An Open Letter To Allen & The Moderators

[John Taylor]

Originally Posted by Bakai

I think it is obvious that changes were made for financial considerations. WSO's are a driving force for the owners of the forum and to have overbearing mods would only deflect that.

You clearly don't know the owner of the forum,
else you would realise just how far off the mark
your comment is.


John

[valerieSONORA]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

It's kind of a no win situation. You're damned if you do and you're damned if
you don't.

I agree with that.

Remember when the whole front page of the WF was filled with porn spam?? And there happened to be no moderators on at the time so there was nobody to delete them? And then everyone wanted the members to be mods so we ourselves could take care of it.

Meanwhile half the first page of it was filled with porn spam and nothing anyone could do, only a mod could come and delete it.

And now members are now mods people want it the other way.

So it seems there is no easy answer.

Oh I found a possible solution. I would like to be a mod and nuke all the ppl I don't like. I mean I would never do that. Ahem.

I consider myself an intelligent person. But if I can't seem to make a post
here without people jumping down my throat for everything I say, then
maybe not all of the blame goes to the poster.

I don't agree with that. You're being too sensitive. Look at how many thanks you got. You could probably post a hello and get 10 thanks. Most of your posts are met with positive replies and only a very few are not but you focus more on the few that are not positive.

[lgibbon]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I make a post with tips on doing something and I get replies...

"This is a discussion forum, not a place to give tips."

I think the idea is someone asks a question
and someone replies with tips.

Not, that someone that takes it upon himself to decide
what tips everyone else should be reading day after day,
and when he reaches the end, starts all over again
in case anyone missed them.
That is what blogs are for, then we get the choice.

I know everyone is going to say we don't have to read them,
but with over 50% of the posts here being of the lecture type,
it's getting increasingly more difficult to avoid them.

[Steven Wagenheim]

Originally Posted by valerieSONORA

I don't agree with that. You're being too sensitive. Look at how many thanks you got. You could probably post a hello and get 10 thanks. Most of your posts are met with positive replies and only a very few are not but you focus more on the few that are not positive.

Valerie, I can't even argue with that. You're right. It's just a few people
who constantly get on my case. It's just after 2 years of it, well, there is
only so much anybody can take.

Anyway, it won't be a problem anymore and I'm going to be a lot more
relaxed because of it.

[Bakai]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

You clearly don't know the owner of the forum,
else you would realise just how far off the mark
your comment is.


John

I do not, but after being forced to view certain threads (by admin) before the one I intended to view, It occurs to me that the recession may be prompting certain alterations.

[Elmer Hurlstone]

Happy New Year All!

There have been several, at least from my perspective, valid points made in this thread beginning with John's initial post.

Most seem to agree that things are not as they once were. But then nothing ever is.

Some say there were problems the "way things were." No doubt there were. Perfection is rare.

Some allege some former moderators may have been less than objective in some instances. In that all of the former WF moderators were human beings that's likely true. We each come here with our own ideas and opinions–many very strongly held.

Dropping a "MOD" badge on someone will not necessarily change the way they think or act. The more legalistic will continue to be so. Those that are a bit more permissive or liberal in approach will remain such.

On the whole, in spite of their innate humanity, I believe the former mods did much more good than harm.

Over the past few months I've discussed the "mod v. member-mod" with several Warriors. A couple have posted in this thread, most have not. My totally unscientific, hearsay only, conclusion from the conversations I've participated in is that WF was better off with designated moderators.

Only one person I've personally communicated with–himself a former mod–prefers it as is. At least three other former mods, although not personally desiring to jump back in the saddle, believe WF was a better community with designated moderators.

I agree with John, I, too, would like to see a return of the mods.

Elmer Hurlstone

[Louis Raven]

Allen leaves it up to us but nothing gets done. He'll bring back set moderators and some will moan.

I think the system is set up perfect as it is. The problem is with the system controllers (us).

I have no suggestions except for keep reporting the the threads which are off topic, spam, and against the rules.

Louis

[valerieSONORA]

If it returned, and there happened to be no mods on when spammers came, their spam could take the entire first page until a mod came on.

Then there will be posts complaining about the spam and about how something needs to be done and round and round we go.

Maybe if it goes back to mods, there should be several more mods, so when the spammers and scammers go on a posting spree, it can be dealt with more swiftly and more chances a mod will be online.

