ClubHombre has long provided a message board environment with little to no moderation. This policy has been an intentional one. Our hope was to provide an environment that was as close to a "free-speech" environment as possible, where posters could post without concerning themselves regarding the "rules of posting". A policy such as this is rare on popular discussion boards. With few exceptions, popular message boards enforce strict guidelines regarding what is considered "flaming" and will not allow flames nor perpetually flaming members to remain on their sites.

To clarify, we must make a distinction between arguing different points and flaming. Practically any viewpoint on any topic can be presented without flaming. When these viewpoints are peppered with attacks on a person or people that believe a certain way, it often meets the definition of flaming. A common, simple guideline to follow is "Attack the idea, not the person".

Unfortunately, our permissiveness in what we allow posted is occasionally abused. While we've long been concerned about the effectiveness of our moderation policy, we've delayed discussion and action on it while we work on content and development on the ClubHombre site. However, enough people appear to be concerned about it to prioritize a policy change.

From our viewpoint, here are the pros and cons of our current policy:

Pros:
* Members can post more freely here than most other message boards
* Some members find the occasional flame war entertaining

Cons:
* Flaming discourages some people from posting
* Flame wars distract us from the purpose of the ClubHombre site
* Competitors or fake personas may attempt to damage the site by abusing the policy

Any other thoughts on pros or cons of our current policy?

If we decide to enforce a policy on flaming, another issue will be the penalty for flaming. A warning from a moderator is standard on most sites. After that, a persistent flamer may lose the ability to post (temporary at first, permanent if excessive). Some sites will bypass this step completely and move strictly to the account removal of a member.

What are your thoughts? Does our current moderation policy increase or decrease your enjoyment of the ClubHombre site?

We will also be putting up a poll to gauge general feelings on this issue. We will make an additional announcement when the poll is up.

We would really appreciate some of your thoughts on the matter. If you do not want to post them here, please write us at support@clubhombre.com.

P.S. Please keep this discussion "flame-free".

Hombre:

Personally, I very much appreciate that this forum is moderation free. By definiton, we're all adults. If someone posts something we feel offensive, we're all "grown up" enough to just get over it, ignore it, move on, or whatever. Besides, the occasional flame outburst is fun... ;-)

BS

Thanks for your opinion, Badseed. We've shared a similar viewpoint in the past, but the topic gets brought up to us occasionally and it's something we feel we need to address.

Do you feel there should be a threshold regarding how much one can flame? We certainly don't want to provide a forum in which people abuse our policy where all they do is flame and discourage others from posting.

Or do you feel the issue needs to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, with no change in the policy in general?

If at all possible, we would like to avoid a case-by-case analysis, but if enough people feel that way, that's what we'll do.

One of our main concerns is that the answers here and the opinions we obtain through polling will be a very tiny sample of the true population that visits the CH site daily, we will have to approximate what the general consensus is.

Again, we strongly encourage arguments on both sides of the issue, publicly here or privately through email.

Thanks!

Personally, I'm sick and tired of Badseed's newbie ass spouting off on inane topics such as "How much does a burger cost in Meia Pataca", "Do I have to wear underwear underneath my robe at 4x4," or my personal favorite "How many virgins are there in Help Disco?"

I would strongly support censoring all his posts, and possibly, banishment from the Kingdom of Mongerlandia

Thanks for the example, Bomboa.

Just to make sure that no one misses it (which happens often on discussion boards where you cannot hear vocal inflections or see facial expressions), Bomboa is being sarcastic. (Both Bomboa and Badseed are Brazil veterans)

But since this is a serious subject and will likely result in a policy change, please try to avoid sarcasm in this thread and be more explicit in support or opposition to a change in the moderation policy.

Badseed. You must be saying something of value.

OH

Otrohombre, good point on bringing up the subject of determining the "value" of posts.

Making judgement calls on the value of posters or posts would be taking the route of the case-by-case analysis path which we hope to avoid.

It should certainly be easy to imagine, if one cannot already view, posts that contain valid points and arguments while at the same time be polluted with insults and attacks on other members.

Should we permit attacks on other members when the message also contains useful info or points? How about attacks on members posting trip reports, content, and photos? Does "who" being attacked make a difference?

These kinds of questions make the administration of a discussion site with thousands of members more complex than most people imagine.

Personally, I'm fine with it just the way it has been. I just skip over posts by people who I find a collosal waste of time. And avoid threads that I don't have an interest in. It's a lot like TV or Radio. If I don't like it...I turn it off.

The vast majority of this board is worthwhile....thanks for running it.

