General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')

He's gone inactive.Since this is not a moderation procedure issue to whine about, please do not continue any discussion in this thread.Thanks
AdminPD

No problem, where would you like me to discuss it?

We had a shorter discussion about this than I expected, but the end result is that I guess this thread would be fine.--Percy

Just for information:Anybody can set themselves as "inactive" in their profile page. And they can later set it as active. Making it inactive reduces visibility of profile information. You can login and read while inactive, but you cannot post.Presumably the moose decided that it was time to take a break from the forum. This may or may not have been discussed in the private admin discussion forum.In any case, given the events that happened recently, it is not that surprising that the moose decided to take a break for a while and to mark himself inactive for the duration.

Edited by AdminModulous, : content hidden. Let's keep this on Moderation related whines and the like, thanks.

For some time now, Admin has pulled the rug out of Adminnemooseous's attempt to hold the trolls on either side of the isle at bay, shortening suspensions for the evolutionists, etc.It wasn't long ago that I posted a message to that effect, comparing it to a dad who disciplined a brattish child, restricting his privileges, etc. As soon as dad is off to work, mommy pats little brat on the head, lessens or ends restrictions and hands him a cookie.I don't blame Moose a bit. The only reason for his unpopularity is that he's was, for the most part, the most fair and balanced moderator EvC has ever had. He wasn't striving for popularity among the majority constituency, nor was he all that friendly toward creationists. Nevertheless, he pretty much moderated all fairly.As soon as Admin Modulous (who, for the most part is an excellent moderator, likely 2nd to Adminnemooseous) made a snap judgment not well thought out, so I jeered him for it.In my mind, I thought, sadly, we won't see any more of Moose. ABE: Unfortunately, a pack of mostly trollish active members dog-piled in to support Admin Modulous's suspension of Adminnemooseus. Admin seemed to be pleased about so much support rather than rescind Adminnemooseous's suspension, which imo, should have been his response. Edited by Buzsaw, : As noted.

I guess it just goes to show the importance of viewpoint - I've long believed that the board has suffered from Moose's hamfisted "moderation."

For what its worth, my snap judgement was to leave it to Percy to deal with. After further consideration however, I could not let the offense slide without action. I would have thought that it being a considered action would mean it merits a jeer more, but I'll leave that to you to decide. I'm sure, however, that if hooah called you an idiot with shit in your head and he didn't get suspended you'd at least chalk that up as further evidence of pro-evolutionist/atheist bias, either that or you'd publicly cry foul.Nah - I'm positive you'd think Percy was blameless if he called you an idiot with shit in your head and suspended you for a week for what appeared to be nothing short of the crime of proposing a new topic.

Hi, AdminModulous. Thanks for weighing in. Your analogy doesn't fit, for several reasons.First off, Adminnemooseous has been going at several trollish members like Jar, Hooah, et al, Hooah being the worst. At least Jar contributes significantly along with his trolling, but hardly ever so with Hooah. He's been get a pass for a long time as a troll. Adminnemooseous was spot on regarding his action in suspending the classic site troll.So far as the manner in which he issued the suspension, that's the sort of shit Hooah has been flinging around ever since he came to the proverbial troll bridge under which he resides.The classic troll, as I cited via link, pertaining to forums, is to restrict the forward movement of the topic at hand. I know, because I always get the blame by Admin for dragging out the lengthy threads in which I participate, when in fact, it's five or six trollish participants who restrict the forward movement of these lengthy threads, dragging them on and on.Dr. Jones, not unlike Hooah, is the 2nd most trollish member. Rarely does he post anything edifying and not unlike Hooah, he does it consistently in a meanspirited nasty manner using expletives.There's three or four members who do post some more edifying and challenging messages, but in so doing, instead of going ahead and submitting in a good-spirited manner, type in their meanspirited trollish comments.When it looks like I can simply slap a jeer on them, click the acknowledge button, I do so. However all to often Admin or another moderator will admonish me for failing to respond etc. If not, more often the trollish member who expected a response will go at me for running off, etc.For example in the Exodus threads and elsewhere, Jar, every few messages would simply copy and paste what has been addressed but not to his satisfaction a number of times adnausium, trollishly preventing or slowing the forward movement of the tread. When all's said and done it's Buzsaw that is charged with dragging out lengthy threads.I've said the above to say that Adminnemooseous was unduly suspended by you for needful action.Another thing, AdminModulous, When I was in boot camp in the USAF back in the 1950's at Lackland AFB, Texas, I got mustered in. The first thing the T.I. did before we got our uniforms issued was to line our unit up and looked us over. He was observing our countenances, perhaps, so as to pick out some that appeared defiant. One of first he nosed up to was a feisty whippersnapper who challenged the T.I for a fight. The T.I looked paused a bit and said something like, "O.K. come on, but let me first warn you that I have the whole Air Force backing me and you stand alone. Furthermore, the Sargent isn't always right but he's always the Sargent" etc. Suffice to say that ended that. The young whippersnapper fell in line and eventually became one of best.Likewise, Adminnemooseous is/was one of out two chief Admins, 2nd to Admin. (I forgot the terminology) You et al are down the chain of command as Admin moderators. Imo, did what a military corporal who stood up to a captain would have done. Perhaps the captain erred on some matter, but nevertheless, he's still the captain.I was in the hanger office, sitting at my typewriter when it malfunctioned. I was trained a jet mechanic, but a clerk typeist was needed in the hanger office so I got the job. Being mechanically minded i dismantled my machine so as to find and fix the problem. Well, the captain happened to walk in and noticed that I had the machine spread out on the desk.The captain asked me if I was a typewriter mechanic. Impulsively, I responded by something like, " No sir, but I'm not officially a clerk typist either. It so happened that I had been nominated as airman of the month for our squadron. A tech Sargent who headed the hanger office, a few minutes later and informed me that I had highly ticked the captain and was no longer nominated as AOM.Perhaps if any action should have been taken pertaining to Adminnemooseous, Admin would have been the one to do it.He said nothing and walked out. After a bit the office tech Sargent was needed

