Russian Women Discussion
RWD Administrative => RWD Announcements => Topic started by: Admin on January 04, 2006, 09:29:06 AM
-
There has been something of an ongoing controversy about the differences between internet boards who have the common topic of international dating and relationships with women from the FSU.
As most of you know, RWD was established - by me, and me alone - after spending quite a lot of time in Ukraine from 1998 forward. I have also been a very active participant on a couple of boards, including Patrick's Planet Love board and the BRAMA Ukraine travel board. I preceeded Jack Bragg on P-L, as well as most others who eventually came to visit there. I never participated on - and almost never visited - any other RW board, primarily as no others existed when I started, and then I just didn't have time to split between multiple boards.
Some ignorant posters on other boards have referred to RWD as a "clone" and implied there is some unwritten or unstated agenda of RWD. Of course, those accusations are fueled by jealousy or ignorance or both.
Nonetheless, the fact that RWD has no commercial interest does, definitely and undisputably, have an effect on the readership and participation we draw to our board.
Taking a moment to describe the business nature of a board such as this, consider:
* Why would an introduction agency or travel agency or professional translation firm choose to spend their money on advertisements on an internet board?
* If you owned such an agency, what would motivate you to spend your money on such an advertisement?
* You would ONLY spend that money if you felt it would stimulate a revenue stream. A revenue stream will be generated only if that particular board attracts the type of participant/visitor who will pay for use of your services.
So how does the internet board attract a particular demographic that will appeal to their intended paying advertisers?
I suppose there are multiple answers to this question - but suffice to say, there are certain categories of participants/visitors who would be more attractive than others. For example, a guy who is married and settled in their new country is unlikely to make use of the services of an introduction agency or a translator. They are no longer a major consumer of the services being offered, hence, are a LESS attractive participant than the guy who has just initiated his interest and pursuit in seeking a life partner from the FSU.
So how do you suppose this translates into active participation on these boards?
Well, someone sent me a JPG image taken on 20Dec2005 which shows the online participants here at RWD and at another RW board at exactly the same time. The other board is commercial in nature, hence, appeals to a somewhat different demographic. I've attached the JPG for you to see the differences - and I am told this is a common scenario between these two boards.
What is *seems* to show is that the total number of online participants is approximately the same - 13 for RWD versus 12 for the other board - BUT - the distribution is quite different. Whereas RWD had only 2 guests of the 13 online, the other board had at least 7 guests of the 12 online - or more than half of their 'participants' were lurkers who were not active participants/members of the board.
This is not really surprising when you think about it. The other board has a business need to appeal to new guys who will be actively spending money in this process, hence, will naturally want to bring in 'new blood' so the advertisers can sell their wares and generate new revenues. Guests to their board being referred by search engines or other websites would be expected and highly-desirable by the advetisers, as they represent the most likely 'new blood' to fuel the industry with $$$$.
RWD has no such business need and seems to have appealed to the more mature and experienced participants. They are far less attractive to advertisers - though, arguably, vastly more valuable to the newbies engaged in this pursuit.
I bring this up principally to address this ongoing controversy - and also to illustrate the complementary nature of the various boards on the internet - rather than focus on their differences. While true those differences exist - they can prove useful to the newby who needs to gather information and advice untainted by commercial interests - while also seeking assistance for their pursuit by evaluating various service providers.
What do you all think about this?? Am I on target, or missing something? Please restrict your commentary to positive comments - no accusations or criticisms of other boards please.
- Dan
-
This sounds like a somewhat symbiotic relationship. Go to the other boards for goods and services then come here to find out to do with the goods and services. If I was just getting into this and spent time reading both types of boards I would tend to lean towards using the services recommended here rather than elsewhere just for the fact that they are not commercially motivated for the most part. I say most part as there are service providers here and their posts in some instances are to promote their services.
Ken (not a service provider):D
-
Dan,
all I can think of is: "if it works don't fix it!"
:D
-
Dan,
all I can think of is: "if it works don't fix it!"
:D
BC,
I can see that you don't work for the government do you? :D
Ken
-
Ken,
You are absolutely correct.. but the US government does indirectly pay my salary!
LOL
-
........What do you all think about this?? Am I on target, or missing something?.......
Of course your on target here Dan.
This reminds me of the time I posted a thread on a Russian discussion board about a scam we had discovered. This particular board was a board who accepted advertising dollars from agencies and the scam we found, and could prove, was from the largest paying advertiser at that time.
As you could imagine I was quite surprised when my detailed post in the scammers section was removed. When asked why I was told it was due to some computer glitch. Yea, and it only effected my post. Sure, give me a break, like I just fell off the turnip truck yesterday.
Are you on target here Dan? I would say so.
-
Even though there are a lot of similarities between this and the other board, I see the biggest differences are the freedom to post here and the demographics. That being said, I would like to ask just how different can a format be on any forum? You either use a format like Planet Love that can be confusing without topic titles or catagories or you use the current set up. I like the set up currently being used. The accusations that this forum is a clone of the other is some sort of misplaced jealousy. And as for the set up here being similar to the other forum, well, just how many different topic titles can you have on the exact same subject?
The freedom to post here is a huge selling point to the community of members this forum has attracted. Many have been banned from the other forum for over stepping some imaginary line drawn in the sand over there. Whether it was because of personality or business conflicts, we will never know because once you commit yourself to moderation, you are at the mercy and descretion of the people you give the moderating powers to. The result is uneven moderation. I will say that I think the other forum has backed off of heavy moderation lately and have let more threads take their natural course. I also think that that change can be directly linked to what is being done here.
But it is the demographics that is the biggest difference between the two forums. There just seems to be many more active posters here that have successfully traversed the minefield of marriage to a RW. The active members of the other forum seem to consist of an inordinate amount of players or men that are really not interested in marriage to a RW. Now if I were a newbie, I would want to obtain my advice from men who had successfully traveled the road I was undertaking and not from some sex tourist.
KenC
-
Ken,
You make a number of good points.
I have done substantial research about the major BB software packages out there - and most have a VERY similar look and feel. There are subtle differences - and this one was selected for its simplicity in administration. Had I wished a board which was effective at banner ad management, or one which integrated into a CMS (Content Management System), I would almost certainly have made a different selection - but even those have very similar appearance for the members.
As for topical choices and structure - I have stated it many times, I have visited the RWG only a handful of times in the period it has been active and have visited the other board (Khashyer's - ??) even less - maybe one time in my life. I honestly did not even know the layouts or forum structures or anything else about the other boards, when I set-up this board. I based the structure on my own initial thoughts - then I solicited a few other opinions (yours was among them, IIRC) - and the rest has evolved over time. If there is a similarity in appearance, it has nothing to do with any alleged "cloning" - it is the simple natural progression of the nature of the theme and topical content of the board.
Demographics seem to be driven by a couple of things. One is how the board is marketed. There are numerous websites I have come to recently learn, all on the topic of SEO (Search Engine Optimization) - driven by the fact that Google and Yahoo and others are somewhat closed-mouthed about how, exactly, they rank sites which meet search criterion. There are strategies employed for 'back-links' (whatever those are), and meta-tags (which I am told are useless now), and other similar efforts to try to ratchet a site up on the ranking lists.
Another influence to board demographics is reciprocal links - and links from paying advertisers. RWD does not have many of those - as there are no paid advertisers, and the only links pointing to us, are from those people who have made the decision to point people here because of the value of the information - no other reason. A good example if the blogger who is living in Ukraine right now and is on some sort of sponsorship by an American organization to study the MOB phenomenon. You can find his blogsite here -- http://everybodyiloveyou.blogspot.com/ - and in it, he references RWD and includes a link to our site.
One of the tenets of RWD which I hope is valued and appreciated, is that I tend to do everything pretty transparently. I ask the members what direction they want the board to take. I encourage the members to send me emails, or initiate polls, or take any steps they wish to determine what RWD will become. I do, on occasion, make unilateral decisions to protect the stated interests and mission of the board - but those are so rare as to be almost non-existent.
In other words, there is no "back-room" discussion or politicking in which board direction is set and board administration policies are decided.
Well - we shall see where, if anywhere, this topic goes.
I think it is important to 'clear the air' once in a while - and if nothing else, maybe this has (or will) accomplished that.
- Dan
-
I have done substantial research about the major BB software packages out there - and most have a VERY similar look and feel.
Dan, you have something on these forum who don't exist at any other forum... the "no-hold barred" section...
Other forum delete controversial post... here, they are send in the "no-hold barred" section... everybody is free to search in the trash for find some pearl...
Software and template can be the same but each forum have his own "personality"...
-
Dan, you have something on these forum who don't exist at any other forum... the "no-hold barred" section...
Other forum delete controversial post... here, they are send in the "no-hold barred" section... everybody is free to search in the trash for find some pearl...
Software and template can be the same but each forum have his own "personality"...
Yeah - one of the interesting things I did recently was to re-restablish the criteria for what is a "Popular" topic - found under the tab with that title in the upper left of the Home page.
Of the topics which appear there - an unexpectedly large proportion are from the NHB section.
