Enmos
Valued Senior Member
To himself?
What is up with the moderator vendetta against Gustav?
- Thread starter quadraphonics
- Start date
- Status
To himself?
Since you didn't understand my point I'll be more direct:
They should accept good posters. They should not accept abusive or disruptive posters. Indeed, it is their JOB to not accept abusive or disruptive posters.
Funny how the actually "abusive or disruptive posters" never get banned.
Dont be a dick enmos u know exactly what i was getting at
Hitler even rose above the Nazi party itself — however much people grumbled about the Nazi party and its various functionaries, they never believed that Hitler had anything to do with the problems. It was common for people to say that if only Hitler knew about what was going on, he would set things right, but his subordinates are keeping the truth from him. Even after the war and after all the horrors had been brought to life, some continued to insist that Hitler couldn’t have known about it and that it was all the responsibility of lower-level bureaucrats.
http://atheism.about.com/od/bookreviews/fr/HitlerMyth.htm
If only Plazma knew about this. He vud be Hoppink mad.
http://atheism.about.com/od/bookreviews/fr/HitlerMyth.htm
If only Plazma knew about this. He vud be Hoppink mad.
You know, it's amazing how reactions against Gustav have been twisted around to suit an anti-Gustav agenda. Gustav had always had a high profile here at Sciforums from since his earlier reincarnations—does anybody remember Spooky? Gustav, in comparison, had been toned down quite a bit. So in a manner of speaking, Gustav grew up with Sciforums and help forge its distinct dynamism, its cosmopolitanism, it's color.
Of course, Gustav wasn't the only colorful player in what I use to refer to as the colosseum, for indeed the place then was much grander than a mere forum. So one ought not underestimate Gustav's sense of ease as a poster, for, Sciforums of yore was never especially keen on shamming squeaky-clean morals—what mattered then during periods of hot temperamental and intellectual duress were the virtues that promoted brilliant repartee, thorough foresight, and sharp humor. People had to develop pluck or die to stay in the game.
But now, what do we have? Antiseptic boudoirs for the genteel of suburbia spinning their bloody spinning wheels. Sciforums has fuckin' come a long way, huh? But Gustav—really, one of the last vestiges of the old colosseum, a symbol of controversy, pluck, independence, and style—persisted. But now those have been taken away.
So excuse me if I yawn but it wasn't exactly Sciforums that offed him out: it was you.
Of course, Gustav wasn't the only colorful player in what I use to refer to as the colosseum, for indeed the place then was much grander than a mere forum. So one ought not underestimate Gustav's sense of ease as a poster, for, Sciforums of yore was never especially keen on shamming squeaky-clean morals—what mattered then during periods of hot temperamental and intellectual duress were the virtues that promoted brilliant repartee, thorough foresight, and sharp humor. People had to develop pluck or die to stay in the game.
But now, what do we have? Antiseptic boudoirs for the genteel of suburbia spinning their bloody spinning wheels. Sciforums has fuckin' come a long way, huh? But Gustav—really, one of the last vestiges of the old colosseum, a symbol of controversy, pluck, independence, and style—persisted. But now those have been taken away.
So excuse me if I yawn but it wasn't exactly Sciforums that offed him out: it was you.
Funny, I have seen several of them banned.
From whose perspective?? Yours?
Hi Enmos, pleased to meet you. I haven't time for more than a read only surf-through today, but this was too important to let pass.
Do you realize that you just effectively enunciated what 'protection racket' and 'blackmail' essentials are? Let me explain...
From your statement above (and similar statements from others in the past, I hasten to add), the implication is that certain mod-troll combos 'threaten to quit' unless they continue to be exempted from accountability for their own double-standard and personal agenda behaviour. Do you see this implication?
Such a rationalization/justification for inaction when 'mods go wrong' is not flattering to the integrity of a site/admin who will give in to blackmail and protection tactics just because the site/admin puts the ongoing welfare/contribution of BAD mod-trolls ahead of the ongoing welfare/contribution of GOOD posters. The 'good' posters can be easily discerned from bad posters given PROPER DUE DILIGENCE by the admins (instead of just taking their impression from the word-of-mouth of the 'racketeering/blackmailing mod-troll combos who assassinate character and threads at will....I demonstrated as much scientifically and objectively via my "Mars Rover" EXPERIMENT results which all have seen by now).
