Moderator Thread: Revisited #2
-
@Jeff S said:
Again, let me make this very clear: I HAVE NEVER DELETED ANY OF CHEBROCK'S POSTS.
Liar.
Explain who did do it then.
Are you seriously trying to imply that I (with no mod powers whatsoever) deleted his post?
I know I saw it and replied (which is why chebrock thought it was me), and I know chebrock saw it and replied back... and then the whole string of posts were deleted.
So again... You are a liar, and we all know it.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
Again, let me make this very clear: I HAVE NEVER DELETED ANY OF CHEBROCK'S POSTS.
Liar.
Explain who did do it then.
Are you seriously trying to imply that I (with no mod powers whatsoever) deleted his post?
I know I saw it and replied (which is why chebrock thought it was me), and I know chebrock saw it and replied back... and then the whole string of posts were deleted.
So again... You are a liar, and we all know it.
OK. Time to move on. Thanks.
You almost allowed me to get into an actual, honest dialog with you, but then you caught yourself just in time. No point in trying any more.
-
@WeatherGod said:
I would also, possibly, PM the poster in question to tell them to chill. I would think that if a moderator would tell a user to chill, then it would carry a lot more weight than if another forum user (especially MPS or morbius) told him to chill.
Speaking from experience here, I can tell you that the mods have some sort of auto-notification system for post deletions, but they apparently don't have to use it. If they did, at least the user whose post was deleted would know who to go to for an explanation.
-
@Jeff S said:
It's adorable how you are dancing around the question and refuse to answer it.
There is no dancing. I expect nothing. I am simply doing what ammoQ asked me to do. What happens from there is none of my concern.
You see: I am not a mod and don't think I am qualified to be one, therefore I am handing the judgement to ammoQ who i feel has superior moderation skills.
I wish you could be a man and admit the same thing.
You do realize there is more to moderation than deleting posts and tags right?
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
You do realize there is more to moderation than deleting posts and tags right?
I've asked you now maybe 8 or 9 times to enlighten me, but still no luck.
It's hard to make rules that sound logical and fair when they amount to "MPS and his clan can do it but no one else can!" , huh?
(edit: fixed my quote. Don't want to be flamed or reported by MPS!)
-
@Jeff S said:
See, this is why we need something like the ModerationHistory.aspx page. If disputes arise, it can be quickly settled without dragging it out.@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
Again, let me make this very clear: I HAVE NEVER DELETED ANY OF CHEBROCK'S POSTS.
Liar.
Explain who did do it then.
...
I know I saw it and replied (which is why chebrock thought it was me), and I know chebrock saw it and replied back... and then the whole string of posts were deleted.
OK. Time to move on. Thanks.
You almost allowed me to get into an actual, honest dialog with you, but then you caught yourself just in time. No point in trying any more.
-
@WeatherGod said:
See, this is why we need something like the ModerationHistory.aspx page. If disputes arise, it can be quickly settled without dragging it out.
Or we could just not have dumshit moderators going through threads deleting anything they don't agree with.
-
@Jeff S said:
I've asked you now maybe 8 or 9 times to enlighten me, but still no luck.
I cannot help it if you can't read. I am pretty sure anyone else who reads what I am saying can understand.
-
@bstorer said:
Speaking from experience here, I can tell you that the mods have some sort of auto-notification system for post deletions, but they apparently don't have to use it. If they did, at least the user whose post was deleted would know who to go to for an explanation.
I can understand where that can be an optional feature. It really would do no good to let a spambot know why their posts are deleted. But it certainly would be good for it to be used when dealing with regular users (assuming that they didn't use a spamming address for account creation). Again, though, such notification system is only good for the poster in question. It does nothing to indicate to others what is acceptable and what is not. It also doesn't help when a moderator might have mis-judged, because others don't even notice the deletion, so the rest of the forum can't try and come to a poster's defense.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
I've asked you now maybe 8 or 9 times to enlighten me, but still no luck.
I cannot help it if you can't read. I am pretty sure anyone else who reads what I am saying can understand.
Ah, the standard "you're too stupid to read/understand" response when avoiding a question. Got it.
OK, like I said: we almost had an honest dialog. You almost even answered some questions. But then you caught yourself. And that's ok -- you don't want to break your personna, I understand.
Thanks for your time anyway. We have spent far too much time taking away from all the others who want to complain about my facist moderation tactics, why don't we step aside and let the others speak up. Sound good?
