How Would You Like These Forums Moderated.

The criteria listed by David Roberts sound "right on" to me.

It seems it might be good to have two moderators agree before a change is made to a message that has been posted by a member (or to close a thread). And - if 3 or more changes are made to a poster's messages/threads closed in a reasonable period of time (month or less), it might be worthwhile to consider suspending that members ability to post for a month or so.

Gary Knox

Stan calls me a Troll because I pointed out his failures, and countered his point that the status quo should remain, by electing James M. Were any of the points that I brought up incorrect or fabricated? This is a club who's members primarily communicate through the internet. When the President of the club is a professional web guy, ou should expect that the website be kept current at a minimum. Not years or sometimes as much as a decade out of date. How can anyone argue with that point? If a prospective new member, such as myself, visits the website and looks around. The first thing I might do is see what events might be happening nearby. Once they find out that the events listed on the OC website are all in the past they might leave. If they stay, they'll likely go the regional contacts area to see who they should contact in their area. They get to that section and find that the link to the regional website is dead or the link takes you to another outdated webpage which only has information about a get together that happened 9 years ago. What would the prospective person think? And you wonder why the majority of owners think the OC is dead. Heaven forbid we get a new president to take the club into an entirely new direction. To bring it into this decade.

By the way, just in case anyone is wondering. Stan blocked me from the General Discussion forum as well as most of the other ones because he didn't like what I had to say. I'm glad someone brought up this subject here so I could respond. Thank you.

McLovin statements are widely inaccurate in a number of ways, but rather than respond. I request the moderators delete them from this topic, or move then to another topic where I will be quite happy to respond.

Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net;10938 wrote: McLovin statements are widely inaccurate in a number of ways, but rather than respond. I request the moderators delete them from this topic, or move then to another topic where I will be quite happy to respond.

He says that knowing full well that I cannot access those other forums.

Gary Knox;10931 wrote: The criteria listed by David Roberts sound "right on" to me.

It seems it might be good to have two moderators agree before a change is made to a message that has been posted by a member (or to close a thread). And - if 3 or more changes are made to a poster's messages/threads closed in a reasonable period of time (month or less), it might be worthwhile to consider suspending that members ability to post for a month or so.

Gary Knox

I agree and like your suggestions Gary

Brad