It seems we have a board community that likes to argue about some topics :shock:
FWIW
- Dan
-
Well I like this board fairly well since the change from the old format. In fact under the old format I may have posted a total of 10 times if that. This format however appeals to me & the fact that there are no paid advertisers here also appeals to me. As of late I have been spending more time here than on RWG (oooops I said it). Not for any one reason, but for many.
The whole crowd has pretty much changed over there & I find I am in a group of people that for some reason although, we are involved in the same thing, don't seem to be going down the same path. Don't know if that sounds right or not. I find that you can go a little further now than before in some cases but in others you'll get shut down quickly. I don't really know how to explain it other than to say that most of the old crowd is gone & most of the new crowd, well, I just don't feel like I fit in anymore. So here I is.
I say most part as there are service providers here and their posts in some instances are to promote their services.
There is a section for that very thing & should probably be confined to that section. I try to minimize my advertising on the open forums & keep it in that section.
If however you are going to come back & mention my "tag line", I do that not to advertise but to let people know that my replies to whatever are coming from the view of someone who is in the buisness & should my post take a certain slant, that is why, not to market my buisness. This I started on the other board because I was critizized for certain posts & not mentioning that I was an owner, so now I make it clear right up front on all boards I post on.
Besides if I really wanted to advertise, my URL would be my tag line, LOL.
RVR - Canadian Cowboy/Agency Owner
-
The following is written by Cameraguy from the other board. Because I frequent both boards I was one of several asked to try to make contact. These thoughts are the sole property of Cameraguy, and I am merely facilitating the exchange of ideas.
Dan,
I'm receiving messages that you're seeking a response regarding a post that's perceived as being critical towards RWD.
First of all, any comments that I post solely represent my own views and opinions. Secondly, I never mentioned RWD or made any accusations about "being some sort of shill for Jack Bragg and FirstDream". If this is a typical response to perceived slights or disputes, then it represents the greatest difference in board philosophies.
Spencer was recently threatened with a lawsuit by a reputable agency and long-time board advertiser. They objected to a single critical post after receiving years of positive comments. He immediately severed the relationship and pulled the account. It's too bad that some people think lawsuits are a valid way to resolve disputes, especially from someone who operates a discussion board that's supposedly devoted to free expression and diverse opinions.
After initially hearing several years ago that RWG was going commercial, I disliked the idea. I felt it would be difficult to objectively discuss any agency or service provider who was also a board sponsor. I'm happy to report that I was completely wrong. Most of my few conflicts with agencies over the years have been with those few that are deceptive, manipulative or who think message boards are a cheap and easy method of marketing, something that I've always disliked. For example, a 'Big 3' agency attempted this last year. They even went so far as to incorporate their name in the rep's handle and added a promotional tag line to every post. Despite being the board's top advertiser, I'm strongly opposed to this practice and freely said so. The agency rep assured everyone that he'd be around for a long time. Evidently, he was mistaken.
The message that was forwarded to me also stated, "Rather than stoop to his level and post on the open board, I prefer to deal with him directly." Well, I'm not sure what this thread will accomplish, but if the past is any indication, it'll soon become apparent over many pages and months. BTW, not that it matters, but when I checked each board's online members, it was 31 to 6. For total vitriol and snide insinuations (which has already started, but is somehow never considered inappropriate), there's no comparison. As I've previously said, if you don't like the place -- for whatever reason, don't post. Otherwise, it's being hypocritical. Any board with lots of members attracts a few strange characters and publicity hounds who are more trouble than they're worth. OTOH, the overall depth and diversity of experiences and advice is unparalleled.
The challenges of this endeavor are always changing and involve more than being married to an RW for 5 or 10 years. But having done that is no small accomplishment, as I believe the overall AM/RW success rates are much lower than domestic marriages. Going in without knowing the experiences of others further reduces those odds.
Even though I question the propriety of starting a thread that implicitly sanctions another long-term bash-fest, I appreciate Dan's (and KenC's) civil attitude. Now if only every member could act accordingly...
~CG
-
I say most part as there are service providers here and their posts in some instances are to promote their services.
There is a section for that very thing & should probably be confined to that section. I try to minimize my advertising on the open forums & keep it in that section.
RVR - Canadian Cowboy/Agency Owner[/quote]
Rvr,
I didn't say that to judge or be harsh in any way. Just as a qualifier to what I was saying. I fully agree that those who are in the business (agency owner, interpreter, apartment renter, flower deliverer) should have a place to sell their wares and it is appropriate that they do. The majority of this type of professional who posts here does keep it up front who/what they are. I respect that very much and know that they have a different and valuable side of information to give here.
Ken
-
Dan,
I'm receiving messages that you're seeking a response regarding a post that's perceived as being critical towards RWD.
First of all, any comments that I post solely represent my own views and opinions. Secondly, I never mentioned RWD or made any accusations about "being some sort of shill for Jack Bragg and FirstDream". If this is a typical response to perceived slights or disputes, then it represents the greatest difference in board philosophies.
Spencer was recently threatened with a lawsuit by a reputable agency and long-time board advertiser. They objected to a single critical post after receiving years of positive comments. He immediately severed the relationship and pulled the account. It's too bad that some people think lawsuits are a valid way to resolve disputes, especially from someone who operates a discussion board that's supposedly devoted to free expression and diverse opinions.
After initially hearing several years ago that RWG was going commercial, I disliked the idea. I felt it would be difficult to objectively discuss any agency or service provider who was also a board sponsor. I'm happy to report that I was completely wrong. Most of my few conflicts with agencies over the years have been with those few that are deceptive, manipulative or who think message boards are a cheap and easy method of marketing, something that I've always disliked. For example, a 'Big 3' agency attempted this last year. They even went so far as to incorporate their name in the rep's handle and added a promotional tag line to every post. Despite being the board's top advertiser, I'm strongly opposed to this practice and freely said so. The agency rep assured everyone that he'd be around for a long time. Evidently, he was mistaken.
The message that was forwarded to me also stated, "Rather than stoop to his level and post on the open board, I prefer to deal with him directly." Well, I'm not sure what this thread will accomplish, but if the past is any indication, it'll soon become apparent over many pages and months. BTW, not that it matters, but when I checked each board's online members, it was 31 to 6. For total vitriol and snide insinuations (which has already started, but is somehow never considered inappropriate), there's no comparison. As I've previously said, if you don't like the place -- for whatever reason, don't post. Otherwise, it's being hypocritical. Any board with lots of members attracts a few strange characters and publicity hounds who are more trouble than they're worth. OTOH, the overall depth and diversity of experiences and advice is unparalleled.
The challenges of this endeavor are always changing and involve more than being married to an RW for 5 or 10 years. But having done that is no small accomplishment, as I believe the overall AM/RW success rates are much lower than domestic marriages. Going in without knowing the experiences of others further reduces those odds.
Even though I question the propriety of starting a thread that implicitly sanctions another long-term bash-fest, I appreciate Dan's (and KenC's) civil attitude. Now if only every member could act accordingly...
~CG
[/quote]
Thanks Jet,
It serves no useful purpose to engage in any sort of exchange like this on the open boards, which is why I sought a direct exchange. CG made his point(s) clear in his post - and his posts of the past. His action to take my request to the open internet says a lot - but this is not the proper venue.
- Dan
-
It serves no useful purpose to engage in any sort of exchange like this on the open boards, which is why I sought a direct exchange.
I tend to agree, ESPECIALLY through a third party. I have honored one request from each side of the issue, can I be done now? :huh:
-
I tend to agree, ESPECIALLY through a third party. I have honored one request from each side of the issue, can I be done now? :huh:
Thanks again.
- Dan
-
Well at least folks here do not get banned for not posting ;)
-
Well at least folks here do not get banned for not posting ;)
I think you were not banned BC.. in their urge to get rid of Elen they blocked all non-American IP's :D
-
Well at least folks here do not get banned for not posting ;)
We all know how rowdy you can be BC. Banning is the nicest thing to befall a rabble-rouser like you!
:zappedhim:
[tongue planted firmly in cheek] - (is there an emoticon for that???)
- Dan
-
LOL Dan,
According to a very trustworthy source they do have a problem with the board..
Rats.. just when things were getting interesting.. Oh well back to procrastinating yardwork!
-
LOL Dan,
According to a very trustworthy source they do have a problem with the board..
Rats.. just when things were getting interesting.. Oh well back to procrastinating yardwork!
Yeah, I suspected as much - from all the comments I've been receiving (PM and email). Though, of course, none from the person whom I invited to engage in a private exchange.
I am trying SOOOOOO hard to contain my sarcastic commentary. :cool:
- Dan
-
I am trying SOOOOOO hard to contain my sarcastic commentary. :cool:
Yeah that can indeed be difficult to do at times ... :D
-
Shadow, why on earth did Spencer want to get rid of Elen that he blocked all European internet IP's? She has been active on this board for a while as well.
Dan, by the way, I whole heartedly agree with your initial post.
-
Shadow, why on earth did Spencer want to get rid of Elen that he blocked all European internet IP's? She has been active on this board for a while as well.
