Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > abuse people.
> John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > my sense of humour.
> W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > taken:-
> 1. The posts in question be expunged. > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > entirely.
> John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > some sort of game.
> I am no longer amused.
> Matthew James (dockarl)
> On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > by me
> I miss read that post. :(
> You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > unlike you.
> I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.
> is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few months, but also the level of participation of some of those who remain.
Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead become something of a sporadic battleground.
There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably alienated.
This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised and don't get out of hand.
I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- club, not with a Google group... There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread a few days ago.
> Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> Craig
> On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > abuse people.
> > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > my sense of humour.
> > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > taken:-
> > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > entirely.
> > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > some sort of game.
> > I am no longer amused.
> > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > by me
> > I miss read that post. :(
> > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > unlike you.
> > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
I like helping people, so I'll always come back, but the lack of Googler input has really upset me, I've been told its going to get back up to par, but that hasn't happened yet. Though props to Jonathon Simon for stepping up to the plate as of late.
As far a gohde goes, if what he said made sense half the time I'd be worried, but I'm pretty sure anyone with common sense can figure him out in a post or two. If they do moderate him, he'll just create another identity and continue on, so perhaps a sticky that says not to respond to him would do more, he'll get bored and move on to torture vending machine repairmen or some other newsgroup.
> > is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only > the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few > months, but also the level of participation of some of those who > remain.
> Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously > put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would > appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this > place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead > become something of a sporadic battleground.
> There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the > sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive > here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane > or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to > return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably > alienated.
> This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into > mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing > but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
> There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert > deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised > and don't get out of hand.
> I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- > club, not with a Google group... > There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread > a few days ago.
> So yes, I think the matter of everyone here having to stick to the > same set of 'play nicely' rules is becoming a matter of some urgency.
> Sasch
> On May 3, 9:34 am, cass-hacks wrote:
> > Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > Craig
> > On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > > abuse people.
> > > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > > my sense of humour.
> > > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > > taken:-
> > > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > > entirely.
> > > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > > some sort of game.
> > > I am no longer amused.
> > > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > > by me
> > > I miss read that post. :(
> > > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > > unlike you.
> > > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
For me it's work commitments, not the behaviour of a minority, that has slowed down my posting, but that's irrelevant.
I'm still fed up with the abuse he hands out - to everyone. I don't know what the answer is - moderation was working though.
Perhaps a simple autogenerated signature - 'this person has been placed on moderation by the group administrators due to personal attacks' and a link to the nhp.net site would act as a form of 'self- moderation'.
> I like helping people, so I'll always come back, but the lack of > Googler input has really upset me, I've been told its going to get > back up to par, but that hasn't happened yet. Though props to > Jonathon Simon for stepping up to the plate as of late.
> As far a gohde goes, if what he said made sense half the time I'd be > worried, but I'm pretty sure anyone with common sense can figure him > out in a post or two. If they do moderate him, he'll just create > another identity and continue on, so perhaps a sticky that says not to > respond to him would do more, he'll get bored and move on to torture > vending machine repairmen or some other newsgroup.
> On May 3, 6:43 am, IceGiant wrote:
> > > is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only > > the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few > > months, but also the level of participation of some of those who > > remain.
> > Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously > > put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would > > appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this > > place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead > > become something of a sporadic battleground.
> > There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the > > sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive > > here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane > > or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to > > return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably > > alienated.
> > This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into > > mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing > > but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
> > There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert > > deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised > > and don't get out of hand.
> > I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- > > club, not with a Google group... > > There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread > > a few days ago.
> > So yes, I think the matter of everyone here having to stick to the > > same set of 'play nicely' rules is becoming a matter of some urgency.
> > Sasch
> > On May 3, 9:34 am, cass-hacks wrote:
> > > Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > Craig
> > > On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > > > abuse people.
> > > > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > > > my sense of humour.
> > > > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > > > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > > > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > > > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > > > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > > > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > > > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > > > taken:-
> > > > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > > > entirely.
> > > > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > > > some sort of game.
> > > > I am no longer amused.
> > > > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > > > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > > > by me
> > > > I miss read that post. :(
> > > > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > > > unlike you.
> > > > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
In America, Dockarl, the first letter of names are capitalized.
On May 3, 12:04 am, dockarl wrote:
> W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
Well, I do. :)
You just admitted in print that my comments were totally correct. :)
You either ran, or are continuing to run, certain advertisements on your web site that I personally found offensive. And, that any sensitive female would also find offensive.