Have a great weekend!
(edit: fixed a typo)
-
@WeatherGod said:
I can understand where that can be an optional feature. It really would do no good to let a spambot know why their posts are deleted.
Good point. I didn't even think of that.
@WeatherGod said:But it certainly would be good for it to be used when dealing with regular users (assuming that they didn't use a spamming address for account creation). Again, though, such notification system is only good for the poster in question. It does nothing to indicate to others what is acceptable and what is not. It also doesn't help when a moderator might have mis-judged, because others don't even notice the deletion, so the rest of the forum can't try and come to a poster's defense.
True, but I have no idea whether such a thing would be feasible with CS. Frankly, I'll take whatever transparency I can get here. As long as we don't move to the /. moderation system, that is...
-
Jeff, I know that MPS likes to be implicit and force you to read between the lines of things that he wrote. However, I like my conversation style like I like my programming languages: explicit declarations where-ever possible. That's why I posted my suggestions for what to do. So far, MPS hasn't disagreed with what I suggested, so maybe what I suggested is along the lines of what he would like to see done. What do you think of my suggestions?
-
@WeatherGod said:
Jeff, I know that MPS likes to be implicit and force you to read between the lines of things that he wrote. However, I like my conversation style like I like my programming languages: explicit declarations where-ever possible. That's why I posted my suggestions for what to do. So far, MPS hasn't disagreed with what I suggested, so maybe what I suggested is along the lines of what he would like to see done. What do you think of my suggestions?
Hi -- your suggestions are great, thank you! Sorry I didn't reply. I am not really after forum moderator suggestions in general, I
amwas just trying to get MPS to state his point of view on the topic. And he won't, of course.* It's like sports fans who complain about what the coach did in the previous game, but when asked what the coach should have done, they don't have an answer.Have a nice weekend and thanks for your input, it is very much appreciated. I'll mention it to Alex and the other mods.
* And we know what MPS's suggestion would be if he were to explicitly state them: a forum where he can troll, but others can't.
-
@bstorer said:
@WeatherGod said:
Actually, it would be rather simple, just have the moderator post a 'Chill out' message in response to some sort of troll. If we argee, then we move on, end of that problem. If the poster argues back, then go ahead and delete those posts as they should be PMs. If we don't agree with the "Chill out" message, then we are free to object, probably as a PM to the moderator, but maybe not necessarially.But it certainly would be good for it to be used when dealing with regular users (assuming that they didn't use a spamming address for account creation). Again, though, such notification system is only good for the poster in question. It does nothing to indicate to others what is acceptable and what is not. It also doesn't help when a moderator might have mis-judged, because others don't even notice the deletion, so the rest of the forum can't try and come to a poster's defense.
True, but I have no idea whether such a thing would be feasible with CS.I don't think we need to resort to any sort of crazy features like "Post Restoration" or anything like that.
@bstorer said:
As long as we don't move to the /. moderation system, that is...
I always thought that /.'s moderation system was both brilliant and retarded at the same time. Philosophically speaking, it is great how the community can all be involved in moderating the forum, yet then you realize just how much of the forum is filled with idiots... :-P
-
@WeatherGod said:
What do you think of my suggestions?
Since I already answered Jeff S explicitly, I will answer you explicitly as well.
I am not qualified to make the judgement of whether a post should be deleted or edited or whatever. Therefore, all I know is when something breaks the 'rules' set forth by ammoQ and our moderation threads.
When I see something that goes against these rules, I click report abuse.
If nothing happens, that is fine. I cannot expect for everyone to agree with my viewpoint and/or judgement.
If the post gets deleted or edited or something, then that is fine, since that was a mod's decision.
There are rare times when I ask for someone to perform a particular action in an abuse report though. But in those cases, I think my stance is pretty clear. I don't have any good examples as I don't think I have access to my abuse reporting history.
So tell me, is this not explicit enough?
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Since I already answered Jeff S explicitly, I will answer you explicitly as well.
What you wrote (below) is the first time you've ever mentioned that it is OK for a mod to delete a post according to your rules. At least in direct response to any of my questions. If I am mistaken, please feel free to point it out to me.
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
If the post gets deleted or edited or something, then that is fine, since that was a mod's decision.
