Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2017 23:30:26 GMT -5
Putting Reef's into a moderator role is like putting Trump in charge of Community Immigrent Outreach lol As for ZD I love the guy...good human being But i respect your opinion even if it differs from mine In my experience Reefs is an extremely passive aggressive troller of anybody who shares different views than himself and an inflamer tensions in the forum in the past. But lets see how it goes...so far the tone doesn't look good. I would rather see Enigma be moderator over Reefs Both seem to be hovering around most of the drama that unfolds around here, but Enigma I could see setting aside his ego and try to apply pure logic and deduction to his principles of moderation. While so far, Reefs seems to be approaching the job like someone who is tired of all the people he percieves to be idiots or somehow beneath him and is excited about the oppertunity to enforce his thought paradigm. Please honor the no crusades rule. Actively campaigning against someone will be considered a crusade. Does that mean you will be giving Laughter a final warning for crusading against Theo? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 9, 2017 2:02:58 GMT -5
Please honor the no crusades rule. Actively campaigning against someone will be considered a crusade. Does that mean you will be giving Laughter a final warning for crusading against Theo? I thought you were done here, Satch? I had Theo on my ignore list and I used to skip the food fight stuff before I took over the mod job. So I'm not really aware of what was going on there. And I certainly can't warn or ban Laughter for violating a rule that didn't even exist then. Said that, I haven't seen Theo since and I didn't see any reported posts or PM regarding that matter either. So I didn't see anything happening on my watch. But I'll look into it if it should happen again. If I should miss it, then either report a specific post that you think is violating forum rules or send me a PM. But please don't report just anyone that you find annoying. For that you can use the ignore button as Shawn suggested in the original user guidelines: I'm not into playing kindergarten cop. We are all adults here. I expect everyone to act their age and walk their talk. So before you call in the mods, try to work it out all by yourself first. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 6:26:56 GMT -5
Does that mean you will be giving Laughter a final warning for crusading against Theo? I thought you were done here, Satch? I had Theo on my ignore list and I used to skip the food fight stuff before I took over the mod job. So I'm not really aware of what was going on there. And I certainly can't warn or ban Laughter for violating a rule that didn't even exist then. Said that, I haven't seen Theo since and I didn't see any reported posts or PM regarding that matter either. So I didn't see anything happening on my watch. But I'll look into it if it should happen again. If I should miss it, then either report a specific post that you think is violating forum rules or send me a PM. But please don't report just anyone that you find annoying. For that you can use the ignore button as Shawn suggested in the original user guidelines: I'm not into playing kindergarten cop. We are all adults here. I expect everyone to act their age and walk their talk. So before you call in the mods, try to work it out all by yourself first. You had theo on your ignore list? Why didn't you have laughter on your ignore list? After all, he was the one who was fuelling the food fight. Theo repeatedly said he wanted him to stop. Moreover have you considered banning yourself for making derisory, mocking remarks? And then of course there is the greatest misdemeanour of all which is pretending to be self realized. It may happen though and will presumably take a little bit of grace. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 9, 2017 6:54:02 GMT -5
You had theo on your ignore list? Why didn't you have laughter on your ignore list? After all, he was the one who was fuelling the food fight. Theo repeatedly said he wanted him to stop. Moreover have you considered banning yourself for making derisory, mocking remarks? And then of course there is the greatest misdemeanour of all which is pretending to be self realized. It may happen though and will presumably take a little bit of grace. I just told you I didn't see anything happening on my watch. If you want something to be done about something that happened before I took over the mod post then you have to go to Peter. I have nothing to do with that. But if it should happen again I'll take a closer look at it including post history. And about that last bit, remember to act your age and walk your talk. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Apr 9, 2017 8:27:45 GMT -5
The giraffe is dead! Long live the strawman!
|
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Apr 9, 2017 13:44:18 GMT -5
the Reefocalypse has begun!   Dudes you don't have to worry. Relax. G-man, sincerely sorry to see your harikari.  Satch, hang with us! It won't be hard. Just discuss and share like usual. You've got a lot to offer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 15:42:02 GMT -5
I didn't vote for reefs as a moderator. When did democracy turn into a dictatorship?
I for one do not recognize the authority of a self appointed and bias moderator.
