Define "Open"

[JonathanB]

Lookout's starter post: http://jaguarpc.com/forums/showthrea...7733#post77733

All right, I still don't see why JaguarPC and their mods continue to permit threads like these to litter their forums practically unabated. While they can be interesting to some of us, they have nothing to do with web hosting or running websites. Nor do they engender a particularly flattering image of JaguarPC as a professionally run business, offering enormous opportunity to attract or repel clients based on what they view here. But I am speaking to the wind; it seems the higher powers here are oblivious to such concerns. Ron will no doubt jump in now and say I'm diverting, and others jump in with some long diatribe....

I couldn't agree more. Especially when the partisan B.S. can get so high here you almost need hip-waders. For that reason I try very hard (and for the most part succeed) to stay out of the political debates here.

[Spathiphyllum]

All right, I still don't see why JaguarPC and their mods continue to permit threads like these to litter their forums practically unabated. While they can be interesting to some of us, they have nothing to do with web hosting or running websites. Nor do they engender a particularly flattering image of JaguarPC as a professionally run business, offering enormous opportunity to attract or repel clients based on what they view here. But I am speaking to the wind; it seems the higher powers here are oblivious to such concerns. Ron will no doubt jump in now and say I'm diverting, and others jump in with some long diatribe...

I'll jump in first and I hope Ron doesn't mind.

Jag is hosting 19 forums on this board (2 of which are strictly for notices) which leaves 17 separate boards for posting. Only one of the boards is "open" for whatever community discussion comes along. Are you saying that one broad-topic board out of seventeen is one too many?

Further, did you register for web hosting here on the basis of their forums? I enjoy the banter here but I have to admit that these bulletin boards are at the bottom of the list for selecting a web host in my mind. But to each his own. Since some people are compelled to read material that doesn't interest them, I'll just let 'em keep wasting their time. I hope this doesn't sound too harsh but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. But thanks for sharing your opinion on this open forum.

So back on topic with my own 2 cents...

OK, but shouldn't we be debating on whether or not we should agree with Jaded to vote FOR Bush since the topic header is "Vote For the RIGHT reasons!" Who is the most right in this election anyway?

[lookout]

It the mods want to split this out, fine. I hadn't intended to sidetrack things. I was just making a passing comment based on seeing yet another thread like this here. BTW, thanks JonathanB for your comments.

Further, did you register for web hosting here on the basis of their forums?

No, but they are a factor in the decision process, all other things being equal, or nearly so. I've always thought that monitoring a forum an excellent way to get a better handle on what a host will be like in so many ways before signing up, and I know I am not alone in that opinion.

The kind of talk that I have seen here in the last year or so has not been limited to a single forum or a couple of threads. It has often infused the entire board, making this arm of JaguarPC support an unnecessarily charged environment. Why should anyone writing in with a general email or security question be challenged about their political or other personal leanings? It is as inappropriate here as it is in most service driven businesses.

IMHO, an open forum does not necessarily mean a free speech forum. Few serious tech support sites that I know of interpret it in such terms. It is simply a catchall for things that don't belong in the other forums. These could still be hosting related topics. I maintain that it is in Jaguar's interest to help keep the focus on hosting issues, and to keep all the user soap boxing in check and make the forums reasonably welcoming to ALL clients, not the most vocal ones. Things are the way they are here because JaguarPC chooses to place their resources elsewhere (perhaps rightly so), leaving the forums as a kind of a wild frontier. That is without doubt part of the reason they continue to attract or repel those of us who stumble across them.

[Ron]

An open forum build community... which is what JAG has done nicely here.

BTW, it wasn't me who was doing the complaining about topic diversions. At least not to my best recollection.

[JonathanB]

The kind of talk that I have seen here in the last year or so has not been limited to a single forum or a couple of threads. It has often infused the entire board, making this arm of JaguarPC support an unnecessarily charged environment. Why should anyone writing in with a general email or security question be challenged about their political or other personal leanings? It is as inappropriate here as it is in most service driven businesses.

Excellent point Lookout. I've been a regular visitor to these boards ever since I signed up a few years ago. I agree that kind of atmosphere has spilled over into other non-open forum threads over the past year or so.

Would it make a difference if I were choosing Jaguar for the first time? It might. Of course at this point I've experienced Jaguar's excellent services and support. But, when you're shopping for a host you look at every possible negative there is before you choose one. Especially if you've had an experience with a really bad host.

[lookout]

An open forum build community...

Almost right. An open forum build JaguarPC community.

BTW, it wasn't me who was doing the complaining about topic diversions. At least not to my best recollection.

Then maybe you should look into that. Though having a short memory can be a blessing...

Would it make a difference if I were choosing Jaguar for the first time? It might. Of course at this point I've experienced Jaguar's excellent services and support. But, when you're shopping for a host you look at every possible negative there is before you choose one. Especially if you've had an experience with a really bad host.

Exactly. I would add that this is something that often gets thrown into the re-evaluation mix come renewal time.