This *must* be a different Elen than our Moscovite Elen - right?
- Dan
-
wow, Ellen got banned from a board? Must be a board who feels threatened by her expertise, experience. Or maybe she said something negative towards a paying advertiser, or she must have said something that offended a moderator.
-
Helen and Kvinna have been using the other board as their personal private playground for some time now. Personally I disagree with Spencer on this move as she is very, very insightful *most* of the time. She can get incredibly caustic at times too, though. (Kvinna, I could take or leave...)
One thing I will give her a lot of credit for though, is that each time she comes back, she NEVER tries to hide or disguise her identity: Helen / Helen_13 / Helen_13.1 / Hell13. Of course, to succesfully disguise yourself as someone else is futile in the end anyway, as you'd need to consistantly write in a competely different style than you ever did before and make a concerted effort to change lifelong patterns of spelling & grammer mistakes.
It's funny though,I like most of the married contributers, tend to agree with much of what Helen writes, and find her comments "spot on" most of the time. The guys who have big problems with her advice, are always the ones who are still searching, and are too busy being angry or defensive to really HEAR what she's telling them....
-
wow, Ellen got banned from a board? Must be a board who feels threatened by her expertise, experience. Or maybe she said something negative towards a paying advertiser, or she must have said something that offended a moderator.
None of the above
-
Helen and Kvinna have been using the other board as their personal private playground for some time now. Personally I disagree with Spencer on this move as she is very, very insightful *most* of the time. She can get incredibly caustic at times too, though. (Kvinna, I could take or leave...)
One thing I will give her a lot of credit for though, is that each time she comes back, she NEVER tries to hide or disguise her identity: Helen / Helen_13 / Helen_13.1 / Hell13. Of course, to succesfully disguise yourself as someone else is futile in the end anyway, as you'd need to consistantly write in a competely different style than you ever did before and make a concerted effort to change lifelong patterns of spelling & grammer mistakes.
It's funny though,I like most of the married contributers, tend to agree with much of what Helen writes, and find her comments "spot on" most of the time. The guys who have big problems with her advice, are always the ones who are still searching, and are too busy being angry or defensive to really HEAR what she's telling them....
Maybe I should start a different topic on this - BUT - I wonder - why is the creation/use of multiple identities such a bad thing?
Something I learned a while back is to challenge conventional thinking. The creation and use of multiple identities is often outlawed on internet boards. Let's challenge that a bit - So What? Who cares? and What Difference Does it Make?
Yes, I know some people will play games and answer themselves - and yes, it does give the appearance of some form of scurrillous behavior - but consider the FACTS of the situation.
Each post is, or should be, taken on its own merit. If a single person is going to go to the effort of creating multiple identities, what does that really have to do with the value and content of the board and its topics?
I suppose if EVERYONE did that, and they ALL actively made use of multiple identities, it would create some uncertainty over who is really posting - but with the anonymity of an internet board - is that really a valid concern??
For instance, I have never met jet, nor jb, nor Maxx, nor Shadow, nor MandM (as only a very few examples) - yet, I believe all of them to be valuable posters. I suspect that each of them wishes to be identified with their posts. Someone who would post under multiple identities would be less concerned about being identified distinctly to their postings - but that does not necessarily make the posts, themselves any less valuable - does it?
It seems to me the biggest problem created by multiple identities is the potential diminution of the sense of 'community' one begins to gain by regular participation on a board. Candidly, I am not sure how valid that sense of community is anyway. For some, who have personally met face-to-face, it is more valid. But still, after all, this is an internet board and is both virtual and anonymous. The vast majority of board members will never meet in the 'real world' and the sense of community we gain by participating here needs to be kept in context of the medium we use.
Not so long ago - over on the P-L board - there was a regular who posted under multiple names - and announced he was doing that. It generated no problems whatsoever. Patrick was fully-aware, as was the entire board. The reason he did so, is that P-L installs cookies and if you post from a different computer, the cookies can be lost and password retention (at least for us older folk) becomes problematic, hence, the creation of multiple identities for different computers. No big deal.
So what do you think - what is the downside to multiple identities? Why should we care if someone chooses to exercise that behavior?
And BTW - Elen and Kvinna are both able to post here. I think both know they are allowed here. And yes, at times, they can be a PITA - but I have recently (prior to the RWG situation) exchanged some very nice PM's with Elen and she knows exactly how I feel about her - the positive and the negative. It has been MUCH longer since I communicated with Kvinna, but she knows how to reach me also, if she should care to.
- Dan
-
OK Dan, You have now exposed me!! I have been posting under KenC, Photoguy and Son of Clyde! Jeesh.
KenC
-
.......wow, Ellen got banned from a board? Must be a board who feels threatened by her expertise, experience. Or maybe she said something negative towards a paying advertiser, or she must have said something that offended a moderator......
,,,,,,,None of the above,,,,,,
jet, you must be familiar with what's going on with this situation. What Russian discussion board banned Ellen and what was the reasoning if it was none of the above.
-
Dan, as long as the person who has multiple names is not using any or all of the names to disrupt the board, incite the board or give misinformation it actually is ok. However, it is best if each person tries their best to keep one name because it creates a sense of security and consistency. When Bruce or Dan or whomever posts, you usually know where they are comming from after many posts I hope. For some of us, we never know where they are comming from, but that is ok as well.
-
I'm kinda opposed to the use of multiple ID's on the grounds of,, "what's the point?".....
In the case of a computer crash I can understand a lost password, but to deliberately register several time for no other real purpose usually means sneaky nefarious underhanded skullduggery is afoot, and I would be leary of the person who was uncovered with multiple online personas.
Is't just my suspicious nature, I guess.
-
OK Dan, You have now exposed me!! I have been posting under KenC, Photoguy and Son of Clyde! Jeesh.
KenC
Now we know who is not on KenC's favorites list.
A freudian slip maybe?
:?
-
I'm kinda opposed to the use of multiple ID's on the grounds of,, "what's the point?".....
In the case of a computer crash I can understand a lost password, but to deliberately register several time for no other real purpose usually means sneaky nefarious underhanded skullduggery is afoot, and I would be leary of the person who was uncovered with multiple online personas.
Is't just my suspicious nature, I guess.
I have to agree with you. If one has to hide his identity, then he is up to no good.
Clyde,
It was a joke. Come on, don't look so deep.
KenC
-
I have to agree with you. If one has to hide his identity, then he is up to no good.
But wouldn't those motives appear in the posts they write?? Why would the mere creation and use of a different ID automatically mean they are up to no good? It might - or it might not - but in any case, no-one would know until they started posting, and their 'agenda' became clear.
I guess the reason it doesn't bother me much is that I spend time on another board in which the use of multiple identities is commonplace. Yes, often it is for children to play their games on the board - but that tactic rarely works effectively.
On a board such as RWD, there seems to be a large proportion of our members who use pseudonyms - and there is little suspicion created by the use of a pseudonym. I know that on some other boards I frequent, the mere use of a pseudonym creates suspicions. On those - very professional and structured boards - only the use of an identity which clearly articulates who the poster really is, is acceptable. Here, pseudonyms seem OK - so long as there is only one. I don't know - it still strikes me as not a big issue one way or the other.
Still seeking input/thoughts from board members. Thanks to those already stating their opinions.
- Dan
-
Only have a minute, 7:40pm Kiev time, RWD 14 people on line (12 members, 2 guests) and another board 8 people (3 members, 5 guests). Sign of things to come?
Hey jet, did you see my question to you above regarding who banned Ellen and what for?
-
I have to agree with you. If one has to hide his identity, then he is up to no good.
But wouldn't those motives appear in the posts they write?? Why would the mere creation and use of a different ID automatically mean they are up to no good? It might - or it might not - but in any case, no-one would know until they started posting, and their 'agenda' became clear.
I guess the reason it doesn't bother me much is that I spend time on another board in which the use of multiple identities is commonplace. Yes, often it is for children to play their games on the board - but that tactic rarely works effectively.
On a board such as RWD, there seems to be a large proportion of our members who use pseudonyms - and there is little suspicion created by the use of a pseudonym. I know that on some other boards I frequent, the mere use of a pseudonym creates suspicions. On those - very professional and structured boards - only the use of an identity which clearly articulates who the poster really is, is acceptable. Here, pseudonyms seem OK - so long as there is only one. I don't know - it still strikes me as not a big issue one way or the other.
Still seeking input/thoughts from board members. Thanks to those already stating their opinions.
- Dan[/quote]
OK, Dan,
Let me turn this around on you. What possible positive motivation would someone have to post under a second identity?
KenC
-
.....What possible positive motivation would someone have to post under a second identity?.....
Ken, maybe someone could be on a site and was temporarily banned and during this banishment this person wanted to reply to some threads or to offer suggestions/help. Just maybe this could be one possiable positive motivation.
-
OK, Dan,
Let me turn this around on you. What possible positive motivation would someone have to post under a second identity?
KenC
I agree Ken. It makes little sense to me. I have enough trouble keeping track of ONE. My point was - does the creation of a second (or multiple) identities necessarily mean that someone is planning to misbehave on the board?
