Quote from: Burning Sands, Esq. on June 04, 2009, 08:10:21 PMQuote from: IrrX on June 04, 2009, 06:21:51 PMAnd I wouldn't say that the traffic turned down sharply when I arrived. But I will say that the quality of posters took a nosedive a couple years ago (not quality of content, but quality of contribution), followed by a downturn in board activity. Causation? No telling, but I wouldn't doubt it. Things did improve for a while after EarlCat came on-board as a mod, but then it just went back to the same old BS.Expand on that observation if you wouldn't mind. I've been on the board for a number of years myself and have noticed a significant downturn in board activity as well. You're saying it went back up when there was visible moderation?@ Everybody else, the suggestions look great so far. Keep them coming.Bear with me, because I might be a little off on the time frames, and if anyone else has a different recollection of events, feel free to post your thoughts. I think I came here about six months before Andrew stopped posting consistently, which left you as the sole moderator. It seems that after that, we started seeing more and more "visitors" from XOXO posting porn (Tubgirl, etc.) and shitting up threads for a couple hours every month or so. It would all get cleaned up, but would eventually come back. Some of the regular posters seemed to pick up on this, and posting quality dropped. People didn't engage in honest debates as much, and more flame wars erupted. Some regulars made, and some still make, a regular habit of posting far less substance than their post counts would normally reflect. When EarlCat became a moderator, things changed for a while, and honestly the level of enforcement was a little too present and a little too punitive. But after a period of adjustment, after several regulars--Miss P included, ISUCKATTHIS--asked him to lighten up on the lock and the ban hammer a bit, things became a bit more relaxed. Unfortunately, because I don't think you or EarlCat are able to be here as much as you're needed, the pendulum has swung a bit too far back to the side of relaxed and things could use a bit of cleaning again. Not stricter enforcement, but enforcement of the right things at the right time, and that means a more consistent presence of moderators.I hope that helps.
Quote from: IrrX on June 04, 2009, 06:21:51 PMAnd I wouldn't say that the traffic turned down sharply when I arrived. But I will say that the quality of posters took a nosedive a couple years ago (not quality of content, but quality of contribution), followed by a downturn in board activity. Causation? No telling, but I wouldn't doubt it. Things did improve for a while after EarlCat came on-board as a mod, but then it just went back to the same old BS.Expand on that observation if you wouldn't mind. I've been on the board for a number of years myself and have noticed a significant downturn in board activity as well. You're saying it went back up when there was visible moderation?@ Everybody else, the suggestions look great so far. Keep them coming.
And I wouldn't say that the traffic turned down sharply when I arrived. But I will say that the quality of posters took a nosedive a couple years ago (not quality of content, but quality of contribution), followed by a downturn in board activity. Causation? No telling, but I wouldn't doubt it. Things did improve for a while after EarlCat came on-board as a mod, but then it just went back to the same old BS.
I also think this board is dying because it tends to run off new blood. There are 14 top law schools and 175 “others” yet this board is dominated by posters from just a few school. Newbs come on here looking for advice, often about lower ranked schools, and they get blasted for even consider them. Truth is some folks have no other choice, they need advice, you can tell them it’s a bad choice fine, but it goes beyond that and people start attacking the poster because of his school. No wonder we don’t have a lot of new blood, they get run off because of it.This is nothing the moderators can really do anything about. Nor am I saying people should blow smoke up other asses about how they are going to get a Biglaw job form Cooley. But people can give advice without being an a-hole about it. I also think the regulars could step in and help with this, but any don’t, they just ignore the newbs getting thrashed because it “does not apply to them.” LSD is not as open or accepting of posters who don’t fit the top law school mode as it used to be. New folks don’t stick around as much because they don’t feel welcome. Its Law School discussion not Top Law Schools, save that elitist BS for that board. Instead I’d like to see the veterans take a larger role in welcoming new posters. They know when someone is being an a-hole and not giving any real advice other than to bash, so come out and say so. You don’t have to be a moderator to post ‘let’s be civil and keep it on topic please.” Its takes a village and all the crap.
Sands already said it wasn't because of mod sass, but because of complaints about his behavior leading up to that. I don't find that hard to believe.Quote from: Burning SandsFor the record, the ban was for multiple other complaints against this poster. This particular comment, while annoying, was not ban worthy in and of itself.
For the record, the ban was for multiple other complaints against this poster. This particular comment, while annoying, was not ban worthy in and of itself.
The reasoning in both the post I quoted and the post you quoted is consistent: 1) there were complaints, and 2) this was the last straw leading to the ban. Also, in the case of the post you quoted, there was an insistence by others ("since they insist") that he be banned, which he was going to ignore up to that point. So, to me, it looks like it was earned and should stick. If PILOFOLO put in the effort, let him get what he worked so hard for.