The management will not do anything to stop the user from running everyone off. I've already had that conversation before about another member spamming the site with questions about trash bags. They used to post several at one time. It's "freedom of speech" even if it is ruining the site and running everyone off. Why do you think I stepped down as a mod?
I wasn't around for your stepping down so didn't know the circumstances. I did join a while back but was one of the "runners" who got tired of constantly seeing Trumpmania on the home page. Now I try to time it so I miss the show but obviously many decided it wasn't worth the effort.
Btw, I was admonished for hurting poor trash bag person's feelings, to the point of almost being given a 48 hour "vacation." I posted about it. Wasn't sure if you'd seen it.
I'm no lawyer, but is there no control over freedom of speech on a privately owned site, especially when that speech is detrimental to the site?
I was on Ask.com for a few years before it closed the Q & A part if the site. Many of us then followed Rooster to Blurtit.com. Rooster was banned from that site by the owner---possibly because Rooster as a moderator cared more for the success of the site then the owner himself did. Blurtit.com then started circling the drain, so I and a few others followed Rooster here.
Sites occasionally suffer from benign neglect on the part of the owner, spam, multiple questions on one topic that bores people after a while, dissatisfaction with the "politeness" shown by some members to others (sorry, real intimacy is rarely polite; and if you insist that 2+2=5, you will not find me receptive to your reasoning in defending your beliefs), and the general quality / "matureness" displayed in the answers. And then of course, some people are more easily offended by the comments of others and the occasional sexual references that are a part of human life, but make some more uncomfortable than they reasonably should be.
I am not sure what motivates people to create a website like this---I certainly enjoy it and use it, but if I had to oversee and maintain it, I would find some other way to enjoy my time.
So, for whatever is in it for me, I will continue to come here (although you may notice I do choose to answer or comment as much as I did a few months ago). And if the "cost" for me is to scroll past spam, and questions that I personally find no interest in, and read impolite replies to what I post---then I consider that to be for me quite an acceptable cost.
If you are lactose intolerant, I would certainly not require you to drink milk if I were serving breakfast at my restaurant (example only)---and I would certainly have alternative drinks available for you to choose from---but I would not eliminate milk as a menu item just because your body cannot handle it.
...If we remove all the spice from life, what will be able to pique our interest?
Thanks for your answer Tom. Clarifies a lot. And I like your milk analogy! Looks like the problem is so much milk is being served that people are drowning in it. Thus seeing other menu items becomes quite difficult. A good chef also knows when to streamline the menu, preferring quality over quantity.
LyricalOne 