Now when a spammer goes on a posting spree, ppl can just press report and have it nuked instantly.

[JamesFraze]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

You know, there are so many ironies in this thread
Bottom line: Almost everything I post here is met with ridicule. So ultimately
I decided that beginning this year, I'd make no more new threads to this
forum, since I don't know how to use it properly.

Steve,

I like reading your posts. You provide immense value and inspire me to reach higher.

I don't think that anyone should be slammed for being helpful or posting tips. If there is a discussion about another topic, cool, that's a different thread - but if I make a thread that is meant to be helpful, I do it because I want to help people. I feel that I've been helped so much that this is only right.

As for the wrong behavior on forums - I'm guilty of it, at least my first 15 posts were simply me talking to myself so I could post links. After that I think I have contributed my share for the bandwidth I'm taking.

Honestly if someone tells me my posts aren't welcome I will turn up my techno soundtrack louder, and then go on my merry way - who cares if they don't like it. I'm doing my best to be helpful. Now, if someone has advice to make me better or how to work with the flow - cool, I'll follow it, especially if they respectfully tell me and don't attack. If they do attack, just ignore. They aren't worth the brain cells.

What exactly can someone do to me if they don't like my post (assuming it's not purposely intending to hurt or disrupt anything)? Nothing. Anger only holds the person that holds on to it.

Keep posting good content Steve, they are just jealous! Good content is the lifeblood of the forum.

[MikeRogers]

Personally, I'd like to thank John for having the stones to make the opening post in what I believe will be an ongoing discussion for quite a while.

I think that there can be little doubt that the WF is evolving into something quite different from what it was even a year ago. In some ways it has become a much colder place that seems to be losing its sense of humor.

Hell, we all know that the main forum is for posting threads about "making money". But, since when did making money mean that you aren't allowed to have fun doing it (or for that matter, discussing it?)

When you limit a member's post to "Just the facts, maam", as Sgt. Joe Friday might say, you deny yourself a glimpse into that Warrior's personality and all the threads become as dry as dust; not something many people want to keep coming back to. The forum begins to lose its stickiness as more Warriors just fade away.

Now, I know Allen wants us all to be Moderators and help to police the forum but, the sad truth is...

I'm no moderator and I know it.

I wholeheartedly agree with John's advocacy to bring back the real Mods so that the rest of us can get back to having some fun and making posts without sweating over trying to be perfect in our delivery.

MikeRogers

[John Taylor]

Originally Posted by NathanFalkner

You just want the absolute power to delete, lock,
and/or move threads and posts based on your own
unilateral judgment as to their suitability for the WF?

Nope.

That's what we had before. You can let all members
think they're "moderators" when in fact a dozen former
moderators could run the show. How? By talking to
one another about what threads and posts need to be
removed, and then by collectively hitting the 'report'
button. How is that a BAD thing, when the people in the
cartel are all former moderators who at one point or
another had their own little private forum in which to
presumably share information about bad members, bad
posts, etc? I'm failing to see the flaw in my argument.

John, here's my point. You and the former moderators
can take control of the main discussion forum overnight
and start making the positive changes that you feel are
necessary. Start talking to each other. Start coordinating
your efforts. Trust me, you former mods don't need to be
bestowed the formal title of 'moderator' or given any kind
of special privileges to start cleaning up the forum.

I was Moderator for around 6 months and, quite
frankly, that was long enough.

What makes you think that any of the "former
moderators" can spare the time to "clean up"
the forum?

John

[Darren Mothersele]

I appreciate all the sentiments in the previous replies. Community moderation is an incredibly hard thing to get right.

Good examples to look at are Digg and Slashdot. Both give immense power over to the community to promote and demote content, and it works (most of the time).

Unfortunately there will always be people who try to game the system - so some moderation is always needed. This is a staff role, as it sits outside of the "community moderation" role. It's hard to get community members to perform this moderation role unless their personal incentives are very closely aligned to the mission of the site owners.

[Steven Wagenheim]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

What makes you think that any of the "former
moderators" can spare the time to "clean up"
the forum?
John

John, I personally wouldn't take this job for 7 figures a year, but if not
the former mods, then who?

Your thread says that we should bring back the moderators. I'm not
arguing that at all. I'm all for it.

But if the former mods don't do it, who will?

