This is the forum that's dead
SMace
1,481 Posts
Yawn. Isn't it fun without the controversy?
SMace
1,481 Posts
Comments
But, every day there are serious HR related questions posted with excellent answers. People are coming to get professional help and are finding what they seek. And there is even the occasional frivolity, though it is limited.
It seems to suit some of us just fine.
Personally, I think this forum could be better than it is now but simply adding "controversy" isn't the answer.
The answer is a more modern forum software program with a better interface so you can post more easily and see what threads have been updated and by whom, more interaction from experts and attorneys, more involvement by MLS staff beyond recommending whatever upcoming audio seminar is next, contests, etc.
I have suggested as much to MLS but I don't feel its a priority for them which is too bad because I think this forum could be a more vibrant, thriving community than it is.
Some people do enjoy that kind of interaction. And that's fine if that's what they want. First off, the only thing that has really died on this forum is the HR-de-har-har section. And if one is looking for a serious professional resource, that is not necessarily a bad thing. The serious sections of this forum do have a good amount of activity with a large number of different posters many who return on a regular basis.
I've noticed for several years now, it was just a small number of us that participated in the HR-de--har-har section, including myself. Scan the screen names in some of the other sections, you will see names that appear regularly and who have a good number of posts to their credit, but they never get involved in the funny section. Ever wonder why that is? Maybe they are looking for a serious HR resource and have found it here. They aren't looking to discuss which part of the country is better, or gay bashing. Maybe they get turned off when the discussion turns to or is solely based on ad hominem attacks. Maybe some of us don't like the disrespectful language exhibited elsewhere.
I do participate on other forums and blogs all of which have some kind of controls, some more than others. Mixing it up can be entertaining and exchanging ideas can be informative. But, the longest lasting and ultimately most successful forums and blogs seem to place certain restrictions on interactions. In my opinion, this forum has improved dramatically over the past year. You may disagree, and that is fine. But, another key measurement is the imposition of the forum administrators - or maybe I should say the lack of it in the past year. Lively, civil discussions of current events would be good, but it's not necessary.
Paul mentioned above the concept of community. He is right, that is missing... to an extent. It is more sterile right now, but after what happened in 2005, all the discord and anger and finger pointing, this is a pleasant break. Those who thrive on the in-your-face interaction have found a home for that elsewhere and some who have tried it decided it wasn't for them.
Choices. That's what it comes down to. Rock and Roll vs Classical music. Simpsons vs Masterpiece theater. Anarchy vs Civil discourse.
Nothing wrong with heated exchange, political discussions, lively debate in my opinion. I have tried to stir up my share of that in the past.
Alot of people are content to just sit back and read posts. They dont contribute. Perhaps they have seen how some members were treated in the past. Who knows? Maybe they are worried about saying something stupid. Obviously I have no such concern.
Its too bad Smace didnt stick around to have an actual discussion.
I too have tried to stir up some political debate recently to no avail. That's OK, maybe people don't care. Or when they come here their mind is strictly on HR issues. Or, maybe those who have been around awhile are gun-shy knowing what has happened in the past. Several in recent months have posted that they have been lurkers for several years but never posted until now. Why? Maybe because now they feel more secure?
Someday, there may be good discussions about social issues on this forum, but it may take some time. SMace and Irie, rather than performing a Chicken Little impersonation, start a discussion or add to the ones that were started. Some of us will join in. Smace, you started this thread and there have been several responses. What say you now?
You are a fart in a whirlwind. A turd in a punchbowl. A pimple on my behind. Lastly, I have it on good report that you are gay, ethnic, and voted for Kerry.
Is that the kind of "fun" you are missing, Smace? If so, you know where you can find it.
>what's wrong with some raucous
>in-your-face attacks, heated political
>discussions, and social commentary on current
>events?
