Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > Feedback > Guess what... another complaint about vmarks to be ignored

Guess what... another complaint about vmarks to be ignored (Page 2)
Thread Tools
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 01:17 AM
 
Well, if somebody sasses me I'll just tell them that they aren't going to see pictures of my luscious rack until they shape up and learn how to better treat a lady!
     
ThinkInsane
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 01:38 AM
 
'Atta girl!
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
auto_immune
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 03:13 AM
 
     
Sayf-Allah  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 04:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
You've summed up your personality quite well. You live with a chip on your shoulder. It's not helping that you omit your location.

And to answer your question: No. But don't be offended if people misunderstand you.

Now my question to you. What would be your response to a guy from Michigan, USA with the username "Just a soldier in the Army of God" and had a line in his sig that said "I've got him in my rifle crosshairs"
I wouldn't really care.

Just like I don't care about signatures like red rockets. It's a freaking signature. Not something to be upset by.

Now if a signature said "Bomb *insert country or location or something similar*" I'd have a problem with it. And I'd report it. If the mods would tell me to change it I would. I'd like an explanation but like I say, I'd change it.

And no, I don't have a chip on my shoulder.

"Learn to swim"
     
Sayf-Allah  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 04:58 AM
 
But anyway... since this will be ignored like all other complaints about him...

I simply want to know.

Are the original posts by vmarks (which this complaint is about) worthy of an infraction if someone else would do the same.

That is take up an almost three year old post (which has been explained in that same thread) and then post it again and again and again (in completely unrelated threads) saying I threatened him?

(and isn't threatening another member a pretty clear violation of the rules which should result in a permaban?)

"Learn to swim"
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 05:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by ThinkInsane View Post
Even if you find someone that is completely nonpartisan, people will still feel that any action against them is partisan in someway.
Which is why I find it surprising that only one side seems to be complaining regularly. I don't know what's going on in there, but the fact that one side complains while the other applauds or remains silent to me indicates something's out of balance. When I brought this up last time I was reminded that it's simply because all liberals are crybabies while conservatives are strong and take things like real men. But, and my apologies here, I find that just a weeny itsy-bitsy tiny bit too simple.

It's a forum so polarized that nothing is ever going to make some of the regular posters happy.
It is. And its purpose is questionable at best. So far the only real argument in favor of the PWL I have heard is that it's supposed to be a container for all the rock bottom bickering. IOW a trash can where threads go that under more strict moderation would have simply been locked. But if it is that kind of container, why moderate it at all? Why not restrict yourself to deleting threads with illegal material? If people want to go in there and get messy, why not let them suffer? Why try to moderate flame wars people want to engage in?

If besson was made mod of the PWL, I can almost guarantee that within a month, someone from one side or the other, or based on past history both, will accuse her of partisanship for some action or another.
Well before that would happen, you would probably be faced with the obvious question why somebody with a record of posting fecal jokes was made mod in the first place. No offense, but seriously, why not just chose somebody with a clean slate who openly opposes Vmarks' views?
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 05:48 AM
 
besson3c ≠ chick

http://www.besson.com/en/
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Which is why I find it surprising that only one side seems to be complaining regularly. I don't know what's going on in there, but the fact that one side complains while the other applauds or remains silent to me indicates something's out of balance. When I brought this up last time I was reminded that it's simply because all liberals are crybabies while conservatives are strong and take things like real men. But, and my apologies here, I find that just a weeny itsy-bitsy tiny bit too simple.
IMO, it's a meme. The right-wing folk in the PL were never inclined to believe that vmarks was prejudiced against them because that would be an absolutely insane argument. The other folks, though, had a little bit of wiggle room to believe that when they got infracted, it was because of discrimination. And as people started voicing the idea, more people started seeing the same thing (much like medical students believe they're afflicted with all sorts of illnesses — it's not that they're dumb, but the human mind just works that way).
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 06:51 AM
 
The ones that claim `they're tough' complain just like anyone else. Many do it behind the scenes, though, but they react in the exact same way if they think `the mod who has issued the infraction is on the opposite end of the spectrum' in their bipolar world. So Chuckit is spot-on saying it's something human rather than something that is particularly bad with a certain group of people.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Dec 17, 2008 at 07:25 AM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 08:02 AM
 
and for those that do not complain when given a warning or infraction? what are they if the ones that complain are human?
     
