BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Suggest new topics here

SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE

Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...

Saturday, October 20, 2018

Have blog rules driven contributions down?

I guess all the new "rules" have driven this blog to near-zero contributions. Just as the moderators want, I guess? Less work for them. Controversy is not allowed, only placid, pleasant, agreeable discourse among people who all agree with each other. But, as Hillary and Holder stated, civility is overrated. I wonder how the moderators missed that?

26 comments:

Julian Bentayeb said...

The rules have been in place since blog creation.
What would be more acceptable rules ? I am open to suggestions.
Lastly, blaming the moderator for slow contributions is like blaming the weatherman for hurricanes .
If you have suggestions ,please let me know. Otherwise ,feel free to stay away from this blog .
Notice that the fact I publish your post is proof that I am neutral.

Anonymous said...


I think he/she means that when you could just post on the blog and see your post instanly you could have a dialogue with other posters. Now you can post and maybe a few days later it will appear. When this changed the blog started to really die down.

Anonymous said...

The fact that you published the post is "proof" of nothing more than the desire to be seen as neutral. The current "rules" on the blog home page are much different than the initial set of rules. The wording of rule #4 was never there before a few months ago. Rule #5 is completely new.If the blog moderator doesn't have a clue why blog participation is way down (which fact he has not refuted), why use a false analogy to weathermen and hurricanes? Weathermen predict hurricanes; they have some understanding of hurricanes and can help people prepare for and cope with them. If the moderator doen't think his "rules" affect blog participation, then why have rules? Isn't that the intent of rules??

Anonymous said...

Contributions down pending launch of Triad? Not much pony left to kick with LANS.

Julian Bentayeb said...

Thank you for pointing that out .There is a trade off between immediate gratification of seeing comments instantly and the quality of those comments . With no moderation, you get name calling and personal vendettas.

Julian Bentayeb said...

OK .You obviously do not believe in moderation .I will maintain current rules for lack of suggestions and help on your part .If you can help, I will consider your input but if all you do is criticize ,I will suggest you no longer visit this blog .

Anonymous said...

Julian doesn’t even follow his own guidelines. The stealth deletions have become so common that this blog has devolved into a very shallow, and quiet, echo chamber.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps AI will soon improve to the point of being able to substitute for a moderator, and then we can return to instant dialogue. All one has to do is teach the program the "rules" of acceptable discourse.

scooby said...

I am open to suggestions. If you dont have any, pkease feel free not to visit blog.

scooby said...

Agree . Thanks for your valued contribution .

Anonymous said...

"This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA."

From the above description, instant publication is not offered or implied. The root purpose of this blog is to "expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA." The value of the blog moderator (Scooby) is random, off topic, rude, or threatening posts can be filtered out.

There are some LLNS employees (mostly non-worker bees) that would like to see this blog go away. Prior to blog moderation and filtering, those folks would belittle, discredit, and insult others that were raising lab concerns in good faith, in the attempt to squelch the topic.

Employees that have been around for a while understand that lab concerns and solutions to those concerns are rarely measured in hours, days, or even weeks. Lets please be a little more appreciative of the blog moderators efforts and his retiree time.

Anonymous said...

"I am open to suggestions. If you dont have any, pkease feel free not to visit blog. "

How about something like free Fridays, where moderation is off and the posts can only stay for only that day? If something actually interesting is posted you can let it stay, else everything is gone the next day.


Julian Bentayeb said...

That requires some level of automation. Can you help with that?

Anonymous said...

The implication that blog "rules" don't affect blog participation or volume is just bogus. Filter out illegal material, profanity, and hindrances like spamming, multiple posts of the same material, etc. But why does the moderator care if one poster insults another, or denigrates him? Why does he care if demonstrably false material is posted? And why have a "rule" that disallows "foul" and "inflammatory" language when no one agrees on what that is? Really, this is just the moderator imposing his sense of morality on the blog. Where is the justification for that kind of censorship?

Anonymous said...

Employees that have been around for a while understand that lab concerns and solutions to those concerns are rarely measured in hours, days, or even weeks. Lets please be a little more appreciative of the blog moderators efforts and his retiree time.

October 21, 2018 at 10:51 AM

I agree. Keep up the good work Julian and don't let the negative naysayers get you down. I personally appreciate your efforts.

scooby said...