So, I commented on this slimy characteristic of your site that you just happen to share in common with that hate blog. So, what?
I am demanding a public apology from you, for defaming my character.
> contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
So, the people who WRONGLY thought that they personally OWNED this group have suddenly realized that they were posting too much, here. So, What?
Posting on this forum has exploded from last years posting history. So, you are saying that I am personally responsible for the recent explosion of posts on these forums?
> > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> So, the people who WRONGLY thought that they personally OWNED this > group have suddenly realized that they were posting too much, here. > So, What?
> Posting on this forum has exploded from last years posting history. > So, you are saying that I am personally responsible for the recent > explosion of posts on these forums?
This thread is not about him, it's about what to do about him. In my opinion, his favourite hobby is to take any thread and pollute it with emotive cruft and personal attacks in order to move it right off topic and attract attention to himself.
Let's keep this objective with the aim of having something done about that.
> > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > So, the people who WRONGLY thought that they personally OWNED this > > group have suddenly realized that they were posting too much, here. > > So, What?
> > Posting on this forum has exploded from last years posting history. > > So, you are saying that I am personally responsible for the recent > > explosion of posts on these forums?
> > Perhaps, if you stopped being so self-absorbed?
Putting a person's name in the subject line in the context that you used it is called a personal attack, which just happens to be prohibited. So, I have returned the favor. Let the entire world see, how the self-absorbed Dockarl likes it. :)
Just thought that might want to get a life. And, kindly stop personally attacking me in your posts.
Hmm.. I think I might have thought of a workable solution..
What about delayed posting?
You could handle these people that deliberately take posts off topic by delaying their posts - by, say for instance, 18 hours.
This would be algorithmically easy to implement and would still allow them to have their say - I mean, I have problems with an outright ban too.. everyone has a right to voice their opinion - just not if they tend to regularly go beyond what is fair and objective and tilt towards abusive behaviour.
This, in concert with tighter 'play nice' rules (as suggested by icegiant) and turning off their ability to have replies bring posts back from the dead, could be very effective at eliminating the flame wars that these people start.
> I like helping people, so I'll always come back, but the lack of > Googler input has really upset me, I've been told its going to get > back up to par, but that hasn't happened yet. Though props to > Jonathon Simon for stepping up to the plate as of late.
> As far a gohde goes, if what he said made sense half the time I'd be > worried, but I'm pretty sure anyone with common sense can figure him > out in a post or two. If they do moderate him, he'll just create > another identity and continue on, so perhaps a sticky that says not to > respond to him would do more, he'll get bored and move on to torture > vending machine repairmen or some other newsgroup.
> On May 3, 6:43 am, IceGiant wrote:
> > > is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only > > the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few > > months, but also the level of participation of some of those who > > remain.
> > Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously > > put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would > > appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this > > place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead > > become something of a sporadic battleground.
> > There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the > > sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive > > here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane > > or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to > > return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably > > alienated.
> > This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into > > mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing > > but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
> > There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert > > deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised > > and don't get out of hand.
> > I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- > > club, not with a Google group... > > There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread > > a few days ago.
> > So yes, I think the matter of everyone here having to stick to the > > same set of 'play nicely' rules is becoming a matter of some urgency.
> > Sasch
> > On May 3, 9:34 am, cass-hacks wrote:
> > > Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > Craig
> > > On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > > > abuse people.
> > > > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > > > my sense of humour.
> > > > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > > > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > > > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > > > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > > > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > > > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > > > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > > > taken:-
> > > > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > > > entirely.
> > > > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > > > some sort of game.
> > > > I am no longer amused.
> > > > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > > > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > > > by me
> > > > I miss read that post. :(
> > > > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > > > unlike you.
> > > > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
Maybe you should post this to WebmasterWorld.com/google/ it may get read by a Googler then, otherwise unless you are asking how to submit your sitemap or verify your site you are not going to get an answer here.
I'm going to institute my own policy.
1) Do not reply to abusive posters. 2) Report all abusive posts immediately and continuously. 3) If they really really really upset me, see rule #1
> Hmm.. I think I might have thought of a workable solution..
> What about delayed posting?
> You could handle these people that deliberately take posts off topic > by delaying their posts - by, say for instance, 18 hours.