BTW, I have no problem reading what I see here even when the views expressed are not my own. My complaint is in regards to what constitutes appropriate discussion in the context of a web hosting forum.

[Ron]

Find the times that I complained about topic diversion. I complained about a thread where I was looking for a solution to a specific problem once. That's all I can recall. Maybe you do have a better memory than I.

Connie (clssam) was complaining long and hard about topic diversion and hijacking. Maybe you have us confused. We look very similar now.

What's appropriate is up to Jag. If he would like to change direction, modify rules or define appropriate content, I will be thrilled to accommodate his wishes, in whatever way he sees fit. In the meantime, I will continue to post in the spirit of free discussion and advocation for my (infallibly correct) point of view.

Except when I'm dead wrong. Which is frequent.

[lookout]

Find the times that I complained about topic diversion.

OK, fair enough. Remember, you asked. This is just old history to me.

From one of your posts in the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" thread:

...Congratulations for continuing to obfuscate, confuse, befuddle and distract from the real issues with all of the silliness.

From your post in the "Who are you voting for" thread, where I brought complaint similar to the one in this thread:

Secondly, you want people to stay on topic, which was politics: specifically "Who are you voting for" and Lookout came in and said we shouldn't be discussing this here!.

There may be more, but these are the ones that prompted my comment earlier. Again I would be fine with the mods splitting this subdiscussion out since it is getting so off topic, and I find that kind of thing somewhat irritating myself.

Believe it or not, I fully appreciate your closing sentiments:

What's appropriate is up to Jag. If he would like to change direction, modify rules or define appropriate content, I will be thrilled to accommodate his wishes, in whatever way he sees fit. In the meantime, I will continue to post in the spirit of free discussion and advocation for my (infallibly correct) point of view.

Except when I'm dead wrong. Which is frequent.

I simply see other hosts managing their own forums more professionally, and as a member here who represents several clients, I think Jaguar could use the client feedback. If they want to leave the forums well enough alone, I agree, that is their business.

[Spathiphyllum]

FYI that has nothing to do with Jaded's wholehearted endorsement of Bush or Limbaugh for President - the RIGHT candidates

[mattsiegman]

This is the "Open Discussions" board. This is a topic that qualifies as an open discussion. If the thread gets too bad, i'll do something, but right now, i'm too tired to go and read each post carefully. If you don't like what's happening in a thread, report it so i can get a better idea of what's awry...

[Spathiphyllum]

Just because I felt like reading:

From one of your posts in the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" thread:
From your post in the "Who are you voting for" thread, where I brought complaint similar to the one in this thread:

Well, the first reference was a snippet extracted from post #85 of a thread with thousands of sentences and out of context to boot? No, you don't get credit for this one since Ron was commenting on silliness relevent to the topic and not some irrelevant side note. The second reference was Ron being silly. We'll give you partial credit for your homework.

There may be more, but these are the ones that prompted my comment earlier...

Could be but I had enough time going down memory lane already. Further, Ron rarely comments or rails on others to stay on topic. In fact he explicitly defends the open forum concept and participates quite vigorously and for that he should get some credit. At any rate, some of the threads are still actually quite good reads. I had forgotten how much relevant material has been presented on the open forum and how good some opinions were. Others needed work (and sanity) but were still nice contributions to add flavor. But matt has chimed in to reiterate the open policy of the open forum. Status quo, here we go.

[lokki]

I'm beginning to think *nothing* is ON topic to some people... but I have noticed most of the boards I surf have heated US political discussions going somewhere.

I had some great arguments for and against the banter here. However, in light of the fact it is now 1am local, and I've been up since 5am, I just don't care enough to think coherently. Thus, you are all spared my puerile meanderings. Merry christmas.

[lookout]

No Matt, I won't do that because it's completely pointless. If the powers that be here wanted to do something about this kind of charged stuff in their open discussion forums (or any of the others), they would have long ago. They also would take a more active role in moderation, not leaving the bulk of it to people not even on their staff. It simply is not been a concern for them, and that is their right as the forum host.

As a result, our forums offer almost no effective moderation. This should be clear to anyone who spends a little time poking around the existing threads here. I am far from being the first or only member who has pointed this out before, although I may be the most persistent since I continue to have multiple stakes here. It is a situation which I'm sure JaguarPC is well aware, but they choose to let it slide despite the complaints they get.

Various members of JaguarPC staff are on record as saying that they don't visit the forums much themselves, or only when a particularly noxious post has been brought to their attention. Your post simply reinforces the notion that JaguarPC is only marginally concerned with what goes on in their forums, even if you only represent them by proxy.

[lookout]

You are entitled to voicing your opinion S., although why you feel compelled to jump in and dissect every post to fit your personal world view can't be too healthy. Ron can speak for himself if he likes; I'm sure he at least should now know where I was coming from. I don't expect to see any changes here though, except a continued loss of moderate voices. That's something I doubt you would recognize if you heard one.

[lookout]

... but I have noticed most of the boards I surf have heated US political discussions going somewhere.

I have seen these also, but mostly on non-business sites.