And all the sophistry in the world cannot hide any longer what you have to face: a real choice/balance which is not abdicate ascendancy to either members or mods based on who wields the power but on who is the most constructive and genuine when it comes to discussing NEW and CONTENTIOUS issues/ideas...and let the discourse judge, nit prejudice, malice and elitist power-ego tripping and double-standard rationalization and sophistry to avoid making necessary reforms in the interests of balance and fairness for science and humanity regardless of 'person/provenance'.
If this is a free and open science discourse site, then let it be so, instead of a 'blackmailing/protectionist' playground where your precious mod-trolls 'have you over a barrel' if you put them before scientific discourse openness, integrity and humanity.
If such BAD mod-troll combos persist here, your site and name will be 'mud'....so what price is worth such kow-towing to threats of mod-troll departure because you put members before mod-trolls who ruin discourse and bring their personal ego and malice and elitism/censorship into an open forum where the merits of the OP/contributions and not the members personality should be the deciding factor ONLY AFTER FULL POLITE FAIR discourse has been allowed?
Let's stop all the "It was ever thus" lame excuses; and all the "we could be worse if we wanted to" etc etc. These are symptoms of double-standards and expedient 'rules' where there should only be the polite open discourse without jackbooted little tinpot tyrants ego-tripping into perfectly genuine and interesting discussions for their own tactics, agendas and power-trips.
Please take this as constructive criticism without personal agendas of my own. Life is too short for wasting on grudges, vendettas and ego-tripping while there is still much new science to be discovered and understood. Who knows whence the next 'aha' moment/idea will come. Let the polite and exploratory discourse continue at its own synergistic pace, without undue interference from anyone thinking they have all the answers and all the power to spoil and sabotage by abuse of power and the rules which are their playthings as it suits them.
Good luck and good thinking and good 'governance' to the site and its members! Cheers!
Test.
Well ya know, posters ARE kinda necessary. Ever witness a forum where no one shows up to post accept the admin and a mod. The forum is dead, boring and has little to no activity. I know of a forum that has only a handful of active posters and when I say active, I mean they post maybe 2-4 times a month. Why is this happening there. Because they have ONE mod who thinks he is god and the owner has no will to put a leash on him. But instead just begs members who had left before to return. He even begged Neverfly to come back. But didn't harness his mod so Neverfly keeps getting permabanned by the mod and the owner has to keep unbanning him and begging him back. You'd think the owner would just fire the mod but for some reason he won't. In any case no one really posts there much. there are hundreds of threads started there by the owner that not a single person has replied to. It didn't start out that way. It got that way over time due to the mod getting gradually worse and worse in his behavior.
But a forum with no mods, well I can see a forum like that flourishing. It may be a bit psychotic but it WILL be active. So posters ARE necessary, Mods are not. If you guys wanna quit, good deal. don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
Bells
Staff member
But how would you report posts then?
Neverfly was banned for threatening another person on this site. This is not the first offense, but a second offense. The first time he did it, the administrator's were not pleased, but he was given another chance. I can assure you, permanent bans are rarely not discussed for lengthy periods of time before they actually happen. When a member is permanently banned, their behaviour across the forum is considered as a whole, along with their infraction record and also why they may have been banned previously. As stated, Neverfly was banned for threatening another person on this site for a second time. Few people get to return after they do it the first time.
Now, as to how this forum operates and manages and its level of activity.
We are not a large forum and we have been going as we have been for a number of years. While you may believe prolific posting is necessary, we prefer quality over quantity. We appreciate that you feel concern about this forum's survival without prolific chatter type posts or "psychotic" posting, but we all made our way here because of how it is here.
If you find this forum so boring now, you are free to find greener and more active and social pastures or even forums without moderators. Facebook may also be an option for you. So please, don't let the door hit you on your way out if you choose to leave.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Hi RealityCheck. My post stands on its own.
If there were no mods, this forum would be full of trolls magnitudes worse than the worst troll you've seen here.
If there were no mods, this forum would be unreadable because it would completely flood with spam in hours.
If there were no mods, this forum would be directionless chatroom without much discussion about science.