Sterling

Busting someones balls is one thing. Posters, including myself, constantly raz Milkman, Ben, MasterBates, Sampson, etc because they've been on the boards for a while, they contribute a lot of content and, whether you've met them in person or not, you get to "know" them a little bit and it's easier to know what is acceptable or not acceptable. These guys and others have known senses of humor as well. Basically, the ribbing is just good fun and most people can tell that.

A second area that is somewhat acceptable are the "feuds" that have been ongoing for a long time. Some have evolved into jokes of their creation (such as Dogster/Superman) while others at least keep it on a personal one-to-one level (Ahora007 and Kendricks). Basically, if two posters are consistantly flaming one another and otherwise not bugging anyone, I can live with it, if they can.

One key point here - the poster doing the ball busting must also be known. If Ben wants to raz me, I have no problems with it since I vaguely know him through posts and chats. However, if some new poster with a new handle starts firing away, it will generally be considered a pure flame by just about anyone. It's common sense.

What is clearly not acceptable is the constant, wide-pattern flamer. A poster who attacks the writer and not the writing. In addition, a poster who contibutes no trip reports, provides no useful information on the threads and basically has no positive benefit to the "community" other than to occasionally amuse other members who enjoy reading flames but insists on slamming others is a real bad sign.

Hombre is 100% right when he says that flaming causes posters to have second thoughts about submitting a trip report or posting in the chats and discuss. This is true just about anywhere and at any time but is especially true now. Several long-time, valuable members of the board have been forced to go silent over the past few months due to other members, almost always lurkers, using posts to harm them. There is a second wave of members who have gone near-silent just to avoid a chance of harm. While flamers are generally harmless in person, it is enough concern that some wacko on the board will get pissed, print out pics and reports, walk into a bar or terma or whatever and lay it out to some girl, just for spite.

Finally, this is, for the most part, a paid-board. We all pay our $49.99 a year or whatever but many of us also "pay" in time - time spent writing trip reports, editing pics, etc. While it is fun to do it's not something I would do if it wasn't for the board. If all you get is a flame, or just the chance of a flame, then why post? This board exists primarily as an information exchange and if people start posting useful information, then the board no longer has much value.

I would strongly favor continuation of the no moderation policy unless someone gets really viscious, rascist , or threatening in his posts. If you are not strong enough to tolerate a simple flame then you should not be posting here in the first p[lace. Why would I want to know the opinion of someone who runs to Momma or in this case Hombre complaining " someone is calling me names " !! Better such a milktoast -- sorry Milkman -- go back to a safe protected environment. I do not think we should all bend to please a few members who feel bullied. IMHO it is generally deserved anyway !!

One vote for the Status Quo

(Message edited by khun_mor on August 24, 2003)

I thought that you had it fine the way it is now. Have been with you for a bit and the growth of this site still amazes me. seems like you would not have had the growth if people were unhappy. so i feel the same way as stirling. catocony seems to cover all aspects of the subject.
i did belong to the tsm board before i came here. I remember how bad it was at one time to post on that board. if you tried to post a report, you would have ten people bitching about one thing or another concering your report. the english was not proper, the style was bad, etc.
the whole idea is info. if a person feels like he will have his teeth kicked down his throat, why even try.
So my thought would be that you want people to post and need to protect people who post reports.
but i have heard from some people that they think that you (hombre) have been a bit quick to throw some people off the board.
the idea that it is ok to disagree with ideas but not ok to attack a person seems like the best way to do it. but i have read some "flame wars" in the mexican section that i found to be great fun to read. so having safe areas to post in and other areas where anything goes could allow both.
or perhaps you could allow members to complain about flamers that they think have gone too far. but you could only complain about someone who has flamed you. so for example if stirling and catocony are flaming each other. i could not complain about that. but if catocony tore me up for a report then i could fle a complaint about him. so if someone received say 3 complaints from 3 different members then they would be kicked off. this way the members themselves would be deciding what is acceptable behavior on the board.
anyway i think that you have done a super job here and i am proud to be a member.

Hombre, given that this site is a business, every decision on your rules has some type of impact on the bottom line. I think Catocony brings up some very good points. There is a big difference between regular contributors and people who "know" each other having disagreements as opposed to a pattern flamer who takes a shotgun approach to the board, and never contributes anything. We can all see who the mongerers are who: post trip reports, post pictures, post updates in discus, give advice, and make other contributions. And we can all see who the mongerers are who do none of this but attack those who do take the time to contribute.

The foundation of this site is the knowledge that's being posted. That's why most of us are here. You want to encourage an environment where people want to post and will continue to post. You also want this site to grow, like any business. Thus you want an environment that encourages new people to post as well.

