Moderators

[MarkvW]

when the thread moves from a topic to another topic (in this case is semantics) it has been hijacked.

Anyway, I'd like to know where I have "insulted" you.
If it's when I said maybe you're unable to read, that's as much insulting as saying we're not able to moderate, isn't it? You haven't been banned because I don't consider it insulting.

Don't be coy. You damn well know that Maserati can read. Why mess with him? You're supposed to moderate--not insult.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

When it clogs/hijacks a thread.

Actually, some people clog a thread by failing to respond to simple questions.

As an example - the 10+ posts you gave to PMCG on this thread earlier when he asked why i was banned

 

[Eshnar]

Don't be coy. You damn well know that Maserati can read. Why mess with him? You're supposed to moderate--not insult.

he's supposed to read my posts and he didn't, or pretended not to have read them.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

when the thread moves from a topic to another topic (in this case is semantics) it has been hijacked.

Anyway, I'd like to know where I have "insulted" you.
If it's when I said maybe you're unable to read, that's as much insulting as saying we're not able to moderate, isn't it? You haven't been banned because I don't consider it insulting.

I can read fine, so yes its an insult.

You can't mod - that's not really an insult.

Listen, you may be doing this mod thing part time in the evenings after a busy day working on a cure for cancer, while doing some part time fire fighting in the evening and you are on to help out at the orphanage delivering some fresh baked yummy cookies.

So, I don't know you - you are probably great, but you just don't get this being a mod thing.

 

[the sceptic]

I agree, they are not helpful. They don't belong here. Unfortunately the mods do not agree. They even start threads dedicated to baiting a poster with a derogatory nickname.

....But it does make it easier for posters who cannot engage on the topic to scream "Vortex!!"

says the guy that came up with the most offensive nickname in the thread.

 

[Eshnar]

I can read fine, so yes its an insult.

even if I said "Maybe"
If you're so good in reading, why did you claim that we never told you what you were doing wrong? Able to read? Then liar.

You can't mod - that's not really an insult.

Listen, you may be doing this mod thing part time in the evenings after a busy day working on a cure for cancer, while doing some part time fire fighting in the evening and you are on to help out at the orphanage delivering some fresh baked yummy cookies.

So, I don't know you - you are probably great, but you just don't get this being a mod thing.

I can mod... Do you have any authority or experience to claim that I can't, from the outside?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

when the thread moves from a topic to another topic (in this case is semantics) it has been hijacked.

Anyway, I'd like to know where I have "insulted" you.
If it's when I said maybe you're unable to read, that's as much insulting as saying we're not able to moderate, isn't it? You haven't been banned because I don't consider it insulting.

Hold on.

Semantics is not a topic - it is a perfectly good way of exploring the topic.

As an example - I started a thread about Heins finance's a few weeks ago and a long time member but first time poster with financial experience responded.
It was exactly what it needed - someone to show exactly where the money was divided.

He posted twice and then was never heard from again after getting personally attacked by another poster.

 

[Eshnar]

Hold on.

Semantics is not a topic - it is a perfectly good way of exploring the topic.

As an example - I started a thread about Heins finance's a few weeks ago and a long time member but first time poster with financial experience responded.
It was exactly what it needed - someone to show exactly where the money was divided.

He posted twice and then was never heard from again after getting personally attacked by another poster.

and did you report the attack, or just argued with the offender instead?
Anyway no, semantics is not a good way to explore the topic. Not if the topic doesn't ask for it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

even if I said "Maybe"
If you're so good in reading, why did you claim that we never told you what you were doing wrong? Able to read? Then liar.

I can mod... Do you have any authority or experience to claim that I can't, from the outside?

What?

You guys have not been able to tell me. I get this nonsense of "hijacking" or "derailing" .... or whatever suits you.

You can't even explain what that means.

 

[Netserk]

I suggest that we mods stop responding for a while. The doc clearly don't want to engage in anything other than a vortex.

*I have made this post invisible to non-mods*

 

[red_flanders]

and did you report the attack, or just argued with the offender instead?
Anyway no, semantics is not a good way to explore the topic. Not if the topic doesn't ask for it.

I certainly don't know if it was reported, but a moderator stepped in within the hour (suggesting it was, but not necessarily) and addressed the issue:

He joined in 2011....

However if you suspect someone, then report it. Speculation as to why/when some post is off topic.

The user unfortunately did not seek to continue posting in the thread.

Fair enough, I shall cease and desist with my input. Just thought I could have helped the OP a little in working through the corp docs.

