CPAPtalk.com

...And those CPAPtalkians wisely believe and thrive on: "All things in loose moderation".

On the other hand, the least used tempo indication in music is "moderato". There are very few moderato's, although Sibelius was prone to use them. You can't go wrong with Sibelius.

IF it was decided that categories should be used (and I mean IF, I am impartial), perhaps we could institute a friendly, community moderation system. I mean this seems like a very cooperative community here. Maybe have a "move to alternate topic" option at the bottom of threads. Then anyone can move it.

Of course I guess there are drawbacks there as well if someone doesn't consider their thread OT or if the thread has devolved or evolved (depending on how you look at it) into an OT thread. I know it's naive to believe everyone will behave but with the entire community lending a hand any ridiculous behavior could be kept to a minimum.

Well, just an idea. I'm Sweden over here.

Most people here are good with the single-category "big pot design" and candidly so am I... That certainly doesn't preclude me from evaluating alternatives since robust discussion is the hallmark of what we do around here.

No one in THIS thread seems to be advocating heavy moderation OR rolling the forum up into many tiny categories. Regardless, there has been some pretty darn good debate in this thread opposing that presently vacant position.

Perhaps the assumption is that there will inevitably be disagreements about which category a post belongs in when it contains elements relating to both categories. And maybe it is thought that if no one has the authority to move a thread, any attempts at categories would be largely ignored anyway. Those viewpoints may be based on what transpires at apnea forums that presently attempt to rigidly enforce categorization of information. It may be that this forum has become a collection of hosers who are here specifically because they prefer this freeform mixed flow over the strict approaches of some more structured forums. The concept of organization without enforcement may be a difficult one to grasp, and many here may feel that rules are made to be broken anyway. I would suggest for those who feel that way, that they may want to look at this discussion as one of whether or not there will at some point be another unenforced "rule" that they will have the opportunity to break on a regular basis.

brain_cloud wrote:On the other hand, the least used tempo indication in music is "moderato". There are very few moderato's, although Sibelius was prone to use them. You can't go wrong with Sibelius.

with thanks to brain_cloud for a great idea....................

And for those who are not sure what "moderato" means -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nU5Ydn ... re=related

cheers

Mars

and to keep on track, here are some views of others about unmoderated forums -

http://www.theadminzone.com/forums/show ... 0&p=162440

-SWS wrote:

Amigo wrote:

Sleepy Taz wrote:...
Who among you would like to volunteer to moderate and make sure that only what belongs in a certain category is posted there. This is a time consuming and thankless job, which would create a lot of animosity and the bickering would make this place like other forums that I have visited and never found the personality that is projected here. The uniqueness of this place, the individualism of the people who post, and the level in which they want to provide assistance to those who ask for it is unparalleled anywhere that I have been.

If I remember correctly, ozij has extensive experience being a moderator.

Additionally, I would bet that almost all of those who endorse categorization would be more than happy to volunteer as moderators.

Curious why people think having a couple categories requires moderation any more extensive than we have now.

As soon as a post is made in the wrong category, there will be posts from those who deem it necessary to have them segregated in the first place.

Is the system broken as it is now? IMO, it's not. As a newbie, I've had no problems navigating this forum. Even if a topic is not labeled OT, generally I can tell by the subject line if it's a thread I want to read, whether it's OT or not. I think that if a newbie isn't ready for the info here, they will leave regardless of how it is set up. And if a newbie is serious about getting info about their xpap therapy, they will stick around and be able to get the info they need with relative ease. This was my experience anyway...

Sleepy Taz wrote:

-SWS wrote:

Amigo wrote:

Sleepy Taz wrote:...
Who among you would like to volunteer to moderate and make sure that only what belongs in a certain category is posted there. This is a time consuming and thankless job, which would create a lot of animosity and the bickering would make this place like other forums that I have visited and never found the personality that is projected here. The uniqueness of this place, the individualism of the people who post, and the level in which they want to provide assistance to those who ask for it is unparalleled anywhere that I have been.

If I remember correctly, ozij has extensive experience being a moderator.

Additionally, I would bet that almost all of those who endorse categorization would be more than happy to volunteer as moderators.

Curious why people think having a couple categories requires moderation any more extensive than we have now.

