Lost My Patience

It took a long time. But I finally lost my patience with some of the commenters on this board. The last straw came when B/Gleason/Cav or whoever he or she is basically accused me, yet again, of posting inaccurate information, and by extension, of "cooking the books." That poster is clearly a Realtor, because they have access to the MLS sold data (or, if they're not a Realtor, they have access to a Realtor's MLS sign in.) Fellow Realtors are more than welcome to post comments on here, and counter my statistics or my opinions — but I've asked repeatedly that if they do so, to please identify themselves and not do so anonymously. Then, if there's a discrepency, I can pick up the phone and call them to find out where we're seeing things differently. But they've steadfastly refused, and continue to change their pseudonyms on here.

I'm tired of defending myself on here at every turn, and spending hours every week policing posts with inaccurate or deceptive information, particularly when that information is posted by commenters who refuse to identify themselves, and whose motives are a mystery to me.

So I've changed the settings on this blog to require moderator approval for comments. You can still leave comments, but they won't post until I've read through them. I plan to check pending posts a couple of times a day. Sure, this move may dampen some of the spontaneity and banter, but hopefully it will also help improve the crumudgeon tone that has developed on here over the last few months.

Comments

[Rod]

good for you David - most of your readers will agree (and I'm sure we will hear from ar and his repeated censorship post).

the blog has been diminished with b.'s posting. I just hope he doesn't do anything rash since he will have no audience to crow to.

[Craig P]

Hi...
I have an old 1993 Ford Explorer (155k miles) for sale.
I don't need to sell, so I am asking 85K (cash only).

Thanks

[A guy who wants to use David's insights one day...]

Don't make David angry...you won't like him when he's angry.

[Bix]

Hey, the need to moderate is a sign of this blog's success!

On the other hand, a certain unmoderated Sullivan County Message Board I know that will go nameless (http://sullivancountybbs.proboards.com/index.cgi, if you must know) ain't got much to moderate.

Dave, re our discussion earlier of bid-ask, I'd be curious to get your perspective on the rather scary offering/closing individual prices posted by Caveat Emptor at http://blog.catskill4sale.com/catskill4sale/2009/03/totally-adorable.html?cid=6a00d8341c053e53ef01156e9db148970c#comment-6a00d8341c053e53ef01156e9db148970c

[David Knudsen]

Hey, guy, I don't get angry that much. And if I do, I usually feel so guilty I call up and apologize. (Although folks who know me would agree I have an 'edge').

Bix, I just don't want to spend the time debating individual sales ad infinitum. That whole thread about that $124,000 or whatever sale in the eastern part of the county drove me up a wall. To go into the bid/asks that he posted would involve 1) posting each and every one of the sales and 2) then providing commentary about why or why not I think they sold for what they did. And then that would lead to pages and pages and pages of comments about each and every comment. It's just not energy I want to put out.

There clearly is a desire to debate individual listings and sales, and I'd encourage B. to set up a blog to do that. I've made that suggestion a number of times, by the way. I'd probably drop by to add my two cents as well.

And by the way Bix, regarding the forum you set up, I think it's going great. It's gaining traction pretty quickly. You might want to contact other Realtors to post a link on their websites (like I did mine, on the front page) because I think it's a great resource for things that second home people really want info about, like contractors.

[Bix]

Not a bad idea, thanks.

And by the way, B or whomever is free to post on that message board. One can post there without even registering. There is a Real Estate forum that is going to waste.

