General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 11.0

This is a continuation of the other versions listed below.
This thread replaces Version 10. The following are the 10 previous "General discussion on moderation procedures" topics, from earliest to most recent: Change in Moderation?
General discussion of moderation procedures
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part 7
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0 Edited by Phat, : correctionEdited by AdminPhat, :

Admin writes me:

quote:

---

Not everyone is going to see what is so obvious to you, I'm sure you understand that.

---

Yes, of course.

quote:

---

Sometimes those people who don't see your point of view will be persons in positions of considerable responsibility, or if not then at least moderators at EvC Forum.

---

I had noticed that he'd been made an admin for some reason, if that's what you mean.Or no, I guess you were talking about AdminPD. Then yes, that too is obvious.

quote:

---

This is not to agree with you or with AdminPD, but just to share with you my own feeling that enough people understand your point that it will not get lost or smothered, even if it doesn't happen to get adequately expressed in any particular individual thread.

---

There was never any doubt in my mind, but I'm glad to have it thus noted that many posters do perceive the same insults I do.

quote:

---

But it is incumbent upon me to also point out that EvC Forum is not a haven for the easily offended...

---

Then perhaps that message should be forwarded to AdminPD. I don't see what's so offensive about a string of iterations of the question "who the fuck are you", but apparently that person with admin power does. Funny how you see the same insults I do, and he sees only other insults.Do I take it that if my insults are sufficiently veiled that they might at least escape the notice of some posters, then they would be acceptable? Or is it the rule that thinly veiled insults against the character and morality of other posters are only acceptable when they come from bigoted xians?

---

W.W.E.D.?

nemesis_juggernaut further insults me:

quote:

---

The general philosophy for those who maintain a secular worldview believe in "live and let live."

---

No, you do not get to insult me further. You have no goddamn idea what my philosophy is.I don't care if I get suspended for saying this because you need to know it. I told you to shut the fuck up and leave me alone. I have absolutely no intention of reading one more fucking word from you until I get an apology for your comparison of gays to animals and your comparison of gay sex to rape. So go to hell.

---

W.W.E.D.?

Yes, though of course they have no immediacy for me. But the Christian presuppositions recently expressed about gays are as puzzling to me as those about atheists. Why they think any large group of people could be legitimately stereotyped is beyond me.I think AdminPD may have already said this, but even if not then let me say that at least for me the issue with your recent posts is that they're not consistent with rule 10 of the Forum Guidelines, which concludes with this quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica: Moving on: I guess I'd have to judge every case individually, but in general my own feeling is that the more veiled, subtle and *dispassionate* the insult, the more likely it is to be consistent with rule 10 and fly under the radar. I'm not good at this myself, but just as a poor example, instead of saying, "Stay the fuck away from me," you might try, "Could you try silence for a while, because when you speak it only serves to remove doubt." That might be too obscure, it's a veiled reference to, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt," but you get the idea.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

quote:

---

I think AdminPD may have already said this, but even if not then let me say that at least for me the issue with your recent posts is that they're not consistent with rule 10 of the Forum Guidelines...

---

Oh, I know I ran afoul of rule 10. But I wonder how it is that comparing gays to animals and/or rapists doesn't do exactly the same thing. At the very least, I should think it would be an example of "goading".As a gay man, those comparisons are as deeply insulting as anything I've ever encountered. They're far more insulting than someone saying to my face "fuck you". So I still don't understand why using the 'f' word runs afoul of Rule 10 while comparing gays to animals and rapists is sufficiently acceptable that those making such comparisons are made admins and thus given the power to interpret Rule 10 for others.If the admin/stupid to whom we are referring cannot find any other way to argue against equality under the law for groups of people he doesn't like other than to draw insulting comparison that have no reasonable basis, then perhaps he should be told by an admin with even greater power to simply shut the fuck up.

quote:

---

...instead of saying, "Stay the fuck away from me," you might try, "Could you try silence for a while, because when you speak it only serves to remove doubt.

---

I don't see any real difference, except that one is more straight-forward. Both are equally insulting.

---

W.W.E.D.?

There's no need to suspend him on my account.