Seriously...no matter how good intentioned, this forum is on the road to hell. IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Apr 9, 2017 15:57:00 GMT -5
I didn't vote for reefs as a moderator. When did democracy turn into a dictatorship? I for one do not recognize the authority of a self appointed and bias moderator. Seriously...no matter how good intentioned, this forum is on the road to hell. IMO Dictatorship/Democracy?? If anything, it's always been a dictatorship. If there was ever a vote or discussion it was at the whim of the ruling dictator/moderator. But this forum is within the context of a business model where eyeball views are sold to advertisers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 16:06:31 GMT -5
I didn't vote for reefs as a moderator. When did democracy turn into a dictatorship? I for one do not recognize the authority of a self appointed and bias moderator. Seriously...no matter how good intentioned, this forum is on the road to hell. IMO Dictatorship/Democracy?? If anything, it's always been a dictatorship. If there was ever a vote or discussion it was at the whim of the ruling dictator/moderator. But this forum is within the context of a business model where eyeball views are sold to advertisers. Well sure, the owner of the forum is getting click revenue no doubt about it. One way or another. But reefs lame rule of not engaging someone to make them wrong is absurd. Especially since reefs doesn't know the difference between that and one-upmanship. I say someone should organize a vote on this travesty. And as if acting ones age is a discerning factor for wisdom...idiocy. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 9, 2017 16:59:58 GMT -5
just  |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 9, 2017 17:19:18 GMT -5
Dictatorship/Democracy?? If anything, it's always been a dictatorship. If there was ever a vote or discussion it was at the whim of the ruling dictator/moderator. But this forum is within the context of a business model where eyeball views are sold to advertisers. Well sure, the owner of the forum is getting click revenue no doubt about it. One way or another. But reefs lame rule of not engaging someone to make them wrong is absurd. Especially since reefs doesn't know the difference between that and one-upmanship. I say someone should organize a vote on this travesty. And as if acting ones age is a discerning factor for wisdom...idiocy. If anyone wants to "make someone wrong," play one-upsmanship games, have food fights, or hurl ridicule, they can always post in the unmoderated section. I just hope that Reefs can make the moderated section a civil place where mutual respect is the norm rather than the rare exception. He has my full support, and I suspect that he'll have the full support of many others. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 17:38:14 GMT -5
Well sure, the owner of the forum is getting click revenue no doubt about it. One way or another. But reefs lame rule of not engaging someone to make them wrong is absurd. Especially since reefs doesn't know the difference between that and one-upmanship. I say someone should organize a vote on this travesty. And as if acting ones age is a discerning factor for wisdom...idiocy. If anyone wants to "make someone wrong," play one-upsmanship games, have food fights, or hurl ridicule, they can always post in the unmoderated section. I just hope that Reefs can make the moderated section a civil place where mutual respect is the norm rather than the rare exception. He has my full support, and I suspect that he'll have the full support of many others. Sorry dude, but like most on the forum, you don't realize that you cannot not play the one-upmanship game, here on the forum or in your life outside of it. What's absurd is to confuse it with making someone wrong which is just an idiots version of the game, called "I know you are but what am I"... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 17:49:24 GMT -5
Please honor the no crusades rule. Actively campaigning against someone will be considered a crusade. Does that mean you will be giving Laughter a final warning for crusading against Theo? The only crusade taking place is that of Christian internet forum missionaries... |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Apr 9, 2017 17:54:22 GMT -5
So far I'm happy enough with the 'Reefs effect' because I don't Giraffe anyway and I'm sure I'll be warned if I go on a crusade, which is helpful to me. I reckon a temp ban could have a place, because sometimes people experiencing difficult life circumstances get a bit antsy. Perhaps if their transgressions are not usually characteristic of the person, they might have a lot going on at home or something... so I guess temp bans are suitable for temporary problematic behaviours. I mean Gopal's banning was fair by any reasonable standard, and Satch is free to leave or stay, as is any member, so nothing has gone wrong and everything has been done right, so I say, good job and good luck (and I pity the foo), and we'll see what happens next?
And besides, we might have lost the giraffe, but we've still got the strawman - at least for now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2017 17:57:56 GMT -5
So far I'm happy enough with the 'Reefs effect' because I don't Giraffe anyway and I'm sure I'll be warned if I go on a crusade, which is helpful to me. I reckon a temp ban could have a place, because sometimes people experiencing difficult life circumstances get a bit antsy. Perhaps if their transgressions are not usually characteristic of the person, they might have a lot going on at home or something... so I guess temp bans are suitable for temporary problematic behaviours. I mean Gopal's banning was fair by any reasonable standard, and Satch is free to leave or stay, as is any member, so nothing has gone wrong and everything has been done right, I say, good job and good luck (and I pity the foo), and we'll see what happens next? Apparently the vetting process for moderators these days is a colossal joke if anyone can appoint themselves. |
|
