Why lock threads?

[Karl1459]

Everyone has an opinion but in the case of AU Admin/Moderators you are misinformed and wrong! Several new members were elevated to positions as Volunteers (ie without pay!) They do a great job overall most members feel! If interested why not PM Alan or the Forum Managers and perhaps offer your services! Of course youre always free to Post your opinions, no one is right 100% of the time including AUers! Happy New Year, keep on Posting!

Amen

To the AU Admin/Moderators, thank you for an often thankless job and maintaining an exceptionally friendly forum enviroment.

 

[GG-1]

Aloha

As a member of the team I prefer we act on a conservative approach and hide and lock messages threads while the group makes its decision. This insures a balanced, fair, board!

 

[Big Iron]

This is a good question to pose to the admins here. With Anthony's move to AGR Insider and the subsequent sale of this site,

This site wasn't sold to anyone. No money changed hands. All that changed is Anthony stepped down as an Administrator and the site was moved to a new host.

Amtrak Unlimited is no longer Anthony's benevolent pet project; now its primary purpose for existence is to make money for its owners off of those netizens who visit it.

No, it's now my pet project; along with the rest of the staff. And the primary purpose of this site isn't to make money for the owners. Yes, unlike Anthony who footed part of the hosting bill out of his own pocket, they don't. And therefore the ads have increased in an attempt to cover those costs. But if I thought for a moment that this site existed solely to make money, I'd pull the plug on it. And I do have that power!

With the change in ownership at AU should probably come a housecleaning of the moderation staff. Long past due to break up its clubbiness and insularity. Best practices are frequently lost on them, while years-long-unfunny missives about Penthouses are allowed to perpetuate at the expense of real, useful information about traveling on Amtrak. And whenever a moderator, especially its most outspoken ones, gets painted into a corner, they abuse their deletion privileges to excise all posts that might otherwise embarrass or humiliate them. The net result becomes moderation without accountability. A race to the bottom in other words.

The most false statement you've made in your long and unfounded missive. There is plenty of accountability. More than once I've reversed the decisions of the moderators here and restored posts that they hid and in the process letting them know that it was wrong. Maybe you should just try paying attention to what goes on here instead of creating these useless posts!

Welcome to the current Amtrak Unlimited.

No, welcome to the Amtrak Unlimited created by Anthony and still operating with his blessing and under my leadership which he cultivated for many years! And even though he's removed himself from the leadership here, we still speak frequently and I know that he would let me know if he thought I was doing a bad job.

A request for information from Alan or anyone who chooses to respond. Regarding the ads and income, I don't know how that works. I assume the advertisers pay for their space but would the AU site earn more income if an ad is actually opened? I don't mind the ads and if opening a few that interest me helps the AU website then happy to oblige. I've learned a great deal from this site which has made my Amtrak experiences that much more pleasant.

I'll agree with others that this is a great site with great Staff. Thanks for everything.

 

[me_little_me]

This is a good question to pose to the admins here. With Anthony's move to AGR Insider and the subsequent sale of this site, the insular group of admins/managers/moderators can and should be subject to increased scrutiny. Amtrak Unlimited is no longer Anthony's benevolent pet project; now its primary purpose for existence is to make money for its owners off of those netizens who visit it. Nothing wrong with that, but every ounce of good (and just as often bad or incorrect) advice proffered here is being trafficked for the profits of AU's new owner.

With the change in ownership at AU should probably come a housecleaning of the moderation staff. Long past due to break up its clubbiness and insularity. Best practices are frequently lost on them, while years-long-unfunny missives about Penthouses are allowed to perpetuate at the expense of real, useful information about traveling on Amtrak. And whenever a moderator, especially its most outspoken ones, gets painted into a corner, they abuse their deletion privileges to excise all posts that might otherwise embarrass or humiliate them. The net result becomes moderation without accountability. A race to the bottom in other words.

Welcome to the current Amtrak Unlimited.

