Rant/vent posts

[cass2591]

Okay, let me address a few issues. I didn't believe Keres' post was ranty to begin with, which is why I said repost it under a different title. Now, my impression is, and I could be wrong, is that "ranty mcventy" (or the like) is a bad precedent because posters will object that their post isn't a rant. I think "There has a marked increase in the number of posts that are not only contain the words "rant/ranty/vent/venty" in the thread title makes it clear, but obviously people disagree with me.

Shores was right in that if Keres had used the word "my mom is ranting at me" (or something similar) this thread wouldn't exist and I would be a happy camper doing something else that is far more enjoyable than having to defend my actions.

As for PMing somebody, or even posting in the thread about changing the title, nope, not gonna happen. Another mod might, but frankly I don't care to. Am I a big meanie, maybe, but I have better things to do, believe it or not. Furthermore, and perhaps this is where the communication breakdown occurred, I believe that Jeanne's edict said titles with "rant" or "vent" in them was quite clear. I think consequences have actions, and if someone flaunts the rules, they face those consequences.

As for my using "rant/vent" in the title of my post, well, so did Jeanne in her original sticky post addressing it. I used it not to rant/vent, but to remind others that, in my estimation, it's not kosher.

My head hurts. I will, however, despite that, confer w/Jeanne as to the exact meaning of the original post.

[snowball's chance]

I see a rule against entitling a post 'vent' and having that post consist of nothing but venting.  It is not clear that the words 'vent/rant' are expressly forbidden in the title of the post.

It is plain that I am not the only one who interpreted the post as 'not only are posts that are nothing but rants prohibited, but it really annoys us when it admits it is a rant right in the title'.

The title indicated what the thread was about, that being how to respond to someone who constantly thinks you want to hear the rants.

There has a marked increase in the number of posts that are not only contain the words "rant/ranty/vent/venty" in the thread title but also consist of nothing more than griping, venting and ranting about a specific situation without the benefit of seeking any application of etiquette. 

...

There will be increased moderation in this area because it has gotten too excessive lately. 

I interpret this to mean "not only are these words in the title a no-no, but..."

This is what I took it to mean as well, and I could swear I have seen at least one thread locked *just* for having the word "rant" in the title awhile back. 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Cass, there seems to be some venom in you post-I don't think anyone thinks you're a big "meanie" for not editing. I know I for one am not questioning the rule itself-ii'll abide by whatever, but it was one that was unclear to me. Others disagree, and a few have posted their confusion and others their understanding. I hope you don't think you were being asked to "defend" yourself, but I'm sure you understand why posters that were confused were asking you for clarification-who better than a mod who's taken action? I don't know, at least that's how I think about it- would a pm or another method be better?

[Keres]

I'm sorry, I thought that's what you were saying the rule was. That it was a violation of forum rules to use the word "rant" or "vent" in the title of a thread. Isn't that what you are saying, and why Keres's thread was locked???

That is what I thought.

I used it not to rant/vent, but to remind others that, in my estimation, it's not kosher.

That is actually exactly why I used it, because I did not find it pleasant to be ranted too constantly.  Please do not take my confusion on the issue personally.

[Ehelldame]

When I write rules or clarification of rules, I try to articulate the problem and how the new rule will address that.   The post I made 18 months ago was specifically addressing a problem the mods were observing of a noticeable increase in the number of rant/vents posts which also contained the words "rant" or "vent" in the title.  The main concern in restricting those words from subjects and titles was to not give the impression to readers scanning the forum threads that these types of posts were permissible.  I still get people privately begging me to allow vent and rant posts so I don't think it is unreasonable to continue with a policy that makes sure people are not mislead regarding the appropriateness of these types of posts.

One challenge dealing with moderation of a forum community is that there is no perfect, balanced, totally fair way of applying rules.  Some mods are more lenient, some tend to a more legalistic interpretation but the one thing I consider to be this forum's strength is that your mods do seek accountability among themselves to be as fair as possible.  If one is swinging too far in one direction, the other mods are there to bring balance.  There was unanimous agreement among the mods that the forum rules prohibiting the use of the words "vent" and "rant" in the title was a good rule and needed to be upheld. 

As for changing thread titles,  mods rarely do that.  We get a lot of grief from OPs when we have changed titles and since it takes our time to change the thread title, we just leave it to OPs to do that. 

[Aeris]

Ehelldame -

Thank you so much for clarifying the policy. I do understand now the rationale behind such a restriction, and can see how it helps promote the right environment at Ehell, and will save time for the mods in the long run (by there being less actual rants/vents by people mistakenly thinking they're okay).

It does seem that some people interpreted the intented application of this policy corrected, and some did not , which produced the confusion in this thread. I know I had just thought that actual rants/vents were out of bounds, and just made more flagrant violations by announcing the title that that's what they were.

Do you think it would be possible to have a slightly more direct note added to the "Forum Rules" post? Perhaps "It is a good idea to generally avoid even the words "rant" and "vent" in your thread titles, as these may be misinterpreted by both mods and other forum members to mean that your post IS a rant or vent, even if it is not. Because of this, even when a thread is clearly not a rant/vent, use of these words in the title may result in permanent locking, so that other forum members do not mistakenly think that your thread indicates in any way that actual rant/vent posts are acceptable in this forum."

I'm providing this possible draft just as an idea - I hope that it accurately reflects the policy. I worry that, given the confusion evidenced in this thread, that it's likely a number of current or future forum members are/would be similarly confused on the policy, but may never read this particular thread.

Thanks again for the clarification of the policy.

[Keres]

We get a lot of grief from OPs when we have changed titles and since it takes our time to change the thread title, we just leave it to OPs to do that. 

I would happily do so if given the opportunity.