> This would be algorithmically easy to implement and would still allow > them to have their say - I mean, I have problems with an outright ban > too.. everyone has a right to voice their opinion - just not if they > tend to regularly go beyond what is fair and objective and tilt > towards abusive behaviour.
> This, in concert with tighter 'play nice' rules (as suggested by > icegiant) and turning off their ability to have replies bring posts > back from the dead, could be very effective at eliminating the flame > wars that these people start.
> doc
> On May 3, 10:06 pm, JLH wrote:
> > I like helping people, so I'll always come back, but the lack of > > Googler input has really upset me, I've been told its going to get > > back up to par, but that hasn't happened yet. Though props to > > Jonathon Simon for stepping up to the plate as of late.
> > As far a gohde goes, if what he said made sense half the time I'd be > > worried, but I'm pretty sure anyone with common sense can figure him > > out in a post or two. If they do moderate him, he'll just create > > another identity and continue on, so perhaps a sticky that says not to > > respond to him would do more, he'll get bored and move on to torture > > vending machine repairmen or some other newsgroup.
> > On May 3, 6:43 am, IceGiant wrote:
> > > > is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only > > > the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few > > > months, but also the level of participation of some of those who > > > remain.
> > > Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously > > > put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would > > > appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this > > > place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead > > > become something of a sporadic battleground.
> > > There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the > > > sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive > > > here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane > > > or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to > > > return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably > > > alienated.
> > > This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into > > > mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing > > > but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
> > > There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert > > > deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised > > > and don't get out of hand.
> > > I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- > > > club, not with a Google group... > > > There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread > > > a few days ago.
> > > So yes, I think the matter of everyone here having to stick to the > > > same set of 'play nicely' rules is becoming a matter of some urgency.
> > > Sasch
> > > On May 3, 9:34 am, cass-hacks wrote:
> > > > Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > > > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > > Craig
> > > > On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > > > > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > > > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > > > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > > > > abuse people.
> > > > > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > > > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > > > > my sense of humour.
> > > > > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > > > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > > > > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > > > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > > > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > > > > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > > > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > > > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > > > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > > > > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > > > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > > > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > > > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > > > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > > > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > > > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > > > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > > > > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > > > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > > > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > > > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > > > > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > > > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > > > > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > > > > taken:-
> > > > > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > > > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > > > > entirely.
> > > > > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > > > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > > > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > > > > some sort of game.
> > > > > I am no longer amused.
> > > > > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > > > > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > > > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > > > > by me
> > > > > I miss read that post. :(
> > > > > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > > > > unlike you.
> > > > > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > > > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
Nah - I'll just keep it here.. I know you're feeling a bit jaded (like many of us) about the relative lack of Googler input here JLH, but change will happen on these forums if change is asked for on these forums, eventually.
> Maybe you should post this to WebmasterWorld.com/google/ it may get > read by a Googler then, otherwise unless you are asking how to submit > your sitemap or verify your site you are not going to get an answer > here.
> I'm going to institute my own policy.
> 1) Do not reply to abusive posters. > 2) Report all abusive posts immediately and continuously. > 3) If they really really really upset me, see rule #1
> On May 3, 9:32 am, dockarl wrote:
> > Hmm.. I think I might have thought of a workable solution..
> > What about delayed posting?
> > You could handle these people that deliberately take posts off topic > > by delaying their posts - by, say for instance, 18 hours.
> > This would be algorithmically easy to implement and would still allow > > them to have their say - I mean, I have problems with an outright ban > > too.. everyone has a right to voice their opinion - just not if they > > tend to regularly go beyond what is fair and objective and tilt > > towards abusive behaviour.
> > This, in concert with tighter 'play nice' rules (as suggested by > > icegiant) and turning off their ability to have replies bring posts > > back from the dead, could be very effective at eliminating the flame > > wars that these people start.
> > doc
> > On May 3, 10:06 pm, JLH wrote:
> > > I like helping people, so I'll always come back, but the lack of > > > Googler input has really upset me, I've been told its going to get > > > back up to par, but that hasn't happened yet. Though props to > > > Jonathon Simon for stepping up to the plate as of late.
> > > As far a gohde goes, if what he said made sense half the time I'd be > > > worried, but I'm pretty sure anyone with common sense can figure him > > > out in a post or two. If they do moderate him, he'll just create > > > another identity and continue on, so perhaps a sticky that says not to > > > respond to him would do more, he'll get bored and move on to torture > > > vending machine repairmen or some other newsgroup.