I might take what you have to say as something worth believing if you were not a coward and signed in as a guest. If you are only a guest, then maybe hang around awhile and see the true work that these fine mods do. There is nothing wrong with the correct current moderators. They do what they need to do. They don't do anything without the agreement of the rest of the moderation team. They may lock a post, but then it is reviewed by the whole team. I for one appreciate the mods on this site.

In the past, I have posted things on various sites as a guest in fear of retribution from a site's staff who could (and in some cases, would) kick one off the site if you complained about something they do. I was NOT the person that posted the complaint but I don't blame them for posting anonymously. Personally, I myself feel afraid to publicly criticize moderators' actions as I would hate to be banned.

You may trust them implicitly but others do not. Ease off because someday you may be in the poster's shoes.

 

[SarahZ]

Big Iron: some ads generate revenue if you "click through" from the AU site and purchase a product, and some generate revenue simply by being linked to AU. That's why some of us have AU "white listed" in our Ad-Block program.

 

[Bob Dylan]

As One who Posted in Defense of the Current Admin Staff and Moderators, I'm Not Hesitant to Disagree with Any of Them when I think they are Wrong! And I've Had Posts Deleted and Hidden Many Times, Most of which were Deserved Even though I Seldom Express Strong Personal Opinions About Anything! :lol: No-One should Ever Be Afraid to Post Logged in under their Member Name, it's Anonymous Posts that usually are the Cowards or Trolls MO!! If you want to Visit a Website that's Censored and Control by the In Crowd, Check out trainorders.com YMMV

 

[Big Iron]

Big Iron: some ads generate revenue if you "click through" from the AU site and purchase a product, and some generate revenue simply by being linked to AU. That's why some of us have AU "white listed" in our Ad-Block program.

Many thanks! I'd like to see this site thrive for many years to come.

 

[pennyk]

Big Iron: some ads generate revenue if you "click through" from the AU site and purchase a product, and some generate revenue simply by being linked to AU. That's why some of us have AU "white listed" in our Ad-Block program.

Many thanks! I'd like to see this site thrive for many years to come.

Previously, I think AU earned revenue, every time one clicked on a ad regardless of whether a product is purchased. I am not sure whether that has changed.

 

[leemell]

This is a good question to pose to the admins here. With Anthony's move to AGR Insider and the subsequent sale of this site,

This site wasn't sold to anyone. No money changed hands. All that changed is Anthony stepped down as an Administrator and the site was moved to a new host.

Amtrak Unlimited is no longer Anthony's benevolent pet project; now its primary purpose for existence is to make money for its owners off of those netizens who visit it.

No, it's now my pet project; along with the rest of the staff. And the primary purpose of this site isn't to make money for the owners. Yes, unlike Anthony who footed part of the hosting bill out of his own pocket, they don't. And therefore the ads have increased in an attempt to cover those costs. But if I thought for a moment that this site existed solely to make money, I'd pull the plug on it. And I do have that power!

With the change in ownership at AU should probably come a housecleaning of the moderation staff. Long past due to break up its clubbiness and insularity. Best practices are frequently lost on them, while years-long-unfunny missives about Penthouses are allowed to perpetuate at the expense of real, useful information about traveling on Amtrak. And whenever a moderator, especially its most outspoken ones, gets painted into a corner, they abuse their deletion privileges to excise all posts that might otherwise embarrass or humiliate them. The net result becomes moderation without accountability. A race to the bottom in other words.

The most false statement you've made in your long and unfounded missive. There is plenty of accountability. More than once I've reversed the decisions of the moderators here and restored posts that they hid and in the process letting them know that it was wrong. Maybe you should just try paying attention to what goes on here instead of creating these useless posts!

Welcome to the current Amtrak Unlimited.

No, welcome to the Amtrak Unlimited created by Anthony and still operating with his blessing and under my leadership which he cultivated for many years! And even though he's removed himself from the leadership here, we still speak frequently and I know that he would let me know if he thought I was doing a bad job.