The cons you detailed in your original posting are very real, and to be honest, there have been times when I have wondered whether some handles were held by people who were intentionally trying to disrupt your business. I now see I'm not the only person who has had that observation.

With this in mind, I'd say fine tune your policy. Try to keep your freedom of speech mode as much as possible, within context. Context again would mean between regulars who contribute and who somewhat know each other. At the same time, also keep an eye for patterns with certain mongerers who don't make contributions and quickly gain reputations for flaming. This really shouldn't be too hard to implement. I believe these people become quite evident over time. Then you can take action as you see fit in order to protect your business.

I'd bet the primary reason why many other boards had to implement their no flame policies was that they needed to keep an eye on the bottom line. Given the fact that you felt compelled to establish this thread in the first place tells me that a number of your paying members have expressed concerns to you about this matter. That means it may be time to tighten up the policy a tad.

M

Hombre:

As much as I hate flames, I must say that CH's current policy is working. Perhaps because it is a paid site, (1) the posters by and large are on the level, and (2) people have something to lose if they totally misbehave (it costs to just reappear with a new handle). The result is a culture of civility. As long as it ain't broke, I wouldn't fix it.

If a minimal policy were to be adopted, I would restrict it to:

1. New posters who start out flaming. Some may not be used to the CH culture, and are just having fun based on the rules of other free boards they are used to. For those, I'd suggest a gentle e-mail telling them that this is not the way things are done at CH.

2. Ugly flame wars that people will alert you to. Perhaps you can delete the posts without further ado. It may be a delicate thing to do without being viewed as taking sides, though.

The whole problem with moderation is that assigning "value" to a post is, in the end, totally subjective anyway. So as long as it's subjective, may as well stay with things as they are... When a person gets above a purely subjective pain-in-the-ass threshold, Hombre kicks them off the board or at least moves the entire conversation to a seperate thread that people can read, contribute to, or ignore as they see fit (the latest round of "discussion" on Rio guides being an example). Sabio has it right - we all know who the idiots are, when they step over the line, yank heir chain or kick them off. In the meantime relax, it's just bits and bytes.

BS

BTW, Bomboa... virgins at Help Disco? Not if I can help it! and kiss my newbie ass, veado! ;-)

(Message edited by badseed on August 24, 2003)

Hombre:

While this site isn't moderated, I find the info and level of civility higher than on most. Plus, what's wrong with ignoring the idiots who get off on crappin' on others (oops, did i just flame there??)? I like what you did on the recent brasil report...moving all the annoying gude vs. no guide b/s to a new thread. As long as you remain a benevolent dictator, I'll be here.

I am almost always opposed to any type of moderation. I haven't personally noticed anything going on here that has risen to the level of being disruptive but maybe I missed something. In general I have been on the Internet a very long time and am very thick skinned so maybe what seems like nothing to me is seen as disruptive by some others definition. I would vote against moderation but here is how I would handle genuinely disruptive, off topic posts that are clearly way over the line. Create a forum where they will be welcomed. Set like a 3 month expiration on this forum. Move the offending post to this forum where they are still available to anyone interested therefore you have not censored anyone. If something is moved, leave a message indicating where it has been moved so that anyone really interested can still read it. After 3 months or so expire it, so trivial flame wars do not clog your board forever. If you implemented a policy such as this it should only be applied in extreme circumstances. That is my opinion.

If moderation were strict on this board, I would have been booted several years ago and imagine how many trip reports you fellas would have missed...This board is the best site on the internet for encompassing the entire world of our hobby. I could care less about topics that are unrelated to our hobby but realize some people use this board as a form of catharsis for sharing their political views.

I wholeheartedly agree with Catocony and Khun Mor. I also agree with Murasaki and Sancho. Even Seaman and Sabio.

We are big boys. I don't think too much censoring is good. On another board where there was censoring on flames it actually drove the regulars away. Some guys like me or Kendricks or even Sancho could care less if someone attacks us - you want a piece of me? Whereas others would cry foul. Many guys actually enjoy reading a good flame war, but it would be un PC to email Hombre and say he enjoys the flame war going on. A few guys would complain, of course. My biggest flame war was with my bitch Kidcisco, and since he is the biggest flamer on the board I had no problem giving him a load of mine.

What is a flame? If someone says A is true and someone else say, no, B is true. Is that a flame or just correcting some facts? If one person thinks this way and another that way, shouldn't they be allowed to argue it out? When someone goes over the top with mother^%$ker punk *&^ clown should that be allowed? Why not? it's entertaining. As long as it doesn't cross the line. And we can always stop it. And there are always the good natured flames like Ben robbing the cradle or Milky shacking up with a TV that's as just funny as Loony Tunes.