Which is unfortunate. Unfortunate the person was attacked and unfortunate they didn't return after the mod intervention. Personal choice.

Entire thread here.

 

[Eshnar]

What?

You guys have not been able to tell me. I get this nonsense of "hijacking" or "derailing" .... or whatever suits you.

You can't even explain what that means.

repeating it doesn't make it true. I already answered and you already demonstrated to have understood, even if you don't agree.
edit: That's my last post here for tonight.

 

[Race Radio]

Here you have it:

. Dr. Maserati
.
.
.
.
.

Fixed that for you

 

[Dr. Maserati]

and did you report the attack, or just argued with the offender instead?
Anyway no, semantics is not a good way to explore the topic. Not if the topic doesn't ask for it.

No, I certainly did not argue with the 'offender' - as I wanted to encourage participation and discussion on the thread.

I leave the flaming to the mods.

So - to the blue - now you guys are deciding what a topic does or does not need?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

repeating it doesn't make it true. I already answered and you already demonstrated to have understood, even if you don't agree.
edit: That's my last post here for tonight.

And repeating your answer does not make it true.

Do not confuse your ability to ban people with being a moderator.
Good night.

 

[Race Radio]

Here you have it:

Here is a list that more accurately reflects the reality of the forum

. Dr. Maserati
.
.
.
.

 

[MarkvW]

What?

You guys have not been able to tell me. I get this nonsense of "hijacking" or "derailing" .... or whatever suits you.

You can't even explain what that means.

As if preserving the "purity" or "integrity" of a CN Clinic thread is something that anybody really cares about. Its about content control.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I certainly don't know if it was reported, but a moderator stepped in within the hour (suggesting it was, but not necessarily) and addressed the issue:



The user unfortunately did not seek to continue posting in the thread.



Which is unfortunate. Unfortunate the person was attacked and unfortunate they didn't return after the mod intervention. Personal choice.

Entire thread here.

And thats the reality.
As much as I appreciated Netserks intervention (no, i did not report it) the fact that these barbed posts are allowed is what has killed off good discussion.


This is not rocket science - a big issue nor is it difficult to understand.

Why would anyone new want to come in and join a discussion here when there is little discussion of facts, people can post any claim to flame or bait others and allow people hurl insults?

In fact it is noticeable and regrettable that the mods have displayed an us v them attitude to other members (mods, you are members too) on the forum.

 

[Race Radio]

It appears the mods do not want it pointed out that Dr. Masarati is the only poster on the forum that it is ok to give an insulting nickname to.

Wonder what they are scared of?

 

[The Hitch]

Note the difference Zam.

Then why not inform people who reported something that something has been done? Would that hurt?
Dear member, thank you for reporting this post. We have sent that person a pm/ we will contact the poster about that issue/ we believe there is nothing wrong with the issue but thanks for contacting us.

How is Zam supposed to know you did anything? Oh right, its not for zam to know because he isn't a "moderator". Well considering its a forum for and by posters and that the only difference between you and him is you pmd someone saying "i want to be a mod", I don't see why not. If something bothered him enough to report it then presumably he has an interest in finding out how it went so whats the harm in telling him?

While I'm on the subject, it seems to me some of you are digging yourselves into holes by not even bothering with the little things. Being respectful doesn't cost. It would get people a lot less riled up.

For instance Eshnar is a friend poster of mine on here, but I was surprised to see in that list of pm's he tells Dr M "I have no need to threat you. No tribunal will question me for banning you." Even if Eshnar felt Dr Mas deserved it, surely the interest should be in reaching a solution at some point, whereas that reads very much like a put down and is only going to make the poster less willing to cooperate, in this case and in future ones, because the wording is designed to deflate someone's ego and confidence.

If you look at the Gold Standard of moderating on this forum- Francois the Postman, he was always respectful, discussed issues not just with the people who were at fault, and often sacrificed himself to let a controversy die down. For example I remember 1 poster told him to **** off and Francois didnt even ban them, in the interests of letting things calm down.

While im not saying mods should take it that far, on the other hand the current attitude could hardly be more different and the perception is, whether earned or not, that some of you now became mods simply for the power kick. I certainly felt that way after I got a 1 week ban for what was at worst a very very minor insult (the word in question was "idiot", which in this country hasn't been a swear word since about the 12th century), and at best, friendly banter (the poster had asked "am I an idiot"). 1 week, couldn't help but laugh when I saw it. **** em if they cant take a joke seemed to be the message.

And that is especially clear in the case of moderator parullo who deletes threads or posts and refuses to even answer pm's or questions in here about it.

And that often there is no respect.

