Replies to post #208079 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Homebrew]

Hoooboy. I quit.

[Homebrew]

I don't think caving in to that behavior benefits anyone. Expect all boards to become cesspools of insulting screaming matches.

[trader59]

Shelly, I realize this might not be your doing, but have to say I am disappointed with the proposed change. If/when you have the time, scroll through this discussion "over there," begin at about 6 pm EDT yesterday evening, through the overnight posts, and then tell me is this is the sort of discourse those who count clicks on iHub are wanting:

https://stocktwits.com/symbol/VERB

I'm not saying that none of the posts would get zapped under the proposed rule, but enough of them would survive and turn that cesspool into this cesspool.

Now, I expect the motivation for this is a decline in posts (aka - web "reads" and "clicks" that lead to revenue) on iHub, but I can tell you, IMHO, that the lack of a wild west approach to interpersonal interaction isn't the reason folks are "over there" or "over there." When a stock "lights up" for no good business reason, I've looked through the activity on the 2 most popular, fully public venues, and I've concluded what they really don't like "over here" is that the facts of the business being pumped are pointed out, with reference to factual documents published by the company, by a smaller group of folks the con artists would really like to refer to as "paid bashers." They can post their tripe over there and anywhere (but here) without any challenge to the (lack of) underlying facts, as pesky as they are to the narrative/fairy tale being told. And letting folks call those debunkers names isn't going to help that cause.

It's probably time to revisit the mission statement of iHub, if there is one. If the mission is "make money without standards," then have at it. If the mission is "provide a haven for interested grown-ups to discuss potential/current investments," then the proposed changes need some tweaking. When I read through those other cesspools, I'm very glad to not participate.

[CashBowski]

That’s going to be the end of iHub for me, Shelly.

You do realize that overwhelming majority of our deletions is because of unnecessary name calling, derogatory references, and various degrees of personal attacks — however rarely on the points you outlined (Religion, Gender, Sexual orientation , Race , Ethnicity , Age , Disability). I’m sure you are well aware of this fact, and to even consider it, knowing what you know, is very surprising.

If it’s going to be a free-for-all hell site, then what’s the point of moderators as the task will go down to a trickle.

This is going to be a huge mistake that will render the site unbearable to read or post on, because one will have to weed through all the name calling and OT references to get to a legitimate post, and the layout and format is hard enough as it is without having the burden of weeding through the junk.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172146851

Social media is built on a foundation of ‘likes’, which I’m afraid is what iHub is veering into instead of sticking to its roots, and what made it unique as a stock message board without all the noise and pointless bling. Why I stopped using Stocktwits.

[bar1080]

"It's truly baffling." Became crystal clear to me when I realized that 98% of the active members are gambling addicts (or those shilling junk to addicts).

[ChannelTrader]

Here since 2006...you're reverting back to then ?

Yes

Edit: This seems to be all people want to do these days is talk about and insult each other. It's really hard to have guidelines like we have when the entirety of the world seems to have forgotten that civil discourse is actually possible. Even in their professional lives, the vast majority of the people these days have difficulty expressing any disagreement without turning the argument back to the one they disagree with. It's truly baffling.

[TenKay]

I don’t know what iHub will turn into…but at some point I think the boards will become unreadable.

IHub may get clicks and posts, which I guess that is all it is about now, but it will no longer differentiate itself.

So disappointed.

[MrMike241]

For what it's worth, I started posting on IHub instead of Y! because the conversation was more intelligent. It took me a while to understand the rules, but I am no longer surprised when I have a message removed, and removal is rare.

If anything, I would have wished to tighten the rules, as some cleverly attack and remain on topic. When they no longer need to be clever and can directly insult, IHub will be dead and iPhoenix will rise from the ashes. IHub won't be any different than the competition. What will that be like? Some will leave, some will be happy. I'll wait and see what it's like. Good Luck!

Wait, is this a July fools joke? A loyalty test? ;-)

[BullNBear52]

Edit: This seems to be all people want to do these days is talk about and insult each other. It's really hard to have guidelines like we have when the entirety of the world seems to have forgotten that civil discourse is actually possible. Even in their professional lives, the vast majority of the people these days have difficulty expressing any disagreement without turning the argument back to the one they disagree with. It's truly baffling.

