Cthulhu, if you would like me to edit my post in your thread for consistency let me know.
That would be great, thanks.
Cthulhu, if you would like me to edit my post in your thread for consistency let me know.
What if the person made their flawed post and did not return for 6 months? What if they never came on the forum again? Then a PM would be pointless and the change would never be made.
Even more likely than that, the extra effort of the moderator doing that job comes to mind. And the possibility that some people just won't care enough to do the work and make the change so the post goes unmodified by anyone. Too much of that and those willing to put in the extra work may lose interest. Or maybe even the mod then comes across the post again, not sure if they had already addressed that one either sends another message to the user (who possibly gets upset about being messaged twice) or at least is more wasted volunteer time by that moderator.
Those are reasonable concerns. But you also face the potential scenario in which your members simply stop contributing valued content because they're insulted by this editing practice and don't care to set themselves up for more of it.
My two cents: Accuracy in nomenclature is a good thing but I don't think that is what's being disputed. It's the manner in which "correct" (scare quotes in deference to Cthulhu's objections above) nomenclature is policed by a single moderator.
Obsessively editing an entire thread, especially when said edits are curt and punctilious or appear in red in the member's post, is simply uncivil.
I feel that Joseph's taxonomic rigor might be better applied (and certainly more appreciated) at a scientific journal.
Those are reasonable concerns. But you also face the potential scenario in which your members simply stop contributing valued content because they're insulted by this editing practice and don't care to set themselves up for more of it.
While I do hear what you're saying, Paul, I can't agree with you. If a person is that "thinned skin"/immature that they can't handle correction, then she/he has no business being on any forum.
Correction of errors as a moderator comes across them is more time efficient, and I don't see anything belittling about said correction being done directly by the mod. If the "red" makes folks see "red", then perhaps another color for the corrections would still make them visible without offending the poster's delicate sensibilities.
As mentioned by others in this thread, at some point, the type of corrections currently being done are less about accuracy & comprehension then they are about pedantry.Does entire now the story behind h. minor selection 1 h. minor burgundy black and h. minor big orange. I'm interacted in the bumber off seedlings it took to find them three (original creator's identity removed)
Yes. Precisely!
So - why has Joseph not contributed anything to this discussion?? I'm far more likely to find my way to middle ground if he were to make an effort to defend his position and explain his tactic - or at least add his voice to the discussion.
I don't know if its being "lackadaisical" or what, but the chronic misrepresentation of proper names is rampant, its true. So often people tend to abbreviate Latin names and generate perverse nicknames for plants, and all it does is obfuscate any genuine data. Most unhelpful.
If I had to PM every poster over every nomenclatural correction, I'd be an extremely busy moderator. As it is, I've just been tweaking the nomenclature as I notice it in my normal skimming through the forum.
Whenever someone disagrees with my nomenclatural corrections, I welcome the dialogue thus generated.
If you havnt noticed, a majority of us don't appreciated the way you have been going about this. You havnt done it to me yet (that I know of), but I find your tactics extremely rude, degrading, and disrespectful.
Its obvious that not everyone feels this way, and that's fine, to each his own, but a majority of us do.
I meen come on...its really not that hard to pm sombody before changing THIER work.
I know this is an international forum but some of us live in a free country, where we have a right to free speech without being censored.
On another note, I do agree that having the correct information is important.
If I had to PM every poster over every nomenclatural correction, I'd be an extremely busy moderator. As it is, I've just been tweaking the nomenclature as I notice it in my normal skimming through the forum.
I feel strongly that nobody should have license to alter another person’s written word without permission by the author no matter what the intention is, no matter what the subject or arena.
Because, Joseph has already explained his points, in various threads, throughout the forums and you've already acknowledged one of my most recent on this topic, and in an encouraging way. Below this link is a quote of what you said in response to my post -> Nomenclature - it isn't that complicated
I do admit that a few CP taxon are still in dispute. New updates to some names have been published and not yet accepted by everyone. This, however, is not uncommon. Whenever someone disagrees with my nomenclatural corrections, I welcome the dialogue thus generated. It is something I'm sure many passers-by or beginners can appreciate. I know, when I was a beginner I appreciated learning about those things. It demonstrates how dynamic our international plant naming systems can be. For instance, when I first began growing CP, Darlingtonia californica was known as Chrysamphora californica. This was one of my first experiences with the dynamics of CP names.
If I had to PM every poster over every nomenclatural correction, I'd be an extremely busy moderator. As it is, I've just been tweaking the nomenclature as I notice it in my normal skimming through the forum.
If I had to PM every poster over every nomenclatural correction, I'd be an extremely busy moderator.
If I had to PM every poster over every nomenclatural correction, I'd be an extremely busy moderator. As it is, I've just been tweaking the nomenclature as I notice it in my normal skimming through the forum.
This does not mean that I wouldn't do so, if that's what Andrew decides.
Though it seems I alone am presently receiving the credit for correcting nomenclature, I am not the only moderator that does so.
-------------------------------
If Andrew chooses to run TFs like a democracy. He has every right to do so. Or, if he chose to do otherwise, that's entirely up to him. I'm a member of several other internet forums, through various of my other interests. In some of those, I'm also a moderator. I think it very progressive of Andrew that he works with the membership of TF in this way. Most other forums I'm associated with, simply delete any posts that discuss moderation, pro or con, and send warnings to members who made the posts - like mini dictatorships.
-------------------------------------
Even if the majority of posters to this thread, have a certain opinion, that may not necessarily be indicative of the majority of TF members, or it might be.