I kind of agree with you. Those of us who have been here a while and are familiar with Ray just roll our eyes and think, "There he goes again!" and ignore the outburst. I guess the problem is that people unfamiliar with EvC Forum might think the behavior acceptable and be encouraged to try it themselves. So I guess you could think of it as not necessarily being on your account, but just for the long term good of the board. Trust me, we're under no misimpression that you need coddling, which would be counter to board policy anyway.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Well, if there's really no difference it wasn't for lack of trying. What I was trying to do was construct a reply that was *dispassionate*, i.e., contained little hint that it was motivated by anger, hurt and frustration. Without actually reviewing the thread again, I'll just say that something like "Stay the fuck away from me" is kind of blatantly angry, plus it's confrontational and can lead to escalation.Speaking for myself, vocabulary is almost never an issue with me. For me it isn't the words you use but how you use them.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Then perhaps you should go back and review the original thread again. It shouldn't be difficult since you've been continuously posting in it. And "stay the fuck away from me" happened a considerable length of time after the original post that AdminPD felt was too harshly worded against that other admin/stupid.And I still wonder how it is that such a one as him, who makes such insults against large groups of people without restraint or reason, becomes an admin. Somehow I had missed the fact that he had become an admin until he used his admin status to reprimand me in that other thread you haven't reviewed. To be forced to put up with his deeply insulting language is bad enough. For him to use his admin status to reprimand me for returning insults just compounds the injustice.I still have seen no reprimand for him at all. I do, however, note the fact that some time between his comparison of gays to animals and his comarison of gay sex to rape, he was made admin. It would therefore seem that his type of bigotry and insulting behavior, far from being discouraged, is actually rewarded!Also, why is it that there was apparently no "Announcing AdminNJ" thread? Was someone trying to hide something from someone else?I wouldn't be bringing all this up again if you'd addressed it before. I mentioned it in my last post, but you ignored me.

---

W.W.E.D.?

The time I have to devote to EvC Forum issues is considerable but finite, and a lot of it goes to coding for dBoard 3.0. I'm sorry I wasn't able to deliver more satisfactorily, but I have to move on.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

It was never my intention to intrude on your limited time. I made no attempt to drag you into this.

---

W.W.E.D.?

I have noticed in the PT forum some admins tend to 'pick apart' posts they don't aggree with for no other reason than they can find a reason to. They also come accross as very confrontational while doing so. Unfortunately, this adds to the 'aggressivenes' of the forum. When posters see mods responding in a confrontational way it only gives them more license to be overly aggressive.As an example take the response to an OP I presented. Why not just say? "Considering how long your OP is, it would be nice if you provided appropriate structure for smoother reading." Why begin with an introductory snide remark that is condescending?After re-reading my OP I aggree my paragraph structure could have been better partitioned and I did in fact edit the post. I just find it odd that admins think it is best to respond in a way which is likely to provoke a negative response. You see this quite often in the PT forum. The debate itself is heated enough. Do we need more flames to fan the fire?Just offering up some observations. I am not trying to insult anyone. It's your forum and you can operate it however you like.

I apologize. My question was not intended as snide or condescending.We do have posters who choose not to punctuate or capitalize and we do have posters who don't know how.I noticed that your posts are long and well written, but lack adequate commas. My question was to ascertain which camp you're in. It was an attempt at humor, since I assume you know where the commas go.Again, I apologize and will remain neutral in the future.

No apology neccesary. Based on the usual razzing that goes on I perhaps overacted and took the comment as a confrontational jab. Perhaps I need to take my own advice and not take things too serious. Although I used to moderate an internet forum for a University website I really don't have much experience discussing or debating such topics in this format. I also have never been to a forum where original posts are edited for content before they are published - they are just deleted if they get out of hand. I need to adjust I guess. I am used to the Helter skelter approach to internet debate.As far as structure, I would aggree often mine is not the best but I generally post at work and type fast(for obvious reasons). Based on your constructive crticism I aggree and at least can try to pay more attention to the details when possible.Anyways, thanks for the reply and explanation.Also,My apology for jumping to conclusions and not practicing what I preach. I often suffer from Foot-In-Mouth disease. In my defense my brain cells are still fermenting from my night out on the town.Edited by Grizz, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The general philosophy for those who maintain a secular worldview believe in "live and let live."

---

Perhaps you missed in my quote where I said in " general." Besides that, what exactly was so offensive about that? Ordinarily your behavior at this point does warrant a suspension. But Percy seems to be feeling very generous with you and I won't override his leniency being that he is, in a sense, my boss. I'm also engaged in the conversation as an active participant. There would be a conflict of interest for me in an Admin role to suspend you while also being an active participant. So I will that up to the discretion of another Admin. Berberry, if you truly wanted me to leave you alone you wouldn't have responded to my post. Berberry, I've tried to be very civil with you without compromising my position. I've met that objective. I have reviewed my posts to see where your continued misconstrual of my words comes from. I can't see it. So I suspect the real issue is that you are either delusional or that what I'm saying is sinking in. I think the latter explanation will suffice.Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : Edit so that I don't offend delicate sensibilities

---

"The problem of Christianity is not that it has been tried and found wanting, but that it is difficult and left untried" -G.K. Chesterton