Do you think there are a sufficient enough people who regularly attend
this forum, seeing what a thankless and overwhelming job being a mod
is, who would even want the job?

Heck, we can't get this place cleaned up with the members doing the
job themselves, so if experienced mods don't do it I don't see anybody
doing it.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there are a few folks here who welcome the
challenge.

I hope so.

[lgibbon]

Originally Posted by valerieSONORA

If it returned, and there happened to be no mods on when spammers came, their spam could take the entire first page until a mod came on.

Then there will be posts complaining about the spam and about how something needs to be done and round and round we go.

Maybe if it goes back to mods, there should be several more mods, so when the spammers and scammers go on a posting spree, it can be dealt with more swiftly and more chances a mod will be online.

Now when a spammer goes on a posting spree, ppl can just press report and have it nuked instantly.

The system doesn't have to change that much.
Members could still report just as they do now.
We just need more mods that will get the posts that are slipping through the net.

[Bakai]

It seems to me that those preferring a "well moderated forum" have anti freedom of speech philosophies. While outright spam should be stopped, to say that some dialog is not suited for a particular topic is going too far in my opinion. It portrays a sheep like mentality of conformity.

[John Taylor]

Originally Posted by Elmer Hurlstone

I agree with John, I, too, would like to see a return of the mods.

Originally Posted by MikeRogers

I wholeheartedly agree with John's advocacy to bring back the real Mods so that the rest of us can get back to having some fun and making posts without sweating over trying to be perfect in our delivery.

Guys, just for the record, at no point did I suggest
bringing back the Mods.

I suggested that there was a need for a greater
degree of leadership and control.

I'm not sure how that could be accomplished, but
my hope was that this discussion might help to
generate some potential solutions.

John

[Chuck Evans]

John for what it's worth I agree with you but I personally think we should re-install the MODS!

Yes...it IS a thankless job, being abused by forum members, making a decision that may not be popular, but at the end of the day even though this forum has picked up members it certainly isn't the same as when I came on board in 2004!

If there is a "vote" I'm in on bringing back the MODS!

chuck

[Keith Boisvert]

Originally Posted by lgibbon

The system doesn't have to change that much.
Members could still report just as they do now.
We just need more mods that will get the posts that are slipping through the net.

Back to the topic at hand, I feel that this is a great idea. A mix of the old and new might work good.

Understandably this is not my forum, and I am not complaining, as I will continue to visit here regardless of our moderation mode(s). Of course I enjoy and owe much to the WF and want others to experience the same, so anything that I can do or say that makes this place better I am all for.

This thread could be about trying to (as a collective whole) find ways to better the forum or address its current shortcomings. Not that Allen is obligated in any way to listen, but heck, who knows, maybe if discussed intelligently we might come up with something. Who knows?

~keith

[Gary Killops]

Originally Posted by Bakai

I think it is obvious that changes were made for financial considerations. WSO's are a driving force for the owners of the forum and to have overbearing mods would only deflect that.

You just don't know how wrong you are.

Gary

[Elmer Hurlstone]

Originally Posted by Bakai

It seems to me that those preferring a "well moderated forum" have anti freedom of speech philosophies. While outright spam should be stopped, to say that some dialog is not suited for a particular topic is going too far in my opinion. It portrays a sheep like mentality of conformity.

"Freedom of Speech" is not a "right" in the private sector.

The Warrior Forum is not a public entity, but a privately held membership site. The only rights one has here are those specifically granted by the owner and for whatever period of time he wishes to grant them.

John,

Please accept my apology for being so unsanitary as to put words in your mouth.

I hereby revise my statement to read, "I agree with John Taylor that there is, "...need for a greater degree of leadership and control."

I personally think a return to moderation is worth considering to accomplish this end.

Elmer Hurlstone

[rosetrees]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

I'm not sure how that could be accomplished, but my hope was that this discussion might help to
generate some potential solutions.

I've just read this thread. Might some kind of refundable membership fee help? Refundable if the member has contributed sensibly for, say, 6 months. Non refundable, with membership cancelled, if the member tries to spam/abuse/whatever.

That way - membership would be free in the long term (as it currently is) but the number of members passing through to take the p**s would be reduced.

Just a thought anyway.