> > > On May 3, 6:43 am, IceGiant wrote:
> > > > > is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > > There does seem to have been a rather drastic reduction in not only > > > > the number of 'regulars' who hang around there during the last few > > > > months, but also the level of participation of some of those who > > > > remain.
> > > > Since I'm not the world's most constant poster myself, I'd previously > > > > put this down to work-commitments on the part of others. It would > > > > appear though that quite a few have taken flight simply because this > > > > place no longer has the feelgood factor it used to and has instead > > > > become something of a sporadic battleground.
> > > > There have to be some enforcable rules of conduct, not only for the > > > > sake of regular contributors but also the unseen masses who arrive > > > > here asking simple (also oftentimes complicated and frequently inane > > > > or silly) questions about their sites before disappearing, never to > > > > return, once their query has been answered or they have been suitably > > > > alienated.
> > > > This place has a phenomenal visitor turnover... If it turns into > > > > mudslinging central, word about Google Webmaster Help being nothing > > > > but a war zone will get around the web at the speed of thought.
> > > > There will always be disagreements in places like this, but by (insert > > > > deity here), there needs to be a way to ensure these stay civilised > > > > and don't get out of hand.
> > > > I've seen things go to bits before, albeit only with a Star Wars fan- > > > > club, not with a Google group... > > > > There's madness down that road, as I said in a post in another thread > > > > a few days ago.
> > > > So yes, I think the matter of everyone here having to stick to the > > > > same set of 'play nicely' rules is becoming a matter of some urgency.
> > > > Sasch
> > > > On May 3, 9:34 am, cass-hacks wrote:
> > > > > Since N-H-P/John H. Gohde's promise to "poke fun at" the people who > > > > > contribute the most in the Google Webmaster Help forum seems to have > > > > > more so turned into a threat with his idea of "poking fun" being to > > > > > defame people, is it any wonder that participation in this forum by > > > > > the people who used to contribute the most has dropped significantly?
> > > > > Craig
> > > > > On May 2, 9:04 pm, dockarl wrote:
> > > > > > Hi everyone - I don't want to start another ranting Gohde thread, but > > > > > > I think that the time has about come for something to be done to make > > > > > > him realise this is no game, this isn't a place for him to come to > > > > > > abuse people.
> > > > > > John has today crossed an important line. He's prgressed from personal > > > > > > attacks to outright defamation. That's a line at which I abruptly lose > > > > > > my sense of humour.
> > > > > > W.R.T. the 'half naked graphics', I think he's referring to the > > > > > > website of a lingerie company I direct - I don't care about that.
> > > > > > What really concerns me is that John has implied that he thinks that > > > > > > I'm reponsible forhttp://www.naturalhealthperspective.net. He's > > > > > > implied the same various times, but never directly until now .
> > > > > > At first, I laughed it off and told him to pull his head in, but then > > > > > > I thought about his post for a few minutes - these are public forums. > > > > > > I don't want searchable, public records painting me as someone that > > > > > > would devote myself to writing a hate blog.
> > > > > > I explained to John that these days potential employers / business > > > > > > partners etc often do background searches on people prior to forming > > > > > > partnerships with them - I've even done it. I explained to John that I > > > > > > don't want to be known as the type of person that would write a hate > > > > > > blog about another person - it's just not who I am - as a person I > > > > > > aspire to tolerance. It's a central tenet of who I am, it's central to > > > > > > my being - that's why I've butted heads with him previously when he's > > > > > > used these forums for xenophobic and racist monologues.
> > > > > > Regardless of the fact that I think the very fact that someone has > > > > > > devoted a hate blog to him speaks volumes, I will not idly stand by > > > > > > and let him progress from just being a pest to using these forums as a > > > > > > platform for overtly defamatory / slanderous comments.
> > > > > > I've given him a chance to recant his allegation, and he has not only > > > > > > failed to do so, he's taken it up a notch. Enough is enough.
> > > > > > I formally and very seriously request that the following actions be > > > > > > taken:-
> > > > > > 1. The posts in question be expunged. > > > > > > 2. John be placed on permanent moderation or banned from these groups > > > > > > entirely.
> > > > > > John has crossed a line, his statements are very clearly defamatory - > > > > > > and would not be tolerated in the real world - why should they be > > > > > > tolerated in this, a real world forum? He obviously thinks this is > > > > > > some sort of game.
