Post your asides here

[mamselle]

Time at home to get work done with very occasional trips out to forage for cheese, bread, and toilet paper?

Priceless.

M.

[polly_mer]

If someone wants to report something to a moderator, then please use the "report to moderator" link that appears at the bottom of every post.

If someone is concerned that something might possibly violate some rule, then please use the "report to moderator" link that appears at the bottom of every post instead of having the discussion on the thread to bring more attention to something that the casual reader may have overlooked.

Merely saying "mods" in a post does not summon anyone or draw extra attention.

The fora has grown enough that I, at least, am no longer reading most posts most days, especially now that my job duties have increased as a result of stay-at-home orders.

Please use the "report to moderator" function for efficiency and record keeping.

Thank you!

[mamselle]

Thanks, and apologies.

I think I recalled that on the old forum the word, "mods" somehow got flagged to the mods, but maybe that was a cyber-urban myth.

I did it by habit the other day, so if it was I, I'm sorry.

Noted and will follow from now on!

M.

[polly_mer]

I think I recalled that on the old forum the word, "mods" somehow got flagged to the mods, but maybe that was a cyber-urban myth.

Even if a mention of "mods" would summon someone, where should we look in a possibly lengthy thread?  Reporting a given post along with a brief explanation of why the report is being made helps us efficiently make decisions and have moderator discussions all in one place.

Not directed at anyone in particular, but since this is the asides thread, I will mention that sometimes, just like prayer, the moderator group decision is "nope, not going to intervene" even with a report, especially if it's just one person making one report on a heavily read thread with entirely predictable behavior given the known forumites involved.

As was recently discussed on a thread here regarding annual faculty reviews, without a record of a clear pattern of violations reported by multiple people nearly every time the behavior occurs with a record of undesirable consequences for the community at large, ongoing behavior by any specific forumite is obviously acceptable to the community.   I write long, we have multiple political parties represented here, and any typical discussion on what should be done in the big picture tends to get heated quickly.

[mamselle]

Unrelated to the above....

The quadrangular shooting gallery takes on another thread...

M.

[polly_mer]

If you'd rather be somewhere else, there's nothing stopping you from spending your valuable time and energy elsewhere.

I'd much rather have honest disagreement than niceness for the sake of niceness.

[mahagonny]

When someone advocates kindness on the fora I think several things. Probably first thing I think is 'how nice.' Eventually though I wonder, is sarcasm 'not nice?' It's not Mr. Rogers kind of nice, but it's not necessary sinister, or anything to worry about. Some don't even consider it rude. Is it accepted as a rhetorical technique, or is it not?
Maybe we've all been indoors too long.

[polly_mer]

I'm sure it is much too mean of me to point that that people who have contributed almost nothing to these fora by post count or word count aren't really making much of a threat by stating they will leave if their conditions aren't met.

Go.

Stay.

Whatever.

I'd rather have a vibrant enemy from whom I might learn something if I just keep reading.  I don't get royalties or anything from posting here so it's not like just having readers is doing anything for anyone.

Post something worth engaging and make your voice matter.

[namazu]

Consider that there might be more "regulars", and more vibrant, engaging discussions, if people felt they could get a word in edgewise.

...And if every fourth thread weren't hijacked by the same handful of posters flogging their same few dead horses.  It's boorish and unconstructive to derail thread after unrelated thread to rehash the same tired arguments ad nauseam.  Most recently, the "what went wrong with academe and coronavirus" thread seems to have devolved into yet another pointless, off-topic "won't someone think of the adjuncts" vs. "beware the adjunct 'death march'" back-and-forth.  The "COVID and contingent faculty" thread has been overtaken by ad hominems about "failed academics", and so on...

"Civility" and "niceness" should not be invoked as cover to quash principled, honest disagreement.  And I love a well-placed zinger as much as the next guy.  But rudeness (which shows up in things like hijacking threads, calling people out as trolls too quickly or devaluing infrequent contributors, and being needlessly condescending or smarmy or cruelly snarky) does not make for a more vibrant forum.

