on the Religion forum was Tiassa's idiotic anti-atheist rant-thread, diverted by Bells into a very heated and angry feminist abortion thread.
Link to the thread please, I'm bored.
:EDIT:
I think I found it.
You're all messed!
on the Religion forum was Tiassa's idiotic anti-atheist rant-thread, diverted by Bells into a very heated and angry feminist abortion thread.
There's a solution for that.
We need many more members to come in and post a whole lot of content, so that the mods' contributions will be minor in comparison to the overall content on the site.
Interesting content drives discussion, no matter who posts it. It will be a sad day if we ever get to the stage where members only feel like they want to reply to posts made by the moderators.
I'm curious how you decided Bells was the cause of it falling into an abortion thread...
It doesn't help the content when one of the better and more prolific posters is permanently banned for an offence that should have warranted a 7 day ban at most.
Yes, I mean LG.
This site isn't a very welcoming place at the moment, and I think you know why that is.
Why don't you do something about it?
Ancient history. Get over it. Move on.
The relevance of the LG incident to this thread is that when moderators behave arbitrarily, where even the most innocuous remark can get a person permabanned and posthumously slandered, discretion would seem to be the better part of valor. Some moderators might be best avoided. (And that's pretty much this thread's definition of a '1', isn't it?)
I don't know.
Please clarify, James R. (Or anyone.)
Is it that moderators can suspend, but only an admin can permanently ban?
I don't even know LG.
The relevance of the LG incident to this thread is that when moderators behave arbitrarily, where even the most innocuous remark can get a person permabanned and posthumously slandered, discretion would seem to be the better part of valor. Some moderators might be best avoided. (And that's pretty much this thread's definition of a '1', isn't it?)
Is it that moderators can suspend, but only an admin can permanently ban?
The relevance of the LG incident to this thread is that when moderators behave arbitrarily, where even the most innocuous remark can get a person permabanned and posthumously slandered, discretion would seem to be the better part of valor. Some moderators might be best avoided. (And that's pretty much this thread's definition of a '1', isn't it?)
The LG decision was reviewed by the entire moderator group. You can't get less arbitrary than that. Every moderator had a say (and, indeed, a vote) on that matter. That ban was a truly democratic decision, and about as far from arbitrary as you're likely to see here. So, bad example at best.
Ancient history. Get over it. Move on.
I don't know why it is. Please tell me why you don't find sciforums to be a welcoming place, and what you think should be done about it.
How did Morgan Freeman come into it?