I think good healthy debates are normal and should be allowed - controversy is not a bad thing -and a little disputing is not a bad thing - opinions are like a**holes everybody's got one and I don't think it's a bad thing to express them (opinions that is - lol)

I think a thread should be closed when someone is personally attacking someone and name calling or very detremential things are being directly targeted at someone.

I think views of "abuse" are viewed differently by people and by the DS admins - perception of the reader is different by all readers. I've had complaints filed on me by people who can dish it out but cant take it - so whiny butts are one thing real abuse is something else -and if someone dishes out a little hositality towards someone that is not a virtual threat on someone's life or mental health it isn't necessarily an awful thing-

I do feel that when a thread is closed that DS should make it to where the CL or the Admins MUST state the exact reason of the closing of the thread so the people who violated or were abusive can recognize what is abusive in the eyes of DS or the CL - so that it will help people not to travel down the same roads over and over.

I mean heck, we all have bad days and sometimes anger maybe vented a little more than should be and many times someone's normal character is not being displayed and the threads or closed or people are banned. Sometimes someone in a weak state is encouraged and manipulated by others to act out in ways they normally wouldn't.

I also don't think people should get banned for acting like jerks or over flowing the boards with a bunch of bs if they are in a drunken stupor or binging or whatever - what DS doesnt realize, IMO, is that we the responders keep the "abusive" threads up top and active by responding to them. If we the responders wouldn't respond then threads will venture deeper and deeper into the mix - so DS or CL's close a thread, people get banned when we ALL were participants - and I being guilty of the participation - a little blood boiling now and then is good for the heart - lol.

Hell if that was the case, i could go down and file abuse charges on people who cross my path almost daily in person - lol.

So there ya have it my 2 cents. I will wait for yet another warning email of my potential pending ban from the site -

Peace!

While it's true we agree to DS's rules when we join, we are still members and DS needs members to keep going.

I think it is reasonable for members to recieve some specifics on why a thread was closed and reviewed.

Most of us have wondered why the heck a particular thread is closed and again and again all we are told is it's "the rules of the road".

It would be nice if the DS personnel who review these threads communicated with members in a discussion/explanation of their decisions regarding them.

I predicted my post on " Closed Threads" would be closed but not for the reason I predicted it would be closed.
I think it was closed because Pat555 attacked me and couldn't take the responsibility and/or consequences of it and flipped her lid.
Therefore, the thread was no longer a subject but subjective.

Pass

Looks for a 10 foot pole

But threads are being closed that have not violated any rules.

Here is a link to the "rules of the road" in case anyone ones to check them out:

http://www.dailystrength.org/help/rules-of-the-road

When any thread is closed, and it is not immediately obvious why, it is best to check out the reasons for it with the person that closed it. Anything else is speculation.

Threads get closed on here pretty rarely. Obviously not all the people will be happy all of the time so sometimes a thread will be closed and someone won't agree with the decision. The people with the ability to close threads can only do their best.

I personally think controversy is a positive thing. I've been active in recovery for 48 eight years ( sober for 30 via AA ) and have experienced many things. Recovery is about change from my perspective and includes every aspect of my life, including my comments, my behavior and my cognitive processes ( thoughts ). There is an appropriate way of presenting any opinion,like or dislike or disagreement. Diplomacy is the approach for me. I once had a mentor in my profession who taught me how to call anyone just about anything however in a diplomatic manner. Personal attacks are not acceptable in any arena. I do oppose censorship on any level however play within the rules.

It is certainly true that those who close the treads can only do their best. The thing that troubles me is that the rules of the road don't always explain why something was closed. Granted, whether an obtuse remark is a true insult for example, is a subjective thing and open to interpretation. That's why I think lots of people would like more information.

And frankly, since DS members are in effect customers, it seems a reasonable request that an explaination follow a closed thread after the promised review occurs.

I rue the day recovery becomes an ideology or a set of doctrines and the steps are treated as holy writ.

As Hannah Arendt put it in her book, "The Burden of Our Time" (London, 1951), "Its members' [the Communist Party's] whole education is aimed at abolishing their capacity for distinguishing truth from fiction. Their superiority consists in the ability immediately to dissolve every statement of fact into a declaration of purpose... Total loyalty is possible only when fidelity is emptied of all concrete content, from which changes of mind might naturally arise."

I've been a discussion board moderator on another website for 9 years where the subject matter is highly controversial, and it never would have worked if all we could do is close threads. As it is there, we can edit or completely delete any posts or threads that violate the rules of conduct

I discussed this with Doug at DS a couple of years ago when he approached me via PM and asked if I'd be interested in being a CL here. I told him I wouldn't consider taking the job without the appropriate software to do it effectively, and that was the end of my correspondence with him.

IMO, DS puts the CL's in an impossible position by not giving them the tools that other websites use as a matter of course.

Good threads end up being closed not due to the topic of the thread but due to a member verbally attacking another member. If a CL could delete a post rather than close an entire thread it would make life a helluva lot easier for them.

Let me get this straight- we are out of line to second guess or ask any questions about the CL's activity because they are unpaid and it is a tough job? A job that they freely choose to take.

Oh. That clears it up.

The CL's do good service work and like Nemo said it is tough without having appropriate tools. So, big thanks.

CL's have their own' I'm in charge'issues.

Not that my opinion matters but I've seen some threads left open through the years where another member has told another member who was not entirely mentally stable to kill themselves. That was horrifying!

However I think some folks need to develop a tough skin, if you ask for advice, put yourself "out there" so to speak & do not like the answers you are given because it's not what you wanted to hear, those thread should be left open. No woo woo wooing goin on, no one's gonna hold your hand and "you poor baby" you when you've admitted to driving drunk & injuring yourself or others.

It's not necessarily that anyone thinks they're better than anyone else, cause we've all f'ed up, but I think sympathy is a killer to some folks in the throes of this disease. Right between the eyes is my opinion, it's what I need and I can't be the only one.

some folks LOVE to play the martyr and "woe is me" and coddling them is only enabling.

Just my opinion. :)