Removal of Tiassa as moderator

[Pinball1970]

Just a popcorn emoji. This thread needs popcorn!!!

I stand corrected, its seems the thread requires pop corn

 

[Seattle]

I stand corrected, its seems the thread requires pop corn

With extra butter and salt I believe.

 

[Tiassa]

I think the OT is backward tribal and wicked and I still don't think you should be a mentor.

That's quite the answer.

But now you know a bit about this larger dispute: Some people shouldn't have to do any better; that's kind of what this whole moment in melodrama is about.

Try it this way, there was an occasion when a moderator asked↗ a complaining member:

So who do you think undermines this forum more?

Someone who goes at length to research what is being posted, is able to back up any claims with evidence? Or the one flaming with one liners and whining about posts that are just too long?

That's a rhetorical question. The answer should be obvious.​

Three years later, it remains quite clear some would disagree.

• • •​

In his potential defense, though, there's no such thing as passive antiracism (in the Kendi-verse).

Just because it's been mentioned, please observe where our neighbor said—

For instance, I'll use my own case, I made some comment about those who talk about "going to they baby mama house". The response from all "moderators" here...I'm a white supremist and a racist.

There is no logical train of thought between those comments and "white supremist". I've never in my public or private life, uttered a word about the "white race" being superior.

—he is recalling his remarks in re "prejudice and bigotry in law enforcement". (Actually, it's kind of ironic; for all he complains about my posts, he went on to talk about minimum wage and too many bnbies, as well as scary black neighborhoods, in defense of police conduct.)

It's not a question of active or passive antiracism; it's a question of why Seattle chose to behave that way.

(Actually, there's a lot of irony wrapped up in that episode. Like the part where James R, in response to a complaint about trolling, staged a public inquisition↗ about racism in order to both take satisfaction in describing Seattle's ignorance ["I get that Seattle is a bit racist … I'm seeing ignorance, mainly"] while protecting certain impolite manners of discourse at Sciforums ["I'm inclined to say no"].)​

 

[Pinball1970]

That's quite the answer.

But now you know a bit about this larger dispute: Some people shouldn't have to do any better; that's kind of what this whole moment in melodrama is about.

Try it this way, there was an occasion when a moderator asked↗ a complaining member:

So who do you think undermines this forum more?

Someone who goes at length to research what is being posted, is able to back up any claims with evidence? Or the one flaming with one liners and whining about posts that are just too long?

That's a rhetorical question. The answer should be obvious.​

Three years later, it remains quite clear some would disagree.

• • •​

Just because it's been mentioned, please observe where our neighbor said—



—he is recalling his remarks in re "prejudice and bigotry in law enforcement". (Actually, it's kind of ironic; for all he complains about my posts, he went on to talk about minimum wage and too many bnbies, as well as scary black neighborhoods, in defense of police conduct.)

It's not a question of active or passive antiracism; it's a question of why Seattle chose to behave that way.

(Actually, there's a lot of irony wrapped up in that episode. Like the part where James R, in response to a complaint about trolling, staged a public inquisition↗ about racism in order to both take satisfaction in describing Seattle's ignorance ["I get that Seattle is a bit racist … I'm seeing ignorance, mainly"] while protecting certain impolite manners of discourse at Sciforums ["I'm inclined to say no"].)​

TLDR. However start a thread? Perhaps you can detect racism in people that we did not even know about? EDIT: And bigotry, that blight on science.
I would participate.

 

[Pinball1970]

But now you know a bit about this larger dispute: Some people shouldn't have to do any better; that's kind of what this whole moment in melodrama is about.

And on science if you are interested. The site. Are you?
Also, Why do you want to be a mod?
Can you answer that direct question?

 

[RainbowSingularity]

James, restore my access.

You keep getting caught in lies, but refuse the evidence. What was it, late October or early November when I made the point to you in the Mod Lounge?

Moreover, in your latest accusations, you're not even capable of enumerating your complaint.

Face it, James, you were never able to support your claims; that's why you're doing this.

Tiassa is awesome

 

[cluelusshusbund]

James comes across as an ok guy. Tiassa did not come across that way.
Exchemist jumped on me as did James and some other posters about climate change.
In a very intelligent way.
Tiassa did not on another issue.

From an outsider? Member only.

A middle management position such as moderator can be frustratin dependin on the mindset of upper management… an i thank thats whats goin on here at Sciforums.!!!

Over the years ive found Tiassa to be more about the betterment of Sciforums than personal ego.!!!

 

[foghorn]

Why do people come here (forget the site's misleading title)?
The site needs more blog readers.
Threads like the UAP thread are distracting members from reading someone’s blogs.
My bold below

Sorry if I'm just not so worried about ufos, these days. The planet is on fire, Nazis run amok, and then there's this: We peaked in '21, at 689 mass shootings, but the first time we crossed five hundred, it happened in October, 2020. Frankly, my next benchmark is 730, the equivalent of two a day. It is hard to imagine our reaction if we lost this many people, in this many incidents, abroad.

 

[wegs]

Will Tiassa be back, will James leave, where is Bells? Stay tuned to the "Tiassa Chronicles".

On last week's show with James, there was a coup and Tiassa was shown the door. There was some protest but James held firm. Did the Grinch steal Christmas? Will the Good Witch from the North come to the rescue? Will the owner drop in from stage right to save the day? Stay tuned.

