Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
Carico
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 302 (275656)
01-04-2006 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by roxrkool
12-26-2005 8:47 PM


Re: My comments to the NWR message
But every single one of my posts have been on topic and that's what is unjust here. I have not talked about anyone behind his back, nor have I wandered off the topic. Not once. So why am I singled out and others can flame and wander off-topic?
This message has been edited by Carico, 01-04-2006 08:45 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by roxrkool, posted 12-26-2005 8:47 PM roxrkool has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 92 of 302 (275777)
01-04-2006 1:53 PM


Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
I just opened a thread and had it closed by Jar, who said this...
Okay, you could have done this with bookmarks and kept it on your disc. The Coffee House is not a filing cabinet. Closing this thread.
1) The thread was created because a poster is bringing up issues in threads where they are totally off topic, and I did not want to burden a thread with off topic discussion he was creating. Using bookmarks to the original posts and then posting them as links would only extend OT debate within the thread (unless you are suggesting bare links with no explanation?), and encourage the poster to reply in that thread.
2) The issues themselves were OT to the original thread they were in. The second point of my new thread was to condense and move three scattered OT debates in one thread over to a single thread where they could be addressed in the future and not plug up the original thread they existed in.
3) There are plenty of one post threads because of lack of interest. If the poster is going to reply it would be better to be within that singular thread right? All closing it does is scatter the same arguments into possibly two other OT topic threads until one of you guys tell us to create a new thread because we are OT... right?
I thought I did everyone a favor by preemptively creating a thread to contain several arguments which would have been OT if I decided to answer them where they get brought up. Closed, that is exactly what you will get.
On the flipside, what happens if you reopen it? At worst it does not get used, except by me as a ref to point others too (which is arguably much easier for others than travelling to several different links). At best, debate occurs there.
I see no good reason for this judgement at all.
This message has been edited by holmes, 01-04-2006 01:54 PM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 2:22 PM Silent H has replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 302 (275780)
01-04-2006 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Silent H
01-04-2006 1:53 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
I didn't like your thread either, although I hadn't decided what to do about it.
I suggest you might be thankful that AdminJar got to it first and closed it, before a more activist admin chose to suspend you for starting what appears to be a personal attack thread (with an accusation in the thread title).
Both of you (holmes and Rrhain) need to learn how to make a clear final statement of position, then withdraw from the battle without insisting on having the last word. Some other members might also benefit from adopting such a practice.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 1:53 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 5:31 PM AdminNWR has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 94 of 302 (275781)
01-04-2006 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Trixie
01-03-2006 4:09 PM


Re: Admin action please
You received no abuse. Apparently you believe you did. I believe your post was a longwinded "Do you still beat your wife" sort of unanswerable strawman accusation, but apparently you don't see it that way, so I have to assume that you just aren't getting something rather than intending to bait me. So I sincerely apologize for my irritability and impatience insofar as I aimed it at you. But it was directed more at Percy than at you anyway, since our exchange had managed to go reasonably well considering that your post didn't address anything I could relate to. In any case I should have taken more time to cool off before reacting to him too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Trixie, posted 01-03-2006 4:09 PM Trixie has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 95 of 302 (275782)
01-04-2006 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by AdminPD
01-03-2006 5:25 PM