In real life many of us are being screwed by chicas, by traffic courts, by ex-wives, what's a little flame?

-DJ

As a part-time monger not frequenting either SE Asia, Latin or South America it is difficult for me to get a feel for when old monger pals joke with each other, are using sarcasm or irony. S&I - saying one thing but meaning something else, usually the opposite - can be identified somewhat more easily in a face-to-face situation but on a message board they are simply confusing, if not - worse - taken at face value.

Which leads me to my second point, the question of what CH is. Is it a "neutral" information message board or is a club for the mongering veterans who know each other? Since I'm not personally aquainted with any of the old hands here I prefer this to be a "neutral" information message board to avoid confusion.

Maybe there could be a thread called "Veteran mongers razzing&flaming club" where us "outsiders" could be sure that anything written there cannot be safely taken att face value?

I'm not a fan of censoring, more of moderating but people here point out that they are grown-ups and my point is that as such they should be able to understand that a straightforward commentary is better for CH in the long run. I mean, if I'm not sure that contributors mean what they say it will ultimately lead to my and other mongers' coming to the conclusion that this site contains too much of things-other-than-fact which will decrease our enjoyment of the site after which we will leave. Simple as that.

So, if you grown-ups actually are grown-ups you will know exactly what you can say and what you should avoid.

There is a lot of kidding that goes on here, but the only outrageous flameing on this whole board comes from KidCisco. As as previously mentioned, I have never, I mean never, seen one post from him that had any contribution to this board. The only thing this person seems to be able to do is to rag on others.

We should consider the source.

OH

I feel Catocony should be removed from this board until he starts acting nice. Other than that unbias opinion,

I think you have done an excellent job of only stepping in when things got threating or illegal.

I generally agree that less moderation is better than more (aside from the virtue of excessive mongering). As a long-time lurker, who lives vicariously through the steller trip reports of others, I am a little concerned over a policy that would distinguish between those who post based on their history, and lurkers like me, who post infrequently. That is, liberal contributors should not be given a license to flame based on their invaluable prior posts. Flaming is flaming, regardless of whether the poster has been to Cuba, Brazil, A/C and LOS all in the past month, and has reported in minute detail every detail, or is a lurker who has wet dreams fantasizing about living the Dolce Vita with Ben, DG or Porker. Still, I agree with the general tenor of the thread: On the whole, those who post do so in the spirit of fun and espirit de corps that distinguishes CH. As much as Hombre would like the predictability of a policy, implementing one, and then administering it, would do more harm to the character of the board than a policy would do to preserve it. Sermon over.

I have to agree with Dick Johnson on this one. Anyone who gets emotionally traumatized over getting flamed on an internet board is a big sloppy pussy.

I think that flame wars are entertaining, and that some ideas can only be properly expressed in "socially unacceptable" ways. For example, the phrase "a big sloppy pussy" carries with it a connotation that cannot be properly expressed with less colorful words.

Besides, since I think that anyone who disagrees with me is an asshole anyway, why the hell should I care what they think about me personally?

I'm keeping this topic as clean and on-topic as possible. Posts that have strayed too far have been moved to:
-Off-Topic-: -Entertainment: Outside: Off-Topic Moderation Policy Discussion

Skipping over posts that you don't like to read
I'll use an example for this one. Let's say I was a competitor or someone else whose interests were contrary to that of the ClubHombre community. I might enter the site as a flamer and post in a manner that drew a lot of attention to my posts. I could say just to skip over my posts, but I know that some people will be unable, so I'm able to turn informative threads into back and forth flaming. Some people will find it amusing, some will ignore it, some will say screw it and decide it's not worth it.

ClubHombre is moderated
ClubHombre is a moderated site, but we are minimally moderated. We absolutely will not allow queries or specifics posted on minors. The one related topic we reluctantly allow is the discussion of the law itself. We also do not allow discussion of activites that are illegal in the U.S. Other discussion that is not allowed are threats and continual harrassment, but since these are more subjective, they are more difficult for us to monitor and enforce. What we are trying to establish now is if there should be a clear guideline or threshold of flaming that should not be permitted.

Strict Enforcement
I don't think anyone should be concerned about heavy censorship and moderation here, but we certainly want to avoid the perception that we are completely unmoderated and give those with interests in conflict with ClubHombre the opening to disrupt and harm the growth of our site and the sharing of information.