From a purely administrative perspective - it would be a royal PITA to try to prevent it - though the board software has some pretty good alert features to help with that sort of thing.
I can think of a couple of reasons for someone to maintain multiple identities - one of them being, the separation of their commercial interests from their personal interests. For example, if there is someone who sells a service, and they want to be up-front about those posts in which they are representing their product/service - they may post with an identity that clearly describes that. Then, when they are participating as a normal member and seeking information or exchange - but want it kept separate from their commercial interest, they may want a different identity to use for that sort of post. Would you consider this skullduggery? Some might, I suppose.
It just strikes me that it really would not be THAT important. Unless, of course, they were trying to gain some sort of business advantage by disguising themselves.
Perhaps this is just my natural tendency to assume the best in others coming out. Maybe I am not being sufficiently critical or suspicious, but absent a clear danger represented by the behavior - I say - SO WHAT?
More dialogue, please. I am open-minded, but I'd like to review all sides of the issue.
Thanks again.
- Dan
-
For example, if there is someone who sells a service, and they want to be up-front about those posts in which they are representing their product/service - they may post with an identity that clearly describes that. Then, when they are participating as a normal member and seeking information or exchange - but want it kept separate from their commercial interest, they may want a different identity to use for that sort of post.
I think that's a can of worms you don't want to open, ask Jack what happened when he did that same thing on the other board.
-
.....What possible positive motivation would someone have to post under a second identity?.....
Ken, maybe someone could be on a site and was temporarily banned and during this banishment this person wanted to reply to some threads or to offer suggestions/help. Just maybe this could be one possiable positive motivation.
Jack,
Even though the secret identity poster may have the positive motivation to be helpful, it is still underhanded to try and cercumvent the board's administration that intially banned the individual. They were banned for a reason (justifiable or not) and afterall, it is their board to run as they see fit.
KenC
-
It just strikes me that it really would not be THAT important. Unless, of course, they were trying to gain some sort of business advantage by disguising themselves.
Perhaps this is just my natural tendency to assume the best in others coming out. Maybe I am not being sufficiently critical or suspicious, but absent a clear danger represented by the behavior - I say - SO WHAT?
More dialogue, please. I am open-minded, but I'd like to review all sides of the issue.
Thanks again.
- Dan
Dan,
As I said above, I don't know if this is a serious enough problem to worry about, but I cannot see this deception (posting under a second handle) ever being honest.
KenC
-
I have a double identity. And it helps. :toocool: But it is not used for deception.
-
I have a double identity. And it helps. :toocool: But it is not used for deception.
Of course it is a deception. It is an admitted deception to hide your true identity. As in:
SUBTERFUGE (http://javascript:lookup('subterfuge ');) [/i]suggests the adoption of a stratagem or the telling of a lie in order to escape guilt or to gain an end.
Your identity is not "moderator" because you choose not to share your real identity with us. You hide behind your secrete identity to escape any possible retribution. I personally have no problem with that, but it isn't what I would choose to do. Many people may not like my opinions, but I damn well aint gonna hide the fact that they are mine.
KenC
-
Ken,
It would only be deceptive if the moderator is also an active participant in other thread discussions. As long as the person masquerading as "Moderator" isn't also contributing opinions in thread discussion I wouldn't have too much of a problem with the idea of a "moderator". However, now that I've learned that the moderator has a double identity, the possibility exists that he could be agreeing or disagreeing with us while operating in another persona, and then stepping back into the role of moderator and slapping us down for expressing an opinion he didn't like, frankly I'd have a big problem with that.
At least on the other board we knew who the moderators were, and when they posted, it was for all to see and the honesty of the message was taken for granted, i.e., they were accountable for their own words. Now that the moderator has openly admitted he has a double identity it makes me wonder about a few things.
-
Honestly, if "I" were the moderator of this section, I would have deleted the "moderator's" comment as being prone to generating off-topic responses or at best, rather self-serving. FWIW.
-
Ken,
It would only be deceptive if the moderator is also an active participant in other thread discussions. As long as the person masquerading as "Moderator" isn't also contributing opinions in thread discussion I wouldn't have too much of a problem with the idea of a "moderator".  However, now that I've learned that the moderator has a double identity, the possibility exists that he could be agreeing or disagreeing with us while operating in another persona, and then stepping back into the role of moderator and slapping us down for expressing an opinion he didn't like, frankly I'd have a big problem with that.
At least on the other board we knew who the moderators were, and when they posted, it was for all to see and the honesty of the message was taken for granted, i.e., they were accountable for their own words. Now that the moderator has openly admitted he has a double identity it makes me wonder about a few things.
No need to hold back jb - ask away.
In this instance, I asked for some assistance with managing the board. The person I felt could be the best at providing that assistance, had legitimate concerns over how their capacity as moderator here at RWD, might be interpreted (or MIS-interpreted) by those at other boards where this person had established respect over many months.
The simple solution was that I established one account for a Moderator, and further established some limitations on the actions which may be taken - and asked them to provide assistance. This past holiday season was a grand example of why I saw the need for this assistance, as I was barely able to look at the board for more than a week. The Moderator helped immensely by gently guiding things back on track.
I follow the actions the Moderator has taken - and I seriously doubt anyone can complain much at all about the actions taken to date.
Any other questions, please ask.
- Dan
Added:
I recently deleted my announcement about my decision to add a moderator - which followed a poll of the membership. I did, however, find the topic initiated by the Moderator introducing himself. I don't think anything at all has changed - except that we now have some significant experience, and know that the Moderator is more than fair and even-handed in the actions they take.
You can read it here -- http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/forum1/746.html
FWIW
- Dan
-
I didn't think I was too ambiguous in my wonderings, but since you so ask, has the moderator ever posted on this board in the guise of another persona?
-
I think that's a can of worms you don't want to open, ask Jack what happened when he did that same thing on the other board.
Actually, it was Richard's (Rvrwind) recent post here on RWD which made me think of this. He explained that he had gotten some flack, at one time, for not alerting everyone to the fact that he had started an agency. At that point, he began to use a 'signature' so that no-one could claim he was failing to disclose his activities as an agency owner.
I found it rather interesting that there is such sensitivity to the possibility that someone who has a business interest may post as a 'normal' person - and that, all by itself, managed to generate suspicions.
Seems to me there are quite a few people who are incredibly suspicious of others - particularly in this endeavor. I am not clear on why that is - but I am clear that it exists.
- Dan
-
I didn't think I was too ambiguous in my wonderings, but since you so ask, has the moderator ever posted on this board in the guise of another persona?
Sure they have. I asked them to help me with moderation duties after they had established an identity on the board - and they have been incredibly helpful and extremely fair and balanced about doing so. I explained why I chose to implement it the way I did in my previous post.
Have you any specific reason to believe there is ANYTHING inappropriate afoot jb?
- Dan
-
I have a double identity. And it helps. :toocool:But it is not used for deception.
Of course it is a deception. It is an admitted deception to hide your true identity. As in:
SUBTERFUGE (http://javascript:lookup('subterfuge ');) [/i]suggests the adoption of a stratagem or the telling of a lie in order to escape guilt or to gain an end.
Your identity is not "moderator" because you choose not to share your real identity with us. You hide behind your secrete identity to escape any possible retribution. I personally have no problem with that, but it isn't what I would choose to do. Many people may not like my opinions, but I damn well aint gonna hide the fact that they are mine.
KenC
[/quote]
Ken,
It would only be a "lie" or "subterfuge" if we had not been totally and completely up-front about what we were doing at the time.
I ran a poll. I made a decision. I found someone whom I could trust. They had a legitimate concern - and I implemented an approach to overcome that concern - so that I could get the benefit of some assistance which I needed.
None of that was hidden from anyone. In fact, it was announced, and announced, and announced - all while it was going on.
Unfortunately, I have just recently been pruning some of the older Admin topics and I deleted a couple in which I ran the poll asking for input - and I made the announcement about the Moderator. Most should recall that as it wasn't all that long ago - about 6 months.
- Dan
-
WRT the agency owners doing double IDs, Jack will attest, I'm sure, that when he did the multiple screen name gambit, it generated distrust, disrespect, and outright hostility, no only towards himself, but towards his agency when the deception was discovered. I think it ultimately cost him a lot of business.
Most folks just don't like being fooled. I can easily understand Richard's reluctance to cross those boundaries, and I applaud his upfront honesty in the matter.
-
Hey jet, did you see my question to you above regarding who banned Ellen and what for?
Spencer banned her, for details it's probably best to ask him, but the published terms of use were broken. OTOH it doesn't seem to have even put a dent in her posting though, seems she may actually be posting MORE since it was announced.
-
At least on the other board we knew who the moderators were, and when they posted, it was for all to see and the honesty of the message was taken for granted, i.e., they were accountable for their own words. Now that the moderator has openly admitted he has a double identity it makes me wonder about a few things.
Actually, I don't think you DID know who the Moderators were. It follows my rationale that most of us really don't know the other members of the board very well at all. We know the slightest amount - but even that is questionable. On those very rare occasions where we meet someone from the board, we get a little better glimpse - but even then, unless we live close-by and can get to know them closely - we still don't "know" that person very well.