Just because sites like Twitter etc allow it doesn't mean IHub has to allow it. I've been the subject of personal attacks from all spectrum's and long ago not to get into a flaming war with anyone.

IHub would be better off if they insisted on moderators adhering to the TOU along with the specifics of the free boards which is where your biggest problem lies.

[AISI304]

I believe posts focused on or targeting Admin, moderators,
or just IH users that point fingers in a “you, you, you” post
should be removed. On stock boards, the focus should be
on stock, not insulting users, otherwise IH is entertainment.

[PlayMoneyBS]

This seems to be all people want to do these days is talk about and insult each other. It's really hard to have guidelines like we have when the entirety of the world seems to have forgotten that civil discourse is actually possible.

Then let them do that talking and insulting someplace else. There are plenty of outlets for that nonsense anyway. Why give into that and allow it here? Why should we not set the example of how things can still function with civil discourse?

[Gusher405]

Good! It seems moderators on certain boards always went to ‘personal’ attack even if you posted ‘you’ in a general term.

Moderators have to much say on what is discussed. If you don’t agree with their ‘agenda’ you get removed and then limited amount of posts.

[Huggy Bear]

Hi Shelly. I must say I am truly shocked that this is even being considered. The TOS that Ihub currently has in place is the ONLY thing that separates Ihub from all the other sites out there for discussing stocks. When personal attacks and name calling is condoned, boards become a free for all and discussions quickly morph from stock related to poster related, solely.

The TOS is why many of us use Ihub in the first place, and pay for premium services. If this is modified to allow name calling you can count me out. You will lose nearly all of us who respect civility and who try our best to give the general public other things to consider besides the barrage of posts which lead naive retailers down a path of financial ruin. I am sure if the proposed changes go into effect Ihub quickly devolve into a site over run with personal attacks. When there is nothing the promoters of scams can say to retort a poster, they attack the messenger.

"Don't shoot the piano player"

You are proposing to hand them fully automatic weapons and an endless supply of ammunition.

Losing those who detest scamming would be detrimental to retailers who quite simply do not realize they are being conned.

We will not stick around and continue to pay y'all. That is guaranteed.

I hope this is not financially motivated, because if it is, it will backfire on you.

[HappyLibrarian]

Actually, ‘Idiot’, ‘moron’ and ‘dumb’ are not generic insults and actually used to be medical terms for people with various disabilities including intellectual disabilities.

They were increasingly used as insults and stopped being medical terms and now are only used to insult people by saying they live with intellectual disabilities (whether they do or not).

The term ‘retarded’ has a similar history of transitioning from a medical term to an insult and is pretty much shunned.

Even if the target of the slur does not live with an intellectual disability (or other disability) seeing someone called that is hurtful to anyone who has family or friends with an intellectual disability or has one themselves and creates a hostile environment in the same way hearing a racial or ethnic slur does. When such targeting happens with impunity, it creates a hostile environment.

Assuming IHUB remains serious about not allowing insults based upon disabilities or perceived disabilities, terms of abuse like the above would still not be allowed.

[EMPATHY]

If your going to have unlimited insulting
then everyone should get unlimited blocks/ignores.

No one, coming here for legitimate discourse should have to navigate the trolls for it.

Also, add a thumbs down if it's going to be going this way anyway.

[Doc logic]

Shelly,

Big mistake that would likely lead to other investment focused private forum startups in my opinion. Many already spend more time on twitter or elsewhere because of what is currently already allowed. Best wishes.

[TheHappyVulcan]

Shelly,

Please do not allow "generic insults." I cannot support this and will have to terminate my subscription. Upholding reasonable standards of behavior is precisely what needs to happen in the face of unreasonable behavior, even if said behavior is , for whatever reasons, " trendy." I see no valid reason to allow it.....under any cirumstance. Many turn to ihub, as I do, to learn and to support a decent community that has decency and integrity...to make friends,even.

It is the moderator who would not uphold such an obviously necessary rule who should be addressed accordingly. Thank you.