5 pages of replies to this thread is a lot to reply to, and my original goal of addressing everyone's comments is more than I expected after taking a personal day to reflect on the replies; letting the conversation simmer to reduce heated exchanges tends to lead to more conducive and thought-out responses.
I'm pleased with the response this topic received, and all the questions people brought up. For the most part, there is a desire to understand the reason(s) for me posting this thread, and hopefully I can explain my reasons.
There is an inadequate level of checks-and-balances on Bluelight that regulate the actions of some staff members.
It's hard to measure exactly what makes an organization corrupt, there's a whole slew of characteristics that can put an organization at risk for corruption - I can't say that i'm an expert at identifying all those risks, but will say that checks-and-balances will help keep it from getting to the point of irredeemable corruption. That's the main theme for me creating this thread. Not to expose the organization as being corrupt, or the members who I believe are contributing to the risk of potential corruption, but to encourage self-checks in the administration to identify the patterns of behavior of its staff that lead to unfair and unjust actions. I will give specific examples a little later.
Most of the points I wanted to talk about were already brought up by other members, and through this discussion we can identify the problem areas that cause disjointedness between staff and its members. Some of the claims made by some members about the state of Bluelight and/or the staff aren't founded on anything else but a hunch or a suspicion, and a rational person would seek to find reasons for these claims rather than dismissing them as conspiracy. Claims that The Lounge was never meant to be shut down, and having to see it dwindle from being the most active forum on the site to a forum that barely gets more than a handful of posts daily - there are reasons for this, and i'm willing to believe that it's due to other reasons that aren't due to management purposefully killing that forum. But when I see patterns of behavior that allude to systematic picking-off of specific members that make up the biggest contributions to The Lounge, with an overwhelmingly positive response in favor of infracting/banning, and retaliation against the person who disagrees, then it starts to look like a "my way or the highway" type of scenario - especially if no one else is willing to defend the non-conformist.
[edited]
Just from the first page, i've been slandered with negative comments with no reasonable evidence and contemptuous opinions. I've been told:
? That what I posted isn't true / isn't factual
? that i'm fishing for negative commentary
? that I haven't made any effort to substantiate anything
? that i'm defending posts that are racist, sexist, homophobic
? that my posts aren't constructive
? that my posts are a confusing spray at people
? that my post is a personal beef made public
? that i've chosen not to step up and sit in the sidelines
? that i'm immature and belligerent
? that i'm too bitter
? that my intent is somehow comparable to Hitler and Osama Bin Laden's
? that my post is vague and impotent
? that my post makes no sense
? that I was feeling bold when I made this thread
? that I've got a sandy vagina
? that i'm maliciously shit-stirring with no intention of adding to beneficial discussion
? there is no basis to this besides personal drama
? that I'm one of the two staff members who thinks there's a conspiracy
? that i'm a whiner
? that i'm a constant moaner
? that i'm piling on criticism and negativity
? that other members are just taking my word for there being something wrong on staff
? that i'm not being honest
? that my focus is on allowing racist of bigoted material
This is just from the first page, and all of it is from current and former staff. Tell me, is this how a reasonable and rational discussion on appropriate behavior is supposed to look like? The few bad apples on staff make these comments, this sets the pace for everyone else to jump on the bashing bandwagon. Several times I have reported a post made by another staff member on the forums, addressing the issue of hypocrisy. The concern of my report was dismissed, and ended up being an attack on my character by several other staff members. Pointing out the problems I see as they come up is something a responsible staff member should be doing if they're at all concerned about the way things are executed. If an organization sees any criticisms of its staff behaviors as an attack, then what hope is there in curbing unethical behavior? Thankfully, there is a platform where a member can give feedback or criticisms, most of them are responded to and addressed, despite the profuse objections that there even is a problem.
[edited]
The audacity of some staff to be so happy about banning other members. First by vilifying them to absolve themselves from guilt, then issuing permanent infractions, and patting each other on the back for getting rid of their artificial threat.
I can't believe i'm spending so much time writing about all this when it'll likely not change anything for the better, but rather give me more guff...