So, when a post is a clear troll (like perhaps many you have reported), and it is intended only to troll and make the thread go off course, and it is universally agreed (by the mod and others and common sense) that the post is an off-topic flame, is it OK for the mod to delete that post?
(sorry -- did some edits ..)
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
So tell me, is this not explicit enough?
Oh, I know it was clear enough for me earlier, and hopefully this serves as being clear enough for Jeff. Maybe he just wanted to have a nice summary of the discussion so far...?Filed under: Seriously what do I need to clarify to make this understandable?
-
@WeatherGod said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
So tell me, is this not explicit enough?
Oh, I know it was clear enough for me earlier, and hopefully this serves as being clear enough for Jeff. Maybe he just wanted to have a nice summary of the discussion so far...?Filed under: Seriously what do I need to clarify to make this understandable?
No -- he never once wrote what he felt is acceptable that moderators might do to address reported violations.
-
@Jeff S said:
first time you've ever mentioned that it is OK for a mod to delete a post according to your rules.
@Jeff S said:
is it OK for the mod to delete that post?
That is what I said.Why do you keep trying to make everything black or white? Are you this desperate to try to use my words against me?
I have explained to you time and time again... I don't make these judgements. ammoQ does. It is none of my business.
-
@Jeff S said:
No -- he never once wrote what he felt is acceptable that moderators might do to address reported violations.
So you were waiting for me to use the word 'delete' so that you can try to justify the shitheaded abuse you have been implementing? Nice try.
Nothing is going to justify away the mod abuse that we have all seen you commit.
-
@Jeff S said:
So, when a post is a clear troll (like perhaps many you have reported), and it is intended only to troll and make the thread go off course, and it is universally agreed (by the mod and others and common sense) that the post is an off-topic flame, is it OK for the mod to delete that post?
Personally I would rather just see the troll be ignored and/or flamed into oblivion. We've had problem children before like JimBastard and Lysis and they quickly grew tired of shouting for attention and being mocked for their stupidity so they left. If they hadn't been free to act like retards, most of the people on this site never would have known and they might still be amongst us to this day.
Now, I'm not talking about something that is just ridiculous like "nigger" repeated 100 times or even something like the "retard" post MPS made. However, you selectively showed the two retard posts devoid of context and not the other posts that you deleted. You are censoring actual opinions and contributions because they mock you and your pretend authority. You deleted a few of my posts that were actually on-topic, just because I called someone a name. Oh no! Whatever shall we do??
Given your behavior thus far, your contemptable disregard for intelligence and your general, bellicose nature I don't think you are a good moderator at all. Your posts sound childish and quarrelsome, like any number of other nitwits who have jumped on the anti-MPS -- and as of late, anti-Morbz ;_; -- bandwagons. The fact that you tried to spy in IRC and have an obsession with those of us who like chatting with our fellow WTFers is simply pathetic. It's like you weren't invited to join our club so you're just going to get your dad to call our parents. The thing is, you've always been free to join, but if you want to be a whingey little douchebag you probably are going to be mocked and flamed into oblivion.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
first time you've ever mentioned that it is OK for a mod to delete a post according to your rules.
@Jeff S said:
is it OK for the mod to delete that post?
That is what I said.Why do you keep trying to make everything black or white? Are you this desperate to try to use my words against me?
I have explained to you time and time again... I don't make these judgements. ammoQ does. It is none of my business.
Got it! Thank you!
So, in the end, you are in favor of censorship and non-peer moderation of these forums. You don't like some moderators for personal reasons (i.e., they have deleted your posts), but the idea of moderating the forum, deleting posts, and eliminating troll posts and flames and such is fine by you.
Thanks for clearing it all up.
I will say: I'm not sure how the TDWFMafia will feel about your viewpoint, though. But the important thing is this: You and I, at least, are completely on the same page regarding all this.
Again, have a great weekend and thank you for rubber-stamping my efforts to eliminate trolling and abusive posts in these forums!
-
@Jeff S said:
No -- he never once wrote what he felt is acceptable that moderators might do to address reported violations.
The issue at hand is what he thought was unacceptable, which was deleting posts. It was you who brought up the issue regarding his "Report Abuse" practice. I am going to go out on a limb here and wonder if you just assumed that MPS wanted you to delete those posts? The hypocracy with regards to deleting posts is in your head. You might have a point for possible hypocracy with regards to the content of his posts versus the content of the posts that he reports, but he never once asked that they be deleted. The "Report Abuse" button merely brings posts to your attention, and asks that you moderate according to your judgement. The very 'evidence' that you gave shows that he didn't try to dictate what he would like done, because he knows that he isn't moderator.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Personally I would rather just see the troll be ignored and/or flamed into oblivion.