As soon as a post is made in the wrong category, there will be posts from those who deem it necessary to have them segregated in the first place.

Well all message-board implementations, including the current layout, are absolutely guaranteed to be as objectionable as they are executed imperfectly.

To roll the forum up into MANY tiny categories would be OCD'ish---colloquially speaking---as So Well suggested. To worry that adults on this message board WILL execute dual-categorization imperfectly is also OCD'ish---speaking just as colloquially. If there were social benefits outweighing the social cost of occasional miscategorization, then the trade-off is justified.

calgurl@hrt wrote:Is the system broken as it is now? IMO, it's not.

Well, we might rationally discuss the prospect of change toward fixing that which is broken OR toward fair evaluation of functional enhancements.

Sleepy Taz wrote:

-SWS wrote:

Amigo wrote:

Sleepy Taz wrote:...
Who among you would like to volunteer to moderate and make sure that only what belongs in a certain category is posted there. This is a time consuming and thankless job, which would create a lot of animosity and the bickering would make this place like other forums that I have visited and never found the personality that is projected here. The uniqueness of this place, the individualism of the people who post, and the level in which they want to provide assistance to those who ask for it is unparalleled anywhere that I have been.

If I remember correctly, ozij has extensive experience being a moderator.

Additionally, I would bet that almost all of those who endorse categorization would be more than happy to volunteer as moderators.

Curious why people think having a couple categories requires moderation any more extensive than we have now.

As soon as a post is made in the wrong category, there will be posts from those who deem it necessary to have them segregated in the first place.

I voted yes (with only a slight lean in that direction), but I've changed my mind. I, too, thought why in world would there be more moderation just for a two-category split? I don't think the owners would be moderating any more than they do now and I don't think the activity on this board would decrease because the CONTENT would not be moderated. But Taz brings up a good point above (especially for this group ). Plus there would be lengthy argument and debate about whether that post belonged in Door #1 or Door #2, then the debate of where it belonged with be consider OT and people would argue that THAT thread needed to be in OT even if the OP in question were in the apnea thread and...and let's not even go to a thread that starts on topic and veers off topic...Yep, more than one category would be a mess around here!

In some forums I think it's absolutely necessary to have categories because there are so many different topics that lend themselves easily to categorization, and it would be a mess trying to find anything if it wasn't. But here? I now seriously believe having no categories is best because almost everything is so intertwined and even an ON topic thread can change to OFF topic quickly. No format will be perfect all the time for everybody.

Pam

Good points, calgurl!

Any while I'm typing, that reminds me... hey, carbonman -- more popcorn, please!

Buttered, of course.

Still chuckling at Jeff's quirky,wry humor:

jnk wrote:The concept of organization without enforcement may be a difficult one to grasp, and many here may feel that rules are made to be broken anyway. I would suggest for those who feel that way, that they may want to look at this discussion as one of whether or not there will at some point be another unenforced "rule" that they will have the opportunity to break on a regular basis.

So my take is that most people on this message board STILL prefer one big category...

And posters can and should post ANYTHING within reason. Social networking topics such as employment, politics, spiritualism, family, sex etc. should ALL continue to go into the big pot without discouragement. Further more, people who want to avoid reading any given topic should do just that.

Do I interpret that informal quorum right?

-SWS wrote: Do I interpret that informal quorum right?

That is how I interpret it too. So is it okay if I post an OT that my baby grandson was born this morning?

-SWS wrote:So my take is that most people on this message board STILL prefer one big category...

And posters can and should post ANYTHING within reason. Social networking topics such as employment, politics, spiritualism, family, sex etc. should ALL continue to go into the big pot without discouragement. Further more, people who want to avoid reading any given topic should do just that.

Do I interpret that informal quorum right?

That's my take, too.
People can read and contribute to or avoid any thread they do or don't like. Or, said another way, take what you want and skip the rest.

If it wasn't like the way it is (or was changed into some other model), I don't think it would be the most successful and informative forum in this category. If it was all strictly about sleep and no other chit-chat, it would be pretty darned boring.


Den

OutaSync wrote:

-SWS wrote: Do I interpret that informal quorum right?

That is how I interpret it too. So is it okay if I post an OT that my baby grandson was born this morning?

Well congratulations Good for your family, I hope he's happy and healthy.