Nothing but crickets

Posted by: retroscree

Nothing but crickets - 07/20/13 01:58 PM

Not even an echo.
Is it time to shutter this place?
Posted by: SethG

Re: Nothing but crickets - 07/20/13 02:04 PM

You missed the exciting climbing content I just posted.
Posted by: rg@ofmc

Re: Nothing but crickets - 07/20/13 06:20 PM

Quick, somebody cut some webbing off a rappel anchor.
Posted by: donald perry

Re: Nothing but crickets - 07/28/13 10:41 PM

The less people the better. Yes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMkgSi_gSU
Posted by: FiveTwo

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/03/13 02:54 PM

I still like the idea of having a site for the local crag.
Posted by: GOclimb

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/07/13 08:24 PM

Originally Posted By: rg@ofmc
Quick, somebody cut some webbing off a rappel anchor.


You mean a convenience anchor? wink

GO
Posted by: rg@ofmc

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/07/13 08:36 PM

Is there a difference in the Gunks?
Posted by: oenophore

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 10:01 AM

Originally Posted By: retroscree
Not even an echo.
Is it time to shutter this place?


Look at the posting "archives" of half a decade ago and beyond. You will notice the colloquy then was livelier than it is now and it's not just flaming. This may be due in part to the "retirement" of gunks.commies who had thoughtful and stimulating stuff to post. (This is not to disparage present frequent posters. but the veterans here know what I mean.)
Posted by: talus

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 10:55 AM

over moderation! everything has to be approved first BS. it's more fun watching paint dry now
Posted by: retroscree

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 03:05 PM

Originally Posted By: talus
over moderation! everything has to be approved first BS.

Really? I haven't noticed that. Are you talking about new users when they first post?
Posted by: talus

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 04:08 PM

^ yes but this site from day 1 has always been over moderated. when something of controversy is posted = delete and block the poster. should change the name to gestapo.com
Posted by: retroscree

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 07:34 PM

Oh yeah, I see what you mean. Maybe someone who actually cares about the gunks having its own site should take it over.
Posted by: oenophore

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 07:59 PM

Originally Posted By: talus
^ yes but this site from day 1 has always been over moderated. when something of controversy is posted = delete and block the poster. should change the name to gestapo.com
This surprises me. I've posted here quite a bit; some of my posts might be deemed outrageous, and never a word from any moderator.
Posted by: retroscree

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 09:06 PM

Originally Posted By: oenophore
This surprises me. I've posted here quite a bit; some of my posts might be deemed outrageous, and never a word from any moderator.

Outrageous doesn't matter - it's all about who you disagree with.
Posted by: crimpy

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 09:07 PM

fuck...that means someone agrees with me.
Posted by: Kent

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 09:23 PM

Retro, aka MarcC, if you were banned under your previous user name, it might have something to do with you suggesting the webmaster was engaging in certain unnatural acts, shall we say, with other users because Evan wasn't moderating the way you wanted him to.

The level of vitriol here was off the chart sometimes, complete with threats of physical violence against some posters for their views. Perhaps Evan overreacted at times by moderating too much, but under previous circumstances moderation became a near full time job.

I was, and am still, grateful to Evan, the webmaster, for making this space available.
Posted by: oenophore

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/08/13 10:03 PM

it's all about who you disagree with

Perhaps it's the manner of expression of the disagreement that counts.
Posted by: SethG

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/09/13 02:08 PM

I've participated in several of these boards, some related to climbing and some related to other things like food and cycling. I was even a moderator for a time on a food board (never again!!). Every such board faces complaints of over-moderation.

Gunks.com seems hardly moderated at all compared to other boards that I've been involved with, fwiw.

Also, I learned when I was a moderator that it is possible to place certain posters in a Moderated Queue, so that their posts can be reviewed before they are publicly posted. Maybe this is what talus is talking about here, since most of us do not have to wait for approval, but can see our posts the moment we press "submit." There may be some people who were at one time placed in the Mod Queue-- I'm just making an educated guess here, I have no information about this actually happening.
Posted by: retroscree

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/09/13 05:06 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
Retro, aka MarcC, if you were banned under your previous user name, it might have something to do with you suggesting the webmaster was engaging in certain unnatural acts, shall we say, with other users because Evan wasn't moderating the way you wanted him to.

wtf are you talking about and why do you insist on thinking i'm someone else?
Posted by: Kent

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/09/13 05:08 PM

It's pretty easy to compare your posts with those of MarcC and find very very strong similarities, especially the snarkiness.
Posted by: talus

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/09/13 06:57 PM

totalitarian chat.com
Posted by: strat

Re: Nothing but crickets - 08/09/13 07:39 PM

There was a time where we were heavily moderated because the postings weren't substantial content and were what amounted to banter between a small group of users. After that, it went to local issue vitriol. I made some very good friends from this website. Now, I check in about once every 3 or 4 months or when I'm contemplating climbing at the gunks to see if there is any whacky thing I should know.