Carol

[kumar]

Originally Posted by lgibbon

The system doesn't have to change that much.
Members could still report just as they do now.
We just need more mods that will get the posts that are slipping through the net.

And probably, the mods could be from different time zones, so that the forum could be moderated at almost all times.

By the way, is it necessary for our mods to have good experience in IM? Personally, I don't think so.

[Clark]

I agree with you John.

The solution to the problem is not in a shift in moderation but to clarify the rules which govern this diamond mine.

Sadly, the current rules do not speak to the type of content posted in the Main but rather, specific to signature file use, avatar use and blog use.

Another sad fact is that there are only 4000+ views for the forum rules to date.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ead-first.html

I like your definition of noise in the Main and will vote for adding it to the current community rules of this forum (if the option was present to vote).

Cheers!

[Steven Wagenheim]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

Guys, just for the record, at no point did I suggest
bringing back the Mods.

I suggested that there was a need for a greater
degree of leadership and control.

I'm not sure how that could be accomplished, but
my hope was that this discussion might help to
generate some potential solutions.

John

John, I may have a solution.

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this because it is a problem.

But let's look at this logically.

We have 3 possibilities for control of this forum.

1. Official
2. Unofficial
3. Combined


Official is the appointing of moderators by Allen to police the forum.

Unofficial is the self moderating that we now have by members.

Combined is where we do both. Appoint moderators but still give members
the ability to report threads and have them put into moderation for
deletion.

The problem with 2 and 3 is that under the present conditions of this
forum, there is no real incentive for members to take on the job of
reporting threads in violation.

I know you could say that the incentive is to have a better forum, but
here is the reality of human nature as you're going to have the following
character traits. I'll simplify these.

1. The Die Hard - This is the person who probably should be a mod. He
will report anything that moves that he feels doesn't belong.

2. The Casual Crime Fighter - He'll report the blatantly obvious spam
posts, but he's not going to go reading through every thread to see if
a post "belongs" or doesn't belong, such as if it belongs in OT or another
part of the forum or if it's an "I" type of post that people seem to have
problems with, or whatever. There is just too much work involved to
read through these and determine what is appropriate and what is not,
especially since a lot of this is subjective. As I said previously, I honestly
don't know what I can post here anymore.

3. The Apathetic - These are the people who just don't care enough. They
don't read the posts that don't interest them or think are self promotional
or whatever and therefore, they're not going to report what they don't
read. You can't really blame these people because let's be honest, where
is their incentive to take on this job? And make no mistake about it, this
is a job.

So what's the answer?

The answer is to give the 2's and 3's incentive to police this place. And no,
like I said, having a clean forum isn't enough of an incentive. If it was,
they'd be doing it now, so obviously it's not.

Well, one suggestion for an incentive would be for every 100 posts that
you report that ultimately get deleted, you get 1 moderator point. When
you reach 20 moderator points, you can cash them in for maybe a free
WSO post or maybe a solo ad at the forum like Allen occasionally runs
for certain members.

This is just one suggestion. Maybe others can come up with other
incentives.

Now I Know that there is going to be some who will try to abuse the
"rewards" system. They'll report posts that are perfectly fine...BUT...with
keeping the same system, where one report can't delete a post, these
people trying to game the system won't get anything from it because
those who play fairly, won't report these perfectly acceptable posts.

Anyway, there is my contribution for a solution.

I think it has merits, but I'm open to other suggestions.

[MikeRogers]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

Guys, just for the record, at no point did I suggest
bringing back the Mods.

I suggested that there was a need for a greater
degree of leadership and control.
John

Ah, Yes... I see that now.

However, unlike Elmer, I do not wish to extend an apology.

On the contrary, I fully intend to exercise my "Right to illiteracy" and cling to my inability to fully comprehend a post. To do otherwise would considerably lower my self esteem.

MikeRogers

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

Thanks John,

Because I believe people should become the change they want to see, I will report more of the questionable posts than I already do.

Usually I just go after the blatant spammers, but now it'll be any post I read that doen't belong here. I will try to use my best judgment, but can't guarantee I will get it right every time. However, any posts I flag will be for what I think is the good of the forum.

On a side note, it doesn't matter to me if you have 1 post or 5,000 - if it doesn't belong here, I'm flagging it.

Here's to a brighter and better WF in 2009!

All the best,
Michael Oksa

Michael,

Just wanted to openly thank you for stepping up and being part of the solution John states in his OP.