Please support the "Tiassa Chronicles" Hit the subscribe button, the like button and leave a comment. For a behind the scenes look at the "Tiassa Chronicles" consider joining our Patreon channel or our Discord group.

Remember, always disclose any and all vested interests and have a Happy Holiday!

You should toss your hat into the ring for moderator in 2024. Be the change you wish to see in the world.

 

[wegs]

Is this a face book science site?

It could be. I think forums evolve though, in terms of what attracts people. Any site really, no matter what the general theme, newbies usually become regulars based on the social aspect of the site. Of course, that doesn’t mean we ignore what the common theme is here, and that is science.

 

[Seattle]

You should toss your hat into the ring for moderator in 2024. Be the change you wish to see in the world.

Haha, as long as James has input that would never happen nor would I be interested in such an environment Which also begs the question, why would Tiassa even want the "job" given the realities? Neither are really well suited for their role.They both should be members since they have a lot to say. Both are too opinionated, IMO, to moderate.

 

[Sarkus]

Which also begs the question, why would Tiassa even want the "job" given the realities?

It may be that Tiassa wanted his access restored only to be able to access (and take copies of?) the wealth of backroom messages and arguments, for future reference? Not sure how much warning he got, but I guess it's like being sacked and not even being given time to clear the locker. Think of all that lovely stationary that he's left behind!

 

[Pinball1970]

Prefer the science, I hope to learn something. I posted on a couple of politics threads and also religion because I am interested in Biblical scholarship but on the whole it is science.

 

[C C]

It could be. I think forums evolve though, in terms of what attracts people. Any site really, no matter what the general theme, newbies usually become regulars based on the social aspect of the site. Of course, that doesn’t mean we ignore what the common theme is here, and that is science.

And let's not forget that -- despite the board's name -- only one section is devoted to science disciplinary areas, with the Technology section straddling. The philosophy section was once thriving like Singapore, before bans eliminated some [reviled(?) but somehow favorite(?)] opponents people liked to argue with, and other factors drove them off.

If SF was indeed a science workshop back in its earliest days, it has long since deteriorated into more of a semi-casual science discussion board. Perhaps it would be better to accept that to a mitigated degree, than unrealistically pretend that it's what it was in its glory days (IF that idealized recollection was ever the case at all).
_

 

[Seattle]

It may be that Tiassa wanted his access restored only to be able to access (and take copies of?) the wealth of backroom messages and arguments, for future reference? Not sure how much warning he got, but I guess it's like being sacked and not even being given time to clear the locker. Think of all that lovely stationary that he's left behind!

It's always the stapler they go back for.

 

[DaveC426913]

Neither are really well suited for their role.They both should be members since they have a lot to say. Both are too opinionated, IMO, to moderate.

I've encountered this kind of sentiment before.

In an ideal world, a moderator would be dispassionate and remain at arms-length from discussion, yet at the same time, monitoring it for any trouble, ready to moderate. And they would do this for free.

This is not an ideal world. It is practically impossible to get someone to volunteer to monitor a forum of some discipline or field unless they're interested in the subject and therefore are certainly going to have things to say. In short, either they get paid and it's a job, or there has to be some other reward in it for them.

It's hardly fair to criticize a moderator for being human, being interested and opinionated, and putting in a lot of volunteer hours.

 

[C C]

I've encountered this kind of sentiment before.

In an ideal world, a moderator would be dispassionate and remain at arms-length from discussion, yet at the same time, monitoring it for any trouble, ready to moderate. And they would do this for free.

This is not an ideal world. It is practically impossible to get someone to volunteer to monitor a forum of some discipline or field unless they're interested in the subject and therefore are certainly going to have things to say. In short, either they get paid and it's a job, or there has to be some other reward in it for them.

It's hardly fair to criticize a moderator for being human, being interested and opinionated, and putting in a lot of volunteer hours.

Basically, it boils down to members not wanting to give up participating as members just because they've acquired Mod status. (I mean, the latter surely isn't what they came here for in the first place.)

Though there are places that have somehow acquired a Mod who is perfectly content to remain invisible most of the time, until a lightning bolt is justified by circumstances.
_

 

[Tiassa]

TLDR. However start a thread?

Is changing subjects all you do?

And on science if you are interested. The site. Are you?
Also, Why do you want to be a mod?
Can you answer that direct question?

Same reason as always; it was something I could do for my community.

Do you think you could be bothered to get a clue before asking random questions?

See, the thing is that once upon a time, we had pretenses of rational discourse and skeptical, sciency, evidence-based this and that, but the practical reality is that such lofty ambitions can be disruptive to other needs and priorities, so that got put aside in favor of a pretense of free speech that is generally inconsistent unto itself. For everything the Administrator didn't want us moderating, it's ridiculous that he would bother complaining that we don't do enough; there's not much to do, and that's how he wanted it.

Kind of like TheVat said:

… the historical perspective on the site, and familiarity with social dynamics among members, that should inform moderation.

Or, as you put it:

From an outsider?

It does kind of make things weird, doesn't it—

I do not think it is fair on Tiassa to draw out this discussion publicly whilst drawing other things into it.

—when you don't really know what you're on about?

 

[Pinball1970]

Is changing subjects all you do?

With you? Yes.
Like I said, just start a thread or blog. Totally fine.

 

[Pinball1970]

Same reason as always; it was something I could do for my community.

Ok, well that has not panned out. Not on a science site anyway.
Why go for a science site rather than a politics or philosophy site?