point the finger of blame at others. Same the world over.

Guest,

<<beneficii, please note the "or create" in my sentence above and here, repeated.

><The normal action of a good moderator is to contact the "offenders" by email or create a thread which reminds everyone of the rules of the forum without naming names. >>>>

You still have the potential that either they won't read it, won't think it applies to them, etc. With no assured private method of contacting members, sometimes a public thread calling people out by name may be necessary.

<With no assured private method of contacting members, sometimes a public thread calling people out by name may be necessary. >

Would you be called out?

<I've tried the more general tack, but the various members of the academy didn't seem to listen.>

Where was that?

<In response to Gwest, I don't see anyone else starting flame wars here. >

What about the people who participate in them? What about guests who call people "asshole". Can you tell us anything about their/his/her IPs? Did you post a thread to criticise such people?