Long Term Interests
Penitent brings up an excellent point about the long term interests of ClubHombre and the perspective of a poster who is not as familiar with all the others. While the flaming may be fun for those that have been around and those that "know" each other, what kind of effect do flame wars have on people new to the ClubHombre site looking for information? Is there a conflict between the short-term interests of having funny and exciting flame-wars and the long-term interests of developing a larger, more varied, and more thorough base of posters and reporters?

TripReport Suggestion
I had considered and it was also privately suggested that I apply more strict guidelines to the TripReport section only. If this is done, that wouldn't mean people couldn't disagree, but any personal insults would be deleted or moved out of the thread. Trip Reports, unlike most other message sections, tend to be more personal (e.g. HombreX's report, HombreY's report) and therefore should be safe from "hijacking" from someone whose only interest was to flame.

This day has been hectic, I'll try to post more on the subject later and get the poll together.

Hombre, I'm wondering why you have chosen now to bring all of this up? This board has its ups and downs like all others but seems to have survived some of the worse excessives that have destroyed others. As has been pointed out most of us get a feeling over time for individual posters and adjust our willingness to follow them, respond to them, or just ignore them. It's been a while since I have seen anyone with multiple handles doing their best to start a fight.

To me the strength of CH has always been in the detailed reports and information available on a number of places. As I write this with one hand I am also using your Links page to check out various escorts sites in BA and Rio. Along with the great information you are pretty much guaranteed to have a good time following the travels of many here who obviously spend time and thought in describing what they are experiencing.

If someone wants a sanitized wimpy willy version of 14 days across Europe or where ever they can watch Rick Whatshisname on PBS or read National Geographic. This site is about paying for sex in foreign countries and having a good time in most everything you do. For something that perfectly normal men have been doing for hundreds of years it is pretty sad that you can find virtually nothing of informational value in our society outside of sites like this on the Internet. If that means putting up with a few jerks who never got over being on the debating team in college then so be it.

Talking about travel and sex, years ago regular guide books used to have a prostitution section and/or red light district info. Now they've taken those parts out.

-DJ

Tight_fit you don't get it. This isn't about turning CH into The National Geographic, it's about keeping the postings informative (which, for a site of this nature, also means entertaining). This, which I see as one of the few really long-term goals of CH, is disturbed by people either not telling things as they are (sarcasm and irony may be just as effective in confusing members such as me as making up reports) or getting into disputes (which may be funny to the participants but which leads me to wonder about what the board is all about and about the maturity of some of its members).

Let's face it: we don't read our daily newspaper and expect to become confused by less-than-factual news coverage, do we? Certain parts of the paper are reserved for personal views but the rest is mostly factual or ads.

I actually feel pretty silly writing these obvious things, it's not as if you have to be a rocket scientist to get it!

Penitent:

Admitedly, I follow the Brazil and Cuba discussions more than anything else here, BUT... so far any outright bullshit/misinformation/distoritons have been quickly corrected by other hombres. So I don't really see any problems with readers getting confused by wrong info, if nothing else, the "differing points of view" (to be charitable) have meant that more people have spoken up and given valuable information. And this is not a newspaper, it's a DISCUSSION forum, so the format is a bit different.

As for the disputes themselves (all the wasted typing when the flame wars occur), yeah they can be annoying, but Hombre has been pretty good about moving these disputes off to seperate threads (a brilliant solution). He could delete these threads, "heavy moderation" - Jackson's moderation actions over at WSG being a prime example, check out the Rio Trip reports thread over there. But this would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater - by making content decisions Hombre could potentially lose good content. Besides, it's annoying as hell - going back to WSG as an example, Jackson has filters to **** out profanity... you can't type "whore" "bitch" "fuck" over there... and it' ssupposed to be an adult board!!! and WSG even has filters to block out the name "clubhombre.com" on the occasions that it comes up. Do we want that here? Of course, there is still moderation on this board, but it's commonsense - discussing prostitution in the USA or with minors would, eventually, get this board shut down.

In practical terms, lets take our buddy KidCisco as an example (hope I don't get my post kicked to another thread). Yes, he's annoyed the hell out of some hombres, and yes he abuses the hell out of English grammar, emiticons, and Miss Daisy's Rules of Etiquite. In my eyes, his biggest sin is that he rambles ON and ON and ON, but then again, so do I! ;-) And he's very quick to call people idiots.... but if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. OK,let's face it, he's a pain in the ass. But are his FACTS wrong? He's certainly got something to say (Don't be a sucker, don't believe the whores or touts in Rio for one instant, and if you want to stay %100 healthy then don't suck pro-girl face or pussy) and it's valuable info. So do you want to throw out that info (hey maybe his unique way of saying things will get thru to some hombres) just because KC can be a real ass? Hell, *I* can be a real ass, and that's just when I'm sober. Who's going to judge? This is the old argument "I disagree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it". (And I'm no KC fan, personally I think he's lying his ass off about being a SEAL, although he probably was a swabbie, so what the hell... and continuing THIS part of the discussion would certainly be the start of a flame war).

So I stick by my "vote" of leave the board moderation policy as it is. Let members post freely (except for whatever endangers the board), Hombre separates extraneous off-topic discussions off to other threads, and other hombre members are man enough to tell guys that get out of line to pipe down (that's known as a self-moderating board).

BS

Badseed
Very eloquently said !
I could not agree more.
It ain't broke . Why are we trying to fix it ???

Penitent, no one said this site needs to be turned into a mongering National Geographic. Nor do most people believe that the "facts" in a newpaper are much more than a tepid version of what's on the editorial page. Just like a newspaper or major TV network this site has a personality that comes from the people who post here and what they talk about. Over time everyone's bias becomes apparent along with the perceived value of what they share. And it is the variety of opinions and individual quirks that make it all interesting.

I think the current policy is fine.

Anyway, Badseed, on wsg, where I used to be pretty active, the rules are odd IMHO. You can't type fuck, whore etc but anyone without a membership incl. kids can look at picks of whores with their legs spread open!

-DJ

I vote for leave it as is. If anyone or a group) gets REALLY out of line, then it might be time to revisit the issue! I love the flow, sarcasm, etc, and have the signal to noise ratio is very high. As an occasional hobbyest (sp), due to the distance I live from our favorite parts of the world, I find a read of the board always brings a grin. Also, I have found a lot of support from various members working through a few things that I am thinking about, and have enjoyed sharing thoughts about characters and chicas we have known in common. I would really hate to see that go down the tubes I sure don't see it as broke!


Sandy

These flame wars are like a forest fire. They can get big and nasty, but eventually run out of fuel and burn themselves out (at least until the next one). Even so, they can still be fairly informative (if not entertaining) from the contributions of the members that apply reason to the particular issue at hand. I do think that giving the issue it's own thread is a good idea in order to isolate it from the rest of the board and you have done a good job at that. This is a great website, please don't change it.

As the flamee that got this started I must wade into the pool. After reading part of KC´s attack on my sexual preferences and asserations of my lack of intelligence I was more than pleased to see the flaming parts moved to another area. I had considered ending my posts about Rio, but with the move of the flames I have continued. I am not thin skinned, just not into reading poorly written personal abuse.
I agree that for the most part this boad is not broken and does not need fixing. I do appreciate the moderator moving very offensive personal berating to a separate area.
Bottom line, I will continue to post and continue to read, but skipping over the known flamers.

Tight Fit:
Regarding "why now", the flaming issue is something we've long considered to be a potential problem. You say, "...most of us get a feeling over time...", but the most of us reflects the opinion of a subset (most active posters) of the whole (the whole CH community). While the subset may enjoy the brawling, we have to consider the interests of our entire membership. In the meantime, we are potentially losing contributors and customers.

You are correct that CH strength is in detailed reports and information. Does flaming add to or detract from this strength? That's the questions we've been trying to determine.

The issue at hand is not the discussion of controversial issues, what we're concerned about is people that start to get personal where members start being called names and insults are hurled about. Lively debate can occur without the need for personal attacks.

Can I agree with both Penitent and Badseed?
Some people will not post in flame environments. Do we only want reports from people that will stick around after being flamed or do we want reports from all types of members? Again, we're not talking about blocking controversial subjects, we're talking about letting members call other members names and personally insult them.

Tight Fit said "And it is the variety of opinions and individual quirks that make it all interesting."
What we want is a variety of opinions, a wide variety. That's what we see as a potential problem. If the perception is built that there is excessive flaming on CH, even if it is an incorrect perception, than we risk losing the opinions of those that are unwilling to read, deal with, or endure the flaming.

Sandy and Myxlplyx
Today it has gotten out of line and there is new fuel to the fire, but this has taken place outside of CH. This brings me to a point I forget to consider earlier.

Potential for escalation
Many of us recognize that what is written on here are just words, thoughts, and ideas. However, as flaming continues, some will start to take it more seriously. In the most serious cases, this could lead to harassment and people going after one another outside of CH. This is an even greater risk on a site of this nature, where most of us choose to keep our involvement in this lifestyle a secret to the general public.

The privacy and personal lives of our members need to stay private and personal. We do not want to inhibit controversial discussion, but we do not want flaming on CH to be a stepping stone for members harassing one another.

