Moderator for the History Section.

Wolfy:

Surely.
And it suffers from Andysyphyllitis, how it comes back deleting its posts that way.

Never fuck with a woman's memory, is the mantra.
The deleted post went something like this:

Hathor:
"So gendanken, you think you can wag your finger in the biology section at Spuriousmonkey or James do you? You pathetic little cunt.
They should, however, have a whole section just for literature. I'd vote for you right away.
Even the whole a & c section, I'd vote for you there as mod too.
(here he quotes Wolfy and sayz):
At least Gendanken is not as vindictive as Xev, ja?
Here's hoping she meets up with an accident involving wild animals.
Its time for my prayer now....(followed by a bunch of jesus bullshit)"


To wit- you're a fucking moron. I never once claimed superiority to either the monkey or James in biolgy and I don't seek to wag my finger at anyone.
I said I was just as adept as most in the field- and that means every damn body in here. Any one of them could be a moderator, and my history speaks for itself.
Impartial and bias is my platform- I've had too many posts either deleted or modified without warning.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Aye, I saw those posts.
My comment looks a little lonely now, does it not? It had them for company a few hours ago. Silly poodle.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Silly, silly poodle.
I'm picturing strawberry fields strewn with canine parts and it *still* barking for attention in spite of the butchery. Strawberry fields forever....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And it suffers from Andysyphyllitis, how it comes back deleting its posts that way.

bah! i sense the end of days. tedious

 

Surely.

i resent the mischaracterization tho am used to it. typical bitchlike belittlement

Never fuck with a woman's memory , is the mantra.

too bad you had to prove fallibility

The deleted post went something like this:

the admission of vagueness saved your ass from a brutal attack. yet i see holes that can be exploited

Hathor:
"So gendanken, you think you can wag your finger in the biology section at Spuriousmonkey or James do you? You pathetic little cunt. "

just bitch. (which is affectionate when applied to you) "pathetic little cunt" would have been inappropriate

"They should, however, have a whole section just for literature. I'd vote for you right away. Even the whole a & c section, I'd vote for you there as mod too. "

so? how bout some punani?
the rest seems ok. hardly a testament to a "woman's memory" tho. damn wannabe revisionist mod


To wit- you're a fucking moron.

well moderator goofball? just kidding. dont you dare touch a hair of my precious.

I never once claimed superiority to either the monkey or James in biolgy and I don't seek to wag my finger at anyone.

i know, darling. keep that thought in mind a year down the road. something to do with..paved..good intentions...blahh

I said I was just as adept as most in the field- and that means every damn body in here.

ok

.....and my history speaks for itself.

dont push your luck

Impartial and bias is my platform-

bloody red meat. hmm, freudian slip? blatant and cunning declaration of intent? oh alright.. a neuron misfired

 

you mourned, dahling

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Personally, I think gendy... is the wrong person for the task.

 

Then say why. If you have a reason at all other than she's crossed you once, of course. You do, don't you?

This is a reason why democracy is overrated - but that's something different. Porfiry should be more dictatorial, if benevolent - as I'm sure he has the capability of being from what I've seen. As a side note, Porfiry, quit mincing and appoint, and watch the results.

Read the threads she participates in - posters circle around her like flies, and if one takes the time to sift through the garbage the pearls are there for the taking where otherwise they'd be lost. If you want dross labelled and categorised and gold discussed, then Gendanken's your man.

My honest opinion is that she'd be wasted in history though. Give her Human Science and watch it bloom even more.

 

Slow down Fenris , no need to start a revolution yet.

To me there are three types of moderators here:
1. The intelligent book-smart type who contributes greatly to, what I call, 'blue-sky' debate - nothing really tangible in their posts, lacking personal experience, but great for intellectual debate.

2. The knowledgable type who contributes to posts when, and only when, they have something tangible to contribute (have personal experience/knowledge to back it up) rather than just 'blue-sky' debating.

3. Finally, the 'has time to review threads for off topic ramblings' type - this type has nothing really good to contribute by way of posts but does a fantastic job of keeping discussions on track by closing, or moving, threads that go awry.

