|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 30, 2014 22:29:12 GMT -5
Greetings.. No worries Tzu, and good point about one less debate team member! However 'good' the point was, it seems that you stayed on the debate team while selectively managing the rules.. isn't there a legal principle about interest divided between personal gratification and public service? does that legal principle apply when subject of the polls is also moderating them? Be well.. You have my word that before any warning similar to the last that I'll take into account all extenuating circumstances, including provocations of you by both myself and those that I'm chummy with. Just cut and past the link to this promise into a text file for future use as evidence in future litigation. |
|
|
|
Post by onehandclapping on Jan 31, 2014 18:17:40 GMT -5
hahaha. Tzu is seriously concerned about this...... Congrats laughter! Just remember to not to get too "unbiased" in your moderation. It's way more fun when the moderators are like the Supreme Court members...........biased and out for their own agenda.  Dang it....just got flagged again by NSA. hahahahaha |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 31, 2014 19:05:19 GMT -5
hahaha. Tzu is seriously concerned about this...... Congrats laughter! Just remember to not to get too "unbiased" in your moderation. It's way more fun when the moderators are like the Supreme Court members...........biased and out for their own agenda. Dang it....just got flagged again by NSA. hahahahaha (** skijump! **) |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2014 11:41:52 GMT -5
So of these three polls about rules: Should private messages remain private?Do you want moderation rules?Should posts be moved? Only the first one gleaned much interest at all, but even if the nine votes are taken at face value that's less than half the active membership. I'd composed a moderation policy post that I was going to make sticky to replace the NAT thread with, but the fact is that there's really not any demand for moderation services right now, and in my opinion, no need for active policing either. If that situation changes I'll reconsider posting a policy statement. Also, please keep in mind that Peter still logs in regularly and might decide to implement his own policy of moderation at any time and if he does he has my full support and won't face any 2nd-guessing of any of his decisions by me. That said any announcements about policy will be about the policies I'll be implementing, so please don't expect Peter to enforce them. It also goes without saying that although ZD has officially stepped aside that any time he wants to use the admin tools he is more than welcome to do whatever he wants and without question. So beyond noting the fact of the moderation team and the lack of interest in moderation or rules, I'll nod to the one new rule that I am implementing about private messages. Also, please keep discussion about moderation or complaints about content that you think should be subject to moderation out of the GSD and other sections of the site, as these conversations can get contentious, and as such belong over in the UM section. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 4, 2014 12:49:27 GMT -5
So of these three polls about rules: Should private messages remain private?Do you want moderation rules?Should posts be moved? Only the first one gleaned much interest at all, but even if the nine votes are taken at face value that's less than half the active membership. I'd composed a moderation policy post that I was going to make sticky to replace the NAT thread with, but the fact is that there's really not any demand for moderation services right now, and in my opinion, no need for active policing either. If that situation changes I'll reconsider posting a policy statement. Also, please keep in mind that Peter still logs in regularly and might decide to implement his own policy of moderation at any time and if he does he has my full support and won't face any 2nd-guessing of any of his decisions by me. That said any announcements about policy will be about the policies I'll be implementing, so please don't expect Peter to enforce them. It also goes without saying that although ZD has officially stepped aside that any time he wants to use the admin tools he is more than welcome to do whatever he wants and without question. So beyond noting the fact of the moderation team and the lack of interest in moderation or rules, I'll nod to the one new rule that I am implementing about private messages. Also, please keep discussion about moderation or complaints about content that you think should be subject to moderation out of the GSD and other sections of the site, as these conversations can get contentious, and as such belong over in the UM section. I thought contention was okay in the moderated section, unless it's a NAT or it violates TOS. Do we need another poll? Hehe. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2014 14:35:16 GMT -5
"Bureaucracies force us to practice nonsense."