Atheist
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 08:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by brassplayersrock² View Post
and for those that do not complain when given a warning or infraction? what are they if the ones that complain are human?
Why super-human... of course.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 09:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
IMO, it's a meme. The right-wing folk in the PL were never inclined to believe that vmarks was prejudiced against them because that would be an absolutely insane argument. The other folks, though, had a little bit of wiggle room to believe that when they got infracted, it was because of discrimination. And as people started voicing the idea, more people started seeing the same thing (much like medical students believe they're afflicted with all sorts of illnesses — it's not that they're dumb, but the human mind just works that way).
Which is precisely why moderators shouldn't participate in the discussion they're moderating. If they participate, they're going to end up on one side of the conversation or another and there will be the perception, even if unfounded, that they're favoring that side in their moderation.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 10:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Well before that would happen, you would probably be faced with the obvious question why somebody with a record of posting fecal jokes was made mod in the first place. No offense, but seriously, why not just chose somebody with a clean slate who openly opposes Vmarks' views?
No one (with the power) is actually proposing besson be made a mod. ThinkInsane was just using him as a theoretical example since he tossed his name into the ring.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 10:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Well, if somebody sasses me I'll just tell them that they aren't going to see pictures of my luscious rack until they shape up and learn how to better treat a lady!
You know that you can't refer to your ass as a "rack" ?

-t
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Which is precisely why moderators shouldn't participate in the discussion they're moderating. If they participate, they're going to end up on one side of the conversation or another and there will be the perception, even if unfounded, that they're favoring that side in their moderation.
Again, all fine in theory, but you won't find somebody who is not interested in the PL and willing to moderate it. Who'd want to read that stuff then? (Remember, we're not getting paid for this!)
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
ThinkInsane
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 12:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Which is why I find it surprising that only one side seems to be complaining regularly. I don't know what's going on in there, but the fact that one side complains while the other applauds or remains silent to me indicates something's out of balance. When I brought this up last time I was reminded that it's simply because all liberals are crybabies while conservatives are strong and take things like real men. But, and my apologies here, I find that just a weeny itsy-bitsy tiny bit too simple.
To say that "the right" doesn't complain when they are moderated wouldn't be exactly true. They may not do so publicly, I don't read the feedback forum nearly as often as I probably should, but I've gotten who knows how many PM's whining about actions taken them. "Why did I get an infraction, so and so dirty liberal said blah blah blah and didn't get in trouble". It would seem that one side does so publicly, one side does so privately. I rarely get PMs from those on "the left", but it would seem that those complaints do end up in here. I don't know if that's due to perceived bias or not. You'd have to ask them to find out why.



It is. And its purpose is questionable at best. So far the only real argument in favor of the PWL I have heard is that it's supposed to be a container for all the rock bottom bickering. IOW a trash can where threads go that under more strict moderation would have simply been locked. But if it is that kind of container, why moderate it at all? Why not restrict yourself to deleting threads with illegal material? If people want to go in there and get messy, why not let them suffer? Why try to moderate flame wars people want to engage in?
I agree to a point. Yes, the intention of the PWL was to create a temporary (not so temporary anymore) forum to keep the vitriol out of the lounge. It was getting pretty nasty for a while and we had regular posters that were leaving because of it. At the same time, we are a tech forum and leaving that section completely unmoderated, in my ever humble opinion, would reflect badly on MacNN. As it is now "ideological differences" between the two camps spill over into the other forums. If it was left as a free for all I can only imagine we'd have far more problems in that regard. These are topics that people are passionate about. We try to maintain some level of civility in the discourse.



Well before that would happen, you would probably be faced with the obvious question why somebody with a record of posting fecal jokes was made mod in the first place. No offense, but seriously, why not just chose somebody with a clean slate who openly opposes Vmarks' views?
There were two reasons why I used besson as the example. As someone mentioned above, he had offered to do it, so he was an obvious example to use. Second, The Crook acted as straight man and set it up so I could refer to him as "her".

As to having a "left leaning" mod for the PWL, well, we are a tech forum first and foremost, and as such I think promoting a new moderator based on their political views is... kinda dumb. And I don't mean to be insulting when I say that. If we were a site and forums focused on politics I'd agree wholeheartedly. We aren't. We have one subsection of one forum section to handle those topics, and it exists solely to try and keep the bickering out of the other areas. To select a mod based on political ideology, again in my opinion, gives undue importance to the least important part of this forum.

Come to think of it, I can actually see doing so making the situation worse, once both sides think the have a "champion" to defend their nonsense.

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
But anyway... since this will be ignored like all other complaints about him...

I simply want to know.

Are the original posts by vmarks (which this complaint is about) worthy of an infraction if someone else would do the same.

That is take up an almost three year old post (which has been explained in that same thread) and then post it again and again and again (in completely unrelated threads) saying I threatened him?

(and isn't threatening another member a pretty clear violation of the rules which should result in a permaban?)
You said there were MacNN members that supported ethnic cleansing. The response was that you made an unsupported statement and that you had made threats yourself. You responded with "prove it". So he posted examples. He did what you asked, and still addressed the original topic. I don't see this as an issue. I've let you slide on more egregious postings in the past.

If you ask someone to defend a statement, and they do so, that is not a personal attack in my opinion. When you attempted to show the context of what vmarks posted, I can see how someone could easily misconstrue (if it wasn't actually your intention) that BigMac was one of the racist little piggies you couldn't wait to get what they had coming to them.