> > > > > > I am no longer amused.
> > > > > > Matthew James (dockarl)
> > > > > > On May 2, 5:55 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > > > > > > NHP wrote in response to my comment that the NHP.net site is not run > > > > > > > by me
> > > > > > I miss read that post. :(
> > > > > > You are NOT the hate blogger, because he is NOT mentally unstable: > > > > > > unlike you.
> > > > > > I would say that dockarl is the most likely person. Since both have > > > > > > displayed a marked preference for semi-naked female graphics.- Hide quoted text -
I can say that I have stopped contributing to the forum because I am sick and tired Gohde. Despite Gohde's many claims that I have no idea what I am talking about, my track record speaks for itself WRT SEO. Like many regulars here, I am the sort of person Google wants as a regular because I am able to provide good advice to many queries that arise here.
I stopped contributing to the forum for the best part of a month because Gohde personally attacked me after almost every post I made. When I returned last week I noticed that Gohde was still up to his antics and started the thread to have him permanently moderated or banned.
I am certain that Gohde sits back after each insulting post and congratulates himself with offending another person. In whatever sad excuse for existence he calls a life, he is feeding off the trouble he creates here.
What I am really dismayed about is that Google staff sit back and do nothing. I think Gohde considers this complicit consent to keep being a tool.
Doc, I don't know if the delayed posting would help - Peckerhead would just need to wait a few hours before gaining the satisfaction of stirring someone up.
If we ban him, he will just come back under a different name. Google is unlikely to moderate him because they do not have enough staff monitoring this NG to even bother replying to this thread let alone read each of Gohde's posts.
So how's this for a solution. Google appoint 3 or 4 people as moderators. If all of these moderators reach consensus that a persons behaviour is unacceptable that's person receives a warning from the moderators. If the person continues to "rock the boat" then that person is place on moderation. This moderation will be conducted by one of the persons Google appoints as a moderator.
The benefit of this is that it puts in place a system that allows the forum to self moderate.
> I can say that I have stopped contributing to the forum because I am > sick and tired Gohde. Despite Gohde's many claims that I have no idea > what I am talking about, my track record speaks for itself WRT SEO. > Like many regulars here, I am the sort of person Google wants as a > regular because I am able to provide good advice to many queries that > arise here.
> I stopped contributing to the forum for the best part of a month > because Gohde personally attacked me after almost every post I made. > When I returned last week I noticed that Gohde was still up to his > antics and started the thread to have him permanently moderated or > banned.
> I am certain that Gohde sits back after each insulting post and > congratulates himself with offending another person. In whatever sad > excuse for existence he calls a life, he is feeding off the trouble he > creates here.
> What I am really dismayed about is that Google staff sit back and do > nothing. I think Gohde considers this complicit consent to keep being > a tool.
> Doc, I don't know if the delayed posting would help - Peckerhead would > just need to wait a few hours before gaining the satisfaction of > stirring someone up.
> If we ban him, he will just come back under a different name. > Google is unlikely to moderate him because they do not have enough > staff monitoring this NG to even bother replying to this thread let > alone read each of Gohde's posts.
> So how's this for a solution. Google appoint 3 or 4 people as > moderators. If all of these moderators reach consensus that a persons > behaviour is unacceptable that's person receives a warning from the > moderators. If the person continues to "rock the boat" then that > person is place on moderation. This moderation will be conducted by > one of the persons Google appoints as a moderator.
> The benefit of this is that it puts in place a system that allows the > forum to self moderate.
Putting a person's name in the subject line in the context that you used it is called a personal attack, which just happens to be prohibited. So, I have returned the favor. Let the entire world see, how the self-absorbed Dockarl likes it. :)
I think the moderators idea is a good one, if not a sad one. This place has worked so well without them. That's a major part of why this whole situation managed to irritate me.
I guess things will sort out in the long run... I've slept on it, and I've reverted back to 'easy going dockarl'.. I'm no longer aiming for his outright banning - I think what others have said is right - it's probably exactly what he wants.
In effect I guess we're all probably better off dealing with him by starving him of fun. Let's (as JLH suggests above) all just not answer anything he says, either directly or indirectly, from now on - if you're concerned about the quality of what he's saying, or the fact that he's having a go at a newbie, the occasional one line response - a well aimed link, should be more than sufficient to add balance.. As for me, well, I've let everyone know I am not the author of the hate site, and now that I've done so, I feel better.
