thehorseofpower

@ChiCricket Please DM me, too. You really are doing the Lord's work here!

I apologize for misspeaking. The post I was talking about, though, says "moderator note" right at the top of it. Not "community organizer" note, which is why I used that term. I will fully admit I have no idea what the difference is between the two groups. The note at the top of this site as a whole talks about the changing role of moderators, not community organizers...so if there is a significant difference between the two, the official language does not make that obvious.

There is now a post at the top of this thread that's "recommended" by a moderator and has what I guess is supposed to be a thought-provoking question from the mod attached to it. I'm more confused than ever. The original quoted post is from a user who seems to think this forum is okay but that sometimes posters are too fixated on harping on certain things, to the point where it makes posters seem "unbalanced." The mod's thought-provoking question at the top of this page states "How can this community talk about hard tropes with kindness? And what is a community really saying when we talk about unbalanced mental health?" Um....does the mod realize the post they quoted is, if anything, being unkind to other posters in stating why they think the forum is in trouble? No one would be saying anyone was "unbalanced" if the mods hadn't red lighted this forum and confused the heck out of everyone in trying to figure out why. This is crazy-making.

I saw your post last night. So clearly there is a mod in this thread, choosing not to engage with us on the questions on the new rules and saving our forum, but deleting posts that explain the change in leadership and their apparent decision to get rid of this forum for reasons that I still don't really understand (we're not "diverse" enough? They don't like sarcasm?). How helpful and mature of them. I guess the time we've been given to "elevate the quality of our conversations" or some such nonsense is just a farce to make it look like we have any power to change anything.

I haven't seen a cult-like mentality among the frequent posters here. I don't post much but read here almost every day. I see long-time members disagree and debate, particularly over Jill and Derick and their motivations, and typically this ends with an "agree to disagree" sort of sentiment. When I posted in Small Talk on occasion during the pandemic, I was welcomed immediately and received support and understanding even though I was not an every day poster. People did not always resoundingly agree with everything I posted on the Duggars, either, and this did not offend me but gave me food for thought. We have posters here who are Christians and posters who are atheists and everyone provides a unique perspective. I have learned a lot over the years just from the "Gimme That Old Time Religion" topic. It's a shame these new forum managers are seemingly only interested in looking at surface level topic titles and silly nicknames, both of which can be easily changed, rather than looking deeper at the real discourse had here on some very difficult topics. One thing most of us do have in common, though, is that we think the Duggars and their ilk are extremely harmful, both to their own family system and potentially our larger society. A lot of us came here because we were horrified by what we were seeing on TV and found community in our mutual horror. And we come at these topics with a healthy dose of snark, because sometimes (at least for me) the snark softens that horror and gives us a way to talk about what we're seeing without becoming wholly depressed about it. If snark is not your thing, and you find yourself put off by the tone of this forum, or you don't think the Duggars' brand of religion is all that bad, I don't understand why you would continue to visit and post here. Every community has its own culture and personality, so if this one doesn't work for you, there are plenty of others to try out. This forum has always been moderated and any poster has always had the ability to report someone they feel is breaking a rule or attacking them. This has never been a free for all. And now, apparently whatever complaints have been made by people who don't seem to enjoy the basic premise of this community have enough power to take it all down for everyone, because these new mods don't appear interested in having a conversation about our forum culture or our rules.

If the way this forum is being treated is an indication of how the new management intends to treat everyone and manage the entirety of the forums, I can't imagine it will be long. Closing threads with no clear reasoning except for titles out of the members' control, alluding to member complaints with zero specificity resulting in members speculating and turning on each other, threatening to shut down an entire forum with no warning and no actual discussion or communication of changed posting rules, when said forum has existed for many years over which a decided tone and culture has developed, treating members like children and offering "badges" no one wants as some sort of reward instead of just being clear about what is now acceptable and what is not, failing to answer messages or respond to member questions.....and all the while claiming you are moving away from being "punitive." Nope, definitely no problem brewing at all and nothing but fully functional leadership happening here.

If this is the case, then why aren't the specific concerns raised in the survey (such as one poster's statement that they raised an objection to Cade's nickname) being called out in the mod's note? Why are the posted rules for this forum not being reviewed and updated with new guidelines so we understand what is changing? The mods have given us nothing beyond objecting to thread titles (that were created by mods!) and stating blanketly that most of the content in the closed threads are somehow not good. Not good in what way? Are we no longer allowed to say Josh deserves to be in prison, given that his thread is one of the closed ones? If the mods want to effect change, they should be clearly communicating what people object to and what actually goes against their new guidelines, instead of threatening a full forum closure out of the blue. For a mod team that claims to be against punitive measures, they certainly aren't practicing what they preach.