Heated political discussion, social commentary -- all good. It's the "raucous in-your-face-attacks" that I don't care for. People ought to be able to express a divergent opinion, argue with someone else's opinion, and even passionately advance a position without personal attacks. Humor, criticism, and even teasing and sarcasm all have their place in discourse among people of reasonable intelligence. But resorting to ad hominem attacks (as you aptly labeled them, Ray, and as Paul facetiously exemplified) to make a point is a failing of intellect, in my opinion. It's also pretty gutless, since most people who personally attack others on the internet wouldn't do so in person.
But for anyone who goes in for that sort of thing, it's widely available. One need not look far.
Personal attacks and name calling appear to be more important than substance.
I am not a confrontational person by nature, and avoid it unless absolutely required (and some of us are just not good debaters). I found myself avoiding posting after one innocent post got me an earful in a private email, not to mention some remarks online. Between not feeling safe to post and wanting to avoid all the negativity I stopped coming. Once or twice a year I would come back to look something up when I couldn't find it anywhere else. Last time I discovered that things had changed. I have been a regular poster ever since.
It is perhaps a little too quiet (popular people become that way because they are often so witty and funny), and I miss some of the humor. Still, I feel like I can get on here almost every day because I will have time to read what has been posted and learn more. I guess I am just one of those that prefers the quiet, even if it gets a little boring, to the hostility.
I say Quiet is GOOD. (However, if any of you feel like you can impart humor and wittiness, bring it on!)
Nae
I imagine alot of people experienced the same thing you did. I got one of those nasty private e-mails and it really caught me off guard. I never expected that level of venom from a "professional forum member".
That's all water under the bridge now. Personally, I think Smace has a point. I wish he had stuck around to have a discussion.
I hope MLS will make this forum a priority again. Forums are particularly helpful for HR pros as we deal with complex issues that generally go way beyond what is covered in a policy manual. The advice and thoughtful comments of a colleague are always appreciated. Sometimes you just need someone to say, "Yeah, it sounds like you are handling everything OK."
I was one of the people happy to see the "icky" part of last year's forum go away. We are adults, people. Let's not run with scissors.
In any case, I have enjoyed the witty banter - it's nice to have a chuckle during the 3pm doldrums.
I'll be the first to admit I suck at debate, but I love to read what others have posted. I do wish the activity would pick up a little though. SHRM's forum stinks and another one out there is just way too personal for me. They truly have a select group and it's hard to break in and feel comfortable. I feel like Goldilocks: "this one's too hot, this one's too cold, but this one is just right".
I was wondering if some of the negative view is related to instant gratification. In our society today we expect instant results and communication. One posts a statement and expect immediate responses and if no one responds, like right now, they figure no one cares and the forum is dead. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams kept up a correspondence that lasted decades. Often heated, since they were on opposite sides politically. But, their letters travelled slowly, taking weeks to reach their destination. Still, they kept at it. Typically, questions get answered here, it may take a few days, but the posters get the information they need. This thread is a good example that the forum is alive and well.
I participate in the HR-de-har-har section because I enjoy it, and usually go there when I need a mental break. Engaging in debate is not a mental break for me, nor is it invigorating, but of course is can be for others.
I usually find the more frequent contributors have already given meaningful answers to serious questions by the time I get to them, or often I just am not sure of the answer. I learn a lot of things that "I didn't know I didn't know".
I almost always get meaningful answers to my questions, and almost always within a couple of hours.
That is what I need and expect, so I'm happy.
But since he cannot defend himself, we all know that jacket is really black leather. If I recall, aren't the two of you "Twin Sons of a different Mother?"
Can you play that on the trombone?
Please dont get Ray started about his trombone.
We had teased Beagle so much about that leather jacket I forgot what it really was, black or brown.
Yes, we were accused of being twins, but I'm good looking one.
You guys did just fine without me. What I feel this forum lost with it's loss of controversy is the level of questions and responses. Not that exciting.
I will continue to respond to questions when I can.