Update

peapod
#1
Jimmy moyer I have unbanned you, Toro if you come to this board again and start what you did last night, you are going to be banned. Your choice....perhaps you can discuss it with your broker, and just so your clear, there were complaints.
 
Cosmo
#2
As a moderator, I'm finding the infighting here a total pain in the back end. Personal attacks have got to stop, no exceptions. If you folk want to fight, fine ... but do it via PMs, email or get together in the street and duke it out. Just don't bring it here.

Admitedly it's tough to be fair when people involved are forum folk we've grown to know and like a lot, but as mods, we have no choice but to apply the same rules across the board.

Get it together people ... quit the damn fighting. If you can't exchange ideas without resorting to character assassination, it certainly reduces you in everyone's eyes. It doesn't take a genius to name call but it does take a certain level of cleverness and wit to get ones point across without personal attack.
 
I think not
#3
Define character assasination please
 
Jay
#4
"Define character assasination please"


It would be like me calling you a young lad.....and we all know this isn't true.....
 
I think not
#5
 
Cosmo
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

Define character assasination please

Ok ... Here is the official definition from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Quote:

Character assassination refers to the act of individuals or groups who intentionally attempt to influence the portrayal or reputation of a particular person, whether living or a historical personage, in such a way as to cause others to develop an extremely negative, unethical or unappealing perception of him/her. By its nature, it involves deliberate exaggeration or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. For living individuals, this can cause the target to be rejected by his or her community, family, or members of his/her living or work environment. Such acts are typically very difficult to reverse or rectify, therefore the process is correctly likened to a literal assassination of a human life. The damage sustained can be life-long, or for historical personages, last for many centuries after their death.
Humans, by nature, work and live in groups and have criteria for acceptance and rejection. It is a mechanism for justice, and a way to enforce standards of behavior in group members. The threat of rejection is the means of enforcement.
Humans, by nature, also have the ability to rationalize and 'toe the line'. One definition of power is being able to get a person's community to think the way one wants it to think. The threat of force (loss of job, for example) is very powerful in getting people to see things one's way.
Character assassination is the predatory use of this power to cause a person...

Quote has been trimmed
Basically, it means you're free to debate ideas but not to attack other members personally. You can disagree with what I think in any way you like, but when you start denigrating who I am, that crosses the line.

I suspect you're smart enough to know this, ITN.
 
I think not
#7
I am Cosmo, but quite honestly, you have to start banning quite a few people if we use that definition.

I can't quite honestly see why jimmoyer was banned. And if Toro was then Rev should have been also.

You said in one of your posts if we have a complaint we should be open about it.

Here's my complaint, if you're part of the "crowd" you are given preferential treatment. This isn't fair at all in my opinion. And I am not passing judgement, as I recognize the fact being a moderator isn't an easy thing.

Nevertheless, I think you need to be a bit more objective in your perceptions.
 
peapod
#8
Andem trusts our decsion making and his moderators. How many times do we have to go over this!!! Most of the people that post are from the left, so naturally there is going to be tension with the right.
Now toro little action last night brought Xrepports, and not from the rev. Cosmos wanted toro banned for good, after a discussion, we have decided he will be given a chance, even tho he has been warned before. Thats as good as it gets.
 
I think not
#9
It makes no difference if you are from the right, extreme right, neo-con or dead center. If you're not on the left your chances of getting banned have quadrupled.
 
Jay
#10
"Most of the people that post are from the left, so naturally there is going to be tension with the right. "

And this is changing. There are more and more conservatives on this site than there was when I first arrived on the scene.
 
peapod
#11
The Xrepports were in regards to toro think not, not the rev. Who started it???? Toro. Do not question my decsion to ban jimmy, he was trying to goad the rev and carrying on with his nonsense. The rev has been told not to bite and goad either. Last night toro was here to do nothing but bait everyone into a bar room brawl with his comments, the rev had nothing to do with it, he was not even here when toro started.
Again if you are unhappy here leave. We do our best to try and be fair, which is difficult if your left. If you have a problem with me banning jimmy for the night think...do a xrepport. Toro ran away, so I saw no need to ban him for the night.
At some point I think it would be a good idea to have a conservative as a moderator also, I will wait until I see a reasonable one and recommend that.
 