I don't advocate heavy-handed moderation, and as a moderator on another forum, I appreciate the thankless work that goes into keeping the lights on.  That said, it would be nice if a few people would step back and quit running their mouths fingers every now and then  -- not because their ideas are odious or unworthy of consideration, but because their constant repetition and/or preening is tiresome.  But that might be too much to ask.  Since they occasionally have worthwhile things to say, I'm hesitant to ignore them altogether.  And of course, perhaps those tired arguments constitute the bulk of what remains here because so many other would-be participants have been turned off and left.

[hungry_ghost]

Consider that there might be more "regulars", and more vibrant, engaging discussions, if people felt they could get a word in edgewise.

I do agree with this.

I am not sure about "flogging dead horses"--I've been skipping those threads for ages--but I think it's worth a moment for each of us to go to Members > Posts and see where we fall on posting frequency. 

I would like to hear more from some of the less frequent posters. 

[dismalist]

Speaking with Bismarck: The trick is knowing when to stop. :-)

[mahagonny]

Consider that there might be more "regulars", and more vibrant, engaging discussions, if people felt they could get a word in edgewise.

...And if every fourth thread weren't hijacked by the same handful of posters flogging their same few dead horses.  It's boorish and unconstructive to derail thread after unrelated thread to rehash the same tired arguments ad nauseam.  Most recently, the "what went wrong with academe and coronavirus" thread seems to have devolved into yet another pointless, off-topic "won't someone think of the adjuncts" vs. "beware the adjunct 'death march'" back-and-forth.  The "COVID and contingent faculty" thread has been overtaken by ad hominems about "failed academics", and so on...

There's nothing on that thread about adjunct faculty.

It could be that in general you hate to hear anything about how the adjunct experiences things, including discussions, differently than what you consider the 'main thing,' the full time faculty, and their experiences,  so every time you do, it seems like it can't be part of the discussion, or it's happening more often than it is.

[namazu]

Consider that there might be more "regulars", and more vibrant, engaging discussions, if people felt they could get a word in edgewise.

...And if every fourth thread weren't hijacked by the same handful of posters flogging their same few dead horses.  It's boorish and unconstructive to derail thread after unrelated thread to rehash the same tired arguments ad nauseam.  Most recently, the "what went wrong with academe and coronavirus" thread seems to have devolved into yet another pointless, off-topic "won't someone think of the adjuncts" vs. "beware the adjunct 'death march'" back-and-forth.  The "COVID and contingent faculty" thread has been overtaken by ad hominems about "failed academics", and so on...

There's nothing on that thread about adjunct faculty.

My apologies; you are correct.  The phrase "death march" does appear there, though, and I believe it is way off-topic and unhelpful (and symptomatic of similar derails across the fora).

It could be that in general you hate to hear anything about how the adjunct experiences things differently than what you consider the 'main thing,' the full time faculty, so every time you do, it seems like it can't be part of the discussion.

Huh?  I am not a full-time faculty member myself, and I support hearing from a wide variety of voices.  But I don't support thread hijacking.

[mahagonny]

Consider that there might be more "regulars", and more vibrant, engaging discussions, if people felt they could get a word in edgewise.

...And if every fourth thread weren't hijacked by the same handful of posters flogging their same few dead horses.  It's boorish and unconstructive to derail thread after unrelated thread to rehash the same tired arguments ad nauseam.  Most recently, the "what went wrong with academe and coronavirus" thread seems to have devolved into yet another pointless, off-topic "won't someone think of the adjuncts" vs. "beware the adjunct 'death march'" back-and-forth.  The "COVID and contingent faculty" thread has been overtaken by ad hominems about "failed academics", and so on...

There's nothing on that thread about adjunct faculty.

My apologies; you are correct.  The phrase "death march" does appear there, though, and I believe it is way off-topic and unhelpful (and symptomatic of similar derails across the fora).

It could be that in general you hate to hear anything about how the adjunct experiences things differently than what you consider the 'main thing,' the full time faculty, so every time you do, it seems like it can't be part of the discussion.

Huh?  I am not a full-time faculty member myself, and I support hearing from a wide variety of voices. But I don't support thread hijacking.

I'll be watching your responses to see if that is true.

[namazu]

I'll be watching your responses to see if that is true.

Great! 

Will you also be avoiding absurd and unsubstantiated claims/speculations about other people's motives?  That would be lovely!