Well said and great job.

 

[the_traveler]

I may be wrong, but as I understand it, what Penny said is how any ad on the Internet works. Just by clicking an ad earns that site income.

 

[AlanB]

In the past, I have posted things on various sites as a guest in fear of retribution from a site's staff who could (and in some cases, would) kick one off the site if you complained about something they do. I was NOT the person that posted the complaint but I don't blame them for posting anonymously. Personally, I myself feel afraid to publicly criticize moderators' actions as I would hate to be banned.

You may trust them implicitly but others do not. Ease off because someday you may be in the poster's shoes.

I frown on public criticism of moderators, as it doesn't help the situation and only leads to undercutting their authority. But in the 13+ years now that I've been on staff, only one member has ever been banned for speaking their mind publicly. And he was banned because he believed that he had the right to say whatever he wanted about anything, including calling Anthony a **** Jew. We don't take kindly to public insults like that.

All that said, I encourage anyone with a problem to contact me via PM or email at any time. I can't promise that you will always be happy with my decision, but I do promise to listen and take your issue seriously. Even if that issue regards me. I will also say that your complaint will be taken far more seriously when sent in private; than if you post it publicly. And as some have seen in the past, I'm far more likely to embarrass the poster in my public response, as again I feel that its best for the peace and community feel of the board not to do this type of thing publicly.

But again, as long as you are being civil, you will never be banned for speaking your mind. Between Anthony & I, I don't think that more than 10 people have ever been banned by either of us from this forum. Frankly I think that the actual number is probably around 5, but alas one of the upgrades destroyed some of those records so I can't tell anymore. Under the current version, there are only 2 members listed as banned and one of those was a spammer who got through our front line defenses. And I probably should have just deleted that account.

I'll warn you, try to work with you to improve the situation, even put you on mod approval if I think it will help, before I resort to banishment.

 

[Ryan]

Is that why my posts take so long to show up?

Seriously, Alan has been very responsive every time we've talked, and if you have a complaint, don't be a coward and abuse the guest posting privileges to complain. At least have the courage to stand behind your words.

 

[SarahZ]

I may be wrong, but as I understand it, what Penny said is how any ad on the Internet works. Just by clicking an ad earns that site income.

Whoops. If that's the case, then I'll start clicking like crazy.

 

[shelzp]

I'm with the group that realizes the moderators do a great (and mostly thankless) job. I appreciate their effort. Sometimes when a subject is locked it is a relief because we do go off subject and it can be frustrating to read certain insulting comments. So I commend and thank them.

 

[buddy559]

I am just curious, no malice meant over here, but what happened to the thread that was revived earlier this afternoon in regards to the electronic cigarettes? It was brought back current, a few people commented on it, and then it was edited and eventually disappeared. I am all for moderation, but why are threads being commented on, and then deleted? That just seems a bit unfair. It seemed to be a productive thread again, then a moderator posted, (to use a phrase that has been used against me as a newbie) a " Snarky" response, and then 30 minutes late said snarky response was removed, but the thread was still posted as current. Then 15 mins later it disappeared. We should all have the liberty to post responses, and then delete threads and edit as seen fit.

 

[buddy559]

?

 

[AlanB]

I am just curious, no malice meant over here, but what happened to the thread that was revived earlier this afternoon in regards to the electronic cigarettes? It was brought back current, a few people commented on it, and then it was edited and eventually disappeared. I am all for moderation, but why are threads being commented on, and then deleted? That just seems a bit unfair. It seemed to be a productive thread again, then a moderator posted, (to use a phrase that has been used against me as a newbie) a " Snarky" response, and then 30 minutes late said snarky response was removed, but the thread was still posted as current. Then 15 mins later it disappeared. We should all have the liberty to post responses, and then delete threads and edit as seen fit.