So I submit that while you knew a little of their internet board persona, you still had little idea of who they are - and there is almost no difference to what I implemented here.
- Dan
-
WRT the agency owners doing double IDs, Jack will attest, I'm sure, that when he did the multiple screen name gambit, it generated distrust, disrespect, and outright hostility, no only towards himself, but towards his agency when the deception was discovered. I think it ultimately cost him a lot of business.
Most folks just don't like being fooled. I can easily understand Richard's reluctance to cross those boundaries, and I applaud his upfront honesty in the matter.
No-one likes to feel they've been made a fool of. As I've mentioned many times before, I never followed the goings-on at RWG, hence, have no personal knowledge of what happened. I can imagine that, if anyone came onto the board, and presented themselves as one thing - and their subsequent actions called that into questions - then there is bound to be suspicion and repurcussions.
In the case of Richard - once again, I did not personally witness it - but I have the impression he was just posting as he always had posted - but after he made the announcement he had started an agency, those very same posting practices began to generate suspicions.
I find that kind of odd - but, at the same time, I see how it might occur.
Some of the policies I have enforced on the board are - I do not allow someone to establish a username which promotes their commercial activities. I explicitly turned-off the board feature which allows 'Signatures' to be included in every post. I frown on the use of board identities which are obviously commercial in nature.
Now - with this exchange - and considering how I have seen other boards deal with similar questions - I am re-thinking some of these policies.
For example, one board I visit has the poster's 'status' displayed with their username on every post. Some are "Management" some are "Moderators" some are "Commercial Members" some are "Members" - and there are probably some other classifications I am missing. I want to take some time to think about that, and determine if there is a value to the board in implementing something similar.
In any case, I certainly may have done some things that are not the most efficient - but I assure you (and others) there was NEVER any intent to mislead anyone.
- Dan
-
Dan wrote:
Have you any specific reason to believe there is ANYTHING inappropriate afoot jb?
Obviously not, but that's the nature of a successful deception, isn't it? The victims are not aware of being deceived. Now you've inferred that there are more than one unknown moderators out there, alas, whom can we trust,,, we just don't know anymore.
And FYI, since I was a moderator on the other board for a time, I did have occasion to meet on the phone with some of the other moderators. We, especially Leslie and I, tried to be as transparent as possible, which was probably the reason we didn't last too long in that role.
-
Now you've inferred that there are more than one unknown moderators out there, alas, whom can we trust,,, we just don't know anymore.
jb,
Not sure where you are seeing that inference - but let me deal with it explicitly - there is only ONE moderator on RWD - in addition to my acting as a moderator from time to time.
Now as for the bigger question - I don't know about you, but if I felt I was being deceived or lied-to or there was subterfuge afoot - it wouldn't take me long to 'vote with my feet' and go elsewhere.
I resent any baseless unfounded allegations of wrongdoing - and welcome anyone to ask any questions they wish. I also encourage anyone who feels a lack of confidence in my management of the board - to find one they are more comfortable with.
I've worked hard to insure my decisions are transparent to the board community - though I reserve the right to act in the best interest of the board, as I solely see fit.
Anyone who feels uncomfortable with any of that, always has the option to find more comfortable territory - and I wish them well.
- Dan
-
As far as the multiple identities, for me it all boils down to credibility. There are many members here and elsewhere that due to their credibility, have earned my highest respect (whether or not I agree with them). Once a poster starts to assume multiple identities, it erodes my confidence in their credibility even if they have the most noble of intentions. I start to look for underlying motives which may or may not be present.
This does not apply (in my mind) to those who as Dan suggests, might have seperate computers/IPs at home and work like Randy and Randy2 or multiple incarnations of Helen on RWG. Usually no attempt is made by these people to disguise the fact that both usernames are in fact, the same person - usually they'll use the same avatar for all accounts so it is easily understandable to others.
-
You miss my point, you seem to think I'm deliberately chopping down trees while you try to enjoy the view of the forrest. Not the case at all. My concerns are simply that I got the impression from an earlier post of yours that the moderator(s) was/were someone you know and trust, possibly located in Europe. Isn't that true?
Considering the nature of my relationship with our two principle European based posters, (now that it's been established that the moderator is also an active principal on the board), and my opinion, especially of one in particular, it just makes me wonder. If the person you've appointed to be in charge in your stead is indeed that same person that you recently took me to task about, I will vote with my feet. Be assured of that.
You tell me, should I leave or stay?
-
You miss my point, you seem to think I'm deliberately chopping down trees while you try to enjoy the view of the forrest. Not the case at all. My concerns are simply that I got the impression from an earlier post of yours that the moderator(s) was/were someone you know and trust, possibly located in Europe. Isn't that true?
Considering the nature of my relationship with our two principle European based posters, (now that it's been established that the moderator is also an active principal on the board), and my opinion, especially of one in particular, it just makes me wonder. If the person you've appointed to be in charge in your stead is indeed that same person that you recently took me to task about, I will vote with my feet. Be assured of that.
You tell me, should I leave or stay?
jb,
I will answer the specific question you are NOT asking, in a PM in a few moments.
Yes, the Moderator is based in Europe. That was a strategic decision I made to provide some overlapping coverage taking advantage of the timezone differentials.
The Moderator has done a terrific job of acting on my behalf - and I appreciate VERY MUCH their efforts. Candidly, so should you and the rest of the board. They have provided much needed stability when I have been unable. I *know* they have acted in a fair and even-handed manner and have even moderated some of my tangents once or twice.
jb, you seem to feel there is some revelation in this latest exchange insofar as the Moderator is concerned. I know that all of this was discussed ad nauseum some time back. There is nothing new, and it perplexes me why this is suddenly consuming so much bandwidth. It has all been previously discussed and we now have many months of experience to see the fair and balanced action of the Moderator.
Seems a bit strange.
- Dan
-
......that when he did the multiple screen name gambit, it generated distrust, disrespect, and outright hostility, no only towards himself, but towards his agency when the deception was discovered. I think it ultimately cost him a lot of business.....
jb I will respectively disagree. landscaper post's were not deceptive in any way. I did not see any drop in business during or after this time. But I believe that was mostly due to a small percentage of our business coming from discussion boards.
-
Jack,
I distinctly recall you used "Landscaper" as a shill for First Dream, I also recall you lost a good deal of credibility among board members when it was realized you had conned them with the multiple IDs. I suspect much of the business that was gobbled up by Witchdoctor's (Ron Woody) LTP might have gone to you had that scheme not backfired on you.
For what it's worth, I think honesty is still the best policy. As I said up thread, folks just don't like to be fooled.
-
Dan.
Please don't let these posts regarding the moderator be a source of frustration for you. The topic here was double identities and the moderator chose to reveal that he had two different identities. No one here is questioning that you were open and honest about establishing a moderator. No one questions the quality of the moderation. But that is not the point. The point is that the moderator has a second identity which he uses to post his personal opinions. That is new news. At least to me it is. I had previously thought that the mod was not an active member here.
Maybe I was too strong in my previous description of this action being deceptive, but in truth it is not entirely open either. Why the hidden identity? Is the moderator not proud of his work? To explain where I am coming from with this, I will use RVR as an example. You wonder why his opinions were suddenly questioned when it became known that he had an agency? It was because he then had a second agenda, his business, to consider and to be considered by other posters. Once he became an owner of an agency, people will question if his post is his personal opinion, or is it a self serving opinion of an agency owner. Just for the record, I will say that I very much admire Richard as a man's man, and as honest a man as you could ever come across, but it is also only common sense for people to now question if his opinions are self serving or not. He now has something to gain or lose with each post. I personally do not question Richard's integrity, but I also do not question others that tend to scrutinize his posts just a little bit more now that he is an agency owner.
Say what you want, but there is some honor in being open and honest with just whom is doing the moderation. The fact that on RWG, the moderators are not only named but are also specifically responsible for their individual sub-sections is a very above board way to do business. I could understand not sharing your moderator's identity when it was assumed that he wasn't an active poster because it was a non-event. But to be secretive about his identity while he actively posts, is another issue all together. It doesn't seem completely honorable to me.
KenC
-
......that when he did the multiple screen name gambit, it generated distrust, disrespect, and outright hostility, no only towards himself, but towards his agency when the deception was discovered. I think it ultimately cost him a lot of business.....
jb I will respectively disagree. landscaper post's were not deceptive in any way. I did not see any drop in business during or after this time. But I believe that was mostly due to a small percentage of our business coming from discussion boards.
Jack,
It may not have affected your business, but your integrity did take a hit.
KenC
-
Considering the nature of my relationship with our two principle European based posters, (now that it's been established that the moderator is also an active principal on the board), and my opinion, especially of one in particular, it just makes me wonder. If the person you've appointed to be in charge in your stead is indeed that same person that you recently took me to task about, I will vote with my feet. Be assured of that.
Jb, don't worry, i am not the moderator :P ... in anycase, i cannot accept so work with my motivated and controversial post... i don't wish moderate myself ;) ...
