why did you step in on the thread about takign custody?

[Anonymous]

Seems really arbitrary of you to insist that answers be responsive to the poster's question when a lot of people had perfectly good reasons to challenge the OP's premise... Why this one and not others?

[jsteele]

Because the OP requested me to get involved. I want DCUM to be a useful place to obtain information. As I've said in other posts, it's not helpful to ask how to grill a steak and be told you shouldn't eat meat. Such responses dissuade people from using DCUM for its intended purpose. Anyone who starts a thread is free to ask for the same sort of intervention.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Because the OP requested me to get involved. I want DCUM to be a useful place to obtain information. As I've said in other posts, it's not helpful to ask how to grill a steak and be told you shouldn't eat meat. Such responses dissuade people from using DCUM for its intended purpose. Anyone who starts a thread is free to ask for the same sort of intervention.

I understand your perspective. But, wow. Just, wow. That OP is something else.

[Anonymous]

I think the op sounds great and I wish her all the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the op sounds great and I wish her all the best.

HI OP

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Because the OP requested me to get involved. I want DCUM to be a useful place to obtain information. As I've said in other posts, it's not helpful to ask how to grill a steak and be told you shouldn't eat meat. Such responses dissuade people from using DCUM for its intended purpose. Anyone who starts a thread is free to ask for the same sort of intervention.

Personally as a long time poster to DCUM (and the one you deleted from the thread -- I guess you didn't like my response to your intervention), I would have responded much differently to you if you had simply stated this when you got involved. I wouldn't have responded at all, nor posted here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Because the OP requested me to get involved. I want DCUM to be a useful place to obtain information. As I've said in other posts, it's not helpful to ask how to grill a steak and be told you shouldn't eat meat. Such responses dissuade people from using DCUM for its intended purpose. Anyone who starts a thread is free to ask for the same sort of intervention.

Personally as a long time poster to DCUM (and the one you deleted from the thread -- I guess you didn't like my response to your intervention), I would have responded much differently to you if you had simply stated this when you got involved. I wouldn't have responded at all, nor posted here.

Also, I don't think this is the equivalent of telling someone looking for a cut of steak not to eat meat. This woman is fucking with the lives of children.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Personally as a long time poster to DCUM (and the one you deleted from the thread -- I guess you didn't like my response to your intervention), I would have responded much differently to you if you had simply stated this when you got involved. I wouldn't have responded at all, nor posted here.

Yes, but as you see from a subsequent post, my explanation here might have satisfied you but it wouldn't have satisfied others. No matter what I have to say, someone will choose to argue. Also, as your response in the previous thread demonstrated, no matter how clear I make it that responses to me should be in this forum, someone will ignore it.

[Anonymous]

Jeff,

This is the second time you've censored posts (that I know of) because the OP does not want any information that doesn't match her very strict question. I understand your point about cut of steak, eating meat, but you know, there probably HAVE been posts about steak, and meat, and people may in fact have benefited from the information. How about, if you're going to eat meat, eat pastured, grass fed beef? Taht's not exactly what "cut" to eat, but it's still information that goes beyond what the OP is asking for. But it might be beneficial. Grass fed beef tastes different. Some experts have pretty compelling evidence that it is healthier. And keep in mind that not only is the OP learning and benefitting from the thread, other people are, too.

I understand that there are some occasions where you have to step in simply because the heat of the issue will guarantee 20 inflammatory posts for every 1 useful post - therapeutic abortion comes to mind. But it's a slippery slope to start telling posters that the OP gets to control not only her question but the responses she gets. Is this an open forum or not? I think there may be cause to weigh in on a case by case basis here, but I hope it's not going to be the case that every OP simply gets to say "only give me the answers I want, and don't offer your opinion on anything else or I'm telling Jeff," and then you come in and squash the debate.

For full disclosure, I am one of the posters who disagreed with you on censoring the medication for ADHD thread. (And I"m not anti-med, I just don't like the artificiality of a thread where only pre-approved answers the fit the OP's demands for germaneness are allowed).

Another thought. A while back I posted about ways I could politely tell a lactation consultant I wanted to try to breastfeed my infant in private before she offered help. I got sooo many off topic replies. I understand, it is annoying. People were telling me that I should seek therapy for my "issues," etc. But I still got a few good pieces of advice. And actually, a few of those posters who I thought had irrelevant information ended up giving me valuable tips. And maybe someone else reading it got valuable tips.

On a forum where you won't get involved with people publicly blaming a mom who has just lost her child for not providing an epi-pen, a forum where people routinely say racist things, and are really ugly to one another, I'm just a bit bemused by why, exactly, this is a line you want to draw in the sand.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic - but please help me understand why this is worth meddling in, but other things are not.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
On a forum where you won't get involved with people publicly blaming a mom who has just lost her child for not providing an epi-pen, a forum where people routinely say racist things, and are really ugly to one another, I'm just a bit bemused by why, exactly, this is a line you want to draw in the sand.