~~ Laurence Gonzales
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2014 22:29:49 GMT -5
So of these three polls about rules: Should private messages remain private?Do you want moderation rules?Should posts be moved? Only the first one gleaned much interest at all, but even if the nine votes are taken at face value that's less than half the active membership. I'd composed a moderation policy post that I was going to make sticky to replace the NAT thread with, but the fact is that there's really not any demand for moderation services right now, and in my opinion, no need for active policing either. If that situation changes I'll reconsider posting a policy statement. Also, please keep in mind that Peter still logs in regularly and might decide to implement his own policy of moderation at any time and if he does he has my full support and won't face any 2nd-guessing of any of his decisions by me. That said any announcements about policy will be about the policies I'll be implementing, so please don't expect Peter to enforce them. It also goes without saying that although ZD has officially stepped aside that any time he wants to use the admin tools he is more than welcome to do whatever he wants and without question. So beyond noting the fact of the moderation team and the lack of interest in moderation or rules, I'll nod to the one new rule that I am implementing about private messages. Also, please keep discussion about moderation or complaints about content that you think should be subject to moderation out of the GSD and other sections of the site, as these conversations can get contentious, and as such belong over in the UM section. I thought contention was okay in the moderated section, unless it's a NAT or it violates TOS. Do we need another poll? Hehe. Yes, contention is fine outside of UM ... as is lots of other stuff! ... but if there's no interest in rules then my guess is that most find the mod-centered talk to be tedious. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2014 2:58:33 GMT -5
I thought contention was okay in the moderated section, unless it's a NAT or it violates TOS. Do we need another poll? Hehe. Yes, contention is fine outside of UM ... as is lots of other stuff! ... but if there's no interest in rules then my guess is that most find the mod-centered talk to be tedious. And you don't want peeps to be tedioused by having to read the discussion about moderation? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 5, 2014 11:23:03 GMT -5
Yes, contention is fine outside of UM ... as is lots of other stuff! ... but if there's no interest in rules then my guess is that most find the mod-centered talk to be tedious. And you don't want peeps to be tedioused by having to read the discussion about moderation? Well here's a metaphorical hypo that might explain my orientation on this. If one week there were suddenly dozens of posts over in the GSD about the proper diet and habitat for pet bunnies (say, like this article) I'd likely react by directing the traffic somehow. The idea of directing expressions of concern about behavior here to UM is to remove a systemic source of tedious contention. A model emerges that can be stated this way: disagreement and debate are contentious, but not all disagreement and debate (not all contention) belong outside of GSD or Spiritual Teachers, etc ... just stuff that essentially pointlessly derails the flow of conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 5, 2014 20:13:31 GMT -5
Greetings.. And you don't want peeps to be tedioused by having to read the discussion about moderation? Well here's a metaphorical hypo that might explain my orientation on this. If one week there were suddenly dozens of posts over in the GSD about the proper diet and habitat for pet bunnies (say, like this article) I'd likely react by directing the traffic somehow. The idea of directing expressions of concern about behavior here to UM is to remove a systemic source of tedious contention. A model emerges that can be stated this way: disagreement and debate are contentious, but not all disagreement and debate (not all contention) belong outside of GSD or Spiritual Teachers, etc ... just stuff that essentially pointlessly derails the flow of conversation. It 'boils' down to your personal preference for the players.. in this post: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/176625 , you can see the members advocating contention and conflict as a means to change, but.. when the same tactic is applied to at least one of them, there is the cry of foul and official actions are used to maintain the advantage in favor of the favored.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2014 21:12:33 GMT -5
Greetings.. Well here's a metaphorical hypo that might explain my orientation on this. If one week there were suddenly dozens of posts over in the GSD about the proper diet and habitat for pet bunnies (say, like this article) I'd likely react by directing the traffic somehow. The idea of directing expressions of concern about behavior here to UM is to remove a systemic source of tedious contention. A model emerges that can be stated this way: disagreement and debate are contentious, but not all disagreement and debate (not all contention) belong outside of GSD or Spiritual Teachers, etc ... just stuff that essentially pointlessly derails the flow of conversation. It 'boils' down to your personal preference for the players.. in this post: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/176625 , you can see the members advocating contention and conflict as a means to change, but.. when the same tactic is applied to at least one of them, there is the cry of foul and official actions are used to maintain the advantage in favor of the favored.. Be well.. I don't care what tactics you use. It's childish, repetitive, udderly false and embarrassing to watch, but it doesn't really have much to do with me. I don't recall ever trying to stop you or have you moderated. Well, unless you count shooting at you.  |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 5, 2014 21:43:33 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. It 'boils' down to your personal preference for the players.. in this post: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/176625 , you can see the members advocating contention and conflict as a means to change, but.. when the same tactic is applied to at least one of them, there is the cry of foul and official actions are used to maintain the advantage in favor of the favored.. Be well.. I don't care what tactics you use. It's childish, repetitive, udderly false and embarrassing to watch, but it doesn't really have much to do with me. I don't recall ever trying to stop you or have you moderated. Well, unless you count shooting at you. Of course you care, you whine about it, but.. you refuse to do the one thing that neutralize it, engage in open honest discussion about the issues.. you contrive excuses and blame others, but dodge the actuality of direct discussion.. so much so that you've contrived the illusion that there is no 'you', which you use to pretend to validate your aggressive tactics.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 6, 2014 1:00:04 GMT -5
Greetings.. I don't care what tactics you use. It's childish, repetitive, udderly false and embarrassing to watch, but it doesn't really have much to do with me. I don't recall ever trying to stop you or have you moderated. Well, unless you count shooting at you. Of course you care, you whine about it, but.. you refuse to do the one thing that neutralize it, engage in open honest discussion about the issues.. you contrive excuses and blame others, but dodge the actuality of direct discussion.. so much so that you've contrived the illusion that there is no 'you', which you use to pretend to validate your aggressive tactics.. Be well.. Yes, you do whine, you do refuse to engage in open and honest discussion, and you do blame others for it. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 6, 2014 6:07:11 GMT -5
Greetings.. Of course you care, you whine about it, but.. you refuse to do the one thing that neutralize it, engage in open honest discussion about the issues.. you contrive excuses and blame others, but dodge the actuality of direct discussion.. so much so that you've contrived the illusion that there is no 'you', which you use to pretend to validate your aggressive tactics.. Be well.. Yes, you do whine, you do refuse to engage in open and honest discussion, and you do blame others for it. Why do you avoid direct open honest discussion about the differences between your understandings and the understandings of others? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 6, 2014 11:05:16 GMT -5
Yes, you do whine, you do refuse to engage in open and honest discussion, and you do blame others for it. Why do you avoid direct open honest discussion about the differences between your understandings and the understandings of others? I don't. Those discussions are happening all the time, just not so much with you. |
|