Buddy,

The topic itself still remains on the forum. But since it was over 1 year old, when the new post was deleted, it dropped back into date order and is now probably 30 or 40 pages back in the history.

As for the post itself, it was removed because it basically said that the guest didn't care what the rules on smoking were he/she was going to violate them no matter what. It wasn't a post that contributed meaningful information to the topic at hand; it was a post that basically said "I'm self-important and I can do what ever I like and the rules don't apply to me because I'm so special."

You don't always have to like the rules, and lively discussion regarding them is welcome be it pro or con. But you do have to obey the rules and advocating to disregard the rules isn't what we need here.

Once the post was deleted, it can take a few minutes for the cache of recent posts to be updated, which is why you saw it still being listed 10 to 15 minutes later. And you do have the liberty to post responses and within the limits set you have the liberty to edit them. And you can always request that a staff member make an edit if your editing time window has expired. Deleting is a moderator/Admin function.

Finally, expecting an answer to your question an hour after you first posted it in the middle of the night is IMHO a bit extreme. Most of us do need to get some sleep at night.

 

[rrdude]

Alan, your explanation specifucally about "following rules" is where it gets a little squishy for me. It's hard for others to see "where you draw the line" on following the rules. Is it "ok" to sneak on more than the technically allowed two carry ones? (Which, IMO is regularly not followed) and to be told by AU posters, "I think you will ok, I've never been hassled..."

But, it seems that the convo related to electronic cigarettes was hidden/deleted and the reason given below:

---------

"....As for the post itself, it was removed because it basically said that the guest didn't care what the rules on smoking were he/she was going to violate them no matter what. It wasn't a post that contributed meaningful information to the topic at hand; it was a post that basically said "I'm self-important and I can do what ever I like and the rules don't apply to me because I'm so special."

You don't always have to like the rules, and lively discussion regarding them is welcome be it pro or con. But you do have to obey the rules and advocating to disregard the rules isn't what we need here......"

---------

I certainly don't mean to nit-pik, but I guess I am. A lot of us "break the rules" on Amtrak, sometimes on a regular basis, sometimes only once in awhile. (Opening windows, using a Red Cap to pre-board, staying longer than should in PPC or SSL, bringing more than 2 carry-ons, drinking personal stock outside of sleeper, taking too long of shower, standing too close to the tracks, walking right past TSA goons, etc., etc.)

I understand censoring a post if someone is advocating how to derail a train, or MAYBE even sneak a free ride, but just talking about electronic cigarettes? Not so much.

Personally, I'd like to find a way to sneak a Go-Pro camera onto the nose of a P42, but am too CHEAP. To take the risk. I also think that Amtrak, or the host RR wud prolly frown upon that, even tho there is probably no specfic law forbidding it.

But does merely POSTING that desire automatically warrent it's deletion?

Don't get me wrong, I totally support what you and the other Mods do. Just playing the Devil's Advocate.......

 

[the_traveler]

This is my own personal opinion only.

Carry-on rule of 2 bags - It should be enforced equally and fairly. Example KIN dies not have checked baggage service, so I can only have 2 carry on bags to CHI. Yet someone who boards in NYP (which does offer the service) can check 2 bags plus have 2 more carry on bags. If I could get my other 2 bags to NYP, I could do the same. So is that fair? :huh:

As far as the ecigs, that poster was saying he doesn't care about the law, and will break the law no matter what! And he doesn't care what anyone else thinks. Because he is special and apparently above the law.

 

[afigg]

...

But, it seems that the convo related to electronic cigarettes was hidden/deleted and the reason given below:

---------

"....As for the post itself, it was removed because it basically said that the guest didn't care what the rules on smoking were he/she was going to violate them no matter what. It wasn't a post that contributed meaningful information to the topic at hand; it was a post that basically said "I'm self-important and I can do what ever I like and the rules don't apply to me because I'm so special."