I have reported blatant rule breakers in the past, this is easy - I have no doubt you will use your best judgment when practicing Moderation on the less obvious inappropriate posts.

When more do the same a couple of things will occur. First, the obvious removal of blatant rule breaks on a regular basis. Second, and I see this as equally as good, we will all become better at being relevant in our posting because we know others are watching closely.

Fear of the consequences will help more of us to improve our relevant posting. Hopefully.

I too will step up and practice both being relevant and keeping a keen eye out for that which doesn't belong.

Doug

PS - Thank you too John Taylor!

[lgibbon]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I think it has merits, but I'm open to other suggestions.

Stand aside John, your thread has been taken over.

[Kim Standerline]

You know it's been said before, and I'm going to say it again.

This forum belongs to Allen. It's an Internet Marketing Forum. and if you don't like anything the owner decides to do, you don't have to visit!

I doubt very much its anything to do with the recession!

Kim

Originally Posted by Bakai

I do not, but after being forced to view certain threads (by admin) before the one I intended to view, It occurs to me that the recession may be prompting certain alterations.

[Frank Donovan]

John

It's hard to disagree with the points you make in your OP, but I wonder if we've given self-moderation enough of a chance?

The current system relies not just on the action of members, but also their understanding of what constitutes an inappropriate post/thread. I can imagine some newer members being a little confused over some of the transgressions you point out, particularly when they see so many similar posts being made.

This puts a greater onus on the more experienced members. It would certainly be useful if the reporting was weighted to reflect the reporter's experience/standing (of course, this may well already be the case) so that fewer reports were needed from certain members to bring about an action. It can occasionally be frustrating when a reported post remains on view, but hey, that's democracy.

I also note that, at the time of this post, there were 60 members, including many experienced Warriors, expressing thanks for the OP. I'm pretty sure that if only a handful of these members were to regularly report offending posts, the transgressors wouldn't stand a chance.

[How many of us have reported the 8 or 9 threads currently on the main page that are committing at least one of the transgressions mentioned in the OP?]

All in all, I find myself agreeing with Les's idea about a compromise solution - self-moderation but with a stronger emphasis on the reporting by certain more experienced members.

Happy New Year everyone.


Frank

[Kim Standerline]

Because for some weird reason they seem to think all the previous mods were on a power trip and are dying to do it again lol

Originally Posted by John Taylor

Nope.

What makes you think that any of the "former
moderators" can spare the time to "clean up"
the forum?

John

[RobinSkeen]

Just wanted to pipe in and say a little something about the report button. Members with higher post counts have greater leverage when reporting than those with lower post counts. Knowing that, some members may not feel it is worth reporting as their report will not be given much weight.

[Bakai]

Originally Posted by Elmer Hurlstone

"Freedom of Speech" is not a "right" in the private sector.

You say that like freedom of speech is something to be avoided at all costs.

[David_Thompson]

stop posting so damm fast guys just running to the kitchen to get
popcorn and a coke and I can't afford to miss the ring side actions...LOL

It seems like gloves are coming off, which is a bit silly...Guys we all
know this was coming John just had the balls to say it.

We all could sit around a pussy foot around the issue but if we don't take
a stand and air out these issues big brother will, and to me that is going backwards...

--David

[Jim Stewart]

And here was me thinking that it was just me who was becoming disappointed and disillusioned with how the WF has become in the past year or so.

A timely post though John, and kudos for posting it.

After over 10 years as a member here, I believe it is time to call it a day, for me anyway.

This has become a kiddies forum.

It used to be a place where folks could come and really learn about what it takes to be successful in IM.

There were times when I didn't agree with the actions of Allen and some of the Mods, but I could live with them because of the calibre of information and the people giving it.

Does anyone else remember when it felt "Special" to be a member here?

That was something that no other forum could offer...It made it unique and it was a major factor in its success. It is a pity that it has lost that 'uniqueness'

Not a place I want to call home anymore....It has become "Just another forum"

Sad, but true...

[bobt57]

Hello,

I just wanted to comment, I think the discussion here is a very good one, I joined back in 2006 and admit that I have not visited as much as I should and have not done a lot of posting.

