Thanks for your thoughtful response. I remember well your
participation and our limited interaction in the years here before the
conflict got so large.

It appears that everyone agrees. There's no choice left for the regulars.

I agree that it is hard to see another option. I suspect that those
who were enjoying the friendly and safe interaction before the
conflicts would join us in seeing moderation as the best/only way to
renew the friendly interaction. I infer from some of the posts
recently that some people don't want the moderation and do fear it
would be vindictive or subjective.

...But on-topic content isn't always considered and
personalities become involved as was the case with the moderated Google
Aquarium group.

I would love to have a group where content is the measure of a post and
where anyone could post. That might be easier to achieve once the
rapid, reactive responses have settled down. I am thinking here of the
way people sometimes 'go after' even constructive posts by people with
whom they are angry. Seems hard not to have the hostility invade and
blend in. Maybe a period of calm would let the reactivity settle.
Ongoing wars crossposted across many groups makes that really hard to
achieve.


Because of what the other NG calls "mission posters." We call them trolls.
They're not interested in rec.ponds and several of them don't even own ponds
or fish.

I (Jim) had not heard the term 'mission poster' before, but it makes
sense to me. I would like rec.ponds to be a place where those missions
could be put aside. Moderation and even suspension might help people
learn to have a mission-free zone. Or maybe to conduct a constructive
pond mission! Committed people helped Phyllis and me with our pond.

We support the effort to have a moderated group.

As do most of us. There's no choice left when a group has resident posters
"on a mission."

I hope there will be enough who support a moderated group that it can
get going. Maybe it could even be a place where the mission posters do
experience participation without the particular mission.


I personally would like to see anyone free to post on the moderated
group. Content is the best basis for moderation.

That doesn't always happen in the real world. What happens if posts are
on-topic but the moderator disagrees (look at the fish food issue) with the
poster's stand? To my great sorrow I listened to a poster here, switched to
an outrageously expensive koi food and now have hundreds of undersized koi I
will be stuck with in the spring. The new spring fry will need the space
these undersized fish will be taking. I sorely regret switching foods but
they wont want anyone to know that! I have no idea now what I'm going to do
with these undersized koi come spring - that is if they survive the winter.
:-( Am I not supposed to voice my opinion and share my experience?

I think your point is a good one. People will give advice, generally
the best they can see. Sometimes it is in error. That would be a good
place for other ponders with other knowledge to enter into the
discussion. It is there that differences need to be accommodated and
the joint commitment to respect despite difference to be modelled. We
need that ability in lots of places in life!


I see a problem,
however, with that. It is volume. The moderators would have a lot of
reviewing to do. It seems to me that some basic filtering/moderating
rules would be good...like crossposted messages, certain words and,
yes, suspending or banning members who persist in conflict rather than
pond messages.

This is a good part of the answer. Just stopping the mindless cross-posting,
personal attacks and sniping at others will about cure the problem here.

I agree with that. I wish I had a magic wand that could achieve that
result! I amhopeful that moderation will help us move in that
direction. Vainly, I fear, I would like to see moderation succeed to
such a level that it would not be needed.

Effective moderation would help members prone to conflictual messages
to exercise self-control.

And get rid of 100% of the cross-posted trash and assorted trolls, on a
"mission" or not. :-) And no one has to hide for awhile then try and sneak
back with another persona in hopes the trolls wont recognize them - a poor
idea from the start.

I'll buy that. No crossposting; no trolling; people free to be honest,
genuine and different.


Moderating seems to be the best bet.

It's the ONLY bet at this point.

Sadly, I concur.

For what they are worth, those are our thoughts. They are launched in
a spirit of friendship and intended to be without rancor.

Jim

I also expressed my thoughts in the spirit of friendship,without rancor and
a 10 year history here.

I remember and value those earlier days of friendships without rancor.
I hope we can achieve more of them.
Jim