You in particular Netserk like to be a **** a lot of the time, as you were for example in the post with miburo 2 days ago.

Not that I have anything against that, I like banter and the heat of the discussion, but other people do mind that and as a moderator you should take all posters into account and understand that not all posters will enjoy reading verbal ***** slaps from the people tasked with ensuring civility on the forum.

You explain this away by arguing that your poster personality is different from your mod personality and insist that it is the prerogative of everyone else to learn to adapt to that.

But do you want to know how your explanation reads to everyone else?
More like, " I want all the power and perks of being a moderator without any of the responsibility".

As a mod on here you wear the moderator badge on here all the time. Its there next to your name everytime you post.
People will not have an on off button in their heads to switch once they learn to differentiate between what posts you intend as a mod and which ones you intend as a non mod. So long as you are a moderator people will read your posts as that of a moderator.

You needlessly put miburo down. Not like its the only example, others have complained before, but I use it as its fresh in my mind. It wasn't against the rules but still the little things matter. If it ever comes to dealing with miburo from a moderator standpoint, will you recuse yourself from his case? If not have you thought about how he might feel, a person who needlessly put him down over total BS, now being on the jury for his case?

Please and thank yous go a long way. And sometimes turning the other cheek to calm down a discussion. Its not like you dont still have the power to ban a person if they don't follow your lead and calm down themselves.

I suspect a lot more people would apply for the moderator position if they thought it was just a way of getting to ban people, delete posts, without informing anyone, getting access to the info regular posters aren't shown, without any sacrifice whatsoever. But from my experience most people think being a moderator involves a lot more than that. Certainly people like Francois the Postman, Peddaling Squares, Martin318is, 180crank, Red Flanders in the previous generation of mods saw it that way, and many of them posted a lot less after becoming mods, especially on controversial subjects.

I do remember that during that era there was a rule that no one who had previously been banned could apply for being a moderator. i see by the identity of some mods that rule must have now been dropped. As clearly have the standards.

 

[red_flanders]

And thats the reality.
As much as I appreciated Netserks intervention (no, i did not report it) the fact that these barbed posts are allowed is what has killed off good discussion.


This is not rocket science - a big issue nor is it difficult to understand.

Why would anyone new want to come in and join a discussion here when there is little discussion of facts, people can post any claim to flame or bait others and allow people hurl insults?

In fact it is noticeable and regrettable that the mods have displayed an us v them attitude to other members (mods, you are members too) on the forum.

Why would you claim it was allowed? A moderator came in and stopped it within (by my calculation) 31 minutes. I would not expect more on any forum. Are you suggesting that the moderator should have deleted the post? Maybe he wanted it to remain as a warning to others not to continue with similar questions.

I can't for the life of me figure out why you referenced that thread. The mods did exactly what they should have in this case.

 

[Race Radio]

Then why not inform people who reported something that something has been done? Would that hurt?
Dear member, thank you for reporting this post. We have sent that person a pm/ we will contact the poster about that issue/ we believe there is nothing wrong with the issue but thanks for contacting us.

How is Zam supposed to know you did anything? Oh right, its not for zam to know because he isn't a "moderator". Well considering its a forum for and by posters and that the only difference between you and him is you pmd someone saying "i want to be a mod", I don't see why not. If something bothered him enough to report it then presumably he has an interest in finding out how it went so whats the harm in telling him?

While I'm on the subject, it seems to me some of you are digging yourselves into holes by not even bothering with the little things. Being respectful doesn't cost. It would get people a lot less riled up.

For instance Eshnar is a friend poster of mine on here, but I was surprised to see in that list of pm's he tells Dr M "I have no need to threat you. No tribunal will question me for banning you." Even if Eshnar felt Dr Mas deserved it, surely the interest should be in reaching a solution at some point, whereas that reads very much like a put down and is only going to make the poster less willing to cooperate, in this case and in future ones, because the wording is designed to deflate someone's ego and confidence.

If you look at the Gold Standard of moderating on this forum- Francois the Postman, he was always respectful, discussed issues not just with the people who were at fault, and often sacrificed himself to let a controversy die down. For example I remember 1 poster told him to **** off and Francois didnt even ban them, in the interests of letting things calm down.

While im not saying mods should take it that far, on the other hand the current attitude could hardly be more different and the perception is, whether earned or not, that some of you now became mods simply for the power kick. I certainly felt that way after I got a 1 week ban for what was at worst a very very minor insult (the word in question was "idiot", which in this country hasn't been a swear word since about the 12th century), and at best, friendly banter (the poster had asked "am I an idiot"). 1 week, couldn't help but laugh when I saw it. **** em if they cant take a joke seemed to be the message.