Thanks to both of you for the recognition.

Evil Echo said...

The accusation of stealth censorship and hidden agendas is and has been without proof, yet there are some that think they can Kavenaugh their way into a return of trolling by smearing Scooby's reputation. All that you can do is repeat the LIE over and over, hoping to dissuade even more people from participating.

And along with those attacks comes a plea for a moderation-free interval so that posters can launch attacks and innuendo at each other unabated. Ah, a return to the good old days where a handful of contributors turned this blog into a war zone. No information relevant to working at the labs, just flame after flame.

To answer October 21, 2018 at 5:29 PM - why do Scooby ( and I ) care about insults and denigrating comments? Because it's off-topic, noise, and juvenile. Scooby wants a blog that talks about the lab's, not a competition for who can make the most snarky comment.

He had rules of conduct posted, just like Facebook and so many other sites have their rules. You violate Facebook rules and they put the hammer down on you. I'd like to see how far you'd get accusing their moderators in the manner you have Scooby. He's a lot more lenient than they are in that way.

I'm grateful for the endless hours Scooby has poured into this blog. It warrants a "thank you" at least - even if you do have some issue with him.

Julian Bentayeb said...

Thanks for speaking out EE!

Anonymous said...

"they can Kavenaugh their way"

I am not sure what you mean, does that mean by smearing Kavenaugh, or Kavenaugh smearing others. I not trying to be a troll or anything, it is just when someone says you are "Kavenaugh your way" I want to figure out the meaning.

Evil Echo said...

October 24, 2018 at 8:15 AM - it's a reference to the outlandishly shameful behavior during US senate hearings where one faction did all they could to smear Judge Kavenaugh's reputation.

One senator outed ( at the last moment ) a woman who had requested privacy, violating her trust. Another senator staged a scene claiming he was some kind of hero by releasing classified documents, only those documents had already been cleared for release. And there were the professional protesters shrieking from gallery. In the end the accusation had no supporting evidence or witnesses.

All very much like how some here treat Scooby.

Anonymous said...

Some here who don't like scooby's moderation of this blog (nothing personal against scooby) are (almost) as conservative as you are. It's all about freedom of speech as opposed to those who want to constrain such (such as the stealth deletion of the post following 8:15 am). PC is just as bad when practiced by the right.

Evil Echo said...

Oh yeah, drag out the freedom of speech bit.

* This is a private blog, not some entity controlled by the government.
* There is no censorship of opinion, only enforcement of a civil level of conversation. Civility according to the age-old definition.
* Including false accusations ( stealth deletions ) has nothing to do with political bend. Whether you're a left-wing troll or a right-wing troll you're still a troll.

It continues to amaze me that someone is stupid enough to think that they can make such blatant lie and get away with it. Hello, former blog moderator here. I helped set up the current schema for reviewing submitted comments. How every submission is registered on a private queue. How a rejected entry still exists in the logs, making it trivial to inspect those logs. Don't you think I didn't check those logs long ago for just what you accused Scooby of doing? The logs don't lie.

Anonymous said...

... it's a reference to the outlandishly shameful behavior during US senate hearings where one faction did all they could to smear Judge Kavenaugh's reputation."

October 24, 2018 at 10:15 PM

Gee. And here I thought that to "Kavenaugh ones way into something" meant to lie under oath to gain a trusted position.

Anonymous said...

Gee. And here I thought that to "Kavenaugh ones way into something" meant to lie under oath to gain a trusted position.


October 26, 2018 at 12:25 PM

This is what I thought. He lied under oath, looked creepy, they would not let the literally hundreds of witness come out to show that hid did it, they only considered the one person's claim not all the other credible women, they simply ignored that he is a raging alcoholic.
The lying under oath was obvious with his comments on the year book. How can any one get away with this after a very credible accusation. There is no doubt many many more. Don't give the whole due process thing, this was a job interview not a trial. He was never going to jail.

Anonymous said...

Gee. And here I thought that to "Kavenaugh ones way into something" meant to lie under oath to gain a trusted position.

October 26, 2018 at 12:25 PM

You were wrong. You have lots of company.

Anonymous said...

Drop moderation as a 6 month experiment. The blog will improve.

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days