I'm going to start by apologizing for whatever sarcasm of mine created an air of "disrespect" or "inconducivity" to my more recent posts. I am also going to apologize for not being as specific as I could have been (moose's suggestion of creating links is a good one) such that people may not have understood exactly what I was discussing.
I will strive to be as clear as possible and without a trace of sarcasm. There are a couple problems intertwined here. I think they should be examined carefully and thoughtfully.
The first is a problem with moderation, and unfortunately it influences everything else. There is an air of defensiveness which is not helping honest questions and criticisms to be dealt with in a fair way. I realize that mods are voluntary and may not have time to get to everything. But when mods do, it does not seem that it is always in a way that is "conducive" to a resolution.
For example, I began discussion of an issue with
this post. With the exception of possibly the title (which I meant as comical) and the last line (which was an accurate assessment from my POV) there is nothing in that post which could realistically be interpreted as disrespectful. This was followed by
a second,
third, and
fourth post with no intention of lack of respect, and none that I can find that could be read that way. The response I was getting from a moderator was inconsistent with the decision I was asking about, and laced with some insulting language (the first practically a threat). Thus those following posts showed restraint.
Only once I became upset verbally did I start getting a larger response, though no actual address to the problem I was discussing. The result was a feeling that no one was interested in actually resolving an issue, and instead only in arguing in a defensive nature against perceptions of wrongdoing.
I then tried to erase the board and just offer suggestions in
post #142. People should note that that received absolutely no responses at all.
I actually had abandoned the topic after being told admins were working on an answer. I gave it no thought until the issue appeared to be coming up in a totally different thread. So I became curious and asked if there had been a resolution. I received no reply. Yet when randman wrote a sarcastic response to me, he got a response. When I tried to refocus discussion to my question, I was treated to unflattering language and suggestions which did not bear on the problem I was discussing. This again created an impression that resolution was not as much an interest or worthy of time as debating wrongdoing.
After my suspension, randman went to defend me and criticize moderation and the results can be seen: moderators have time to engage in personal debates, where none could find time to deal strictly with the issue I raised (in an originally wholly respectful way). This gave truth to what randman suggested originally, and what he later pointed out as mods began debating him.
When criticism or questions are raised, whether it is valid or invalid, there appears to be a "circle the wagons" approach to the person, rather than cutting to the chase and focusing on what procedural rule might be best for the issue at hand.
The second issue has also been demonstrated well in subsequent posts after my suspension. Jar has raised the issue of misrepresentation, and indeed repeated misrepresentation, and this is ironic given that he was the one who remonstrated me for the method I employed and so why I came looking for a solution.
Randman was not correct in thinking I was worried about real world retribution, though that could very well happen I suppose (though I wouldn't think Jar would). He was right however about something being a permanent record with my position being wholly misrepresented, and additionally no one caring until the same was done to a mod.
Misrepresentation is an issue that people, clearly even mods, don't enjoy and feel the desire to correct. It is more complex when it is done by people referring to issues from other threads, and repeat such behavior. Repetition of references to other debates(whether misreps or not) is a problem which others seem to be implying about randman, and pink backed me as being a problem in general.
It appears then that this is a real problem that requires a solution. I have not said that my way was the only way, nor have I tried to make that case. All I did was try to come up with a method on my own, only to face censure, without a replacement offered. All I am asking for is a replacement. None have been given, or supported when I raised a follow up question.
Jar in these last posts appears to have defied his own suggestion to me when faced with the same situation, and the admin is apparently unsatisfied with the suggestion he gave me (as that is exactly what Jar did here).
Okay so that's it. If no one has time or interest in dealing with these problems, or "perceived" problems, then please don't respond. And if someone wants to respond please do not do so with accusations or implications about me personally. I am really just trying to make debate flow better.
(edit to fix links - AdminNWR)
This message has been edited by AdminNWR, 01-25-2006 07:50 AM
holmes
"If you're going to kick authority in the teeth, you might as well use two feet. " (K.Richards)
™ Version 4.2