Reply to Calling all nice people - what to do about the mean people on DCUM

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Calling all nice people - what to do about the mean people on DCUM"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I've been a DCUM since 2003 when it was a listserve and you didn't often get the vitrolic, accusatory responses like you get on the forum. I like the forum format and post most frequently on the Special Needs forum and don't encounter this a lot (and trolls/negative people are usually just ignored).  But I recently started this thread http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/209337.page .  I am/was looking for information from people who had experience with temporary guardianship or had information to offer.  When the majority of responses were from people who had no experience and were, instead, negative and unhelpful, I asked Jeff if he would be so kind to ask people to stick to the question asked and he did.  I have no problem doing that because I had already asked people to stick to the question asked and Jeff has made it clear that he wants DCUM to be a place people find useful, participate and feel comfortable posting.  When my post gets hijacked like that, I appreciate that he's willing to help get it back on course.  I've also reported threads to him where a significant number of posts were abusive to the OP or not furthering discussion.  I don't often do that but I, too, want DCUM to be useful place.  Some posts are for discussion, some are from seeking information, some are seeking support.  It's an open forum put that doesn't mean it's a free for all.  People are welcome to start their own threads if they want to debate or pontificate.

Of course, not everyone feels the same way.  When Jeff intervened in my thread, someone complained to him via the Feedback forum http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/209397.page .  I think he explains further his thoughts on the website and his actions.  I don't report very often, I usually try to ignore or nicely ask that people limit responses to the question asked.  But, I do appreciate Jeff's willingness to keep an eye on things.  I hope it lasts.[/quote]

[quote=Anonymous]So, basically, the new rule should be "answer only the question specifically asked"?  
What if someone were to post: "My gay neighbors are trying to adopt, and I feel children are best raised by a man and a woman. How should I go about stopping this adoption?"

Or "My 4 year old DD is getting a little chunky. I'm thinking about giving her some of DS's Adderall to help reduce her appetite. How much should I give her? Half a pill?"

I think in a lot of cases there's room to question both the "how" and the "whether".[/quote]

Agree with this.  Once you put a question out there you cant expect to control where it goes from there. You don't have to read all of the responses if you don't find them helpful, but it's absurd to try to censor other people's responses (unless maybe they are being horribly cruel or offensive, which the guardianship ones were not.)  Probably half the discussions on DCUM veer off from the original post, and honestly that's part of what keeps the conversation interesting.  If Jeff deleted every response that didn't directly answer the original post, there would be like 3 posts left.  That's just how conversations go, in real life and online.

And PP, you do realize that OP's post was about mean people, not people who change the subject, right?  Hello pot, this is kettle...[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics