Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Buzz announcements, site development, new competitions, events and quizzes.

TOPIC: Groups must be open to all

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2287480

  • Vegemite Kid
  • Vegemite Kid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Posts: 986
  • Well said received: 2364
  • Points: 236932
  • Honor Medal 2010
No - I am just not posting about individuals or anything that can be construed as individual or personal.

But like you say, it really doesn't matter if anyone, including you and I, understand or not, since closed groups are no longer allowed.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2287481

  • Vegemite Kid
  • Vegemite Kid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Posts: 986
  • Well said received: 2364
  • Points: 236932
  • Honor Medal 2010

Artangel wrote: When I looked at it, I thought the group was for smokers? I can't believe that Buzz 50 didn't have a No Smoking policy!! :)


Now I'm really not understanding :laugh: :S :silly: :laugh:

Never mind, all water under the bridge. :)
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2287482

  • smilesrus10
  • smilesrus10's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 742
  • Well said received: 415
  • Points: 170352
  • Honor Medal 2010
I just want to clarify this for veg, when I was talking about responsibility.


Part of veg's post in reply to my post:
On the main forum I have no responsibility either or obligation to post, I'm just here for the enjoyment.
Nothing different there.


That is not what I meant....what I meant was, Mike has full responsibility for Buzz...financially and time-consuming, He puts a lot in this site....for all of us to enjoy....sure not every decision will be taken in the good way...but ultimately they are his decisions.

On the other hand....members creating "sub-forums" within a forum, and I am saying "sub-forums" and not groups, because the impression I get in this case is that one particular "group" was formed to have their own threads to discuss (controversial at the beginning, but then I am sure there would have been other kinds of threads, just as you would find on the main forum) with a select "membership"....with "owner" and "moderators".

These kind of "sub-forums" do not have the responsibility that Mike has...in other words, no financial investment, no headaches....etc...just the enjoyment of creating and being in mini forums within a main forum. That is where I think it is wrong.

I don't think I can add anything else on this topic, most of what could be said has been said and the group in question has been closed....so no point really discussing the pros and cons about that group.
The following user(s) said Well Said: Pascalou, Pats
You can't force a person to show you respect but you can refuse to tolerate their disrespect
Last edit: by smilesrus10.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291065

  • WinVA
  • WinVA's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
I just read 13 pages of comments on this thread.

I've often thought the line between serious discussion and argumentative and controvercial was blurred.
As I understand it a new group was formed because some members didn't always feel comfortable posting in the Serious Discussion forum, particularly on topics involving (so called) race. I understand this line of reasoning, the SD forum had become toxic with hate. Some members are racist. Some are openly so, unapologetic in their ideology. Some are aggressive and some are both racist and aggressive. That's not a safe environment.

It makes sense that members who want to feel safe in exchanging ideas might decide to start their own discussion group. It makes sense that members who start a discussion group in order to avoid racists might not welcome racists in their group.

I am becoming less patient with racists when I encounter them.

Bullies also.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291095

  • Pats
  • Pats's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Admin
  • Admin
  • Posts: 11453
  • Well said received: 5671
  • Points: 1008129
  • Honor Medal 2010

WinVA wrote:
It makes sense that members who want to feel safe in exchanging ideas might decide to start their own discussion group. It makes sense that members who start a discussion group in order to avoid racists might not welcome racists in their group. .


The problem here WinVA is when is a 'group' not a 'group'.... in this case it was as Mike himself said, "a 'sub-division' of our main site"
Happy to help.
Last edit: by Pats.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291102

  • sags
  • sags's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor

WinVA wrote: I just read 13 pages of comments on this thread.

I've often thought the line between serious discussion and argumentative and controvercial was blurred.
As I understand it a new group was formed because some members didn't always feel comfortable posting in the Serious Discussion forum, particularly on topics involving (so called) race. I understand this line of reasoning, the SD forum had become toxic with hate. Some members are racist. Some are openly so, unapologetic in their ideology. Some are aggressive and some are both racist and aggressive. That's not a safe environment.

.


Only my own opinion, of course ... but I rather take exception to some members been dubbed racist.

However ... all I will say is this. If any such Group was formed on this forum (who set themselves up in judgement of other members) ... I'd form my own private Group too. :)
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291209

  • CatnipLuvsTiger
  • CatnipLuvsTiger's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
I suppose my response will be an unpopular one, but I feel there should be exceptions to the rules. An example would be a group with a sensitive topic of discussion, such as grief, etc. Personally, I feel that I would be reluctant to join an open forum regarding widows, widower's, or grief in itself because it is such a personal, sensitive matter and it would leave the door open for the busy bodies and scammers to join.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291223

  • Jinty
  • Jinty's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
There is a closed group/section just for those kind of topics Catnip :)
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291327

  • Katieeee
  • Katieeee's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
There's been a lot if talk about derailment as the reason for starting the Private Group. But let's not forget that it was this same group (owner and moderators) who derailed the Racism thread on the main forum.

That was odd to me because instead of retreating to their private group which was already up and running, they chose to derail a thread on the "main" forum.
The topic has been locked.

Groups must be open to all 6 years 3 weeks ago #2291334

  • Pats
  • Pats's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Admin
  • Admin
  • Posts: 11453
  • Well said received: 5671
  • Points: 1008129
  • Honor Medal 2010
I believe that Mike has made it clear more than once on this thread that all Groups are now open and why he made that decision to do so.

I also think that 'raking over old coals' will serve no purpose whatsoever.

I will now lock this thread.

Pats. admin.
Happy to help.
The topic has been locked.
Moderators: mikePatssmilesrus10Pascalou
Time to create page: 0.194 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum

Over 50 forums just for seniors Join Free here!

Buzz50 is one of the few sites where the forums are strictly restricted to those who are over 50 only.

Our senior forums are run by over 50s purely for over 50s to enjoy. If you like serious or even light hearted discussions then this is the place for you.