Originally Posted by
essxjay
One could make a similar observation from the counter perspective:
While I have seen all sorts of strong assertions and claimed benefits around this proposal what I have yet to see articulated or demonstrated is a significant upside to this proposal. What is so 'bad' about encouraging posters to utilize the current available modes of communication to provide input on how their favorite forums are managed on a day-to-day basis?
Calls for greater transparency, accountability and other populist 'goods' imply those attributes are somehow missing or deficient in current forum management. Are they really? And why is more normatively better than the levels we've got?
I'll give you one example of why public discussion is good. Let's say I hate the mega-threading that goes on in the United forum. I have no idea if anyone else feels the same way. And no one else knows that I feel this way. I can't discuss it publicly, so any talk is squirreled away to PM, and the conversation is then controlled by the person who moderates in a way I disagree with. What are the chances that one person is going to change his mind?
Public, open discussion would allow everyone to get a sense of where opinions lie. If I'm the lone mega-thread hater, discussion would die, and I would have to deal. If there was a majority opinion against the practice, solutions could be worked out that would benefit the membership of the forum. This only happens in an open, collaborative setting.
Originally Posted by
essxjay
I think you're conflating the prohibition on discussing specific actions such as post edits/deletions, mod-to-member PMs, individual member warnings and suspensions with discussion about forum management tools (such as splitting). To be fair, few members ask about the latter because they don't realize that there's a distinction or where the the line might be. I personally don't mind answering PMs about why I moved, merged, renamed or closed threads or why we chose to split TS/S, but only to the extent that I can without violating the directive on member privacy, i.e. disciplinary action.
I hope these threads (if they are created) would not be used to ask about specific deletions/suspensions. I do agree those situations are better handled in private. I'm thinking they would be more about larger, more general issues.
Originally Posted by
essxjay
For the record, prior to shuttering TS/S for reorganization we posted a sticky about it, stating the dates of closure and our reasons for the split. To characterize that notice as 'dark of night' activity puzzles me. Additionally, there is precedent for mod discretion in temporarily closing, splitting or merging forums -- OMNI (by Randy back in 20xx), OMNIlite/PR (more recently) and Midwest/Frontier (by me in August), respectively, come to mind. TS/S is not a special case because of the resulting uproar, it was a hotbed of discontent to begin with.
I don't think people are disputing that you gave advanced warning of your decision and actions. I think they are upset with the lack of warning that the process was occurring, before those decisions were made.