Sadly, MPS disagrees with your view point. He prefers censorship.
-
@WeatherGod said:
@Jeff S said:
No -- he never once wrote what he felt is acceptable that moderators might do to address reported violations.
The issue at hand is what he thought was unacceptable, which was deleting posts. It was you who brought up the issue regarding his "Report Abuse" practice. I am going to go out on a limb here and wonder if you just assumed that MPS wanted you to delete those posts? The hypocracy with regards to deleting posts is in your head. You might have a point with regards to possible hypocracy with regards to the content of his posts versus the content of the posts that he reports, but he never once asked that they be deleted. The "Report Abuse" button merely brings posts to your attention, and asks that you moderate according to your judgement. The very 'evidence' that you gave shows that he didn't try to dictate what he would like done, because he knows that he isn't moderator.He just said that in his book, deleting posts as deemed necessary by moderators is OK. I didn't say it. He did.
-
Guys-- I cannot thank you enough for this thread. It has been really enlightening!
As I mentioned,though, let's all step aside and let the other forum members here vent their outrage at my nazi-facist moderation tactics, OK?
-
@Jeff S said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Personally I would rather just see the troll be ignored and/or flamed into oblivion.
Sadly, MPS disagrees with your view point. He prefers censorship.
Wow you are immensely full of shit, and stupid to boot. You know goddamn well that isn't what he said. You sound like a fucking 10 year old who can't hold his own in an argument so he just takes the first thing he can out of context, twists the shit out of it and then claims he won and that the argument is over. Die in a fire, you worthless cocksucker.
-
@Jeff S said:
So, in the end, you are in favor of censorship and non-peer moderation of these forums.
Um. You could always learn to read...
You have exactly opposite of what I am about there.
@Jeff S said:
You don't like some moderators for personal reasons
Singular. I don't like you. Because you are an arrogant prick with a stick up your ass and you have been coming at me for a few days now for seemingly no reason.
@Jeff S said:
but the idea of moderating the forum, deleting posts, and eliminating troll posts and flames and such is fine by you.
Nope, but it is out of my control. Luckily ammoQ has done a good job of not doing any of those things and we all feel comfortable.
@Jeff S said:
I'm not sure how the TDWFMafia will feel about your viewpoint, though.
What does the IRC channel have to do with anything? We do you have such a hard-on for the IRC channel? Do you feel left out or something?
@Jeff S said:
You and I, at least, are completely on the same page regarding all this.
You wish.
@Jeff S said:
Again, have a great weekend
How many times will you repeat this before actually leaving?
-
@Jeff S said:
He just said that in his book, deleting posts as deemed necessary by moderators is OK. I didn't say it. He did.
Everybody, this is perfect example of the dangers of implicit languages... Yes, MPS did say that if a moderator deemed it necessary to delete a post, then that is an appropriate action. What is implicit in that statement though is the level of trust that must exists. If I were to say that I approve of actions that the President deems necessary to do such and such, it implies that I trust the President to make sound judgement on my behalf. That's why he is President! However, if he starts to take questionable actions and overstep bounds, then such trust is weakened and the statement no longer applies.
-
@WeatherGod said:
Everybody, this is perfect example of the dangers of implicit languages... Yes, MPS did say that if a moderator deemed it necessary to delete a post, then that is an appropriate action. What is implicit in that statement though is the level of trust that must exists. If I were to say that I approve of actions that the President deems necessary to do such and such, it implies that I trust the President to make sound judgement on my behalf. That's why he is President! However, if he starts to take questionable actions and overstep bounds, then such trust is weakened and the statement no longer applies.
Agreed, again I think any reasonable person with intelligence greater than a 5 year old would understand what I said.
Clearly Jeff S is not getting his way here and has chosen to take the childish route.
I cannot say that I am surprised.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
So, in the end, you are in favor of censorship and non-peer moderation of these forums.
Um. You could always learn to read...
You have exactly opposite of what I am about there.
@Jeff S said:
You don't like some moderators for personal reasons
Singular. I don't like you. Because you are an arrogant prick with a stick up your ass and you have been coming at me for a few days now for seemingly no reason.