[ar]

I've expressed viewpoints at various times, to be sure, but I don't know what Rod is talking about regarding a "repeated censorship post." Ain't me. The unspoken premise underlying B's posts and those of some others is this: Is there reason to question the reliability of information that is provided by people who have an interest in a particular spin? To put a finer point on it: should one take with a grain of salt optimistic characterizations of the market provided by people -- commissioned real estate brokers, whether sellers' or buyers' agents, builders, etc. -- who have an interest in creating an impression that the market is healthier than it is? The B's of the world are there to keep the real estate professionals honest -- or, more precisely but equally important, to create the impression that the real estate professionals are being kept honest. Before anyone flips out, this isn't a matter of accusing anyone of deliberate falsehoods. It's about the more subtle effect of nuanced slant: the builder who insists, under various pseudonyms, that the NYRI powerline project is not really much of a threat, so don't let it deter you from buying one of my houses; the commissioned real estate broker whose interest lies in downplaying the significance of plunging prices or low sales volume. The B's of the world counterbalance the risk of skepticism; and so, ironically, by allowing them unfettered access to the bullhorn, you actually served to bolster the credibility of the site. But, hey, I understand that freedom of the press belongs to those who own a press, and Dave owns this one. That said, I would encourage him to place a permanent notice on the site, in a reasonably prominent place, advising all that comments are moderated.

[Reg]

Thank goodness. I've stopped reading the site as often because of the commenters. It'll be nice to come back.

[Nick]

FYI there is a third option between moderation and non-moderation, which is required registration. I don't know if TypePad or whatever platform this is supports it, but that seems to be a pretty common solution to this problem. In other words:

1) Registered users can comment without moderation.

2) Unregistered users can comment anonymously, but they'll have to wait for their post to be approved.

3) Users can be banned if they don't adhere to the site policies (which you can state) and if you're on the right platform you can ban people if they consistently register under different names by referencing their IP address.

You can never prevent a hyper-persistent spammer/vandal -- ie one that resorts to proxy servers, etc -- but that's what most people with highly trafficked blogs (especially political ones where this problem is rampant) do to allow conversations to proceed uninterrupted without having this problem.

Maybe more work than it's worth it just to maintain comments when you have real work to do, but just a thought.

[David Knudsen]

Typepad has a registration process, but unfortunately it doesn't have validation, i.e. you register and put in an email address, and the system sends you an email to click on to validate your email. Without that, registration in my mind is useless. B with all his aliases could just register a new user name every time he wanted to post, and use fake email addresses each time.

[Thinking Ahead]

It's the smarmy, sarcastic, needling and whining posters who detract from this and most blogs, and bravo to Dave for steering the conversation toward reasoned dialogue. Freedom of speech in this country has always been guaranteed so long as it is responsible speech -- anything less deserves the obstacles it runs into. Put another way, you can't have civilization without being civilized, and unfortunately, the blogosphere is hurting more than helping progressive civil discourse when it encourages posters to nastily fire away while hiding behind an impenenetrable wall of anonymity.

Critical thinkers will always bring skepticism to whatever they read, whereas cynicism tends to be unhealthy and dialogue-stifling. A moderated blog, if managed properly, will be far more informative, healthy and worthwhile to read than the cynical potshots that serve to merely entertain (and often needlessly divide) at the expense of real conversation.

Want to disagree? From the sounds of it, that will be more than welcome here. It is the key reason I read this blog daily. Want to stay anonymous (like myself)? Fine. But want to yell, scream, carry on, call names and play games? Get your own blog. Thanks to Dave for realizing the difference between people who want to talk and people who simply want to dominate the discussion (or lack thereof).

[Susie]

Good for you, David. Let the trolls and parasites get and build up their own popular venue. Chances are, they don't have the talent to do it.

[Tech Girl]

Bravo! I'm happy to hear this news as it was getting to a ridiculous/malicious level. I have always appreciated the wealth of information and different point of views that this blog has to offer.

[D]

Bix, I like the fact that you set up the Sullivan board, but I would bet you would get more traffic if you had a set up on Yahoo! groups, which is a much more common forum. Most of the buildings and neighborhoods I have lived in have had a Yahoo! site.

[ar]

Anybody who thinks the NYRI high-voltage powerline proposal is no longer a threat to Sullivan County ought to be paying attention to the ongoing hearings by the New York Public Service Commission. See this very recent article: http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090329/NEWS/903290314

The 10-13-story powerline towers would traverse every town in western Sullivan County, slicing through the middle of Hortonville, to take one example, on their way to Orange County. This article says the PSC will make its ruling on whether to approve the project by August. In addition to deciding whether to approve the project at all, the PSC will decide the precise route of the towers, if they are approved.