You don't always have to like the rules, and lively discussion regarding them is welcome be it pro or con. But you do have to obey the rules and advocating to disregard the rules isn't what we need here......"

---------

I certainly don't mean to nit-pik, but I guess I am. A lot of us "break the rules" on Amtrak, sometimes on a regular basis, sometimes only once in awhile. (Opening windows, using a Red Cap to pre-board, staying longer than should in PPC or SSL, bringing more than 2 carry-ons, drinking personal stock outside of sleeper, taking too long of shower, standing too close to the tracks, walking right past TSA goons, etc., etc.)

I understand censoring a post if someone is advocating how to derail a train, or MAYBE even sneak a free ride, but just talking about electronic cigarettes? Not so much.

...

I saw the guest post to the year old thread on e-cigarettes and it was an obvious troll. I would have given the poster a troll rating of 6 out of 10. The post added nothing to the conversation and it was a reasonable decision to delete it. If you want to discuss the Amtrak rules on e-cigarettes, you can always post to the thread.

 

[me_little_me]

In the past, I have posted things on various sites as a guest in fear of retribution from a site's staff who could (and in some cases, would) kick one off the site if you complained about something they do. I was NOT the person that posted the complaint but I don't blame them for posting anonymously. Personally, I myself feel afraid to publicly criticize moderators' actions as I would hate to be banned.

You may trust them implicitly but others do not. Ease off because someday you may be in the poster's shoes.

I frown on public criticism of moderators, as it doesn't help the situation and only leads to undercutting their authority. But in the 13+ years now that I've been on staff, only one member has ever been banned for speaking their mind publicly. And he was banned because he believed that he had the right to say whatever he wanted about anything, including calling Anthony a **** Jew. We don't take kindly to public insults like that.

All that said, I encourage anyone with a problem to contact me via PM or email at any time. I can't promise that you will always be happy with my decision, but I do promise to listen and take your issue seriously. Even if that issue regards me. I will also say that your complaint will be taken far more seriously when sent in private; than if you post it publicly. And as some have seen in the past, I'm far more likely to embarrass the poster in my public response, as again I feel that its best for the peace and community feel of the board not to do this type of thing publicly.

But again, as long as you are being civil, you will never be banned for speaking your mind. Between Anthony & I, I don't think that more than 10 people have ever been banned by either of us from this forum. Frankly I think that the actual number is probably around 5, but alas one of the upgrades destroyed some of those records so I can't tell anymore. Under the current version, there are only 2 members listed as banned and one of those was a spammer who got through our front line defenses. And I probably should have just deleted that account.

I'll warn you, try to work with you to improve the situation, even put you on mod approval if I think it will help, before I resort to banishment.

The problem with PMing a moderator is that the issue may be an issue that others also have but they will never know if the complainant keeps it private. Look at this thread. It has brought out an issue that some are sympathetic with (as well as a personal attack for doing it anonymously). Airing in private may be good for moderator authority but may not be good for either the people having an issue nor for the forum itself. And since airing in public can be done anonymously but airing in private cannot, those that are unwilling to express themselves honestly without leaving their name cannot do it via PM.

And as a moderator, no matter how often you state your fairness, there is no way you are going to forget that a person stated that you were part of (or all of) a problem instead of part of the solution. It's human nature. How many times have you read about people who bring up issues privately and they never get resolved? Then when they are publicized, the issue is fixed but sometime after those that complained (even privately) somehow lose their job due to some generic excuse.

I don't think that moderators have their authority undermined by open complaints. It gives them a chance to openly show they are willing to address issues that can fester. That enhances authority. Do you think that your having to answer issues publicly above has hurt your authority?

Some possible solutions:

A separate forum for addressing internal issues publicly.

Ability to anonymously PM moderators.

An assurance that if someone has an issue with one moderator that they can PM another moderator and be assured that their name would not be revealed.

