Hmm. Well. I did mean to say something about 'as far as I recall' so as to hedge my bets, but it would appear that this statement didn't make the cut. Oh well. You're too sensitive. Seriously. Did you make some serious comments about the policy presented or were you basically just complaining about overmoderation, undermoderation, people bitching, blah blah blah? Your complaints are generally more ambiguous than useful, aren't they? If you read my words, you'll note I mention actual useful discussion about the policy, not vague bitching. If you (or anyone else) did offer useful, constructive discussion then my apologies. Oh, just shutup with this fucking garbage. My being a moderator extends to editing posts in two forums. That's it. I'm just posting as a user here. Learn the difference and don't try to turn my every word into some diktat from the high aboves. I speak for myself now as always. More useless drama.
Well, so I was a tad bored and followed a link to Tor's blog which contained a link to Spurious's forum and found this: http://spuriousmonkey.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=105 Well said, and I agree with several points made inside. However, I strongly disagree with the idea he pushes forth about the atmosphere being set from the top down. People need to own up to their own responsibility. Does James antagonize people? Does Q troll woo woos? Hell, I'm a bit antagonistic myself (just a bit, I'm mostly a loveable teddy bear). But, are these done by moderators or by users? Moderation is clear. Moderation edits posts. Moderation demands adherence to rules and whatnot. Moderation warns. Moderators are users too. And it is in the role of user that these things happen. So just get off this power corrupts bullshit. (I do hate this infraction bullshit though. I cringe sometimes when I see some of the stupid shit people get infractions for. But, I console myself with the knowledge that infractions mean nothing these days.) However, there is a problem with the 'secret forum' that I've disliked from day one. Things get discussed in there and it's easy to forget how it appears from outside. There is nothing but ominous silence outside. The idea of secret councils deciding the fate of thousands meeting in dark and smoky rooms. People don't like that. And who can blame them? And then Avatar's comments about the unruly mob and whatnot, that was a bit over the top as well. But, again, that was the opinion of a user. And, I believe, was meant as a joke more than anything else. But, users get their panties in a bunch and take every word as some form of expression of moderator power. It's ironic that, as I stated before, Avatar's attempt at creating a policy was sparked, in its entirety, from Spurious's bitching about Sandy. And, now he'd decided to start flirting with her as a new tactic? Heh. You people are all freaks. Anyway, I don't think that anyone agreed... well. I guess a couple of people did... with the reporting Tor to her ISP thing. I think that was just an example of things being taken over the top. However, Plazma has already promised to never do it again. We all make mistakes, and I don't see why we can't allow him a modicum of trust to stand by his words.
I detect member-cum-moderator-high-horse-pluck. So I suppose moderator outbursts are unobjectionable. I read thru TOR's nit-picking of the policy and thought she was doing brilliantly—until, that is, she was hit at her achilles heel: her own personal sensitivity, like stuffing a sock in her mouth. And what was there to discuss anyway after she more or less addressed the crucial aspects of the policy but wasn't being met halfway by the other side? At that point, after she started nose-diving in preparation for a ban, the thread continued on its course, as it had become, by TOR's self-defence, as a personal declaration to policy. Policy wasn't being addressed as so much proposed policy was. And if personal declarations aren't good enough, then nor are our reactions to policy. But I think that's how policy is written anyway: as dead weight.
And you were spawned by these freaks which makes you a bigger freak because now you're a bigger people! Lol.
And that must be why said policy was subsequently forced down your throat? Oh... wait... Anyway. I decided to go through the thread and see if you did make any contributions, and as I thought you were basically just making vague comments. I detect no moderation taking place in this thread. Did you get a post deleted or something? If so, then don't blame me, I only moderate two forums and this isn't one of them. One thing you're forgetting in your little conspiracy theory rant. She was allowed back in after several bans. She is an example of leniency not oppression. She didn't need to be banned to be shut up. She was already banned and said ban could just have never been lifted. Bigger people? How so? I've actually been losing weight lately.
You don't think members of the forum's police force should be held to higher standards than the rest of us? Or that wayward off-duty behaviour can lead to... confusion? Peace.
Why should I be held to a higher standard? And, even if I were to be held to a 'higher standard', what would that higher standard be? Should I be removed from my mod position because I forget a comma? Because I say fuck? Because I call an idiot an idiot? Or, should my moderator position be judged on, you know, my actions as a moderator, not my actions as a user? Take, for instance, Q. He's a well known woo woo stalker. But, what does this have to do with his moderation?