The managers' new guidelines/expectations state the below - where is the "targeted feedback" promised in the second paragraph to "coach" us? I see no targeted feedback from moderators/managers. They also say they are "evolving" from a "punitive" role. What is more punitive than threatening permanent deletion of a forum with the only clear feedback being that our thread titles, which were created with past mod permission, are now inappropriate (which members have no access to change)? "Our moderation team is evolving from a traditional more punitive role to become champions of community health. As you peruse the forums, you may see us: Using emojis and targeted feedback to coach community members towards more inclusive and diverse perspectives.Connecting members by highlighting threads and posts that foster constructive dialogue.Challenging the community to think deeper and engage respectfully with differing viewpoints.Creating spaces for underrepresented voices, ensuring that a broad spectrum of experiences and opinions are heard. Our moderators are here not just to enforce rules but to celebrate achievements, guide discussions, and help everyone find a place in our community."

This is where I'm at with the thread titles - I cannot understand why you would threaten to shut down a whole forum over thread titles that were created with the approval of the former mods. There is nothing we as the regular posters can do to change these. If they no longer fit the site rules, the new mods need to tell us that and change them, not lock the entire thread and threaten deletion of the entire forum. This forum has always leaned to the snark side and our past posts reflect that. This has never been a Duggar fan site; it has always come with a healthy dose of calling out their harmful behaviors and cult-like tendencies. That being said, when we have veered over the line in the past, the mods have called it out and let us know specifically what is inappropriate, which is still clearly visible in past mod notes reminding us of the politics policy and David R's inappropriate nickname. If Cade's nickname has also crossed the line of what is now expected, we should be told this directly so it can stop. That is a pretty easy behavior change and a clear example of what may no longer be appropriate. Threatening closure of the forum with no actual examples of why or what complaints have been lodged by users is not.

I messaged the mod who locked the threads, asking them to please just update thread titles to fit new guidelines, because regular posters certainly can't change those, and to please come to this thread and engage with us on what the new expectations are for threads on someone like Josh in particular. If their new goal is to not police us but lead us...it seems this would be the right thing to do. It probably won't change anything, but at least I feel like I tried. :(

I don't post here often, but I read almost every day and found this forum to be a bit of a lifeline during the worst times of the pandemic. I see posters respectfully disagree and debate in a healthy way all the time. This forum is the opposite of rude, cruel, or harmful - it points out the cruelty and harm of the cult this family and its adjacent follow, for certain...but this is not a cult fan site. The new banner on the site states "the role of moderators - beyond policing to celebrating and leading." How is threatening to shut down this entire forum with zero explanation of what is wrong, beyond "thread titles are a cheap laugh" in any way not policing? These thread titles were put up by the previous moderators! If standards have changed, why are these new mods not simply changing them? Who in this forum would even have the access to change them other than these new mods who are threatening closure in the first place? I'm very confused and upset. I really value this forum and the thought of it going away is upsetting.

These are exactly my thoughts. If she is struggling to adjust to three kids, or is having post-partum issues in general, having two active boys at home that need daily schooling and structure sounds like the worst possible situation for her to put herself in. Having two of them gone at school most of the day so she can focus on just the baby and home chores seems like it would be a relief. Yes, getting the kids up and ready and out the door can be stressful but it's nothing compared to an entire day of homeschooling (virtual schooling for my two kids during the early pandemic was hard enough and there was an actual teacher involved in keeping things on track for that)! If she is indeed homeschooling, doing it because it's "easier" for her during an emotionally volatile time doesn't make any sense to me.

I got my booster two days ago on Thursday. Mine was Pfizer, though. I've had mild arm pain and yesterday had all over body aches and exhaustion, and some chills. That "just got hit by a truck" feeling was pretty bad and I should have taken the day off yesterday (and I was working from home on the computer, so I have to be pretty sick feeling to not be able to work at all). I didn't feel this bad with the original booster I got last fall. I just got up and am drinking my coffee, so hard to tell yet if I'm swinging back to feeling normal again. My husband got the Moderna one a few days before mine and had bad arm pain - said he felt like he got hit by a fastball. He didn't get the body aches and exhaustion like I did, but said the arm pain was similar to the other Moderna shots. Hope it goes well for you with minimal side effects. I had to go into the office a few times this week, and on one day I ended up stuck in a meeting room with someone who was coughing and unmasked and saying "I don't THINK I have Covid." I was livid and made my appointment for the booster the next day. So glad to have updated protection when there are so many thoughtless people I'm unfortunately forced to be around again.

Man...that basement "apartment" is awful. It looks so dark and dirty. Nothing wrong with that for a typical basement storage area...but to live in as newlyweds? Yikes. If Jonathan actually has a job lined up, why would they not plan to rent a real apartment come November?

That's good to hear, @Absolom. I made the mistake of googling "why does dense breast tissue increase cancer risk" this morning and reading a bunch of articles on the topic got me all worked up even more so than I already was. Nothing good ever comes for me of googling health-related topics!