Re: Conflict Resolution Thread
I think any discussion of this would take us right back to the disagreement on the thread itself. It's not personal. Apparently Trixie didn't intend to be baiting me or accusing me and I overreacted when Percy intervened. So I don't see anything to discuss, but thanks for the offer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by AdminPD, posted 01-03-2006 5:25 PM AdminPD has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 96 of 302 (275842)
01-04-2006 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by AdminNWR
01-04-2006 2:22 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
before a more activist admin chose to suspend you for starting what appears to be a personal attack thread (with an accusation in the thread title).
I am now beginning to feel pretty uncomfortable at EvC. I want to get this straight...
1) On top of blatantly misrepresenting data, a poster also plagiarized which is a violation of guidelines and gets no warning whatsoever. (In fact YOU supposedly read my post and then said nothing).
2) Then in another thread, he begins to misrepresent my positions and actions repeatedly within another thread... which is an attack on me... and he gets no warning whatsoever.
3) Then I open up a thread which gathers all the points he had been refering to and put them in a single thread (concisely) so if he wants to bring it up again I can point to that thread and he can move debate to that... I am treated as if I am attacking HIM?
need to learn how to make a clear final statement of position, then withdraw from the battle without insisting on having the last word.
This is NOT about having the last word. I already gave a final statement of my position. In fact this isn't even about POSITIONS. With the exception of mentioning at the very end that a position he took on one subject was undercut, I do not argue a position on those subjects.
He accused me of wrongdoing within that other thread. I am simply pulling quotes from the argument to show that what he was accusing me of doing was not true.
Only on the last point do I also note that a position happens to be wrong because it is ironically what he used to accuse me of something wrong.
Yes, if he wants to continue debate on one of those debate positions he can then do so there, rather than starting it up elsewhere. But if you read what I wrote in the new thread I start each point explaining what he has accused me of doing and that what follows is to show that I did not do what he accused me of doing.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 2:22 PM AdminNWR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 6:27 PM Silent H has replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 302 (275857)
01-04-2006 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Silent H
01-04-2006 5:31 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
Sorry to break the bad news. However, if you expect moderators to read in full detail every message, and to do fact checking research on every message, then you would need a system of paid moderators, and well paid at that.
I stopped detailed reading of disputes between you and Rrhain some time ago.
I generally respect you as a poster. You make many thoughtful comments. But when you get into a dispute like those, the posts that are part of the dispute quickly become unproductive, and quite boring.
It is hard to say whether moderators should have stepped in and stopped it. There was fault on both sides. The dispute was in a Coffee Room topic, so not disruptive to the main debates. The level of personal attacks in what I read was not high enough to raise serious concerns. Sometimes it is better to let a fight work itself out.
The title of your newest thread (the one AdminJar closed) was a little inflammatory, and made worse because it is a thread title and not just text within a thread.
This is NOT about having the last word. I already gave a final statement of my position.
Your new thread was about documenting your grievances. Don't you think that Rrhain would have felt entitled to respond in kind?
Both you and Rrhain could have been wise enough to have broken off your debates several rounds earlier, at about the time they started to become unproductive and boring.
Try to remember that what you are posting is being written for a broad public. When it stops being of interest to that public audience, it is time to withdraw from that particular debate. If Rrhain is reading this, he should take the same advice. And, truth to tell, I should be more careful to follow that advice myself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 5:31 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 7:27 PM AdminNWR has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 98 of 302 (275877)
01-04-2006 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by AdminNWR
01-04-2006 6:27 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
if you expect moderators to read in full detail every message, and to do fact checking research on every message, then you would need a system of paid moderators, and well paid at that.
Fair enough, but when I get censured based on assumptions of what is going on and it has not been read, that seems a bit odd.
The title of your newest thread (the one AdminJar closed) was a little inflammatory, and made worse because it is a thread title and not just text within a thread.
The title is inconsequential and I would be willing to change it. "Rrhain outstanding issues" is neutral and describes that the thread involves outstanding issues which involve rrhain. "(misrepresentation)" was actually just a riff on what was happening. He was accusing me of misrepresenting things, and so this was a thread looking at the misreps he had accused me of and showing that they were in fact misreps he had been making.
If the title is the problem, let me change it or do it yourselves... I don't mind at all.
Your new thread was about documenting your grievances. Don't you think that Rrhain would have felt entitled to respond in kind?
It is not just documenting my grievances. It shows that his charges were not true. If someone said (in the middle of an argument with you on Evolution) that "In another thread you said you were for killing babies", would it really be wrong to set out a clear response showing that you had not done so?
That is all I did. All three points show what he accused me of saying, or doing, and I set out to show that was not true.
I'm a bit perplexed how he could show I did otherwise but if he wanted to respond in kind (I assume you mean within the thread) what would be the problem?
If there is some problem with the possibility of his responding... such that I cannot do the kind of thing I just did... what I am essentially being told is that I have to put up with someone slandering me.
When it stops being of interest to that public audience, it is time to withdraw from that particular debate.
This is where I don't get where I'm the problem. I wasn't continuing the debate, (though if he wanted to on any of those points he could if he wanted and then it would not be OT). He had been misrepresenting my statements and actions and I collected what was necessary to show this was not true.
As far as stopping discussion when things stop being of interest to the public, how am I supposed to know when that is? And how do we know whether this particular thread would be of interest to people or not? Wouldn't we know by leaving it open and seeing what reaction is? Or maybe asking people?
And indeed if following public interest only is really a functioning rationale, shouldn't we be discouraging people "bumping" threads?
This message has been edited by holmes, 01-04-2006 07:31 PM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 6:27 PM AdminNWR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 8:26 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 100 by AdminJar, posted 01-04-2006 8:50 PM Silent H has replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 302 (275886)
01-04-2006 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Silent H
01-04-2006 7:27 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
I won't say much here, lest this become unproductive.
As far as stopping discussion when things stop being of interest to the public, how am I supposed to know when that is?
If you cannot tell, then you have become too emotionally involved.
And indeed if following public interest only is really a functioning rationale, shouldn't we be discouraging people "bumping" threads?
I am not a fan of empty bumping (i.e. without contributing anything to the thread). I admit to the possibility that I may have done that myself.
As to your thread - as far as I am concerned, that is up to AdminJar. I am sure he has been reading our dialog.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 7:27 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Silent H, posted 01-05-2006 5:56 AM AdminNWR has replied