@Jeff S said:
but the idea of moderating the forum, deleting posts, and eliminating troll posts and flames and such is fine by you.
Nope, but it is out of my control. Luckily ammoQ has done a good job of not doing any of those things and we all feel comfortable.
@Jeff S said:
I'm not sure how the TDWFMafia will feel about your viewpoint, though.
What does the IRC channel have to do with anything? We do you have such a hard-on for the IRC channel? Do you feel left out or something?
@Jeff S said:
You and I, at least, are completely on the same page regarding all this.
You wish.
@Jeff S said:
Again, have a great weekend
How many times will you repeat this before actually leaving?
yet ...@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
is it OK for the mod to delete that post?
That is what I said.... and indeed, it is what he said:
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
When I see something that goes against these rules, I click report abuse.
If nothing happens, that is fine. I cannot expect for everyone to agree with my viewpoint and/or judgement.
If the post gets deleted or edited or something, then that is fine, since that was a mod's decision.
.. snip ..So tell me, is this not explicit enough?
-
@Jeff S said:
yet ...I am at a loss for what you don't understand about what is being explained to you.
At some point have you stopped to think that you are the only one who is buying the crap you are spewing? Does that tell you anything?
-
@WeatherGod said:
@Jeff S said:
He just said that in his book, deleting posts as deemed necessary by moderators is OK. I didn't say it. He did.
Everybody, this is perfect example of the dangers of implicit languages... Yes, MPS did say that if a moderator deemed it necessary to delete a post, then that is an appropriate action. What is implicit in that statement though is the level of trust that must exists. If I were to say that I approve of actions that the President deems necessary to do such and such, it implies that I trust the President to make sound judgement on my behalf. That's why he is President! However, if he starts to take questionable actions and overstep bounds, then such trust is weakened and the statement no longer applies.Indeed. Yet, his trust is not a requirement for being a moderator. He will hate a moderator who deletes his trolls. As all trolls do. Yet, others who are reporting his posts are quite satisfied I bet with the moderation being done when his posts are deleted.
It's simple, isn't it?
He approves of moderating in general, but he doesn't like it when it happens to him. He hates trolls, but not when he is the one trolling. And, of course, he likes the moderators here -- except when it's me.
His fair and balance forum rules are all based on his needs, his opinions, and his ability to troll/flame/insult. Not of the general population.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
I am at a loss for what you don't understand about what is being explained to you.
At some point have you stopped to think that you are the only one who is buying the crap you are spewing? Does that tell you anything?
I didn't write much of anything there, did I? I just quoted you. Why would you take offense at someone simply posting your own quotes?
I am sorry to "out" you in the front of the Mafia, but that's what happens sometimes. You and me are in this together, kid. Those of us in favor of moderating the people, versus those who believe in self-moderation and anti-censorship. It will be a tough battle, but together, you and I will prevail. Thanks for your support!
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@Jeff S said:
Again, have a great weekend
How many times will you repeat this before actually leaving?
By the way -- that was quite good, actually. You got me there!
-
@Jeff S said:
He will hate a moderator who deletes his trolls.
Interesting considering I get along with ammoQ and he has been known to delete my posts...
@Jeff S said:
As all trolls do.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times, but it never gets anymore true.
@Jeff S said:
Yet, others who are reporting his posts are quite satisfied I bet with the moderation being done when his posts are deleted.
Like all the people agreeing with you here?
@Jeff S said:
And, of course, he likes the moderators here -- except when it's me.
Congratulations, first honest thing I have seen you say so far.
@Jeff S said:
Not of the general population.
Remind me/us again of all the people agreeing with you?
-
@Jeff S said:
I didn't write much of anything there, did I? I just quoted you. Why would you take offense at someone simply posting your own quotes?
I am not offended. It would take way more than an abusive mod to offend me.
However, if you had read what I wrote, like other people will you would know I was pointing out that you obviously don't understand anything of what I have said...
@Jeff S said:
I am sorry to "out" you in the front of the Mafia, but that's what happens sometimes.
Again, why do you keep bringing up the IRC channel? Are you upset that people talk to each other outside of the forum?
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Remind me/us again of all the people agreeing with you?
You agree with me in principle, and that's all that matters to me.