I think all three types are needed, they all contribute greatly in different, but equally important, ways.

In my opinion, the History Forum requires a type 2 moderator. Gendy... is a type 1 moderator, again, in my opinion.

The problem I foresee with a type 1 moderator for the History Forum is that their contributions may turn the discussions into philosophical debating, something I think is better applied to some science forums and all philosophy forums.

To think my opinion has anything to do with the person proper, is quite an insult. If there's anything I can do well, it is: seperate positions from personalities.

 

I would almost swear that Hathor was spookz....for a new member his grudges with Spookz's foes are very apprent and his style is more and more like that of spookz now.

Hmm..

 

Sarge:

Bet the house on it. 'tis.

Fireguy:

And you envision type One a curmudgeon?

Hathor:
*relucatance*

My apologies. Won't touch a hair on your precious.

 

Revolution? I was rather advocating a more authoritarian approach from Porfiry.

I think that history could do with a little more "blue sky" debating, to use your term. Without it, it does become rather dry and rarely questioned. Secondly, Gendanken's historical knowledge (usually from an anthropological perspective) has often been displayed in other forums and I find it strange you think she has a lack of it. Rather than a professor with an area of interest limited to a certain few periods, it would be better perhaps to have someone with a broader general understanding of the subject across the board. Once interest in a forum gathers strength, contributors with interests in particular periods will show themselves of their own accord.

Considering that very few would have personal experience of anything outside the last half century at most, you're saying with your type 2 ... apply within - but only if you hold the relevant papers issued by whichever institution you were indocrinated by? Apart from this levelling the available candidates down to something close to none, it would lead to a state of affairs where the forum became little more than a place people post questions in order to finish their homework without actually having to do any research of their own (aside - I actually don't mind this so much, as long as it generates discussion).

My view is that philosophy and history (not to mention anthropology) are often very much intertwined - history without discussion of effect and the shaping of events afterwards is merely a statement of accepted fact in point form, such as one might find in a high school classroom. Such an approach by a moderator does not lead to any spirited discussion. The history forum as it is at the moment could certainly do with some livening up, yes?

...and in the light of what I've just said, I retract my previous comments regarding the forum Gendanken should moderate. She might actually do rather well in history, although I still stand by her suitability for human science as well.

Consider yourself insulted then. You would have some work to do trying to convince me that anyone is capable of being completely impartial with regard to this sort of thing. It is human nature to find reasons to vote for or against those we like or dislike. Not finding a good reason often results in the kind of disgruntled mumbling I just witnessed.

Oh, and for the record:
...Perhaps curmudgeons have gotten a bad rap in the same way that the messenger is blamed for the message: They have the temerity to comment on the human condition without apology. They not only refuse to applaud mediocrity, they howl it down with morose glee. Their versions of the truth unsettle us, and we hold it against them, even though they soften it with humor. - Jon Winokur

 

*don't have much time here.... a couple observations...*

You may be right.

quite easy to question my motives without having a reference point of my own, eh? lets see if i'm up for the task..... ummm, how about Tiassa? i think tiassa has, time and again, proven his ability to contribute constructively, promote somewhat of a 'blue-sky' debate whilst anchoring it to the topic. a trait i have yet to see gendy... display.

everytime tiassa has been called to the carpet he rises to the occasion. he stands with character and conviction to his viewpoints, makes convinving arguments all the while respecting the others character/position (something that requires soft-skills, again a trait yet to be displayed by gendy...) and keeps things focussed. he fosters debate.

on the other hand gendy... (no doubt an intelligent person), when called to the carpet, rises to the occasion on her ego alone (from what i've seen). i've whitnessed her deconstruct a persons character for no other reason than to strengthen her own view-point. now i ask you Fenris..., is this the type of person who fosters healthy debate?

gendy... would have my vote too if she parked her ego. lately i've noticed her doing that - keep it up gendy...!

tiassa has knowledge and personal experience (that personal experience has developed in him the ability to debate construtively with others - play nice).

don't get me wrong, sometimes i think tiassa is so high he doesn't even know what it is he's saying - nevertheless i seperate the person from the position [i concede, maybe that's something i can't do with gendy..., which is why i typically ignore her, although i could easily accuse her of the same]

I personally like posting in history, heck why wouldn't i, i've dabbled in it academically and personally. my fear is that gendy... will resort to her old ways as mod in there, that being the case i'd steer clear of it.

i gotta go.....
:m:

 

i miss you. where art thou?
i also have no idea what you are on about

 

Hathor:

Thy nightmares.