Cosmo
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

I am Cosmo, but quite honestly, you have to start banning quite a few people if we use that definition.

I can't quite honestly see why jimmoyer was banned. And if Toro was then Rev should have been also.

You said in one of your posts if we have a complaint we should be open about it.

Here's my complaint, if you're part of the "crowd" you are given preferential treatment. This isn't fair at all in my opinion. And I am not passing judgement, as I recognize the fact being a moderator isn't an easy thing.

Nevertheless, I think you need to be a bit more objective in your perceptions.

First of all, ITN, kudos to you for addressing me directly. I respect people who are willing to do that.

You are right. Both Toro and the Rev should have been banned, if I was banning anyone. As it is, I made an error in judgement by banning anyone. Our policy is to give warnings first. Pea phoned me and told me I was hasty. I unbanned Toro and PM'd him with an apology. I think I did my part in rectifying my mistake on this issue.

It's been my observation that any forum has groups of friendships that form. That's just life. I've spent my entire life listening to people whine about cliques ... and I have no patience for it. To be part of a clique, all you have to do is participate. You may be surprised at my PM folder ... I spend time talking to lots of different people on a personal level. Even Toro, FYI.

And yes, it's tougher to ban friends than strangers. But it's also part of the responsibility we agreed to. Andem is pretty careful about who he chooses as mods and being able to be impartial is part of it. Your willingness to confront me directly is part of the way that forum members have some control over policy. And you were correct, which I have no problem admitting and making reparations for.

Character assassination in a forum requires a little common sense. I may say something to Pea (whom I've known for years in real life) that sounds like an insult, but because we have a history, it is ok. I think the line is drawn when someone's feelings get hurt. If I feel the need to defend my character from someone, that crosses the line. Anyone with a modicum of sensitivity can tell the difference. One thing I have always been surprised at is the number of truly intelligent people that frequent this board. I trust that the majority of people here can make that judgement call. You included, ITN.
 
I think not
#13
No what you need are moderators that fall dead center, to be able to make the distinction. Who started bares no consequence. It takes two to tango.

Your comment of, if you don't like it leave, falls under the Bush doctrine. You're either with us or against us.

Just as you have stated you don't like that doctrine, please refrain from imposing it on me.
 
I think not
#14
Thanks for the time you took in responding Cosmo.
 
Jay
#15
" I will wait until I see a reasonable one and recommend that."

We will be waiting a long time I suspect. :P

Just kidding Pea.
 
Cosmo
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

No what you need are moderators that fall dead center, to be able to make the distinction. Who started bares no consequence. It takes two to tango.

Your comment of, if you don't like it leave, falls under the Bush doctrine. You're either with us or against us.

Just as you have stated you don't like that doctrine, please refrain from imposing it on me.

You know anyone here who is dead centre, ITN? I have yet to meet them.

Pea's comment has nothing to do with the Bush doctrine ... it's just a fact. There are a zillion forums out there. If this one annoys you, find one that doesn't. It's simple. Took me a while to find the forums that work for me.

There will be some impositions here, as there are anywhere. I'm a closet anarchist, but until that belief system becomes popular, I live peacefully under the current system. For this place to work, we all have to follow certain policies, like it or not.

You must remember that Andem owns this board ... it's not some entity that birthed fully formed from a black hole in cyberspace. It's taken him a long time and a great deal of effort to provide this place for us. His vision is for a politically centred forum, but getting there means a few power struggles between philosophies along the way. These power struggles require some refereeing ... and that's what we, as mods, attempt to do.

What would you have us do? Outright ban anyone who doesn't play nice? Never ban anyone and let this place degenerate into nothingness as many forums have? What do you suggest?
 
peapod
#17
Think I said if you do not like it you can leave, its that simple, however if you want to stay, thats good, your a good addition to the board, spook or not.

You can say what you like about my moderation, I only answer to andem, if he has a problem with my moderating, he will tell me. Hes not scared of me, we are buds
 
Jay
#18
"You know anyone here who is dead centre, ITN? I have yet to meet them."