Though, let's step back a moment. Forum participation, by your count, is at an all-time high. membership is way up, because people enjoy the way the "mafia" is running things here. Right?
Yet -- discounting the mafia of course, there's been maybe 4 people who are voicing their complaints about the way you and I agree to run this forum, with strict moderation to clean out trolling. How can this be? What's going on here? thanks to the mafia's efforts, these forms are thriving, yet I only see the same 4-5 people posting over and over -- especially in key topics like this one.
Hmmmm... Something's not adding up here. Either these forums aren't as thriving as you think they are, or ....
-
@Jeff S said:
Indeed. Yet, his trust is not a requirement for being a moderator. He will hate a moderator who deletes his trolls. As all trolls do. Yet, others who are reporting his posts are quite satisfied I bet with the moderation being done when his posts are deleted.
Are you again assuming that MPS wanted those posts he reported to be deleted? No, he wanted you to use your best judgement to decide the best course of action. So far, it appears to me that you prefer the judicious use of deleting posts. Therefore, the trust (at least for me) breaks down.On a slight side note, I was just catching up on the threads when I noticed the "thing your so smart" thread with the missing bstorer post. It really threw me off when reading such a discontinuity. Now, I don't know who deleted that one, but I am perplexed why you would have the deleted post quoted in your own post?
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
However, if you had read what I wrote, like other people will you would know I was pointing out that you obviously don't understand anything of what I have said...
Zing! You got me again with the "avoid directly addressing issues and just say the person is too stupid/can't read" technique. You know, you are correct: My forum knowledge is lacking. If I knew that trick, I'd clearly be doing much better in this debate.
-
@Jeff S said:
Let's all step aside and let the other forum members here vent their outrage at my nazi-facist moderation tactics, OK?
Your tactics are not facist, just silly and counter productive. When, one day after the regular moderator leaves for vacation, his stand-in gets involved in, no, becomes the center a flame war, he's not doing a good job.
@morbiuswilters said:
[...] we are now in the middle of a widespread epidemic of stupidity. I used to come here to be educated by brilliant and original minds that formed the brain trust of my industry. Today I find the forums mostly useful as a source of unintentional WTFs in the form of terrible, wrong OPs and horribly biased and uneducated replies. You may not like my style, you may not like what I have to say and you may not even like me. But I defy any of you to claim that I am biased, closed-minded, uneducated, unintelligent or apathetic. I care deeply about this site and the community around it and want to make it better.
Seconded - but at the point were TDWTF Mafia makes up more than half of the posts you should look in the mirror and ask if there may be a correlation. You are one of the few original minds left in this forum, but your tone and style sets a precedent. It drags along other people that are neither brilliant nor original but just uneducated. And I am not talking about the n00bs. Tone it down a bit.
-
@WeatherGod said:
On a slight side note, I was just catching up on the threads when I noticed the "thing your so smart" thread with the missing bstorer post. It really threw me off when reading such a discontinuity. Now, I don't know who deleted that one, but I am perplexed why you would have the deleted post quoted in your own post?
Again, I will say this one more time: I am not the only moderator who is deleting posts around here. And, for that particular post, I did not delete it. I actually responded to it and quoted it, so why would I then delete it? I thought mine should be deleted as well, to be honest. Of course, MPS will call me a liar, but that is the truth.
That's kind of the whole issue here -- for some reason, MPS and others keep assuming only one moderator is deleting posts. that's not the case.
-
@Jeff S said:
You agree with me in principle, and that's all that matters to me.
Keep telling yourself that. For your FUD to work people need to believe it.
@Jeff S said:
Forum participation, by your count, is at an all-time high. membership is way up, because people enjoy the way the "mafia" is running things here. Right?
What does the IRC channel have to do with anything? And how is anyone 'running' anything?
@Jeff S said:
thanks to the mafia's efforts, these forms are thriving, yet I only see the same 4-5 people posting over and over -- especially in key topics like this one.
I chose to post this in GD which is less frequented than sidebar, since it is not sidebar material. (Although your childish behavior is starting to bring it close)
@Jeff S said:
Hmmmm... Something's not adding up here. Either these forums aren't as thriving as you think they are, or ....
I suggest you actually pay attention for more than a few days then. The sidebar is alive and well and the other forums are as busy as usual.
In fact, just looking at the sidebar thread list disproves anything you have to say.