One thing I have noticed more lately is that folks can sometimes get very nasty, I won't name names but I have seen a few threads get deleted because what started out as a respectable subject turned into a very mean bashing either of the thread starter or someone who commented in a thread.

For one warrior in particular, its seems his/her sole purpose on this forum is to defame another warrior as evidenced by the warriors name.

Pointing out in a respectable way that you do not agree or appreciate something someone did or said is one thing, but some of the posts I read seemed to go well beyond that. And some of the infractions that were at the source of the bashing did not even occur on this forum.

My mistake was not reporting it when I read it, that will change.

I sincerely believe that the majority of the people on this forum are decent people that are here to learn and help others, collectively there has to be millions of dollars in experience and education within the posts of this forum and thats the main reason I am here, to learn and grow.

Thank you to those Warriors and please keep doing what your doing.

Thanks for reading,
Bob T

[Johnny Slater]

Although Les and I have not always met eye to eye in the past his post here is spot on.

As I see it the only way to meet in the middle of the mod/no mod issue is to leave self moderation like it is and give a select few people the ability to delete or move posts from the main forum.

We already have a few who handle this task in other portions of the fourm and perhaps its time to bring back a few people with that ability to the main forum as well.

Originally Posted by lgibbon

The system doesn't have to change that much.
Members could still report just as they do now.
We just need more mods that will get the posts that are slipping through the net.

[AaronJones]

Self moderation is flawed because it requires more than one member to catch onto what is going on.

Even if it is caught, the person breaking the rules ends up sticking around long enough to get enough traffic to not discourage them before enough people report them for action to be taken.

[Richard Odell]

Thing is John - where is the leadership any more?

Don't get me wrong I love this forum and I perhaps I am worst offender when someone tramples on one of my replies or posts - but I get the distinct feeling that we are being left to or own devices?

Allen is missing from this forum - we need him back - we need him to lay down the law and we need his wisdom - where is he?

The best thing that I ever did in my on-line marketing career was the day that signed up for membership here. Unfortunately if I see another month or two of this fighting and wrangling I may just depart for new fields.

Will that bother anyone - I doubt it but - but it saddens me profoundly that I have started to see the decline of the best IM resource that is available anywhere on the web!

We need Allen posting more often - the Mods back in place and most of all we need direction - unfortunately this can come only from one person (who by the way I have the utmost respect for).

If we are not very careful we could see another example of Michel Fortin's forum happening here and the doors closing to everyone.

Yours very sincerely

-Rich

[Scott Ames]

It should be simple. The posted rules are the guide, but many will flag a thread because they simply don't agree, or they don't like that person.

I never worry about repeated questions. It bugs some people and they like to yell " Use the search feature".. Well, they could, but it may not be the most current answer to the question. Someone may have a completely different answer. This is a forum, a discussion, not a knowlege base. Subjects will
come up over and over as new people come and go.

[Kevin Flask]

If I may offer an observation from someone less knowledgeable of these matters...

I would very much like to contribute to the integrity of this forum. I hope I have been with the reporting of some spammers as of late.

The rules of this forum are very clearly stated, and there are not that many to remember to follow.

However, it has been noticeable that spammers and scammers are becoming...how should I say it...more resourceful. I'm still learning and am not that technologically savvy yet to determine if someone is less than scrupulous.

In a previous post I read that we, the forum members, are encouraged to do our due diligence in researching and identifying credibility and falsities.

My question is....how can I learn to identify and research the validity of someone's claims, websites, and affiliations that go against the integrity of this forum and its members and report them accordingly?

Aside from the new members racking up post counts by starting threads one after the other with only one or two lines, and the obvious affiliate links in their sig file.

It would be beneficial to me and maybe others if we new what to look for and become more active in reporting the rule breakers.

Respectfully,

Kevin Flask

[kennethtang]

An analogy, if I may...

We live in a great big city of multitudes of people. The citizens are well-trained in martial arts and self-defence (and through experience, some have developed some skill in law-enforcement measures and police work) and are tasked with keeping the city safe.

However, they are not professional police. They are citizen police. They have to make a living. Previously, when the city was just an average sized village, and infractions were of an "innocent" nature unintentionally committed by mostly honest and decent folks (and the demands of making a living, business, family, and a thousand and one other things weren't that intense) a citizen police force was sufficient to cope.