That all I want to say with my post, because wynn implied that the forum would be better off without moderation.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
There have been many discussions in the past about the well-being of this forum. The biggest complaints have always been about the influx of 'chat-posters', 'religious nuts', and 'crack pots', that are not too interested in the theme of this forum. Those are, largely, the members that start complaining about moderation.
I would hazard a guess that a lot of 'respected' posters left because we failed to stop the aforementioned from, well, kind of taking over the forum; there is too little science and too much nonsense and woo woo.
Also, I noticed a decline in activity right after the new software was installed. That's also when the spam increased to 90% of the activity.
Where do you get the idea that we want to quit?
The mods are not going away and this forum will not become psychotic, as you seem to prefer.
Posters are not only necessary, they are the forum. They make it what it is.
"don't let the door hit ya on the way out."
You are relatively new here. Where do you get the arrogance and the audacity to tell me that.. If you want to post on a psychotic, unmoderated forum, go find one.
Go to any Usenet group. It is an endless stream of get-rich schemes, ads for porn and viruses.
In the early days of the Internet the only "forums" out there were Usenet groups. No mods and anyone could post. They flourished until about 1998, when spambots made them unusable. I would not want this forum to turn into a Usenet group.
Well, if you want active, just create a new email address and post that address all over the net. You'll get thousands of spams a day - and will get a good sense of what this place would be like without mods. And if that's your thing, it's a very easy way to get it.
Thanks for your response, enmos.
Please note that a proper and objective reading (without just accepting the lies and propaganda/skewing of the troll-mod combo types) of my posting record will show that I am a constructive challenger not like anarchist/sadistic trolls who sometimes come in all guises (yes, even mods, unfortunately). All my efforts have been aimed at having the problem corrected by asking for MODIFICATION of moderating BEHAVIOUR ONLY, and NOT firing them. It is the threat (and apparently admin's fear) of their quitting if pushed to improve fairness that brought up 'mod quitting/firing' option.
In short: I have advocated for 'improving' moderation, not 'no' moderation. I have many times suggested where and how the improvements in moderator behaviour may be made. The usual kneejerk from admin and mod-troll combos who feel threatened by the idea of reform is the 'black and white' attitude/rationalizations that 'we do this for nothing and/or don't have time to do this properly or if you don't like the bad moderating then tough' etc etc..
I and any reasonable person comes to a science site to contribute and/or follow ideas, logic, science and humanity via open discourse; not to maliciously poison discourse either as mod-troll or ordinary member.
I have only goodwill towards everyone on this site and the site itself, and sites like it, which are a good thing on an internet otherwise blighted by extreme levels of ignorance, sociopathic ego and malice of all sorts. Let's not just become a site which adds more of that.
Balanced, objective and sensitive interactions require the mods setting the highest example, so that there is no reasonable person/reputation/idea injured and put off by bad moderator-troll behaviour/victimization etc.
I want the mods to stay. I want them to see where sometimes they are the problem. So just read my past posts about such problems and you can see what needs to be done: properly accountable mods and properly-dealt with trolls, irrespective. Just because admin may fear losing the mod/troll for reasons of its own, their is no justification for supporting bad moderation which ruins good discussion and aborts threads which may have led to synergistic serendipitous insights for all concerned.
Again, I thank you for your time and work. This has been exacerbated, as you say, by the software changes. By the way, the sooner you change your registration procedures/requirements the better....
SUGGESTION: I noticed some time back (When I carried out my new temporary registration for my MARS ROVER EXPERIMENT), that when a new would-be member registers, the page comes up with the 'activation string' which needs entering before the system activates the new member. HOWEVER, instead of being forced to MANUALLY enter that string, I was allowed to just 'click' on the part of the page where the activation string was 'linked'....and VOILA, I was IN without needing to prove I was a human by typing in the string manually. Can you remove that automatic entry of the activation string option (if it's still there)?
The people who get banned are those who just won't let things rest.
They start up threads about themselves.
They start targeting mods with whom they have a particular gripe.
Why do they do that?
I'm sure all the mods mostly want is an easy life.
It's an unpaid job.
Why would you put up with someone chasing you around insulting you,
and doubling the time the job takes?
Objectively, Gustav doesn't deserve to be banned.
But he's spent so much time making a few mods lives so difficult,
that they've decided to get rid of him, justly or unjustly.
- Status