Spikey...
- Thread starter Malicedoll
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Not before a trial of her peers. I have no issue with anyone here. My problem is expressed in the very choice of words. . A police response. About committing a crime, and going to jail.
The problem many here are having is that is the prevailing attitude of several Mods. A mod is not a policeman or policewoman. Or worse, a traffic cop, riding around looking for violations. Maybe this will come as news to some, but the objective of good moderation is to quietly veer the over-emotional to a short quiet time out, and ban the trolls.
And when that happens there are upteen members clambering for a public explanation even though none should be required.
be required to take a TEST on the TOU before posting on a forum. Then when you get "BANNED" for rulebreaking...NO EXCUSES
If a mod cannot cite a rule violation...then it should be scrutinized. My 25 cents
If a mod cannot cite a rule violation...then it should be scrutinized. My 25 cents
Quite. The way we operate is via the reported post system, so far from going out on patrol we wait for members to call things in.
Unless we happen to be browsing and come across something, off duty, so to speak, and to take the analogy too far.
SJ, hi. The way you are saying things makes great sense and sounds right, but honestly, that is not the way it has been happening here with SOME mods, not all. That's what we're trying to tell you. What you are saying is all good, but you aren't seeing everything happening here, and I honestly feel that is why some of the outbursts that are happening lately. I wish you could see and understand what many of us are trying to say.
That may be true, SJ. But there is one that cruises the boards in a patrol car. The proof is in the picture.
*that was supposed to be funny* 
Does anyone have solutions or suggestions or just got their undies in a bunch and want everyone to know about it?
LOL Lika, and happily, a suggestion has already been made....to call off the bullying that is going on that I think SJ does not see nor understand. What he is saying here and what is happening are 2 different things. Rules are rules, fine. We need to follow his rules, but bullying, following from thread to thread, going into member's forums where they are doing nothing wrong and just trying to flex power for no reason, and trying to "coach" along practically every thread. I think we all understand the rules now. If the rules are broken, fine, warning or ban. But the bullying is just what is making everyone insane, and then some, just snap, like Spikey did. Everyone knows she is a great person, but some people just can get pushed too far sometimes. But bullying when someone is voicing their opinion maybe more than once or twice and telling them to move along when really, they aren't truly breaking any rules, just builds animosity.
When using that type of system, one needs to take extra time to try to understand the motivation of the reporter and the reported. I wasn't online for this particular event, and therefore cannot comment. My purpose in responding to this post, is to help bring back the sense of community which is quickly eroding, and very much missed. I pointed out the perceived attitude, hoping some might catch a glimpse of their own appearance, while not taking away their value as a community member. The intent is to point out that there are many ways of responding to different things. When feelings and passions are involved, it's not so black and white. Consideration should be given to the many variables, including one's standing in the community at the time of the action.
Unless of course, you want this to become a moderated, opinion- free forum, with videos and news reports on topics of interest, The choice is certainly yours Joe. My personal vote would be a system restore to an earlier date!
Unless of course, you want this to become a moderated, opinion- free forum, with videos and news reports on topics of interest, The choice is certainly yours Joe. My personal vote would be a system restore to an earlier date!
OK I couldn't really read all 11 pages posted today, if I may be so bold, the problem I see SJ didn't address, if the threads were breaking the rules they should be closed and I agree with him on this. What he didn't address was threads being deleted. I've moderated forums and run an IRC chatroom. I've never seen complete threads deleted as it looks like there's something being hidden. If there's something objectionable in a post the post gets edited by a mod but it's also noted that it was which doesn't seem to be the case here. If a thread gets carried away, it gets closed, normally with the mod closing it explaining why it was closed but it's not deleted... I just don't get it,
Hmmmm, deleted posts. I will say I don't care for that much. Although I can understand it in one particular, um.... "colorful" case.
Sometimes it does more to alleviate tensions to see *why* a thread has been locked, than to delete it altogether. I think people would be much less likely to start a crusade.
That's where I was going with this, when people see a comment or 10 and then they get home from work and find the thread not only closed but deleted it causes a certain amount of animosity, the reason it was closed could have absolutely nothing to do with what you had originally read but it's been deleted so that's all you have to go on.
Does anyone else here ever frequent the Offtopic forums? If so, do you think all of this is as funny as I do (both sides of the issue sharing equal hilarity).
- Status