Try not to base your overall opinion of trends and statistics on your limited experience and obvious bias.
-
@WeatherGod said:
On a slight side note, I was just catching up on the threads when I noticed the "thing your so smart" thread with the missing bstorer post. It really threw me off when reading such a discontinuity. Now, I don't know who deleted that one, but I am perplexed why you would have the deleted post quoted in your own post?
Perhaps another question would be why he blatantly lied about it here as well?
-
@Jeff S said:
Again, I will say this one more time: I am not the only moderator who is deleting posts around here. And, for that particular post, I did not delete it. I actually responded to it and quoted it, so why would I then delete it? I thought mine should be deleted as well, to be honest. Of course, MPS will call me a liar, but that is the truth.
That's kind of the whole issue here -- for some reason, MPS and others keep assuming only one moderator is deleting posts. that's not the case.
Alright, then who is this phantom mod deleting posts and giving no notifications?
-
Holly fucking shit!
Yes, that's it, that's my contribution to this thread.
-
@JvdL said:
@Jeff S said:
Let's all step aside and let the other forum members here vent their outrage at my nazi-facist moderation tactics, OK?
Your tactics are not facist, just silly and counter productive. When, one day after the regular moderator leaves for vacation, his stand-in gets involved in, no, becomes the center a flame war, he's not doing a good job.
That may indeed be true. My mistake was simple --calling out the trolls before deleting some of the posts that, as MPS will tell you, should have been deleted. I made myself a little too visible and opened myself up to criticism and flaming, which is fine.
Again -- the trolls are supposed to complain when their trolling gets deleted. I only expected as much! I didn't think they'd be so juvenille (incessent personal attacks via posts and tags) but in retrospect I should have researched this particular group a little more to understand just how committed they are to flaming/trolling/overruning these forums. Indeed, that part was my mistake and I take ownership of that.
-
@Jeff S said:
And, for that particular post, I did not delete it. I actually responded to it and quoted it, so why would I then delete it? I thought mine should be deleted as well, to be honest.
Well, then I think that whichever mod who deleted that post made a serious error in judgement. While I don't like threads being derailed by grammer nazis, deleting such a post really made no sense. In particular, the lack of the deletion of your follow-up post defeats the purpose of deleting the original post. Deleting posts can make more of a mess than it cleans up. I would encourage ALL of the moderators to refrain from deleting posts and locking (active) threads.
-
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
Alright, then who is this phantom mod deleting posts and giving no notifications?
Ask bstorer if he got any notifications. I just looked at the delete list for that thread-- there were quite a few deleted, and I did not delete anything in that thread. I made my comment that the "you're" joke was 'enough is enough', and didn't revisit. It may have been AmmoQ, may have been Alex,may have been someone else.
The only threads I deleted without hestitation the last 2 days were the off-topic personal attacks directed at me that had nothing to do with the original threads.
I like this picture of me as a random guy coming in here and just randomly deleting posts! Kinda cool, like a cowboy or something I guess trying to "clean up this town", but unfortunately nowhere near the case.Of course, I did post a few "ignore him, he's just trolling" comments, but that was deemed unnacceptable by the mafia if I recall. My efforts to stop trolling without moderating --something MPS and others claim to want to do using a method they "approve of" -- resulted, of course, in simply more trolling/flaming. And that's when I decided simply deleting posts from those that have proven to be the worst offenders as opposed to locking threads so that hopefully the thread could continue.
In fact -- it often did, but in a way I did not expect! It turns out I distracted the trolls and they attacked me over and over, and lots of threads were left alone. Like sharks or bullies seeing the new kid in town to pick on. I'll consider that a victory at the expense of the many personal insults thrown at me.
-
@Jeff S said:
That may indeed be true. My mistake was simple --calling out the trolls before deleting some of the posts that, as MPS will tell you, should have been deleted. I made myself a little too visible and opened myself up to criticism and flaming, which is fine.
Perhaps you should be honest about the timeline as well. You started deleting posts way before saying anything to anyone. And you started by not using any kind of notification. It is only when people objected that you started notifying.
You 'called out' no one.
@Jeff S said:
I should have researched this particular group a little more to understand just how committed they are to flaming/trolling/overruning these forums. Indeed, that part was my mistake and I take ownership of that.
Why don't you explain to everyone who you think this 'group' consists of and outline the plot you think is going on.
How does a group 'overrun' a forum?
