Sorry, John, I somehow managed to miss this, it’s the first time I’ve seen it.
I can put you in touch with our Sun-Times advertising guy, that’s not a problem and I’m happy to do it for you. To advertise on The Straight Dope, contact Rich Hummel at rhummel@suntimes.com.
Jenny
your humble TubaDiva
Administrator
I apologize if this was mentioned before (I didn’t read through the whole thread) but one thing I’d really like to see is the ability to “tag” people in posts, like on Facebook. That way, if a user chooses to turn on the option, they get notified if their name is mentioned. Sometimes when a thread gets long, it’s easy to miss a reply to something you said.
You can search for your own name, A lot of people do that once a week or month.
Let’s get a answer. We now have THREE long threads here about ways that we- as members- have a strong consensus about the way something was moderated.
I think it is important to show that the PTB are listening and do something, not just the same-old same-old circling the wagons.
Especially the two threads on way over the line racist posts. If the SDMB wants to be seen as welcoming, that sort of stuff needs to be moderated.
Not necessarily a instant ban or a deletion, but at least a firm warning that that sort of stuff will not be tolerated here.
The question is- is anyone really listening?
With all respect, I disagree. I browse the ATMB frequently and I never got the impression we had a “strong consensus” on any alleged persistent patterns of moderation failures that resulted in condoning racism or hate speech. So your view is your own and is, at best, debatable and not established fact, and in my opinion unsupported by the evidence. It’s also been my observation that those truly espousing racism and hate here are quickly banned, as they should be.
If you think there’s a systemic problem with moderation in this regard – and I don’t – then perhaps a separate thread would be the appropriate place for you to submit the evidence, rather than trying to suggest that it’s an objective fact that needs to be addressed in a thread dedicated to site improvements.
There are two threads here now:
“Some blacks are just dumb and enjoy killing each other” - no warning issued, Tom? Other than the staff, nearly every poster is/was in favor of that post needed a warning. True, some demurred at a insta-ban, some thought deleted that post would be wrong, but I didn’t see one post saying “hey, that is a fine post!” The consensus there is clear- but Tom essentialy gave that person a pass for that racist screed based upon the fact that he doesn’t post much. :rolleyes:
:dubious:
"taco n*s" - no warning issued, mods?: that one is, I admit, more problematic. Miller is getting some support. But I find the idea that that term can be used vs another poster odious in the extreme. Ok, so that one goes back and forth.
So we’ve gone from “three threads with a strong consensus” to two ATMB threads with no consensus at all! One of which has broad disagreement, and the other of which has gone on for four pages with various positions on whether a certain post was truly racist and whether the mod note (which called the post “inflammatory” and threatened future posting privileges) should have been a warning.
That’s quite a difference! And it hardly seems to warrant the broad criticism you made of moderation policy. It just comes down to the usual quibble about mod note vs. warning.
IMHO, also, the matters of racism vs. hate speech are different and should be judged differently in terms of board policy. If someone says, for example, “I’ve hired several [people of ‘x’ race or ethnicity] and none of them have worked out”, that’s essentially racist, but I wouldn’t consider it bannable or even warnable, and certainly not within ten country miles of “hate speech”, which should be an instaban.
I think your complaint here is way overblown. I see no systemic racism or support thereof in board moderation.
One added note. I think we have enough problems on this board with highly creative interpretations of what “accusing someone of lying” means, including things that don’t actually mean that at all, without further impairing free speech with equally creative interpretations of what might possibly be interpreted as racism or hate speech. And that’s all I have to say on the matter.
No, we have one thread with a complete consensus. Most everyone agrees that "“Some blacks are just dumb and enjoy killing each other” deserved AT least a warning. A few called for immediate banning. I call that consensus.
I agree, the Pit thread doesn’t have much of a consensus, but it is that sort of thing which shouldn’t be allowed.
The other thread that did have a consensus was the warning JC gave for a personal insult. However, altho TPTB certainly aeren’t listening there either, that thread has little effect on how the board goes forward- except that the staff simply ignores a consensus.
Since I’m a member, I don’t see ads and don’t know what they’re like now, but there was a short period in the past when I did see them. I found them unbearable, especially one that kind of floated toward the bottom of the screen and blocked part of the text. If I encountered this on a first-time visit to a message board, I would not return.
I’ll bet that the ads here drive away a lot of potential readers.
The “go to first unread” function is important to me, and the function does not work correctly here and never has. Recently another message board I frequented went away, and there were several attempts to replace it. I rejected the one that lacked a “go to first unread” function.
I love the SDMB and would hate to lose it, but really, annoying things do not get fixed. If I were starting from scratch, I doubt that I would hang around here long enough to get addicted.
Wouldn’t a Facebook page cannibalize user engagement from the message board?
I would be interested in participating in this.
Is Teemings still around?
I decided to take a break from posting about three months ago, but have continued to check in to read now and then. When I saw that the future of the SDMB was uncertain and that Charter Memberships were becoming available again, I thought very seriously about renewing my (long lapsed) membership.
I decided against it because of this:
I actually don’t find it easy to ignore thread after thread about the inferiority of the Negro race, what disgusting freaks transgender people are, how victims of sexual assault must have been asking for it, etc. I have often been frustrated by the willingness of the Mods to let trolls troll away, for years in some cases, but I was willing to believe it was just too hard for them to stay on top of everything. Now I know better.
