Yes, this. I myself left b/c of the horrific interface and tone-deaf responses to the criticism. It was only when I joined this board (and when the previously banned posters had a place to talk about what had happened) that I realized how utterly bizarre and offensive the CH moderators were to valued, long-term posters.
2 Likes
Why should the author go into details about how aggressive the moderation on CH might be ? She was never part of CH (so how should she know), the quotes she got from Leff pointed her in a different direction and to be honest I am not sure if everybody would agree that the moderation was continuously aggressive. I don’t always agree with the moderators on CH but rarely found it overly aggressive. There are a number of different possibilities to discuss about food (FTC, HO, eG, CH etc.) why are some people so much interested to show how horrible CH was for them - just move on and post on boards you like.
Huh? I’m not criticizing the author, I’m merely stating my opinion. ::shrug::
I think some people are interested in talking about it b/c it was deeply hurtful for them. I wasn’t hurt by the mods very much at all, but I can certainly understand why other people would want to discuss it.
1 Like
If some people get “deeply hurt” because a discussion board changed they should perhaps consider taking life (and themselves) a little bit less serious and loosen up. The world doesn’t revolve around them
Did you post the article on CH? Seems it’s about THEM so they shouldn’t remove the post. Maybe the loophole to advertising FTC on CH.
Uh, because she’s a journo and these sorts of details make a story interesting?
And honestly, if you’re so happy with CH why are you on here?
You’re completely missing the point. Many of us moved here because we want a community that caters to our needs and is free of intrusion from mods that we found to be a bit aggressive. Not to mention a site that’s more stripped down and easier to navigate.
This isn’t for everyone and you are by no means compelled to participate.
I echo this.
Please refrain from directing comments about the article, commentary of the article, or participation in this site or any other site at any one particular individual.
Thank you.
3 Likes
She asked a view people including Leff, what do you expect for a short story ?
And I like discussing about food here, CH and other sites
Here’s something to think about.
Since the LAT article was published this morning at 10 am (per the byline), this site has gained about 35-40 new users. With more to come no doubt.
Perhaps we should celebrate that the article has made this forum more fulsome and lively, and just leave it at that. After all, thanks to Robert, this place as some have said is a culinary Galt’s Gulch.
Maybe vindication at Chowhound and the TPTB is not the point. And instead we should focus our efforts and energy not at ginning up another article attacking Chowhound but instead turn our attention at making this community even more vibrant and lively than the halcyon days of Chowhound (whenever that may have been for you).
As they say, living well is the best sort of revenge. And we’re kind of living pretty good …
20 Likes
I read it the same way, Kevin.
Honkman, good seeing you here.
My issue with the CH site is it going overboard on the ads and profit side to the point where food discussion is secondary.
Regarding moderation, the moderators letting certain trolls and shills run rampant was an issue for me personally.
I agree Leff and the current CH owners don’t owe us anything. But I’d like to see how they do when the content providers leave.
Again, good seeing you here finally.
I’m one of them; that article told me where to find all y’all 
6 Likes
the CH thread about the article is all about how they don’t need us, and the hell with us rats from a sinking ship, etc., etc.
Mostly from folks who haven’t been there very long.
Thought the article smacked entirely of someone who really had no idea what she was writing about, and Leff’s quote was utter bs. Hes been bitching and moaning for years about how they’re ruining his baby (um, whether I agree or disagree…that’s what happens when you sell your company) and now a change in the user base is good? I smell a payout.
A lot of people here can’t post on Chowhound because our accounts were suspended (contrary to CBS’s own stated policies) for promoting this or other alternatives, so the discussion’s sure to be skewed.
While the article was far from perfect, it definitely shared the dischord created by the redesign of CH’s website - if not the dischord created by the aggressive moderation of the site. As a longtime reader of CH, I most immediately felt the loss of a community, too - as someone mentioned above. I like the public acknowledgment of the loss - because I thought it was a loss.
Jim Leff’s been saying the same sort of thing about every makeover. What he’s missing with this one is that it’s intended to make it easier for clueless casual users to ask random questions, and in the course of doing that they made it harder to post in a fashion that would preserve and promote a community.
The LA Times piece got the technical description backwards. The fundamental structure is unchanged, they just deleted all of the regional boards (now “communities”) and distributed their topics among topical boards.
1 Like
re: the ads - most mobile platforms have limited capacity to block ads the way we can on desktop with extensions such adblock. but that’s slowly being rectified.