And that is especially clear in the case of moderator parullo who deletes threads or posts and refuses to even answer pm's or questions in here about it.

And that often there is no respect.

You in particular Netserk like to be a **** a lot of the time, as you were for example in the post with miburo 2 days ago.

Not that I have anything against that, I like banter and the heat of the discussion, but other people do mind that and as a moderator you should take all posters into account and understand that not all posters will enjoy reading verbal ***** slaps from the people tasked with ensuring civility on the forum.

You explain this away by arguing that your poster personality is different from your mod personality and insist that it is the prerogative of everyone else to learn to adapt to that.

But do you want to know how your explanation reads to everyone else?
More like, " I want all the power and perks of being a moderator without any of the responsibility".

As a mod on here you wear the moderator badge on here all the time. Its there next to your name everytime you post.
People will not have an on off button in their heads to switch once they learn to differentiate between what posts you intend as a mod and which ones you intend as a non mod. So long as you are a moderator people will read your posts as that of a moderator.

You needlessly put miburo down. Not like its the only example, others have complained before, but I use it as its fresh in my mind. It wasn't against the rules but still the little things matter. If it ever comes to dealing with miburo from a moderator standpoint, will you recuse yourself from his case? If not have you thought about how he might feel, a person who needlessly put him down over total BS, now being on the jury for his case?

Please and thank yous go a long way. And sometimes turning the other cheek to calm down a discussion. Its not like you dont still have the power to ban a person if they don't follow your lead and calm down themselves.

I suspect a lot more people would apply for the moderator position if they thought it was just a way of getting to ban people, delete posts, without informing anyone, getting access to the info regular posters aren't shown, without any sacrifice whatsoever. But from my experience most people think being a moderator involves a lot more than that. Certainly people like Francois the Postman, Peddaling Squares, Martin318is, 180crank, Red Flanders in the previous generation of mods saw it that way, and many of them posted a lot less after becoming mods, especially on controversial subjects.

I do remember that during that era there was a rule that no one who had previously been banned could apply for being a moderator. i see by the identity of some mods that rule must have now been dropped. As clearly have the standards.

Good post Hitch. I miss the Postman.....but no way he could keep up those massive, long PM. Nobody would have the time

 

[the sceptic]

It appears the mods do not want it pointed out that Dr. Masarati is the only poster on the forum that it is ok to give an insulting nickname to.

Wonder what they are scared of?

It appears they are scared of banning you.

My guess is because you already report hundreds of posts every week and banning you would lead to you coming back as Vortex^2 which would make the universe collapse.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why would you claim it was allowed? A moderator came in and stopped it within (by my calculation) 31 minutes. I would not expect more on any forum. Are you suggesting that the moderator should have deleted the post? Maybe he wanted it to remain as a warning to others not to continue with similar questions.

I can't for the life of me figure out why you referenced that thread. The mods did exactly what they should have in this case.

Indeed, as I noted, i appreciated netserks intervention.
However, to me it was more the fact that any one would even think about posting that in the first place.

Even if the person was a HeinV fan or whatever - so what? Who has the right to question someone directly like that?
Again, it comes back to removing the personal barbs from contentious posts regardless of what the topic is.

On any given topic people will have strong views one way or the other - for many lurkers this can be an opportunity to learn or make an informed decision on something.

So yes - the post should have been deleted, maybe a minor warning on the thread and a friendly reminder to the 'offender' as it was minor. Simple stuff.
Leaving posts up invites comment - regardless os any warning.

 

[Eshnar]

For instance Eshnar is a friend poster of mine on here, but I was surprised to see in that list of pm's he tells Dr M "I have no need to threat you. No tribunal will question me for banning you." Even if Eshnar felt Dr Mas deserved it, surely the interest should be in reaching a solution at some point, whereas that reads very much like a put down and is only going to make the poster less willing to cooperate, in this case and in future ones, because the wording is designed to deflate someone's ego and confidence.

The tone may look a bit harsh, but that's exactly the truth. The warning was simply an alternative to a straight away ban. "No tribunal will question me", not because there's no tribunal, but because the tribunal would just tell me "good work". That wasn't a "threat". I wasn't trying to influence Dr in some obscure way to do my interests as he may think. I was trying not to ban him. A ban would have been much more fast and simple on my part, and it would have triggered less arguments here than the warning itself.
The "bans don't work" may be the only thing I agree with him. But they are necessary at a certain point, and this is something that appears as clear only when you are a mod.