Is This Possible?

lol I'd imagine everybody from the Denver Post to Huffington's has the exact same problem.

Let me throw this idea out there:
Since the distinction between "the old way" and "the new way" is for the participants themselves to be able to choose (while having to pay for) their moderator....would it be possible for posters to agree, by voting in advance, on the moderator of a particular forum or issue? Then they would feel less wanked if that person came down on them for acting unfairly toward the other side, or whatever.
And, they could be sure (considering this isn't the Post or Huffington's) the moderator chosen didn't have "an agenda" or whatever.

The purpose of any general dialogue, however, has to be airing the positive and negative points of the issue. As I annoyed Daughter by pointing out, there are rarely any Right Answers. So the purpose of the "moderator" wouldn't be to identify one, just to let the dialogue flow fairly between posters.

Soulshiner wrote: Sounds like you should take this over to Pinecam...

There's plenty of other places I go that are naturally adult without the constant flow of insults.....I'm still a mountain guuy at heart so that's why I'm here. PC imo is a waste of time because the mods treat the members like children (in the study anyway).

I really don't have any fantasies about this place getting any more civil....I'm just tired of the instant snipes and was hoping to at least raise an awareness of the stupidity.

I think it would be an interesting experiment if we all changed our nics for a week and then posted on the very same ongoing threads. How much more weight would we give to another posters argument if we couldn't pigeon hole them based on pre-conceived ideas of what they will post.

Im sure it wouldn't take long to identify some of the posters...but there have been many times when i have been surprised by ideas from posters that I wouldn't expect such a post from (both good and bad stuff)

CB, choose a somewhat neutral topic and make sure its worded right. Like "When would you consider alternative energy and why?" It will still draw smarta$$ remarks from someone that will remain nameless :Whistle , but it will cut down on the political division.
Notice I didn't mention anything about the snarkqueen brigade. Opps, I tried.

archer wrote: I think it would be an interesting experiment if we all changed our nics for a week and then posted on the very same ongoing threads. How much more weight would we give to another posters argument if we couldn't pigeon hole them based on pre-conceived ideas of what they will post.

Im sure it wouldn't take long to identify some of the posters...but there have been many times when i have been surprised by ideas from posters that I wouldn't expect such a post from (both good and bad stuff)

That's a good idea, but is it really neccessary? Here's an analogy....have you ever seen the Sienfeld episode when the four main charactors made a bet to see who could go the longest without ..uh, you know, making yourself happy?

I think it would be fun to have a week where we see who can last the longest without a single insult. Use whatever language you want, just try not to insult an individual or a group that individual is part of. You know, it's really as easy as refraining from making racial slurs...although I realize some will not post at all as they are incapable of a mature discussion. I'm actually over it and could care less what others say. I'm just going to do it on my own along with the few others that have always been civil (they know who they are)