My two cents -- Just do what you want; there's no right answer. There's no real mandate to keep the forum completely open or, conversely, to tidy it up for newcomers. Perhaps this is best treated as a business decision, pure and simple.

Do we really need a policy from you? Perhaps it is better if you simply make transparent your benign dictator status. As in, "What I say goes, and I don't like to censor posts or posters unless I absolutely feel I have to. If I become concerned about the tone of your posts, I may remove them or give you a warning..." Set the tone. When things get too rough, simply remove cancerous posts and posters. Make it clear that you'll simply do what you must at any given moment to optimize the quality and quantity of content at your site.

If I'm not mistaken, the primary service provided here is entertainment, even more than detailed information. I'll bet that lots of people here don't participate in the hobby much and are here for the vicarious kick. I'm guessing that Club Hombre succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a soap opera. A polite site, devoid of at least a few tasty personal attacks, is more likely to be a boring site.


Yours in whoring,
Dogster

P.S. Superman is still a dick

Whatever you decide is most likely fine with me, as long as Milky remains everyone's favorite kicking guy - er, boy. But, since he seems to fill that capacity for you as well, I expect that would continue.

-- avisar, who does find most of Milky's posts either amusing or enlightening.

Hombre, after reading your last comments I guess I have to agree with you. I can see where a new member might easily feel intimidated to post something for fear of being ripped to pieces. I watched that happen on TSM and that was one of the reasons why I eventually left the site. And if harrassment is taking place off the site then it really becomes a much larger issue. Too bad some people feel that serious about what is written.

Again, as most everyone has stated, you need to make the decisions that work best for you. I'm sure most of us will stay along for the ride.

Hombre:

I tend to agree with Dogster - you own the board, if someone annoys you, delete their post or them. Why set a policy? Benevolent dicatorship is fine.

BS

I do see a difference in an obvious troll flaming others repeatedly on the same subject, as opposed to heated debate/opinion/argument type posts flaming and kidding around amongst members of a forum. A troll is deliberately trying to cause an emotional response and disrupt the intended purpose of the forum sucking in members right and left and causing an abrupt end to rational discussion.

I think you would be wise to weed out trolls as they show up here because these types only want to stir things up and contribute nothing in the end, except hard feelings and lost memebers. Trolls and Internet kooks are on many public forums, they all have an agenda and it stinks.

How many times someone needs to voice the same tired shrill opinion in such an inflammatory and insulting manner until they make troll status is for you to decide of course. Making policy to try to manage them into giving up their noisy obsessions is like trying to teach turtles to fly. Jerry

There used to be a guy on this site named Tmoney, until maybe a year ago. He constantly posted misogynistic things, frequently venting his hatred of women for all to hear. The consensus at this site seemed to be that “he’s been here a long time; he’s actually OK when you meet him” (though others privately painted a considerably darker picture). Most people at this site didn’t even seem to notice his long trail of venom regarding women and working girls in particular. When a well-known Mexican working girl was murdered, he said she DESERVED to die, and insulted anyone who felt sorry for her, including her ex-boyfriend. After posting his initial comments, he relentlessly escalated his sickening presence at this site with additional hateful posts.

I, along with some other people, attacked him (verbally), as well as his ideas. We weren’t particularly kind to the apologists, either. Some incredibly wimpy and brain-dead people just wanted to tidy everything up and pretend that the long trail of bizarre and hateful ideas meant nothing. As in, “just get back to talking about the girls; this is an informational site; just ignore what these guys say if you don’t like it; this guy is a vet at this site so let it slide.” It was a long battle, and that dude was finally booted from the site for making threats, not personal insults, as I recall.

I think it is great that Tmoney and other misogynists have a forum here. This hobby of ours attracts some truly distorted and unpleasant people, and knowing that they are out there is indeed educational and informative. I think it is great that I and others had the opportunity to attack that guy in print. And more importantly, I think it is great that we were able to blast the large numbers of losers who were too chicken, stupid to gutless to take a stand. The ones that really deserved what they got were the appeasers who believed that sweeping things under the rug was somehow the appropriate moral high ground. We’re supposed to be nice to these fucking morons?

Flame wars are not a problem, in general. What IS a problem is the fact that there are some sick people out there and there’s no shortage of pathetically-polite sheep out there who will look the other way at all costs. As a website and a society, we are truly fucked when the Neville Chamberlains of the world win and the Winston Churchills of the world are silenced.

If you, dear reader, are one of the people who wants everything to be tidy, polite, and “informational,” then fuck you. Your aggressive spinelessness and simple-mindedness are costing our hobby and our country dearly.

Go back to wherever you came from.

