Amy, thanks!

Ira posted:
>I've probably been the target of more personally abusive posts and name-calling and hate-speech than anybody. <

For good reason, Z.>I've probably been the target of more personally abusive posts and name-calling and hate-speech than anybody. <

For good reason, Z.

And she's also probably been the person who has posted more personally abusive posts and name-calling and hate-speech than anybody (outside of the lounge)

Thanks a lot, Amy. I really appreciate having the old threads reopened. I really enjoy them and find useful ideas for trip planning. Recently I read about a beautiful castle B&B in Wales, Castle Gywdir - the original poster(from four years ago) then gave me more information so I could book it for my upcoming trip. I would never have known about it if I hadn't read about it on Fodor's.

<<AmyD, just between us, I have no intention of reading the rules, no intention of not having multiple screen names so my travels can continue to go undetected>>

Undetected? What a hoot! Hardly worth the effort when every post of yours is totally identifiable no matter what the screen name. The tone and message are instantly recognizable: "I live in Italy, so I know better than you. You don't want to go anywhere anyone's ever heard of. You don't want to take the advice of other travelers to Italy. Rather, you'll just love this remote agriturismo where you and your friends can cavort with live donkeys in the fields. I know this because I live in Italy."

LOL!!!

I don't visit the Forums much anymore--but would like the option to read stuff from back then, as I am planning a trip in the fall, and want to know what is still there, what it was like, has it changed, and opinion on guesthouses, then and now, etc..

Incidentally, I think Political threads, or religious, should be handled very carefully..they usually just incite a long squabble...

Thank you Amy.

Peter_S_Aus wrote:

<< I took some pleasure in writing about 30,000 words about Venice. I'd like to think that some people took pleasure in reading it - I can't be sure. But that's the blogo-sphere.>>

We're going to be visiting Venice, and I, for one, read every word that you wrote...and really appreciated the level of detail of your posts. Thanks for the trip help.

Yes, thank you, Amy, for doing a fine job.

I don't come to the Europe board very often - just to research future trips.

Although some of the old threads may be useful, others may not. When they were closed, they were closed for future comments but not for reading and accessing the information - which is fine by me. I always receive valuable information and advice from previous posts.

Either way - closed or not - is fine by me. It's your website to manage and whatever you do to make it a better travel website is fine by me.

Hi everyone,

I also wanted to clear up point 6 in the revised guidelines “Don’t monopolize the boards.” This guideline is two fold: one, to prevent user from posting under multiple identities and user names, which can be confusing to other members of the community, and two, to allow everyone a chance to be heard.

An Original Poster (OP) shouldn't feel as though they "own" any thread they start. Instead, the OP should be happy to entertain differing viewpoints. By the same token a forum is not a blog---it's a place for two-way conversation, and if one voice begins to drown out all the others we want to be able to gently remind that voice to give others a chance to speak.

I hope that helps to clear things up.

clarasong on Jun 8, 10 at 9:02am
"would like the option to read stuff from back then, as I am planning a trip in the fall, and want to know what is still there"

Clara, they should be opened now - I found one of my old reports that was closed, last reply in 2006, was closed yesterday, opened today.

Does Fodor's now have a way to stop people from posting under multiple names? In the past, I don't think they have been able to prevent it.

Amy: thanks for reversing the trip report decision.

Amy, I don't think any OP thinks they own a thread as suggested by one fodorite but when some divert the subject so they and friends, thinking they are clever turn it into a chat, IMHO.

Thanks for reopening older threads!

ttt

Amy, thank you to Fodors for reversing the decision to close older threads. I've found very useful information in those older threads in the past and look forward to having continued access to them. Deborah

I'm still trying to make sense of rule no. 6, to no avail.
Part 1, don't post under multiple screennames... in more than four years on Fodor's, I've met three people who did, and were/are all easily identifiable, as has been said above, due to their very individual style. If three others did the same without having that individual style and thus without being easily identifiable, what harm exactly are they inflicting on me or the community? It's not that I'm against this part of the rule, I just don't get why it's important enough to include it in any set of rules. (I know, many forums do. I still don't get the point. This is not the passport office. Every identity here is fake and fantasy, since hardly anybody would post under their real names.)
Part 2, don't drown out all the others. Well, a forum on the internet is NOT a TV discussion. Nobody here is able to drown out anybody. If member X posts 114 paragraphs on left-hand turns in Provence, who prevents me or three dozens of other posters to post 117 each on right-hand turns? Space on the internet is unlimited - long or multiple posts would only present a problem if every thread ended automatically after, say, 31000 words, and Peter had used up 30000 of them. As it is, though, whoever feels somebody is "monopolizing" a thread (funny wording) can easily reinstate the equilibrium by posting as much as or more than the "monopolizer".
(Needless to say that "monopolized" threads like Peter's trip report on Venice are what makes a forum like this one invaluable - just to make sure that I'm not being too sarcastic here, cf. point 2 of the rules.)
The OP should NOT feel as though s/he "owns" the thread? The contrary is true! It's indispensable s/he feels that way! That's how well-working forums work: have ten thousand moderators instead of three; make everybody feel responsible for what's going on, particularly on their own (yes!) threads - not with the intent of turning anyone in by flagging threads or posts, but with the simple, democratic and adult intent of saying him/herself what has to be said in his/her opinion. We're all adults here, and we can speak for ourselves and our own convictions and precepts, we don't need any help, but thank you for asking. Fodor's has been working exemplarily well that way (for much of my time here, no moderators or editors could ever be seen anywhere on the forum), and no, I'm not among those cultural pessimists who say it won't any further now - we have to wait and see whether these new rules are really going to be enforced. But let me just say I'd rather not.

Nice post, franco

Old threads are very, very useful to us each year as we begin to plan. I print out the reports and read them aloud as we drive to Mom's once a week (an hour drive). Makes the drive go oh so fast and if there is info we think would work for us I hightlight it. It isn't all just restaurants, it is the activities, the food, the wine, the people that were met, etc. Many have the emails so if you have a burning question you can always try that, if you get no reply, oh well. Forums should be to institute conversation..... I have to agree with Franco, the users can probably police themselves, I would think only vile or vulgar should have to be "edited".

franco: maybe you were not here when there was a poster who signed in with at least 40 different names until we just lost count. The different names would agree with one another as if there were a multitude of posters all agreeing that one travel destination was not ideal, whereas it was just one poster.

This IS interfering with the purposes of Fodors.

Besides which, please explain to me the need to have multiple sign-on names? What is the purpose?

It is understandable to have seriatim sign-on names - one could be off Fodors for awhile and forgotten the old name/password, etc., but where is the need to have simultaneous sign-on names?


<i>"Nobody here is able to drown out anybody."</i>

But a group can.

Or have you forgotten how several posters will take over a thread and start chatting with one another to the exclusion of everyone and, especially, in ignoring the OP's original post?

"<i>...with the simple, democratic and adult intent of saying him/herself what has to be said in his/her opinion..."</i>

If we ALL behaved this way, there wouldn't have been any need for the rules, would there? It's the very fact that a handful of posters do NOT behave like adults nor act democratically to allow others their opinions that we have to have moderators in the first place.


The "new" rules aren't anything new. The editors have to repeatedly say in simpler words what is written in the "Subscriber Agreement". Scroll down to the bottom of the page, you'll find the subscriber agreement there.

Personally I think the forebearance of the editors has been extraordinary, given the lack of attention that some posters have had to the very agreement that they've signed up to.

This is Fodors' website, they set the rules because they want to use it for their travel-related purposes. We're just freeloaders. It would appear that the least we can do is to abide by the subscriber agreement since we're using this website for free.