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 302 (275891)
01-04-2006 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Silent H
01-04-2006 7:27 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
I think I pretty much covered the reasoning in the response when I closed the thread. If you want to keep links and content like that on your hard drive, fine. But the Coffee House is not a personal filing cabinet. I've read your responses here as well as reread the initial OP and still see no reason for it's existence or continuation.
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 01-04-2006 07:52 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Silent H, posted 01-04-2006 7:27 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Silent H, posted 01-05-2006 5:06 AM AdminJar has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 302 (275921)
01-04-2006 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Admin
01-02-2006 8:32 AM


Buzsaw Matter
Hi Percy. I tried to email you but the email failed with an underliver error. Anyhow, if you think you might want me to try doing some moderating, I'd be willing to see how it would work out. Whatever your final decision is will be fine with me, as I will take your decision as God's will in the matter. Thanks for working to make the forum compatible to all. May God bless you for that!

Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Admin, posted 01-02-2006 8:32 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Admin, posted 01-05-2006 9:47 AM Buzsaw has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 102 of 302 (275970)
01-05-2006 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by AdminJar
01-04-2006 8:50 PM


Re: Closing of Thread by Jar... what the???
If you want to keep links and content like that on your hard drive, fine. But the Coffee House is not a personal filing cabinet. I've read
That thread does not merely contain links and past content. The fact that you have referred to it twice now as my "personal filing cabinet" suggests that you have not actually read it, or are failing to comprehend what is going on.
I am going to try this one more time. I would like to know that my request is not just getting the brush off, which is exactly what I am feeling right now. So please just relax for a second and read through everything I am about to say carefully, then explain whatever judgement you have.
EXPLANATION...
Several debates occured throughout a sex thread. They were pretty much OT for the thread and are not easy to follow as posted (due to being scattered). As far as I am concerned those specific debates have ended and my position came out supported, but restating my feeling that I "won" is not why the new thread exists.
During the course of those debates I accused and fully substantiated that Rrhain had plagiarized and misrepresented data (ironically for which no admin censured him). This was not simple name-calling, it was a factual discussion with evidence.
Apparently Rrhain has decided to "turn the tables" and accuse me of wrongdoing, specifically that I misrepresent data/terms and engage in quotemining. He does so by referring back to three issues (debates) within that sex thread. He has even invented an insulting phrase ("Holmes-speak") to toss at me in reference to one of those "techniques" he accuses me of engaging in. Unlike my accusation of plagiarism to him, his accusations are not substantiated. In fact they did not occur.
No censure of this activity was forthcoming from admins. This left me with the option of letting him continue to insult me and stay silent, thus perhaps lending credence to his accusations. Or I could respond to the allegations he made using evidence.There is no question that a response in the thread where the accusations were made, would be off topic. They'd even be off topic in the sex thread.
Thus I started the new thread to handle debate on his accusations of my misconduct. In the thread where he made the allegation, or when he falsely accuses me again (in whatever thread) I can direct him to the new thread, where my response is to his accusation is waiting to be debated.
In addition, if he ever wants to continue to debate the positions from which his accusations arose we could continue such debate there as well (rather than in the original sex thread where they were sort of OT anyway).
I thought this was a win win solution all around, and I am not seeing a downside to its existence. It isolates two separate debates into one thread, rather than allowing them to exist in other threads where they'd be off topic.
