Split: SAM's intellectual dishonesty and poor moderation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

(Q)

Encephaloid Martini
Valued Senior Member
Samspoll.jpg




From a small portion of members polled (19) in a short time, (4) hours at best, we find an interesting demographic.

1) There is a split differing by about 20% on whether SAM moderates fairly or not. I suspect this would turn out a wash.

2) Although 37% of those think she moderates fairly, a whopping 84% think SAM is intellectually dishonest.

3) Almost half 48% think SAM does not moderate fairly and is intellectually dishonest.
 
(Q) said:
Samspoll.jpg




From a small portion of members polled (19) in a short time, (4) hours at best, we find an interesting demographic.

1) There is a split differing by about 20% on whether SAM moderates fairly or not. I suspect this would turn out a wash.

2) Although 37% of those think she moderates fairly, a whopping 84% think SAM is intellectually dishonest.

3) Almost half 48% think SAM does not moderate fairly and is intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...


LOL..........( I am sure this will be deleted soon)
 
Let's face it Q, Science and Society has very few threads. I wonder why this is. Is it because people prefer to post in other sections? And why would that be?
 
From the rules:

"Moderators have the final say, and can moderate your posts for any reason they think fit."
 
Sam you are bordering on the dictatorial now, and it must stop. How come Q can post something that shows you up as being perceived as dishonest, but if anyone agrees with his post, it gets deleted?

Is it because you daren't cross blades with another mod?
 
BTW Sam, I don't like your avatar. As someone that lost relatives fighting in WWII, I find it deeply offensive. Please desist using it.
 
SAM has a definate point of view that I do not believe is rational. But I have never known her to be unfair or treat anyone with disrespect or contempt. It is not realistic or fair to expect moderators to not have opinons and point of views. She certianly has a right to her point of view, and she may think my point of view is not rational as well.
So I think SAM is a fine moderator.
 
shorty_37 said:
Why did you move it from the Humour in Science thread?
That is what made it so funny....
Click to expand...

Ah gee.. could it be because it was entirely off topic?:rolleyes:

I'll give yo a hint.. the thread was about humour in science. The posts that have been moved are not about humour in science but was instead an attempt to flame and troll. Can you see the connection? Need a line drawn? Pictures maybe?:)
 
Bells said:
Ah gee.. could it be because it was entirely off topic?:rolleyes:

I'll give yo a hint.. the thread was about humour in science. The posts that have been moved are not about humour in science but was instead an attempt to flame and troll. Can you see the connection? Need a line drawn? Pictures maybe?:)
Click to expand...

Q's Post was indeed Humor in Science! Funnier than whats posted in there right now.
 
shorty_37 said:
Q's Post was indeed Humor in Science!
Click to expand...

Of course it was dear. Tell me, what part of science was Q's post connected to? Since when is how Sam moderates a science?

I can assure you, I do not recall having 'Sam's ability to moderate sciforums' as part of the science curriculum.

Funnier than whats posted in there right now.
Click to expand...
That could be because the humour goes above your head..
 
Bells said:
Ah gee.. could it be because it was entirely off topic?:rolleyes:

I'll give yo a hint.. the thread was about humour in science. The posts that have been moved are not about humour in science but was instead an attempt to flame and troll. Can you see the connection? Need a line drawn? Pictures maybe?:)
Click to expand...

Dude, meta discussion isn't allowed now? Jesus, this is getting more anal that Usenet used to be. Just 'cos you and Sam don't find it funny doesn't mean others don't, unless you two intend to dictate our sense of humour to us too?

Get a grip, eh?
 
Bells said:
I can assure you, I do not recall having 'Sam's ability to moderate sciforums' as part of the science curriculum.
Click to expand...

No, but in my 'Science and Society' course at Uni, we discussed how scientists had to interact with non-scientists and explain things to them. The prescribed method was never 'become a dictatorial asshole and delete questions you don't like.'
 
joepistole said:
So I think SAM is a fine moderator.
Click to expand...

Dude, if you'd checked out Science and Society a few weeks ago you'd have seen that it consisted of about 16 threads, ... four stickies by Sam, four topics started by Sam, and about four locked by Sam. It's more like Sam's sandpit than a topic area. Those numbers do not make her a good mod.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top