Now, about European posters, we have a lot of them... BC, Leslie, Kevin, Richard, Ste... it can be one of the +- 40 european member ( i use the term european in the meaning of continent, not the politic border )...
A judge can have a personal opinion over something and be able to be neutral when he make his job... same for a moderator... i know that i cannot be fully neutral so that i am not able to be moderator ( i have already refuse these charge on other forum )...
Now, why a moderator need to keep a double identity... very simple, if the moderator need to stop member during some of fight, member reponsible of the attack can search revenge and attack usual post that the moderator can make on his own real name...
-
Had to add some extra sugar and milk to my coffee.. boy what a read! :D
[align=center]"Mod Blows his/her Cover!"
[align=left]
I have to admit that I also thought the Mod was an 'off board' personae. This settled the obvious question in the back of my head as to who the 'Mystery Mod' was.. Other boards with mods picked from the user pool seem to be riddled with problems inherent with active user moderation. Dan's original solution seemed quite good if not an excellent solution..
As far as moderation goes I have been pleasantly surprised with actions (or mostly inaction) our Mod has taken so far. That he/she was not an active poster here did a help me accept the few decisions that were deemed necessary.
Now true intrigue sets in.. We (users) are by default a curious lot and I don't believe things will really rest easily. Sure some won't care, some will, but in any case I don't see the issue just 'blowing away'.
That the Mod by slip of tongue or otherwise decided to drop the veil is cause in itself to doubt long term viability of a truly impartial role. There was no need for the Mod (in right mind) to even make a post which indeed was also a statement trying to prove a point or lead to a defined conclusion. Leading a double role is tough, a 'slip' was bound to happen sooner or later. IMHO better that it happened now, before tougher moderation decisions were needed.
At this point it likely serves no good purpose to declare fault or ask for someone's head on a platter. Considering the very few minor interventions over the past months the board has proven it can more or less moderate itself. It would probably work out best just to drop the 'Moderator' title and let the board move on without personalities getting in the way..
Lessons learned with no true harm done.. can't ask for more than that.
btw. 'It is not I am.'
[/align]
[align=left]
[/align][/align]
-
Interesting discussion as expected.
Reasons for making the moderator account were as Dan already told. First reason to protect independence. I am active on many boards. Some have a bad opinion of RWD. Second reason as Bruno states. A decision to moderate could lead to form an opinion about my posts and attacks. RWG moderators are often attacked for posting their personal opinion or entering discussions.
If anyone has big problems with my double identity, PM Dan. He can reveal my other identity if he thinks it useful. I trust him on knowing who to tell and who not.
-
Interesting discussion as expected.
Interesting indeed.. but as expected? I dunno.. :P
I guess it depends on the 'role' Dan wants you to play.. that of line judge or personae to lead/direct/prompt/participate in discussion..
Sure a line judge can err and those playing usually accept the decision or contest with Dan. Get the line judge on court with a racket (racquet) and who knows what will happen..
-
hey jb, it's kind of cool to be able to again call you either a liar or a stupid fool at 40,000 feet. jb, YOU are WRONG, again. landscaper never once shilled for Firstdream, not once. All the post's by landscaper were gone over in great details, their was NO case of landscaper shilling for FD.
Ok, round two, go ahead jb.
-
while I await round 2 from jb I will comment on the unknown moderator.
I think the unknown moderator is doing a good job. We hardly notice him and to me that is a sign he is doing a good job.
To my knowledge only Dan knows who he/she is and that's fine with me. I have tried to guess at who the mod is and I have my guess. And if it is this person we often disagree (no, I don't think it's jb) but I still think that person is doing a good job.
-
Mod wrote:
I am active on many boards. Some have a bad opinion of RWD.
Now this is a statement that I find truly interesting. I think it would be hard to have a bad opinion of something without having ever tasted it. I have also perused some other boards from time to time, and truthfully, I wasn't terribly impressed with the level of operating intelligence in some of those places. There are those who populate other boards of whom I have a low opinion, FWIW, there are members here who do not occupy high places in my esteem either. And,,, I'm sure those feelings are mutual.
IMHO, that thing which makes a good discussion board is the depth of thought that goes into the answers of questions, both simple and complex. If what you see is a majority of one liners, you can generally bet your not playing with a group of Einsteins. In any case, why would a new person to this endeavor really want to get marriage/relationship advisement from a bunch of losers and failures. It would irk me beyond words to have someone who routinely misspells four letter words and has to use an enlarged font so that his advice will occupy more than one line, spouting off with answers and comments about something as important as the selection of a life's mate. Even worse, to learn that those brilliant lines of wit might be coming from someone whose only experience is a single trip, isn't married, or perhaps even a failed marriage, or a K-1 that went sour, and worst case of all, someone with a vested monetary interest. With a few exceptions, RWD has some very experienced and articulate posters who are willing to invest their time and knowledge to share with the newbie. The rest is all fluff and BS.
And curosity drives me to ask, what is your personal opinion of the RWD?
-
Jack,
I am more than a little suprised that you even posted in this thread due to the fact that you were publicly embarrassed by being caught using a second identity. I was a very active member of PL when all that accured, and I remember it well. I think that jb referred to it happening on RWG incorrectly, unless of course you also assumed the role of "landscaper" there too. I wasn't an active member there, so I wouldn't know that part. jb may also have overstated the fact that lanscaper was a shill for First Dream, but not by much. I was going to let that incident slip on by (as you should have), but now that you choose to rub jb's nose in it, well, that just isn't right.
What you did by taking on the second identity of landscaper was to put your integrity up for review and debate. Did landscaper post "I used Jack's agency and found a great wife and you should too"? No. But what you did do under the guise of "landscaper" is endorse your own philosophies promoted by your agency. As "Jack" you can honestly do that all day long and never be questioned for your actions, but to dupe the membership into thinking that there is another guy out there posting under the handle of "landscaper" that has the same mindset as Jack and FirstDream is dishonest and subterfuge. You had something to gain by deceiving the membership, plain and simple. The fact that you also tried in vain to deny that landscaper was actually you, when caught, only added to the deceit. So please don't come here and boast about your actions as landscaper, because it is not something to be proud of. Instead I would suggest that you hope that everyone justs forgets about your past indiscretion.
KenC
-
I have no interest in debating past business ethics with Jack over something that happened six or seven years ago. However, anyone who was involved in the message boards dedicated to the pursuit of a Russian bride at that time, and has more than two working brain cells, will remember the incidents clearly. Jack was caught pretty much red handed, (landscaper also posted on the RWG) he was properly pilloried, crucified, and at least temporarily banished for his sins. Oddly, he was not banned because of the multiple IDs, but for the vicious methods employed to defend his actions.
I will state to his credit, he learned from the experience and now seems to walk the straight and narrow.
-
I think there is a big difference between using multiple user names or using multiple identities and posting to one board. This is quite different from using different user names in different forums.
Personally, I have spoken with Jack several times on the phone and I have exchanged pm's with him.
I have no idea what was done on the other board, I only know that Jack is "above board" (no pun intended) on RWD.
Jacks posts are intelligent and helpful to others.
If anyone here is posting as two people I would not care unless one of the identities was disruptive.
A moderator should have the right to post as a moderator and as a member. The person has the status of being moderator and there is a difference between moderating and posting as one of the guys.
Whatever rumors I heard about Jack in the past seem to have been greatly exaggerated considering his very constructive posts at RWD.
-
Hey Dan
How about adding to the mystery and changing moderators handle to "Deep Throat"? jk:D
-
Interesting discussion as expected.
Reasons for making the moderator account were as Dan already told. First reason to protect independence. I am active on many boards. Some have a bad opinion of RWD. Second reason as Bruno states. A decision to moderate could lead to form an opinion about my posts and attacks. RWG moderators are often attacked for posting their personal opinion or entering discussions.
If anyone has big problems with my double identity, PM Dan. He can reveal my other identity if he thinks it useful. I trust him on knowing who to tell and who not.
No, I feel no need to identify the person helping me as the Moderator.
The Moderator, by extension, is acting on my behalf. Any issues with the Moderator may be taken up with me directly - just as if it was ME who had performed those moderation tasks.
In other words - whenever the board members see ANYTHING from the Moderator - just replace that moniker with 'Dan' and react/respond accordingly.
It has not been my experience that we have a board full of 'shrinking violets' here - so I suspect any concerns/frustrations/ anger will be readily expressed - as it has always been.
- Dan
-
Dan, I believe it is in the best interests of the board that the moderator does not "moderate" on any thread in which he or she posts. If you let the moderator "moderate" on threads he or she posts he / she may slant the thread through "moderation." Now, I do not believe this has occurred. However, now that we know that the moderator is also a board participant I believe for the sake of a threads integrity you should discuss this matter with the moderator so this conflict does not arise.
-
Dan, I believe it is in the best interests of the board that the moderator does not post on any thread in which he or she posts.If you let the moderator "moderate" on threads he or she posts he may slant the thread through "moderation." Now, I do not believe this has occurred. However, now that we know that the moderator is also a board participant I believe for the sake of a threads integrity you should discuss this matter with the moderator.