Here’s what I do find easy: hanging onto my money. It’s very, very easy for me to refrain from paying to provide trolls with a platform where no one is allowed to call them trolls. Over the past few months I’ve also found it easier than I expected to go without posting here. I’m about to flounce off again for a while, but since TubaDiva asked, my suggestion for improving the SDMB would be to think very carefully about whether it’s really worth protecting trolls. The SDMB is going to lose people either way, it’s just a question of who. I don’t flatter myself that my absence is a great loss to the board, but you’ve already lost more valuable posters (Una Persson, for instance) due to the reluctance of the Mods to take action against trolls.
Allow unlimited sock accounts. Think of the increase in traffic as “new” members flood the board with thousands of posts. Google rankings will rise. Advertising dollars will flow.
For bigger donations, something to consider would be, if Cecil is on board, is to get an autograph from him, or some autographed book. Other possibilities for bigger donations would be a meeting, dinner, or possibly a picture with him. Obvsiously with certain caveats, that his true identity never get revealed here, or anywhere else in print or cyberspace, or risk one of three things for such a treacherous offense:
A. Voluntarily coming in to be put in front of a firing squad.
B. If not giving yourself up, a contract will be put on you and your dog’s life.
C. Deal with all the fire and fury that only Cecil could muster up.
So really, the only logical choices for a traitor would be A or B.
I moderate another bb, and we have similar issues to what Bone describes. We probably let too many bigoted posters post for too long, too. Note that I didn’t call them “trolls”, because I think a lot of them honestly believe what they are posting, and aren’t trolling. And it’s not just about “we don’t want to lose posters”, it’s also about “we don’t want to be too aggressive about moderating/censoring ideas”.
Lamia, if you are willing to help, I’d be interested in how you would draw the line.
Cecil’s voice on your answering machine!
I concur to a point. You* can *call them trolls in the PIT or when you report them. But we prefer more civilized discussion without name calling elsewhere. It doesn’t help at all, during a Great Debate to call another person a Troll. If they are a troll, they are happy for the attention.
That being said we have two other threads here in ATMB where many of us complained some racist remarks were not being moderated enough, so yes, i do think racist & other trolling needs to be stepped on more often.
I am not in the inner circle so I don’t really know the whole problem with your particular worry about the future of SD. You have many loyal members, paid subscribers and click bait ads. What your asking for is a little more of SD personality to shine forth bringing in new blood and revenue too.
I propose a new web page that you can address right here on SD or even use a seperate URL that would lead internet customers to SD doorsteps. I offer you this one www.bumdope.com :eek:
With all of the volunteered information and data on SD there has to be some bum dope included, right?
Just transfer any thing that is considered bum dope over to www.bumdope.com plus list it in the debate section and in the IMHO section.
You still have all of those men and women that dot their i’s and cross their t’s to point out anything that is considered bum dope and the moderator can then move it on over.
In fact in the last few years I even myself may have contributed some bum dope that many of y’all have made fun of that could have lived on in a bum dope section. 
It’s all yours no charge for the fun of it all … perhaps a byline that Mr Quatro tried to save SD lol
Given the new ownership of the Straight Dope IP and the SDMB, and the discontinuation of the print column, I’m curious about where this fits in to the Sun-Times strategy, and why the Sun-Times doesn’t just kill the whole thing off?
Surely, it can’t be enough simply to be “profitable”; the operating margins have to be worth it, too. Companies are always killing off products or divisions that aren’t profitable enough so that they can focus their energies on things that are more profitable. If you have ten employees dedicated to profiting $x, and they could be repurposed to profiting $x*5, then killing of the SDMB makes sense.
I suppose accounting-wise, any meager profit attributed to the Chicago Reader would be larger in proportion versus attributing it to the Sun-Times, though.
Straight Dope printed column is Chicago-centric (was it syndicated widely?). The Chicago Sun-Times is the number two Chicago paper, but outside of Chicagoland it has no relevance, and the Reader has even less. Although there are the Straight Dope books, I’m not sure if they’re profitable enough to the Sun-Times to warrant the entire infrastructure investment demanded by the website. Extant books are dated, and there are no concrete signs that anything new is about to be released.
The OP (TubaDiva) asks, “We’re looking for ways to make this site – both the column content and the message board – a bigger, better deal. Since we’re serving you, that means what you think is meaningful here. What would make you more likely to spend time here? What would you find enjoyable, interesting, worthwhile? What would you contribute to? What would you throw money at?”
I’m not sure how spending time here makes the site any more profitable, unless the intention is to keep us here to click on more ads to generate ad revenue. We charter members, though, don’t see ads, and anyone with an ad-blocker won’t see ads, either. You could try anti-ad-blockers, but then you’d be excluding intelligent, capable users that are valuable to the community.
As to what I’d throw money at, I’m happy to continue to pay for my charter membership. Less PayPal’s fees, that’s pure operating revenue to you. I’m not likely to buy swag, though. I make it a point to avoid that kind of tacky stuff. Opinions vary, of course, but how many coffee cups do you have to sell at $2 net revenue in order to keep the website afloat? And then we circle back to, what interest does the Sun-Times even have in keeping things afloat?
I hate to be so pessimistic (I value my time here, and sustain my Charter Membership), but without understanding the vision for the IP/forum and where they fit into the Reader and/or Sun-Times, the only thing I can see that might keep things around is some type of foundation. Heck, it could even be a Sun-Times branded foundation. I don’t see any meaningful profit here.