I too feel Moose was treated unfairly.Of course I don't know all the details, particularly those behind the scenes.But I miss the old bugger!

That doesn't surprise me, Crashfrog. Perhaps if Adminemooseous's actions, over the years, had not been as fair and blanced, you'd not see it as you do here.

After I posted my last message I got thinking about my own first ever first suspension, other than one other years ago.I had posted a spot on topic message. It was responded to with one or two liner trollish messages, to which I submitted a short response.Lo and behold, to my surprise I see I had been suspended by AdminPD for being off topic and preventing forward movement of the thread.Imo, that was another judgement made by a good moderator who, perhaps, had acted too impulsively.

First Buz, you've got to understand that that the rules apply even to people on your side. It isn't unfair to apply the same rules to everyone.Moose posted a message worse than most of Hooah's "offenses", and handed out a full week's suspension for no apparent reason other than posting a topic that Moose didn't like. If a creationist received the same treatment you would be screaming to high heaven at the unfairness of it. And for once you'd even have a case.

quote:

---

For example in the Exodus threads and elsewhere, Jar, every few messages would simply copy and paste what has been addressed but not to his satisfaction a number of times adnausium, trollishly preventing or slowing the forward movement of the tread. When all's said and done it's Buzsaw that is charged with dragging out lengthy threads.

---

It's Buzsaw who bragged that the thread had been stalled, claiming that it supported his case (!) and Buzsaw who whined and whined when Admin intervened to get the thread moving on. It's Buzsaw who insisted that he had to repeat the same tired points AGAIN - still not answering the rebuttals - before he could post new evidence that he claimed to have (and never posted it, eventually admitting that he didn't have any more evidence). The facts put a rather different complexion on it, don't they ?And in fact isn't it true that the vast majority of your jeers are aimed at virtually any post that is critical of you personally ? Yet you feel perfectly free to make false attacks on your opponents.

If hooah performs some act that merits a suspension, the correct procedure is to notify us in the appropriate thread. Whining non-specifically won't change anything. Did hooah's PNT merit a one week suspension, or are you in support of the suspension simply because you don't like hooah? So bad behaviour becomes acceptable behaviour if it is done against someone who behaves badly? Your moral system is clarified, thanks.At this forum, however, we try to hold people accountable for being disrespectful in the way Moose was. And moderators are not only not an exception - but should be held to a higher standard. They are Directors, which means they have a few more powers (such as the ability to delete posts, create new forums etc). It does not render them unaccountable to other moderators should it be judged they have broken forum rules, such as the classic rule number 10.The system is very definitely not modelled on the military, and I would not be a moderator if it was. The only chain of command is that Percy has final say. I would like to think however, that if a Captain committed a crime on a military site, a lower ranked MP would be entitled to arrest him - and the Captain couldn't/shouldn't 'pull rank' to get out of it.

Starting around 13 hears ago the site, then at Yahoo, had a member named Larry Handlin. His member ID is 3. Larry was a great help in moderating the site, and I valued his judgement. Then in early 2002 I responded to one of his posts as moderator, and for the most part we haven't heard from Larry since.Whatever the specifics in this case, I do know that discussion boards are notorious for dustups. Moderators for the most part do the best they can and hope it turns out well. There is often no obvious way to tell if a chosen approach will work or not. Hurt feelings and worse are not uncommon.I'll miss Moose, I hope he returns.