The "we" of course, being hopefully the same as the majority of the members. So, with those "3 options" being:
1: Do nothing. ...................
2: Argue the point. ...................................
3: Delete people and close threads if they don't follow the simple rules. This is what I am leaning towards at the moment as it is becoming very tiresome.”
Interesting options and here, unasked for, are my observations on your three options".
1...That seems to be the current par for the course.
2... “Argue.”? Is that your only response, why not comment on other’s views, or add your views?
3...”Delete people and close threads..” Surely that is the just one part of the role of an active website moderator ?
My queries.
Do you know what the readers want to read?
Agreed, there are complaints about “politics’ entering into threads, but I also see complaints that there are not enough desired threads being created on hunting and shooting matters. So just who is expected to create these desired threads?
Do you know how many members create posts as opposed to just those who reading?
Do the scope of subjects within the “desired threads” need to be expanded? Are reader’s views on what they are interested in, evolving with the interesting times we have?
coming at it from another direction:
When did those who make decisions on this site's directions last consider:
a...what readers want to read. In fact when did they last:
b...do a count of the numbers of readers who make posts.
c...Do a count of how many readers this site actually has?
The information on the last two should be easily gleaned from the systems databases and would be a starting point in deciding if you have enough posters to revert your site back to one with a good supply of fresh posts but only on “Hunting and Shooting” issues
OR
Consider some changes because reality changes.
One way to find an answer is to “Do it”. Delete those who breach the rules, (I anticipate being one of the first to be deleted,no problem) but remember the old saying, “be careful what you wish for” as there is a possibility the site content may be bit thin and stale if you try to "turn back time". and non conformers , once culled may neer be seen again.
Just saying.
Bookmarks