Really, the answer to your question is sort of obvious. I want DCUM to be useful. If someone starts a thread in search for specific information, DCUM is not useful for them if the thread is dominated by posts which not only don't provide the information but are antagonistic toward the original poster. Some users, apparently you are one, will just deal with it. Others will give up on DCUM and any "word of mouth" publicity from them will be negative. Some will ask me to exercise my prerogatives as moderator. If I have the time and feel the request is reasonable, I'll do it.

In the case of the epipen, the thread was not started in order to obtain information. The original post was a clip of a news article. The poster offered no information regarding why the news clip was posted, but it is reasonable to expect discussion of the article. I place a high value on free discussion, even when -- make that especially when -- I disagree with some of the opinions expressed. I think the usefulness of the discussion is enhanced by a wide range of views. I don't think the nuances between an "information-seeking" thread and a "discussion" thread are particularly subtle. We all can tell them apart.

In the case where users are interested in addressing a larger issue rather than a derived request for specific information -- for example, the pros and cons of beef rather than how to cook a steak -- users are free to start their own thread. Nothing prevented you or others from starting a thread about medicating ADHD children. In fact, just that sort of thread was started. Nothing is stopping you from starting a thread regarding the propriety of seeking legal custody of a neighbor's children. Indeed, in the case of the recent abortion-related thread, I stepped in and stopped non-responsive posts and another thread was started almost immediately. That second thread is on the list of Hottest Topics. That's the sort of "censorship" of which you accuse me.

[Anonymous]

Okay, some of this is persuasive, but you think, with everything that gets discussed here and the way it is discussed, that allowing an off-topic thread to stray further off-topic is what's going to get you badmouthed? And that worry that people will badmouth it is what causes you to interfere? Meantime, you've got black women actually saying that the sheer number of racist posts on here make them feel unwelcome. Plus, okay, this guardianship post is quite specific. But the ADHD was more of an open ended question, if I recall correctly. Like, has anyone had luck getting their four year old diagnosed with ADHD (I can't remember exactly). So then the conversation turned to medicating, and the pro-medication stuff stayed and the anti-medication was clipped. It skews the conversation. I guess a spin-off thread is the consolation prize. I think I remember that the ADHD thread in question stopped moving once the debate was quashed, though. And I don't see the temp guardianship moving, either. Maybe both OPs didn't think about the fact that the debate was keeping their post at page one, where more people (eventually someone with straight info) might see it.

Oh well. Your site, not mine. Just sharing my thoughts. Appreciate all you do to keep this going.

[Anonymous]

I am 10.21. And I am not the op! I do indeed think she is great!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Okay, some of this is persuasive, but you think, with everything that gets discussed here and the way it is discussed, that allowing an off-topic thread to stray further off-topic is what's going to get you badmouthed? And that worry that people will badmouth it is what causes you to interfere? Meantime, you've got black women actually saying that the sheer number of racist posts on here make them feel unwelcome. Plus, okay, this guardianship post is quite specific. But the ADHD was more of an open ended question, if I recall correctly. Like, has anyone had luck getting their four year old diagnosed with ADHD (I can't remember exactly). So then the conversation turned to medicating, and the pro-medication stuff stayed and the anti-medication was clipped. It skews the conversation. I guess a spin-off thread is the consolation prize. I think I remember that the ADHD thread in question stopped moving once the debate was quashed, though. And I don't see the temp guardianship moving, either. Maybe both OPs didn't think about the fact that the debate was keeping their post at page one, where more people (eventually someone with straight info) might see it.

Oh well. Your site, not mine. Just sharing my thoughts. Appreciate all you do to keep this going.

Since you have brought the issue of racism up more than once now, I want to address that topic specifically. I have been taking steps to combat racist posts of all types. I view operating this site as more of an art than a science. Hence, I don't have one strategy for every problem. Rather, I address different issues in different manners depending on what I believe will work best. Simply because you are not aware of my actions doesn't mean there are no actions. Racism online is a huge problem everywhere. Check out the comment section of almost any newspaper (except those that closely monitor the comments). DCUM is quite tame in comparison. But, the reality remains that if I don't know about something, I can't do anything about it. So, use the "report" button.

[Anonymous]

I'm the OP of the temporary guardianship thread. I'm one of those who are driven away by the antagonism and vitrolic responses some seem to consider 'debate' or an 'alternative viewpoint'. I'm not just turned away when I'm the OP of a thread, I'm also turned away when I encounter it on someone else's thread. Why should I bother responding when my post will just get lost in sea of negativity or tangents? I appreciate Jeff's willingness to step in and monitor posts (thank you, Jeff) to keep things positive and helpful. I'm also not interested in how my thread 'moves'. If I want my post to stay on page one, I can always bump it up. I'd much rather do that than have the thread degenerate as it did and turn off reasonable people who may have something useful and/or constructive to offer.

(Thanks, also, 10:21. I appreciate the support.)

[Anonymous]

DCUM is edutainment - part information, part entertainment - and that's what makes it successful.

If the OP, or any OP for that matter, really wants a targeted answer to their specific question, google can provide a wealth of very specific msg boards and list servs that are monitored to provide only on topic information.Heck, even baby center. com is pretty well monitored.