Dogster, so tell me. The "pathetically-polite sheep out there who will look the other way at all costs" need to be forced to confront the "some truly distorted and unpleasant people" and kick their fucking butts to get rid of them while also strenghtening their own wimpie bankbones. Right? And the "large numbers of losers who were too chicken, stupid to gutless to take a stand" need to either get THEIR act in gear or they can leave with the first group of trouble makers? Right? So who's left at the party? Just tough ass dudes who know how deal with trouble makers from both the Dark and the Light Side. Right?

It's a very thin and sharp line that the truely chosen must walk as they are even vigilant against intrusions from the violent brain dead zombies on one side while being equally carefully about the spastic drooling four eyed pencil necked worms from the other. It must be a chore to hold one's own natural inclinations in check and not simply let the two sides meet and destroy each other leaving only the endowed to remain in Mt Olympus.

Dogster:

I get your point, but ultimately, the only remedy for trolls (like BullWinkle, for instance) is to ignore the hell out of them. The idiots crave attention, so don't give them any. Still, it DOES feel good to tell them exactly how much of an idiot they are - not that it does any good....

BS

Et tu, Badseed?

Crave attention, moi? (OK, maybe...)

For a moment I forgot that you were a self-avowed, card-carrying lit crit major. This means that in your formative years you were programmed to deconstruct any and all creative (and non-fictional) contributions.

Thus, based on your hard wiring, it is only natural for you to informally appoint yourself Club Hombre quality control specialist, dishing out self-righteous smack and verbose criticism left and right. As such, I don't take yet another of your personal attacks on me personally. I see the reciprocal banter as all in good fun, especially when bright and vocal yet gullible readers like you fall for the bait -- hook, line and sinker.

And seriously, Hombres, I greatly appreciate the wide scope of topics and tones that has been accepted at Club Hombre. The editorial approach that has been taken up till now has been like a breath of fresh air, and certainly has allowed me to have a great time here, trying all sorts of things (never mind my growing internet addiction). The open-mindedness at this site is a major reason that I submit adult travel material here and rarely anywhere else.

At times I have wondered if some of the content I have submitted here is over the top. At some of those times, I have written Hombre for clarification, and to see if he had any objection to things I have posted.

Maybe that's the makings of a decent policy -- if you aren't sure if your post is appropriate, check with the moderator. The willingness to operate within the spirit and intent of the site probably goes a long way--at least that has been my assumption.

The exact wording and nature of any policy is not really all that important, IMHO, except perhaps to lawyer types. What *IS* important is Hombre's reputation as a fair, open-minded, and vigilant moderator. As far as I can tell from anonymous cyberspace, that reputation is SOLID and well-earned. As long as the owners of this site keep the door open to a wide range of contributions, while making any editorial changes needed to ensure security as well as the quality of content at this site, all should be fine.

I might add that security and safety are big issues here, given recent developments with internet stalkers. Maybe it is not a coincidence that these issues are coming to the forefront here at the same time they are becoming big issues worldwide.

In an attempt to protect our security and safety, we can always clamp down and become more strict. That's an easy thing to do, but maybe not a healthy thing. Do we really want to cave in to people who would threaten this forum? Our way of life? Censoring insulting posts may be necessary, but it comes with a cost of its own.

I am impressed by people who don't cave in when their style of life is challenged. GCL, for instance, just voiced his determination to stick to his guns despite a disconcerting stalking episode. That takes guts and is truly admirable in my book.

In the age of PC vindictiveness, and sexual puritanism, the work of adult travel writers is a bold and noble thing.

Bull_winkle
(laughing his ass off but also serious but also laughing his ass off)

Badseed,

I agree that Bull_Winkle is Moose shitting us most of the time.

No way that bastard and his friends could have as much fun as they claim in Cuba and Rio.

Benstilldyingwithenvy

I heard they called Tmoney TMonkey.


-DJ

Dogster's last two posts are above his usual standards.

BTW, Dion was kicked? Why(tho I could care less)? For a few posts? Unless hombre found out it is KC after all.

If I can't flame Ben & Milky,
I'm just gonna' cry...

Hombre

I noticed that the first message in this thread took place shortly after the thread about Rio guides started. I don't know if this was a causal relationship, but that thread is the worst anything I have seen on any board. It is a perfect example of something that should have been DELETED early on, before so much pure ugliness was allowed to pollute the board.

DJ,

If Dion was kicked (though no one is officially announcing who was recently kicked), it has nothing to do with what the person posted and everything to do with what he did with posts on the CH board.

This unnamed person took material from the board and sent it to family members and employees of another member, identifying that member by name in the process. If only we could execute castration via internet, we might give this person the punishment he deserves.