You: well moderator goofball? just kidding. dont you dare touch a hair of my precious.

Me: My apologies. Won't touch a hair on your precious

Idiota.


Fenris:
Durant writes a wonderful play between the greatest minds in our history, gathering them all (Anatole France, Voltaire, Wiliam James, Karl Marx, Gabriel Tarde, Nitszche, Hegel, Carlysle, Bossuet..on and on) in a symposium to speak about the meanings of history.
Through Voltaire he mouths the detriment that the biographer and the topogropher and the royalist have been to the essence of history- they were all patriots blinded by gold of their king and queens that each earned for their eulgoies. So in writing of battles and conquests, this biographer would turn a blind eye on cold fact and fattened his records with useless romance and deception.

Voltaire says:
"Only philosophers should write history. They will know how to distinquish the little from the great in the material they work on; they will avoid details that lead to nothing and are to history what bagagge is to an army- impedimentia; and they will look at thing in the large. The progress of intellectual enlightment, material prosperity and moral elevation is not onlya feature in the history of a nation, it consitutes that history."
- The Meaning of History

Those that have written our history have been patriots first, historians afterwards. This is why America believes herself great despite stealing her candy from a baby- King George. A senile.

 

sorry pumpkin i should have been clearer. lemme try again

well moderator goofball?

goofyfish, what are you gonna do about her swearing?

i hastily add...

kidding! leave my gendy alone

you like?

 

I have a few reasons why Gendanken shouldn't be a moderator.

1. We don't need another Xev. We don't need another intelligent, but bitchy and abusive moderator. One per community please.

2. The ensuing "Should Gendanken be a moderator" threads in this very forum about 3-4 months after her inception.

3. She's way too big for her britches, and I think that what she says about her ability to be impartial a bunch of hogwash as she can not be impartial towards people in general. Moderators need an even hand, not a big red hand.

4. A possible territory issue arising from putting two hot headed women in charge in the same community. I assure you that you want to avoid that at all costs.

 

Arditezza:

And who the fuck are you?
Hmm.

I may know, but irrelevant- my platform stands. I've suffered mod abuse myself and know the bitterness of having a rug pulled out from under you.
People here don't fucking like me, as well dislike Tiassa.
However, I don't see the boy deleting posts on a whim nor brutalizing his privileges. This is my example.
What you choose not see or believe is your doing, not mine.

Went the blind prophet with the big mouth and small feet.
How it knows this is clearly beyond me.

Wishful thinking always stinks of resentment, doesn't it? Camaflouged sewage.

Hmm. Wonder why.

 

And who the fuck are you?

one that is older and wiser than you, my dear
your responses so far buttress her points

tell ya what gendy, we'll put you to the test. right here. in this thread
lets see if you can cope in a manner that is befitting a mod

so far shit like this....

Wishful thinking always stinks of resentment, doesn't it? Camaflouged sewage.

Hmm. Wonder why.

..do not reflect positively on you.

but then again, what do i know. i was a vociferous backer of the sharmoota, xev's, candidacy

hehheh

*why do you ignore my post? i hate you!

 

So easy to ruffle.

I've changed my mind. Put the bitch in. Seeing her have a complete and utter breakdown at the sheer stupidity of most posters might be amusing at least.

If one person can get her panties in such a bunch, imagine the possibilities.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

As for who I am, I am only me. I have never posted on these forums under any other names and have no other intentions or history. I have read your posts, and interpretted your intentions, thoughts and mind therein, as it is all I have to go on. Your petty little tirades, and absolute bullshit stinks of elitist posturing. Sad too, since you are capable of so much more. But I don't need to tell you that, you already know and have heard it a hundred times and yet you still wallow in the muck like a sad little lost duckling. Ah well.