Forest gump,

I was told by one opinion page editor that the newspaper was mostly interested in people with names and so on. I was not that impressed.

That is what I liked about Paddy McGuiness when editor of Quadrant. He published four articles by myself, even though I was a labourer (albeit now with a PhD).

I know too many very ordinary academics that get regular gigs in newspapers, which both pisses me of and is amusing. Some love telling you how good they are and how poor everyone else is, but I would love to see many of them put their articles on OLO and face the audience.

That is why I support minimal censuring on this site and hope Graham does not change this characteristic too much. This is despite Jedimaster raising some good points which may influence advertising decisions. It is always hard to get any balance right, especially for a site that represents a variety of viewpoints.

AKA, I believe (or hope) that 99% of people who participate on this site are not racist and do have sympathy for Aboriginal issues, but I would argue that issues on race are divisive and open discussion is still the best way to addressing key issues.

At the risk of responding further somewhat tangentially to Graham's article, I note the post by Jedimaster, of Thursday, 14 October 2010 at 7:15:52 AM, in which he said:

"The essays are rather like Rorschach tests
or tea leaves, where the viewer reads into [them]
what is really on their mind. Graham's inkblot
or tea leaves was "finance"- we read into it
"blogger behaviour". I wonder why?"

and later:

"Who wants to hang around with people whose
first reflex is to be abusive and have no respect
for the principles of reason that underpin democracy?
Only other abusers- the majority ..... [would] like
a bit of bawdiness, but not a constant exulting
of ignorance and adulation of tyrants."

I agree that such abusiveness lowers the tone of the site, and probably deters some viewers from becoming either or both registered users or contributors. I also note that, especially since the raising of posting limits, as Graham foreshadowed might happen, many abusive-style posts have tended to be "nasty, brutish, and short", if I quote from memory correctly.

Perhaps the issue of such 'blogger behaviour' can be linked to 'finance' via the requiring of the lodgement of a 'good behaviour bond' by those judged to be errant users as a condition for continued posting rights. There could be a scale of fines whereby such deposits could be gradually confiscated if breaches of Forum rules or etiquette continue to be made.

Appropriately tuned, the principle of 'abuser pays' could be, perhaps even somewhat humorously, combined with that of deterrance of bad Forum behaviour on the part of would-be genuine participants. For those posting for no other reason than to deliberately degrade the Forum in the eyes of viewers, such would impose a (hopefully prohibitive) cost.

I would also endorse Jay of Melbourne's recommendation of vBulletin software so far as functionality is concerned. Whilst I have never visited the 'Stormfront' site, I would observe that despite their obvious focus upon open-source software, the (half-million-plus members) Ubuntu Forums themselves use vBulletin. Don't know about price.

I don't think charging people to post will work very well as that will require some type of payment that might or will expose their identity. People have a right to stay anonymous if they want .. I understand why some people want a closed forum, it keeps out the rednecks as someone put it - and clearly no one wants to hear an opinion that is different to their own /sarc of course.

That's the attraction for many, the fact that there is such a wide range of ideas and personalities. I hope you don't inhibit that.

I'm not surprised that the posters who are regularly intolerant and quick to accuse others of various crimes, are complaining of intolerance and want some form of prohibition on people they don't agree with. In fact these people often get reflected to them exactly what they hand out and are completely oblivious to it. They are the people most likely to gain from being exposed to contrary opinions and understand that out in the community there is a wide range of thought.

Most of us learn things and enjoy the cut and thrust of argument on this forum, if things ramp up, maybe you should look at your own posts for the reason it has happened - it's not always someone else's fault.

Thanks Graham, it's an interesting and educational site, the interactions can be stark reflections of the tensions in our society

You might try a donation system, it works in some areas.

Hi rpg,

I second your support and enjoyment of the cut and thrust of vigorous debate.

As for contributing funds, there is the 'Donate' button up there - and most of us have more than one email address, so our anonymity as contributors to discussions can be preserved, while we can still contribute funds. Twenty cents per contribution would be quite fair - $ 20 for one hundred contributions. That might keep some of us contribution junkies down to a bare two dollars a day (i.e. ten contributions) which would provide far more bang for your buck than $ 2 on the pokies. Or a stubbie. Or half a meat pie.

Joe

Well GY, I would of thought at the commencing of a site like this' from day one, a 2 dollar per e.mail address would of been the winning move. I mean, just count the number of people in the A to Z department of user,s and the accounts of that start up time frame from then till now....well, I haven't counted all of the members list, but I could take a wild guess on how much the bank-managers smile and yours for that matter, by now, it would be very hard to remove I'd say.

And whats 2 dollars?

If you can afford a computer, to say the user cant find that much....that's going to be a little hard to believe.

Two dollars per renewed Email address.

I don't think that's asking too much.

Do you?

All the best.

TTM>

I also want to thank Susan and express regret at her going. On the several occasions I have submitted articles she has been courteous and very helpful. These are qualities in short supply in many places.

Des Griffin