There is an awful lot of post deleting going on here, and like others, i'm not very happy about it.

I'm afraid I have to agree. This is not appropriate. Very disturbing.
tc

For those who want to talk to me about the issues surrounding RLG please contact me on the WWMail.

RLG? - Sorry...

Tarrant - Randon Line Generator - an on-going writing exercise that's been rather popular. Look in the writing exercises forum or the forum archives (sorry, I don't know how to do the link to the relevant page!)

Sorry, that should be RandoM, obviously. Although the author's edit option on the forum seem's to have vanished. Perhaps it's a contagious computer epidemic. Another nasty virus causing trouble on this otherwise sunny day...

<Added>

ah ha! My owner edit has returned! The antibiotics must have worked...

I’m tip-toeing here in case this thread suddenly vanishes…

David, do you not think there’s a case for an open discussion here? I’m sure all members, both old and new, would welcome the opportunity to contribute.

I don’t think, when we started this random line thing, we had any idea it would lead to this. No-one wants to damage the site or scare away new members.

One of the problems, as I see it, is that people assume everything posted into any forum – apart from the Lounge – appears on the general forum. So side-lining this topic makes it appear even more of a clique than you believe it is.

Maybe, on the first of the month, we could start a thread with the new line and an explanation of what it’s about for the benefit of new members.

I’m trying my inadequate best to smooth troubled waters here, David. If you don’t agree, please don’t delete Haunted’s thread. Just this comment of mine.

Dee.

The art of compromise is not dead!

David, seriously. . . I think Dee's suggestion is a good one. Start of the month only? Especially useful when as this thread shows, not everyone knows what an RLG is. (I only realised after I'd participated in one).

Thanks --

Richard

The reason I'm not keen on a discussion on the site is that, whilst we do indeed listen very carefully to what our existing members say (as evidenced by the recent archive changes), at the end of the day, there has to be an 'editorial' decision as to how the site is run.

We often move threads off the forum home page when, editorially speaking, we feel they have started to over-dominate the forum - this often happens when threads are busy and chatty. Moving them off the forum home page is in no way censorship, nor does it suggest disapproval, it is merely an editorial decision to adjust the focus of the site. Those who wish to continue in one of these 'moved' discussions can still access the thread by taking just one more click; using the email notification system they can learn of new posts to the thread even more easily.

As regards the RLG specifically, you may have noticed the latest thread regarding future exercises has remained on the home page to allow members who have not yet joined that thread to become aware of it. Proof that there is no discrimation here. It may however get moved at some point if it remains near the top of the forum for a long period, but is actually only involving and of interest to a handful of members.

I am sure you will agree and understand that a site like this must have focus. That focus in our opinion must be provided by the site owners - it cannot be democratic - that way, I promise you would quickly lie choas. We believe it is our determination to do so that has helped to maintain the wonderful atmosphere and high standards that generally prevail here.







<Added>

I also wanted to mention that there were no complaints from other members that led to this action - it was purely editorial on the part of the WriteWords admin team.

In regard to the monthly notification and explanation suggestion that is entirely acceptable, but again if that thread started to dominate for too long we might consider moving it again.

David you really had me until this;

it cannot be democratic

.

OK. So at least we know that now. It’s clear to me that we, the members of this site, need guidelines.

Perhaps, having worked for fifteen years as a member of a very successful workers co-operative, I’m making assumptions that cannot be met on this site. I am not familiar with organisations that do not feel comfortable with – as I see it – democratic discussion. And I don’t believe I’m alone on that.

So… you’ll have to help us out here… I don’t understand how organisations can exist for the benefit of its members without being democratic…

Dee

Continuing the editor analogy, a newspaper is not democratic in that whilst it obviously would be foolish to ignore the views of its readers, it does not ask their permission on mass for every change to its layout or style of content.

To continue the analogy... on a daily basis we can decide whether or not to buy the newspaper. We don't have that option on WW so I really do think we should be allowed the option to discuss this.

Can't you RLGers create an RLG Writer's Group inside writewords? It would be more appropriate, and not require the littering of the forum with threads to bring attention to it.

If this has been suggested before and had the iron hammer of disapproval pounded upon it, I apologise.

To continue the analogy... on a daily basis we can decide whether or not to buy the newspaper. We don't have that option on WW so I really do think we should be allowed the option to discuss this.

I have to agree with David on this one Dee, and your analogy is actually floored in the sense that, just like you can choose to buy or not buy a newspaper, you also can choose whether to visit WW or not, and by being a member and or subscriber to the site you choose to adhere to it's administrative decisions and site rules.

I run a huge community site like David's, with over 3000 members, and I have and continue to run into this situation frequently, trust me, I think we all like the smooth way things are run here! And some times it is for the best to leave editorial decisions for the editors.

[humour]Also true democracy, in it's meaning is yet to be proven or have had yet to work *wink*[/humour]