Even if the PSC declines to approve the project, NYRI has a right to ask federal regulators to override that decision. So the uncertainty continues indefinitely.

[Bix]

That's a thought, but I think that a web based bulletin board makes a bit more sense at the moment.

By the way, I am on a mailing list for something called Hanley Wood Market Intelligence and they just issued the following:

"A Few Bits of Good News Lighten the Mood
Some preliminary signs that housing may be reaching a bottom have been warmly welcomed in recent days, with building permits, housing starts, existing home sales and new home sales all posting increases in February. While the improvements were encouraging, trends remain well off year-ago levels, and should be taken in that context with all due caution. Efforts by the government to help stabilize the housing market may be helping to encourage homebuyers coming off the sidelines to take advantage of record high affordability and the new homebuyer tax credit. February was the first time since July 2008 that both new and existing home sales recorded increases in the same month. With home sales already ticking up ahead of the spring homebuying season, there is an opportunity for a sustained increase in sales activity: welcome news for a beleaguered home building industry."

This is not my field, so I have no idea if the above analysis is valid or not.

[DN]

Thank goodness! The tone of the comments was getting downright nasty, but was especially irritating was that it was basically the same argument over and over again.

[MI]

Recent article in SC Democrat outlines the new reality at Chapin Estate - the power company is claiming no one has waterfront, and the lake is not conducive to recreational living.

That's pretty alarming considering the standard response for 3 years was 'Swinging Bridge is being filled'.

[Bix]

I tend to agree with you, DN. While I doubt very much that misleading information could possibly affect house prices, I can understand David's annoyance at having to take the time to correct misinformation.

As I said previously, posts not allowed here can go on the board I founded (see link at my name). Not being a realtor, I haven't got quite the same concerns as David.

Oh, as for the Yahoo group that someone mentioned: that may be true, but I think a web based bulletin board makes more sense. Besides, an email group requires registration, while anyone can post on the Sullivan County board without even registering. In fact, we've even had some Chinese spams getting past the Captcha.

[cfranch]

Well not to rain on everyone's parade but having someone on this board who gets out of hand every now and then is hardly a reason for comments like DN's or Susie's. I understand Dave getting miffed as his integrity has been attacked but the upside is his blog gets alot of attention and presumably some business. A small price to pay I think. I just hope that honest disagreements do not get stifled.

[ar]

Here's the Democrat article referred to above regarding the shrinkage of Toronto Reservoir. Poor Sullivan County: one step forward, two steps back. http://www.sc-democrat.com/news/003March/31/toronto.htm

[Rod]

I think Dave has shown for years he embraces lively and diverse dialogue. There are many examples of 'knudsen criticism' I would have removed if I was him (remember the 'there vs. their' post). Against his better judgment, David allowed the median debate to repeatively rage for a monotonous 60 days before putting a stop to it.

Thing is, people like Dave's perspective, which is varied, polite, insightful, balanced, foresightful and self-depreciatingly fresh. That can't be said for the bombadier of medians, sales declines, and overall world-is-ending posts, whose main goal seemed to be to wallow in the worst information he could find and post.

[David Knudsen]

I think there's more to the Toronto story than we're hearing. I can't fathom any reason, other than dam repair, for Alliance to keep the lake level low. Certainly no reason to be malicious to the Chapin homeowners themselves. But I believe there has been an ongoing dispute between Alliance and Woodstone Development (the Chapin developers) over that second lake access point down near the dam. I haven't kept close track of the details, but it has to do with the road to the am access point being on Woodstone property (and closed off by Woodstone). Alliance, however, inherited a requirement from FERC (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) when it purchased the reservoirs and dams, to provide two public access points to Toronto. I don't believe, as yet, that Woodstone and Alliance have worked out a mutually agreeable resolution. Alliance has an awfully big stick leverage point with it's control of the lake level in Toronto. Woodstone controls the road and the gate. Alliance controls the water level.