QUESTIONS...
What is the worst that could happen if it is open? And what is the worst that could happen with it closed? It seems to me to be the lesser of two evils and I do not see the issue going away unless Rrhain is stopped from making such accusations, or admins decide he can make them but I can never respond.
If I cannot have that thread (my reasoning is not sound), then I would like a clear resolution of what I am supposed to do when confronted by several accusations (he is using an ad nauseum aproach) of wrongdoing by another poster... and we can start with this case in specific where the accusations are OT.
It does not make for a pleasant environment to have a poster slandering me, and not have a means to defend myself against the accusations.
PS- If the title is causing some problem, as nwr suggests, then I am willing to change it. How about "Holmes-speak?". That would not sound negative toward the other poster and cover the content of the thread.
This message has been edited by holmes, 01-05-2006 05:32 AM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by AdminJar, posted 01-04-2006 8:50 PM AdminJar has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 103 of 302 (275978)
01-05-2006 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by AdminNWR
01-04-2006 8:26 PM


Resolution of Accusations
If you cannot tell, then you have become too emotionally involved.
Are you honestly telling me you know when things are of interest to "the public" or not? I honestly never know what is of interest to anyone else, even when I have no emotional involvement in a topic. Perhaps that is a lack of "public empathy" on my part?
If so, I apologize. All I know is what I like and what I am interested in, and hope for the best.
In any case I do need a resolution, and it might be handy for you guys to get together and figure a general rule to handle such a case. If one poster accuses another of doing something unethical or otherwise against the rules, what is that second poster supposed to do? Especially if the accusations are false and can be shown to be false, but would be OT within the thread where the accusation has been made?
I might add still further if it is not a singular accusation, but a string of them in an ad nauseum approach, where the only adequate response would have to be lengthy?

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by AdminNWR, posted 01-04-2006 8:26 PM AdminNWR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by AdminNWR, posted 01-05-2006 12:03 PM Silent H has replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 104 of 302 (276016)
01-05-2006 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Buzsaw
01-04-2006 10:59 PM


Re: Buzsaw Matter
Hi Buzsaw,
Yes, I would like you to try moderating, but the email failure has me concerned. Could you try sending the email again to admin@? Thanks! When we can exchange email then we can discuss the moderator role.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Buzsaw, posted 01-04-2006 10:59 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Buzsaw, posted 01-05-2006 10:48 AM Admin has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 302 (276034)
01-05-2006 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Admin
01-05-2006 9:47 AM


Re: Buzsaw Matter
Hi Percy. Thanks for giving me a try. I did attempt another email to you by hittng the mail button on your post resulting in another failure. This message came up:
The message could not be sent because one of the recipients was rejected by the server. The rejected e-mail address was 'admin@'. Subject 'Buzsaw Checking In', Account: 'novocon.net', Server: 'mail.novocon.net', Protocol: SMTP, Server Response: '550 Rejected message because your IP is in a black list at dnsbl.sorbs.net', Port: 25, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 550, Error Number: 0x800CCC79
AbE: I am leaving shortly for out of town and will check in likely this eve.
Abe: edited out IP #
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 01-05-2006 10:52 AM
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 01-05-2006 07:36 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Admin, posted 01-05-2006 9:47 AM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by jar, posted 01-05-2006 12:10 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 109 by nwr, posted 01-05-2006 12:28 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024