Then the village became a big city. And those demands became even more intense. Although the citizens have the martial skills, they no longer have the time to actually do the police work. They want to, they have every good intention of making the neighborhoods safe for everyone, but the demands of the times are much more urgent, and must take precedence over "citizen police work".

Because of the times, the city needs a professional police force.

Just my opinion, nothing more (BTW, sorry for the "incomplete" analogy. I'm writing in a rush)

Kenneth

[mjbmedia]

It seems the main sticking point is some threads that are started for 'wrong reasons' ?

The War Room works fine right?

This may go down like a lead balloon but im gonna suggest it anyway.
How about charging a nominal fee for every thread started?
When people join, or at a set date for existing people, they have to deposit say $20 into their WF account. The OP pays $1 say from their account for each new thread made and each responder perhaps 'donates' a few cents as im really fed up of reading post after post of 'yes i agree' or 'great thread' with no content, again if you're giving good content in the post then a few cents is small change for the respectability you could gain from your considered responses.
If you want to post tips etc , sure you can but you pay for the exposure, if youre just blatantly spamming or self promotion with no real content then you pay for it and lose the thread and dont get a refund, if youre asking a question then surely its worth $1 to get the great answers normally recieved.

A lot of people are on here cos its free, and hats off to Allen and Co for that, but times are changing, when things are free, often theyre not respected.

Im away for 3 weeks now PC less on cruise,so i doubt if id be responding to anything said but its just another angle to consider.

Have a great New year

[valerieSONORA]

Pay per post? No way. Then only like 2 people will be posting.

[Keith Boisvert]

Originally Posted by valerieSONORA

Pay per post? No way. Then only like 2 people will be posting.

And Steve W would be broke!!!

I don't think we need to go that far. A little more moderation leadership and we would be leaps and bounds ahead of where we are now.

Keith

[Allen Graves]

Yup - this place is NOTHING like it was a year ago. Defintely on a down.

Respectfully,
Allen Graves

[lgibbon]

Originally Posted by valerieSONORA

Pay per post? No way. Then only like 2 people will be posting.

But at least they might be interesting.

[Charles E. White]

Originally Posted by Bakai

I think it is obvious that changes were made for financial considerations. WSO's are a driving force for the owners of the forum and to have overbearing mods would only deflect that.

I was going to stay out of this discussion because most of what I would say has already been said but then I seen this post and had to comment.

First, most members haven't been here long enough to see all the people Allen (the forum owner) has helped. He has given away more money than the WSO's will ever make if he charged for WSO's for the next 50 years.


Second, he has made millions (not from the forum or WSO's) and really don't need the money and the WSO's probably make the costs to run this forum about even. But less say he makes a million dollars for the WSO's...so what? Where else can you get the exposure to this many people for the lousy low cost WSO fee?


Third, he should charge everyone here a monthly fee and that would take care of most of the spammers and etc. At one time you couldn't even belong here unless you were invited and either paid a fee or purchased an item. So, he made it free and now people accuse him of running it for financial gain, if he wanted financial gain from this forum, it it would never have been free. So, how much did you (being people who read this post..not you personally as it's not to anyone personally) pay to have the opportunity to be here and learn all you can learn?

Fourth, if he did charge a monthly fee, he could pay the mods to work their asses off here like they did before, as some suggests in this thread. Personally, he doesn't have enough money for me to be a mod and have to put up with all the crap they have to from members of this forum.

[Richard Odell]

Originally Posted by mjbmedia

A lot of people are on here cos its free, and hats off to Allen and Co for that, but times are changing, when things are free, often theyre not respected.

Perhaps this is a contributing factor to it all?

Being a member of the 'War Room' you always find a distinct difference there to the Main Internet Marketing Discussion Forum.

To the old hands in the forum, was it better back then, when you paid for the privilege?

-Rich

[Kim Standerline]

100% different

You also got a lot of the very well known marketers posting as well such as John Reese etc.

They hardly visit now, I wonder why

Kim

Originally Posted by Richard Odell

To the old hands in the forum, was it better back then, when you paid for the privilege?

-Rich

[Elmer Hurlstone]

Originally Posted by Bakai...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmer Hurlstone
"Freedom of Speech" is not a "right" in the private sector.

You say that like freedom of speech is something to be avoided at all costs.

I'm continually amazed at conclusions drawn without one iota of supporting evidence.

Elmer Hurlstone