 

[Ryan]

The problem with PMing a moderator is that the issue may be an issue that others also have but they will never know if the complainant keeps it private. Look at this thread. It has brought out an issue that some are sympathetic with (as well as a personal attack for doing it anonymously).

Disagree. The guest post was nothing more than a personal attack on the staff members.

And as a moderator, no matter how often you state your fairness, there is no way you are going to forget that a person stated that you were part of (or all of) a problem instead of part of the solution. It's human nature.

That is why there is a staff of many, many people. I know for a fact that they discuss things and try to come to a consensus on issues. If a particular moderator has a personal beef with you, the other half-dozen moderators are there to make sure that doesn't influence their decisions.

Some possible solutions:

A separate forum for addressing internal issues publicly.

That's what the "Site Suggestions" section can be used for, I think.

Ability to anonymously PM moderators.

Alan has mentioned his email address many times - email him from an account not associated with your profile. If you don't have one, spend 30 seconds and create one on gmail or yahoo. There's also the Sunday night chats where a great many of the staff hang out. It's a great place for informal discussion.

An assurance that if someone has an issue with one moderator that they can PM another moderator and be assured that their name would not be revealed.

I'm not sure why you need that assurance, I'm sure that if I emailed one moderator and said "I have an issue with another mod, can you guys raise it without involving my name?" that it would happen, 100%.
Edited to fix quote tags, because I apparently am too dumb to use them.

 

[AlanB]

Alan, your explanation specifucally about "following rules" is where it gets a little squishy for me. It's hard for others to see "where you draw the line" on following the rules. Is it "ok" to sneak on more than the technically allowed two carry ones? (Which, IMO is regularly not followed) and to be told by AU posters, "I think you will ok, I've never been hassled..."

But, it seems that the convo related to electronic cigarettes was hidden/deleted and the reason given below:

Jerry,

The convo related to electronic cigs wasn't hidden; just the guest's post which contributed nothing to the topic other than to say he/she didn't care about rules. The topic is still visible, albeit back many pages on the forum, and open for discussion. I cannot stop the forum from putting topics in date order; that is an automatic function. So as soon as the recent post was deleted, it dropped back into date order based upon the last post.

But anyone who wishes to find it and provide meaningful discussion is welcome to do so.

And I see a big difference between saying "you may be able to get away with bringing an extra bag, even though that is against the rules" vs. "I'm going to violate the rules on Ecigs because they don't apply to me."

I certainly don't mean to nit-pik, but I guess I am. A lot of us "break the rules" on Amtrak, sometimes on a regular basis, sometimes only once in awhile. (Opening windows, using a Red Cap to pre-board, staying longer than should in PPC or SSL, bringing more than 2 carry-ons, drinking personal stock outside of sleeper, taking too long of shower, standing too close to the tracks, walking right past TSA goons, etc., etc.)

Advocating to open a window is probably a post that I would delete. Using a Redcap to pre-board is not against the rules. Nor is staying longer in the SSL or PPC, taking too long of a shower, or for that matter standing too close to the tracks if you're on a platform. The latter is probably not a wise thing to do; but its not against the rules.

I understand censoring a post if someone is advocating how to derail a train, or MAYBE even sneak a free ride, but just talking about electronic cigarettes? Not so much.

And again, this wasn't just someone talking about the pros & cons of Ecigs, this was someone stating that they are above the rules and are going to do what they want.

 

[buddy559]

If the post was that harmful to the viewing public, and an obvious troll, why was it commented on by a moderator, before being deleted?

 

[pennyk]

If the post was that harmful to the viewing public, and an obvious troll, why was it commented on by a moderator, before being deleted?

As Alan previously mentioned, not all moderators think alike. Apparently one moderator did not originally think the post was harmful and from an obvious troll. He/she may have re-thought the decision or another moderator may have had a different opinion. Final decisions are not made by one moderator alone.

The guest post was "hidden" waiting review of a majority of moderators/administrators.