Bruce,
Interesting comment. Out of curiousity, would you apply the same constraints to me?
The reason I ask is this - the Moderator was an active member of RWD long before I asked for moderation assistance. They, reluctantly I might add, agreed to help - because they could see I needed some assistance and I asked. In my mind, their agreement to help me out, did not automatically mean they had to sacrifice the credibility they had established posting under their own identity. On the very few occasions when the Moderator has stepped-in, I was and am aware of it - and fully support the actions taken.
I see that for some, the logistics and details of selection of the Moderator have come as something of a surprise. This has surprised me, as I spent significant time and effort to insure the board membership had ample opportunity to be heard on this topic.
Bottom line (I've been using that 2-word phrase a LOT lately) is that I needed some help - there was someone offering to help, whom I trusted - and I made a decision, based on board member input along with my own needs, to select a Moderator who has turned out to be extraordinarily fair and even-handed. I continue to see this 'issue' as much ado about nothing - though, at the same time, I am reminded of the fact that it is less my opinion that matters on such things, and far more the collective opinion of the board which matters. All I can do it explain my rationale - and point out the actual experiences - and then the board membership individually must draw their own conclusions.
I think I have said about all there is to say.
- Dan
-
Can we have a "guess the Moderator" contest and you can tell us if we are correct without divulging who is correct?
Reminds me of the strange disease that George Carlin mentioned in his routine that has no symptoms and no cure but fortunately you never know if you have it.
-
The Moderator, by extension, is acting on my behalf. Any issues with the Moderator may be taken up with me directly - just as if it was ME who had performed those moderation tasks.
In other words - whenever the board members see ANYTHING from the Moderator - just replace that moniker with 'Dan' and react/respond accordingly.
Now there's THE solution!.. just give Mod your login!
hehe..
..just stirring the pot LOL
-
Now there'sTHE solution!.. just give Mod your login!
hehe..
..just stirring the pot LOL
BC! Didn't you tell me you RECEIVED that PM with my login details?!?
..stirring back ;)
- Dan
-
... oops!! forgot to check..
-
Dan, I believe you would lose credibility if you "moderated" those who had differing, though not necessarily false viewpoints from yourself on threads. Now, I agree that both you and the unknown moderator have only stepped in a thread when a thread had veered sharply off course and members were for the most part personally attacking each other. Fortunately, you and from the little I have seen, the board's mystery moderator are clear headed, deeply thoughtful and respectful individuals who welcome alternate views and experience.
-
Damn it, BC, we all know you're the moderator!:cool:
KenC
-
Getting back to your original thread, I can't say that having a commercial interest in a board is de facto a bad or for that matter, an undesirable component. Frankly RWD is a very good board, easily in the top three thanks primarily to it's knowledgeable members. However, it is untested both with respect to time and from what I have seen, with regard to dealing with more than just a handful of past unruly posters.
I tend to agree that RWD is a complementary board to the others, and it's one I hope will demonstrate a similar longevity - and if making a few dollars guarantees this, then so be it.
Funny, but I never equated as not making money with some new enterprise as a reason to blow ones horn. Can't say I especially enjoy crass commercialism, but I am enough of a businessman and realist to know how motivating money can be in keeping ones interest in any long term endeavor.
Obviously I can't speak for any other member, but if the board had commercial sponsors for each of the sections and it was done in a tasteful manner, I wouldn't be especially upset, or for that matter, feel that it's direction and content was somehow controlled by these interests. Indeed, I think it could be a value-added feature of the board.
While the RWD has some nearly 600 members at this point, I would welcome seeing some more new "blood." My only real criticism of the board is that a handful of posters tend to dominate the content - acquiring more members would improve the diversity and give it a little more spontaneity and perhaps relevance to the guys who are just starting this adventure.
-
While the RWD has some nearly 600 members at this point, I would welcome seeing some more new "blood." My only real criticism of the board is that a handful of posters tend to dominate the content - acquiring more members would improve the diversity and give it a little more spontaneity and perhaps relevance to the guys who are just starting this adventure.
Racer, each board have his own spirit... and from what i see, these board have the spirit of a "little town"... when new members arrive here, they are first shooted and maybe if they resist the first round , questionned... and for a few of them, who have resist the two first round, some become members of the communauty...
Yes, we have nearly 600 members... but several have never post... they read only... they fear to post... fear to be attacked...
Now, a little :offtopic: ... until now, the moderator was almost invisible... only a few post for calm down... and like Dan have say it before, the moderator is not the owner of the forum, he cannot moderate in all section... really, we have not to complain of the action of the moderator...
-
Not quite sure what the hubbub is over the double identity of the moderator at this point. I distinct recall this all being disclosed when the job was filled. That said, I can understand the mod's concerns about disclosing his identity, as I have first hand experience regarding what happens when you're fully transparent about such matters. Mod's do the best they can with the hand they're dealt and try to be fair. Fact is, it's generally a thankless job, because no matter what, you're going to piss somebody off :noidea:. Personally, I think moderator has done an excellent job here so far.
-
Not quite sure what the hubbub is over the double identity of the moderator at this point. I distinct recall this all being disclosed when the job was filled. That said, I can understand the mod's concerns about disclosing his identity, as I have first hand experience regarding what happens when you're fully transparent about such matters. Mod's do the best they can with the hand they're dealt and try to be fair. Fact is, it's generally a thankless job, because no matter what, you're going to piss somebody off :noidea:. Personally, I think moderator has done an excellent job here so far.
Good post and right on the money Jet. I've done a bit of moderating on another list quite some time ago and it is a thankless job (even with other moderators sometimes!)
Our moderator had done an excellent job staying out of the way unless it was necessary and even then has only minimally intervened.
:D Good job Mystery Mod! Keep up the good work and you'll find something extra in your RWD paycheck this month!!! :D
-
jb, I never posted on the board you mentioned, or on the RWD, as landscaper. I also never posted on the board you mentioned as BarryM but it was reported by cameragurl that he was 100% sure (not 99%, not 98%, but 100% sure) I was BarryM. When BarryM did appear to defend himself he was shouted down by cameragurl as being me as well. In the recent past few years after obtaining many documents thru the discovery portions of some legal actions I pursued it was interesting to read that cameragurl acknowledged I was not BarryM. But did the honest and ethical cameragurl want to let others know he was mistaken? The answer was no, he thought it was best for his deception to remain in place. In my opinion if a moderator can lie and deceive once he can, and will, lie and deceive again.
And again you are wrong, partially with another of your statements. Although I was originally banned for standing up to the misleading post's made by one individual on P-L, I was banned by the owner of the P-L message board for using the landscaper identity. I wrote 96% of the members of P-L shortly before that banning that I apologized for my mistake.
Bruce, I think if Dan was to tell you, and others, that the moderator we have now has no financial interest what's so ever in the pursuit for a Russian bride you might be a little more understanding. Am I right?
Bruno, maybe I am wrong, as I do not read a great many post's here, but I do not see the RWD, unlike another board I know, at taking so many first and second round shot's at new posters.
Dan, Mr or Ms Moderator, your doing a good job.
-
I have to support Jack on this. I was a moderator at the other place at the time this happened.
First there was no evidence that Jack had any other identity on RWG.
Jack was apparently banned from RWG for using the landscaper identity on PL. Now I will never condone using multiple identities whose purpose is to deceive, but this justification is wafer thin. In fact it is non existent !
What in fact happened is that Jack fell out with board's owner who banished him. A very similar case happened here recently with a regular poster. He fell out with Dan and was very rude, so Dan banished him.
Board owners have the right to exclude people from their property for whatever reason. All of them exercise this prerogative.
Moderation is a very difficult job. One which I will not take on again. This board IS sensibly moderated. You cannot please all the people all the time. That is impossible! IMHO there is little purpose in exhuming events from years past. The people involved are not going to change their minds....
-
Well, for obvious reasons I will now be posting over here. Glad to see a great board with many old friends. I will be making a trip on 1/18 2006, my third trip to the FSU...
TO this point I have not posted much over here (although occasionally read some of the posts). But expect to see me and my poor typing file a trip report next week!
Richard11
-
Welcome Richard,
Why don't you update us on what's happening in your pursuit of a RW? Maybe start you T/R with some pretrip reporting? In the T/R section though. Heck, I even want to know.
KenC
-
-
CG,
Welcome!..
First post and I would think the board record for the longest.. :D
I didn't read it all.. I'm not much of an ancient history fan.
Anyway glad you made it here.. we've heard so much about you!
-
First post and I would think the board record for the longest.. :D
:( in my case, i see the shorter one... first post and direct deleted... whowww, Dan is very fast... i can almost not follow for read all the new post ;)
-
First post and I would think the board record for the longest.. :D
:(in my case, i see the shorter one... first post and direct deleted... whowww, Dan is very fast... i can almost not follow for read all the new post ;)
[/quote]
I invited CG over some time ago. While I sincerely wish for him to feel comfortable here in sharing his experience and knowledge, I cannot allow the board to become embroiled in a pissing match which has its roots in ancient history and serves no useful purpose (for the board, that is).
