Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here  (Read 46012 times)

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • Global Moderator
  • LSD Obsessed
  • ****
  • Posts: 7072
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #30 on: June 05, 2009, 10:58:45 AM »

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.

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.

I appreciate that break down.  That is very helpful actually.  It's always good to hear things from the other side.

I, too, first joined the website when Andrew was still posting regularly and it definitely had a more upbeat tone and constant substantive posts on the regular.  At any given time, you could come on here and receive real advice from law students, lawyers, and other law school hopefuls.  Don't get me wrong, it still has that now, but not as much as a few years ago by my view.

I know Earl Cat did a good job at patrolling the board when he first came on, (and continues to do a good job by my view) but I agree that you need a constant moderator presence to nip things in the bud the moment they appear.  If somebody posts some porn right in the middle of a substantive debate, and you hit the report to moderator button and we're not able to get to it for 2 or 3 hours, that time differential really matters.  Trust me, I understand.

I'm a Biglaw associate in NYC so I have to apologize for no longer having the luxury of patrolling the board 24/7 like I used to when I was a law student.  I'll speak to Andrew about adding a few more moderators to help bring back the immediate first-strike capabilities needed to knock an XOXO kid back into cyberspace the moment they post something outrageous on the board.


"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on society. A social engineer is a highly skilled...lawyer who understands the Constitution of the U.S. and knows how to explore its uses in the solving of problems of local communities and in bettering [our] conditions."
Charles H. Houston

Matthies

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 5988
    • View Profile
    • Tell me where you are going to school and you get a cat!
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2009, 11:10:07 AM »
I also think this board is dying because it tends to run off new blood. There are 14 top law schools and 175 ďothersĒ 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 itís a bad choice fine, but it goes beyond that and people start attacking the poster because of his school. No wonder we donít 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 donít, they just ignore the newbs getting thrashed because it ďdoes not apply to them.Ē LSD is not as open or accepting of posters who donít fit the top law school mode as it used to be. New folks donít stick around as much because they donít feel welcome. Its Law School discussion not Top Law Schools, save that elitist BS for that board.

Instead Iíd 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 donít have to be a moderator to post Ďletís be civil and keep it on topic please.Ē Its takes a village and all the crap.
*In clinical studies, Matthies was well tolerated, but women who are pregnant, nursing or might become pregnant should not take or handle Matthies due to a rare, but serious side effect called him having to make child support payments.

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • Global Moderator
  • LSD Obsessed
  • ****
  • Posts: 7072
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2009, 11:34:03 AM »
I also think this board is dying because it tends to run off new blood. There are 14 top law schools and 175 ďothersĒ 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 itís a bad choice fine, but it goes beyond that and people start attacking the poster because of his school. No wonder we donít 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 donít, they just ignore the newbs getting thrashed because it ďdoes not apply to them.Ē LSD is not as open or accepting of posters who donít fit the top law school mode as it used to be. New folks donít stick around as much because they donít feel welcome. Its Law School discussion not Top Law Schools, save that elitist BS for that board.

Instead Iíd 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 donít have to be a moderator to post Ďletís be civil and keep it on topic please.Ē Its takes a village and all the crap.



I hear your point but I have to say as somebody who was around on the board during the Andrew days, there have ALWAYS been a significant number of "elitist" posters who are only concerned with the top 14 schools.  They never dominated the board, however, because, as you suggested, the rest of us who were the regulars back then talked about so much more stuff than just the T-14 law schools.  I mean we talked about everything.  And that direction didn't come from Andrew, we did that ourselves.  We were just excited about the prospect of law school, period.  Let alone a T-14 law school.  If you were one of the fortunate few who went to a T-14 then great, if not then also great, but it didn't matter b/c we were all brought together in our daily debates of why law school is better than B school and how affirmative action was fair or unfair or what kind of financial aid was available, etc.  

If you go back to some of the old school threads when this board was young you'll see that there has always been a T-14 discussion but you will also see that that discussion did not dominate the board by any stretch.  I don't know if it does today or not but, like you said, that's not a moderator issue so much as it's a general community issue.


"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on society. A social engineer is a highly skilled...lawyer who understands the Constitution of the U.S. and knows how to explore its uses in the solving of problems of local communities and in bettering [our] conditions."
Charles H. Houston

CTL

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3553
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2009, 11:39:13 AM »
I also think this board is dying because it tends to run off new blood. There are 14 top law schools and 175 ďothersĒ 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 itís a bad choice fine, but it goes beyond that and people start attacking the poster because of his school. No wonder we donít 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 donít, they just ignore the newbs getting thrashed because it ďdoes not apply to them.Ē LSD is not as open or accepting of posters who donít fit the top law school mode as it used to be. New folks donít stick around as much because they donít feel welcome. Its Law School discussion not Top Law Schools, save that elitist BS for that board.

Instead Iíd 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 donít have to be a moderator to post Ďletís be civil and keep it on topic please.Ē Its takes a village and all the crap.


I'm with you, Matthies.  It would be nice to have a bigger community, as well as a more diverse one.
If looks could kill, you would be an uzi.

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27223
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #34 on: June 06, 2009, 08:26:48 AM »
albanians.  we need albanians.

Scentless Apprentice

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 783
  • My ego isnt LSD strong but I still want to play.
    • View Profile
    • LSN
    • Email
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #35 on: June 10, 2009, 06:30:32 PM »
I think the ban on PILOFOLO should be lifted. We should have as few rules as possible. Short of harassment or spam - it should be allowed.
Birds of a feather flock together.

LSN

Scentless Apprentice

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 783
  • My ego isnt LSD strong but I still want to play.
    • View Profile
    • LSN
    • Email
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #36 on: June 10, 2009, 07:01:18 PM »
Okie dokie.
Birds of a feather flock together.

LSN

UnbiasedObserver

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2014
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #37 on: June 10, 2009, 08:55:01 PM »
I agree that Pilofilo's ban should be lifted.  I still strongly object to the appearance that it was done largely because he mocked a moderator.

I could understand it if he was doing something absurd to a moderator, but it was a childish retort.  It wasn't worth a second glance.

(And again, I respect the moderators and all their hard work.  However, with this case I cannot agree with the decision.) 

UnbiasedObserver

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2014
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #38 on: June 11, 2009, 05:27:54 PM »
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 Sands
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.

That sounds great outside of context.

But take a look at the posts before Burning Sands made that comment in reaction to complaints:

 "Re: Is the LAW SCHOOL DISCUSSION board cliquish?
ę Reply #120 on: May 21, 2009, 11:36:01 PM Ľ   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Sands:

Do you have Law School Discussion Moderator on your resume?  Honest question.  Just curious."

...

Burning Sand's response was then this:

 "Re: Is the LAW SCHOOL DISCUSSION board cliquish?
ę Reply #126 on: May 31, 2009, 01:24:39 PM Ľ   

Oh, another smart ass comment?  Nice.  I was willing to skip the few complaints against this poster but since they insist, enjoy being banned."

That to me seems as though Burning Sands let his emotions get in the way of objective judgment.  It wasn't until after the fact that people found it odd that he banned someone that he was clear about his reasoning.

With that being said, again, he does a great job around here.  But in this situation, I think there's a strong chance that emotion, rather than reason, won.   

UnbiasedObserver

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2014
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #39 on: June 11, 2009, 06:56:40 PM »
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.

Oh, I'm not saying that your opinion is devoid of reasoning.  Reasonable people can disagree.  I just think that next time a moderator should choose his words more carefully, and not wait until immediately after he is insulted to ban a poster.