I think he was just suggesting that moderators (by the very nature of the word) should be moderate. Hard to find though, I agree.
 
thelib
#19
This thread is a little disturbing to a noob like myself. Whatís the deal with the mods ? Do they go on head hunting missions?
 
peapod
#20
Why would you know whats going on here if your a newbie lib?? your remark is uncalled for as you do not know the dynamics of this board yet. The moderators here try to keep things as civil as possible. I find your remark a little strange to say the least, in fact I do not think you are a liberal at at.

When ANDEM the owner and administator of this site is unhappy with moderators, he will let us know.
 
thelib
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by peapod

Why would you know whats going on here if your a newbie lib?? your remark is uncalled for as you do not know the dynamics of this board yet. The moderators here try to keep things as civil as possible. I find your remark a little strange to say the least, in fact I do not think you are a liberal at at.

When ANDEM the owner and administator of this site is unhappy with moderators, he will let us know.

hrmm i asked a question and i get smacked.

i just wanted to know what was up thats all. Why would you use a term spook you do know thatís a derogatory term for a minority right?
 
peapod
#22
No what you are doing is playing games, and your not good at it either, your not a liberal, your probally someone banned from this site, but hey carry on, but you start trolling and your going.

Don't be so silly, I use the term spook as a joke...hello!!!!! what would the CIA being doing at a message board, surely they have better things to meddle in. Grow up!
 
Andem
#23
[ MOVED TO COMMUNITY CENTRE ]
 
Vanni Fucci
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by thelib

Why would you use a term spook you do know thatís a derogatory term for a minority right?

Had you been here long enough to make such judgements, you would have known how ludicrous that statement is...peapod has not, and would not make denigrating remarks against any minority...

My suggestion is take some time to read some posts and catch up a bit before you jump in...
 
thelib
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Vanni Fucci

Quote: Originally Posted by thelib

Why would you use a term spook you do know thatís a derogatory term for a minority right?

Had you been here long enough to make such judgements, you would have known how ludicrous that statement is...peapod has not, and would not make denigrating remarks against any minority...

My suggestion is take some time to read some posts and catch up a bit before you jump in...

I don't have to be here long enough to read a post in the main forum. it's open to everybody (non reg users)

A mod joking or not should not use that term, anybody passing through would not take the time to find out if she/he was joking.
 
peapod
#26
Bull!
 
Vanni Fucci
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by thelib

A mod joking or not should not use that term, anybody passing through would not take the time to find out if she/he was joking.

Then that would be their loss for jumping to such hasty conclusions...
 
Reverend Blair
#28
Don't worry about it, Pea...he's just taking your words out of context to start a fight.
 
Haggis McBagpipe
#29
I haven't been posting in a long while and so it would probably be prudent to avoid making a comment here. What the hell, though. I wouldn't know prudent if it bit me on the butt.

I am about as far-left as you can get, but I do find huge value and enjoyment in having conservative viewpoints on this forum. After all, no point of view is worth having if it can't stand up to some serious attacks.

Thing is, when you thoroughly disagree with someone's political point of view, it is all too easy to search for and find personal offense... but sometimes the offense is simply that the person has (to you) a repellent point of view. In other words, anything they say might be seen as bait.

In an all-out flaming thread that threatens to burn down the house I think all participants should get equal treatment. The person who dangled the bait is no worse than the person who chose to react. After all, nobody is ever *forced* to react to bait. One chooses to do so, and as soon as one does, there is no difference between baiter and reactor. To some degree, I'd go so far as to say the reactor is the bigger offender, because bait, when left untouched, is useless and impotent. Only by taking the bait is it given power.

This is a great forum, with good people, and it can only become better with the addition of members with a completely different point of view. Forums don't do well when filled with just conservatives or just liberals. Since conservatives are the minority on this forum, I think it would be better - bigger - to give them more, not less, benefit of the doubt, for it takes courage to be one voice speaking out against the many.

Now I think it might be time for me to go rustle up some of that prudence I so obviously lack. 8-)
 
jimmoyer
#30
Not bad, Haggis McBagpipe.

You got a kind style.
 

Similar Threads

68
Peak Oil Update
by dumpthemonarchy | Jul 16th, 2008
21
Peak Oil update
by dumpthemonarchy | Nov 27th, 2007
3
update
by hermanntrude | Jan 6th, 2007
1
Air India Update
by Vanni Fucci | Apr 8th, 2005
no new posts