> I can say that I have stopped contributing to the forum because I am > sick and tired Gohde. Despite Gohde's many claims that I have no idea > what I am talking about, my track record speaks for itself WRT SEO. > Like many regulars here, I am the sort of person Google wants as a > regular because I am able to provide good advice to many queries that > arise here.
> I stopped contributing to the forum for the best part of a month > because Gohde personally attacked me after almost every post I made. > When I returned last week I noticed that Gohde was still up to his > antics and started the thread to have him permanently moderated or > banned.
> I am certain that Gohde sits back after each insulting post and > congratulates himself with offending another person. In whatever sad > excuse for existence he calls a life, he is feeding off the trouble he > creates here.
> What I am really dismayed about is that Google staff sit back and do > nothing. I think Gohde considers this complicit consent to keep being > a tool.
> Doc, I don't know if the delayed posting would help - Peckerhead would > just need to wait a few hours before gaining the satisfaction of > stirring someone up.
> If we ban him, he will just come back under a different name. > Google is unlikely to moderate him because they do not have enough > staff monitoring this NG to even bother replying to this thread let > alone read each of Gohde's posts.
> So how's this for a solution. Google appoint 3 or 4 people as > moderators. If all of these moderators reach consensus that a persons > behaviour is unacceptable that's person receives a warning from the > moderators. If the person continues to "rock the boat" then that > person is place on moderation. This moderation will be conducted by > one of the persons Google appoints as a moderator.
> The benefit of this is that it puts in place a system that allows the > forum to self moderate.
> I think the moderators idea is a good one, if not a sad one. This > place has worked so well without them. That's a major part of why this > whole situation managed to irritate me.
> I guess things will sort out in the long run... I've slept on it, and > I've reverted back to 'easy going dockarl'.. I'm no longer aiming for > his outright banning - I think what others have said is right - it's > probably exactly what he wants.
> In effect I guess we're all probably better off dealing with him by > starving him of fun. Let's (as JLH suggests above) all just not answer > anything he says, either directly or indirectly, from now on - if > you're concerned about the quality of what he's saying, or the fact > that he's having a go at a newbie, the occasional one line response - > a well aimed link, should be more than sufficient to add balance.. As > for me, well, I've let everyone know I am not the author of the hate > site, and now that I've done so, I feel better.
> doc
> On May 4, 2:42 am, Volvox777 wrote:
> > Hi Folks
> > I can say that I have stopped contributing to the forum because I am > > sick and tired Gohde. Despite Gohde's many claims that I have no idea > > what I am talking about, my track record speaks for itself WRT SEO. > > Like many regulars here, I am the sort of person Google wants as a > > regular because I am able to provide good advice to many queries that > > arise here.
> > I stopped contributing to the forum for the best part of a month > > because Gohde personally attacked me after almost every post I made. > > When I returned last week I noticed that Gohde was still up to his > > antics and started the thread to have him permanently moderated or > > banned.
> > I am certain that Gohde sits back after each insulting post and > > congratulates himself with offending another person. In whatever sad > > excuse for existence he calls a life, he is feeding off the trouble he > > creates here.
> > What I am really dismayed about is that Google staff sit back and do > > nothing. I think Gohde considers this complicit consent to keep being > > a tool.
> > Doc, I don't know if the delayed posting would help - Peckerhead would > > just need to wait a few hours before gaining the satisfaction of > > stirring someone up.
> > If we ban him, he will just come back under a different name. > > Google is unlikely to moderate him because they do not have enough > > staff monitoring this NG to even bother replying to this thread let > > alone read each of Gohde's posts.
> > So how's this for a solution. Google appoint 3 or 4 people as > > moderators. If all of these moderators reach consensus that a persons > > behaviour is unacceptable that's person receives a warning from the > > moderators. If the person continues to "rock the boat" then that > > person is place on moderation. This moderation will be conducted by > > one of the persons Google appoints as a moderator.
> > The benefit of this is that it puts in place a system that allows the > > forum to self moderate.
jOHN nhp gOHDE is a virtual amoeba. A protozoa has no brain cell you can insult. Just ignore the troll and move on. Stop to one-star his useless rants because that pays way too much attention. Don't even read posts marked with a troll handle. As more you folks discuss the troll as better he feels. If everybody would ignore him there would be no incentive for him to post anymore. Case closed. Sebastian
|