- Dan
-
What's the matter, Dan? It's OK for you to visit RWG to defend yourself in an ancient battle that's nothing more than a pissing match, but it's not OK for me to defend myself here? What do you have to fear from my posting proof of Bragg's multiple handles? Is this what you call impartial?
How about if I post it in "No Holds Barred"? I understand that section isn't moderated -- or is it only moderated for certain people?
~CG
-
What's the matter, Dan? It's OK for you to visit RWG to defend yourself, but it's not OK for me to do the same here? What do you have to fear from my posting proof of Bragg's multiple handles? Is this what you call impartial?
How about if I post it in "No Holds Barred"? I understand that section isn't moderated -- or is it only moderated for certain people?
~CG
CG - I visited RWG to directly respond to a pack of lies. I responded with facts, and I did so respectfully.
Your entrance here was far short of respectful, and was NOT in response to anyone attacking you personally.
The NHB is more like the RWD 'mosh-pit'. Unruly topics end up there - but there is no room on the board for anyone who behaves in a trollish fashion.
I think you already know all this.
I hope you are sincere - and that you will participate and contribute here - but if you are here only to stir things up, please go away.
- Dan
-
What's the matter, Dan? It's OK for you to visit RWG to defend yourself, but it's not OK for me to do the same here? What do you have to fear from my posting proof of Bragg's multiple handles? Is this what you call impartial?
How about if I post it in "No Holds Barred"? I understand that section isn't moderated -- or is it only moderated for certain people?
~CG
CG - I visited RWG to directly respond to a pack of lies. I responded with facts, and I did so respectfully.
Your entrance here was far short of respectful, and was NOT in response to anyone attacking you personally.
The NHB is more like the RWD 'mosh-pit'. Unruly topics end up there - but there is no room on the board for anyone who behaves in a trollish fashion.
I think you already know all this.
I hope you are sincere - and that you will participate and contribute here - but if you are here only to stir things up, please go away.
- Dan[/quote]
There was absolutely nothing disrespectful in the post you deleted. It was nothing but a collection of posts from other boards. The JackAttack is questioning my credibility and has been attacking me since the day you started this board -- as recently as today, so I simply provided documented proof of how the "RW board wars" originally began.
Why do find that so threatening? Or are there different rules for different people?
-
Dan ~ I believe Jack has used the "cameragurl" descriptor on many occasions and I can't help but wonder if CG has a right to set out his side of the story somewhere on this board. No one wants a protracted flame war, even in the NHB section, but in the essence of fairness perhaps each 'side' should be permitted to make a post or two in NHB and then you lock the thread.
-
Hello Marty,
Welcome to RWD !
If you are going to continue your long vendetta against Jack here then I think Dan must banish you.
However If you let this matter drop then I for one would welcome you here. You have travelled extensively in FSU and could contribute a knowledgeable perspective here.
-
In any case it seems the air needs to be cleared.
-
There was absolutely nothing disrespectful in the post you deleted. It was nothing but a collection of posts from other boards. The JackAttack is questioning my credibility and has been attacking me since the day you started this board -- as recently as today, so I simply provided documented proof of how the "RW board wars" originally began.
Why do find that so threatening? Or are there different rules for different people?
CG,
I interpreted your post as a distinct and unequivocal intent to create disruption. You were not responding to anyone maligning you. Your post, appeared to me anyway, as a direct assault on one of the RWD members with no redeeming value to anyone.
To that extent, it was out-of-bounds, and that is why I deleted it.
Look - you may, or may not, believe my sincerity when I tell you that I would like for you to be comfortable here. While there were some of your posts elsewhere that I did not much appreciate, I also feel that many of the ideals which you espoused are in evidence here. If true, then there is common ground, and we should try to leverage that. At least, IMO.
I have no interest in fostering board wars. I made two small posts on RWG today because I was being personally maligned, and the citations were both untrue and could be proved to be untrue. I have no intent of returning to RWG. In the past, when there were things being said/written that I knew to be untrue, I opted to handle them directly rather than air dirty laundry on the open internet.
It is true that this 'style' is a radical departure from my earlier postings at P-L where I was sometimes quick-tempered and often very undiplomatic. I truly do regret the negative impacts and impressions left from those earlier posts - and I am committed to not repeat the mistakes.
Largely because of that experience, I am loathe to open RWD to the sort of pissing match that I know would ensue between you and Jack and your respective supporters and antagonists. I do not see it as being healthy for either one of you, or for the board.
You are, of course, free to conduct those exchanges between yourselves (PM, email) - with my blessing (for whatever THAT may be worth:)).
I *do* believe there is room for both you and Jack here at RWD - though I also recognize that you each may need to restrain yourselves from time to time.
So how about it? Care to give it a try?
I hope you do.
- Dan
-
Cameraguy (CG), welcome aboard. I think we all can agree to let by-gones be by-gones. There is no need for you, Jack or anybody else to continue to hold on to an old bone. Newbies could not care about the past. They want information that helps them today.
This is a board dedicated to helping guys meet, marry and navigate all the trials, tribulations and permutations that may exist in "the process." Everyone who has visited the discussion boards has an opinion about old arguments, problems etc.
Dredging up the past helps nobody. Let each post stand on its own merit, remember we are all human and do sometimes make mistakes, and try our best.
In any event, best of luck, I sincerely hope you post here, sincerely apologize for anything that I may have posted to or about you in the heat of the moment in years past - because you have a tremendous amount of knowledge, experience and all around insightful information which only adds tremendously to boards like this.
-
Dan, I just thought I'd bring this to your attention. But Jack made a number of posts on the RWG Changes thread refering to an individual as "Cameragurl." (made at 07:51, several hours prior to CG's post) Perhaps there is a RWD member by this moniker and that he meant no insult to Cameraguy or CG. If so, please disregard my post.
If however, it was an insult, perhaps it may be worth your while to address it in the interests of burying the hatchet, as it were.
I know little and care less about prior disputes between one agency or another. My goal is simply to "socialize" with other individuals with a common interest in marriage and the FSU. But in the interests of fairness, as well as civility, it would be better to restrict both parties to a conflict rather than just one.
Thanx and best regards to all,
Lysander
-
Dan, I just thought I'd bring this to your attention. But Jack made a number of posts on the RWG Changes thread refering to an individual as "Cameragurl." (made at 07:51, several hours prior to CG's post) Perhaps there is a RWD member by this moniker and that he meant no insult to Cameraguy or CG. If so, please disregard my post.
If however, it was an insult, perhaps it may be worth your while to address it in the interests of burying the hatchet, as it were.
I know little and care less about prior disputes between one agency or another. My goal is simply to "socialize" with other individuals with a common interest in marriage and the FSU. But in the interests of fairness, as well as civility, it would be better to restrict both parties to a conflict rather than just one.
Thanx and best regards to all,
Lysander
Lysander,
No, I was unaware of that. Thanks (I guess) for letting me know.
I will do my best to try to "address" it. Now, if I only knew how :huh:
- Dan
-
Since the time I opened this topic, there have been significant changes in the internet community serving the RW discussion interests.
As a consequence, I feel the need to close this topic at this time.
- Dan
-
I opened the topic again - principally to point out that this board has been, and shall remain, primarily self-moderating.
To that end, I encourage anyone who wishes to engage in further debate on this topic, to head on down to the NHB section and have at it.
- Dan
-
What's the matter, Dan? It's OK for you to visit RWG to defend yourself in an ancient battle that's nothing more than a pissing match, but it's not OK for me to defend myself here? What do you have to fear from my posting proof of Bragg's multiple handles? Is this what you call impartial?
How about if I post it in "No Holds Barred"? I understand that section isn't moderated -- or is it only moderated for certain people?
~CG
Hey CG,
Welcome. Better late than never. You will find that this forum is full of posters that are neither shy nor short on opinions. I really do think it is your type of crowd because you're no shrinking violet either. I think that you will also find that Dan is more than fair here and there is little or no formal moderation of the threads. If anything, it is more like Dan said, "self moderating." For what it is worth, you will find up thread that I have already called out Jack for his double identities and criticized Dan for having the current moderator here be anonymous. I stated my opinion on both and what did I get in return? Jack took it like a man and kept his mouth shut. Dan spiritedly debated his opinion. But in either case none of my posts were edited, deleted or was I asked to shut my ideas down. Isn't that what a forum is meant to be? A free exchange of thoughts and ideas?
We have some strong personalities here. Because of that, there will be an occasional bomb thrown your way. That goes with the territory of being lightly moderated. So be it. There are also an unusually large percentage of manly men here too. We can take it, as well as dish it out. Again, your kind of crowd, if I read you right.
Now if you and Jack want to have your little beetch fest down in the No Hold Barred section, go to it. Others may join in or choose to ignore it completely, we will see. But the two of you need to get it out of your system and move on. You both have a tremendous amount of intelligent input for this forum and I for one am looking forward to seeing some of it.
KenC
-
[user=2]post[/user] deleted by myself
-
Sometimes old enemies make the best of friends. Welcome CG.