[MI]

Here are some reasons -
1. To seek reduced tax assessment from the Town.
2. Define the actual ownership of the lake, shoreline, and the responbilities therein.
3. Resolve the 6 year battle over the bequething of a public road.
4. (deleted)
5. Enforce an order from FERC.
6. Make electricity.

The article goes on to state that historically, the levels are returning to normal, after 6 years (2001-2005) of abnormally high levels due to multiple factors, the least not being the bankruptcy of the company who controlled the reservoir - (Mirant).

The whole saga reminds me of the movie 'The Jerk', where Navin gets rich by engineering some glasses (genius) and then goes to the poorhouse after everyone goes cross-eyed (jerk), just change 'glasses' to 'water' and 'cross-eyed' to 'no water'.

It appears that all vested interests - newspapers, realtors, senators, town - are trying to make Alliance into the bad guys - but, in the end, they seem to just be living up to their electricity license - no more, no less. Woodstone, on the other hand, might have some real explaining to do.

[HS]

MI can you post a link to the article you are referring to?

Number 1 is right on point. Alliance bought the assets in bankruptcy for much less then the assessed FMV that the town is collecting tax on so this is definitely a great way to put pressure on the town to reduce their tax burden. In addition to upsetting residents in the town it also must upset the folks at Chapin who have a fair bit of influence with the town.

[MI]

Regrettably, what the Town and the Chapin residents want is really not the point - or else the reservoir would be full. Is this year 3 of annual extreme water drawdowns? No owner of the reservoir has ever so point-blankly stated that 'the residents of Chapin own no waterfront'. That's quite an extreme negotiating position.

Believe me, I'm not like B. getting kick out of bad news - Alliance's position stated in their letter is worst-case scenario, no matter how you look at it. Sure, in the end they may compromise - or maybe they won't.

Relatedly, this is the 2nd huge battle Woodstone has had over 'who owns what'. Seems unusual, to say the least.

[Robert Paparella]

Don't give up. I look forward to reading this blog and the information posted is always interesting and relevant. Don't let the bad behaviour of one or two get the better of you.

Bob P. - New Homeowner in Hortonville

[ar]

Is it my imagination, or have there been a lot fewer postings -- resulting in a less vibrant overall feel to the blog -- in the two weeks since moderation took hold?

[David Knudsen]

You're right, ar, there have been fewer comments. Since I made the change, there have been 67 comments. Of those, I posted through all but 4. Of those 4, 2 were seemingly from the "mystery man" using yet another alias, one was from someone speculating on the identity of the mystery man (and 'outing' him), and one was from someone who referred to his neighbor as a "a pain in the ass." So I've really done very little censoring.

I've also gotten a number of emails from folks thanking me for exercising some control on here. So while the dialogue may be less vibrant, it's also less confrontational and a bit more welcoming.

[ar]

Let me push it further -- I bet over time you'll discovery that not only will there be fewer comments, but there will be fewer visits to the blog now that moderation is in force. When comments appeared right away, people felt the urge to check in more often because they could expect to see new comments frequently. The delay attendant to moderation reduces that expectation and, I suspect, the traffic it generated. And reduced traffic reinforces itself; people will become habituated to not checking in as much. And less frequent visiting inevitably leads to fewer comments; when people check in, they often felt the urge to respond to what they found, regardless of whether they intended to post when they clicked to the page. Even when they found new posts that fell into the category of what you call "confrontational" or were otherwise objectionable, often readers would ignore those comments and take the occasion of their visit to post on-topic. It's your blog and your business, but I question whether a rate of 4 stinkers out of 67 posts warrants the risk of decreased traffic. I know that a number of people have applauded the moderation. I suspect many of them were troubled by seeing anything negative about the state of the SC real estate market. I always felt that your fearless willingness to let anything fly enhanced the perception that the site was objection and therefore credible. Strictly from a business standpoint, I'll be interested to see whether you stay wedded to the moderation decision.