Just like I have a problem with all racist little pigs and all occupying little pigs. You will all get what you deserve in the end and I can't wait for it to happen.
emphasis added
So the answer is no. You'd be more likely to get an infraction by not supporting such a statement as "you've made threats against another member" with proof. Especially if the person such a comment was directed at specifically asked for examples.
( Last edited by ThinkInsane; Dec 17, 2008 at 12:21 PM. )
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
Sayf-Allah  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 01:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by ThinkInsane View Post
You said there were MacNN members that supported ethnic cleansing. The response was that you made an unsupported statement and that you had made threats yourself. You responded with "prove it". So he posted examples. He did what you asked, and still addressed the original topic. I don't see this as an issue. I've let you slide on more egregious postings in the past.
Where's the threat? IMO it's very serious charge to say that someone threatened another member of this forum.

And why didn't he just ask me to back up that claim? Instead of continuing his personal vendetta against me.

And after explaining myself in the original thread, and then on several occasions after that when does his intentional twisting of my post become harassment?

And I didn't name any names because I was knew that could result in a ban/infraction and also to not make the thread personal. vmarks was able to make it all personal in his first post in the thread.
If you ask someone to defend a statement, and they do so, that is not a personal attack in my opinion. When you attempted to show the context of what vmarks posted, I can see how someone could easily misconstrue (if it wasn't actually your intention) that BigMac was one of the racist little piggies you couldn't wait to get what they had coming to them.
As calling a member of macnn racist is a violation of the forum rules (as I found out with my original nick even if I defended that opinion with the persons own words) calling BigMac a racist would be idiotic.

And again, I explained my words in the original thread and I've explained it several times before to vmarks. So again, when does it start to be classified as harassment?
emphasis added
So the answer is no. You'd be more likely to get an infraction by not supporting such a statement as "you've made threats against another member" with proof. Especially if the person such a comment was directed at specifically asked for examples.
So claiming someone made (personal?) threat towards another MacNNer.... is that less serious than saying that in ones opinion this and that member holds racist believes?

Thanks for answering my questions.

"Learn to swim"
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 01:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
You know that you can't refer to your ass as a "rack" ?

-t

If I wanted to I could, but we should probably continue this conversation privately since this thread is not about my luscious rack. This would belong in another thread.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 01:54 PM
 
I think I must formally withdraw my name in the pool of candidates being considered for MacNN mods. It was a difficult decision, but I talked it over with my family and we decided that I'd have more to offer the world as a regular member.

Thank you for all of you that supported me. You will be in my thoughts for minutes to come.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 02:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Again, all fine in theory, but you won't find somebody who is not interested in the PL and willing to moderate it. Who'd want to read that stuff then? (Remember, we're not getting paid for this!)
Excellent point. I am, of course, speaking in ideals and as someone who moderates many discussions as part of my day job.
     
ThinkInsane
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 02:22 PM
 
SA, he did as you asked, whether you found the proof he presented compelling or not. He made a statement that you asked him to defend. Whether or not you think he did so adequately, he only attempted to present the proof you requested. He also, in the same post addressed the topic at hand. You were the one that said there were members that supported ethnic cleansing, which was irrelevant to the topic. If you derail your own thread you can't then accuse others of doing the same by responding to what you wrote.

If you state a member is a racist, and that person says "WTF? Why would you say that?" and you don't show why you are saying that, or at least attempt to justify that opinion, then it is nothing more than a baseless attack. And make no mistake Logic, you've thrown that term around quite a bit, whether it was warranted or not. He made the statement that you had been threatening to members in the past, and when asked to do so he showed you the posts that he felt supported such a claim. You disagree about the context of those posts. You don't find that proof compelling. He does. So what do you want me to say? I don't find reason to take action. I'm not going to act based on who whines the loudest. You can post in this thread till your finger tips are blue and you aren't going to get the answer you want from me.

You two have seriously ideological differences regarding the state of Israel. That's not going to change, it probably never will. You two don't get along, we all get it, although I will say that from what I've seen you have far more animosity towards him than he to you. His position as a moderator leaves you feeling at a disadvantage even though he has never used that against you. Frankly, I think it leaves you with the "He only gets to say that because he's a moderator" trump card. I'm fairly sure this isn't the first time you've started a feedback forum thread on this very topic.

He has asked others to look at posts you have made, and note I said look at, never "lock, ban, issue an infraction", but look at this and see if you feel some action should be taken, for the sole reason that to take action himself wouldn't be appropriate. You need to understand that it has been mentioned that by your own admission you have evaded a ban in the past by creating a new identity that you then denied was you, only to later admit is was you all along. Based on that it has been suggested that you should be permabanned and treated no different than ca$h. vmarks has never to my knowledge advocated such a thing, which he would be well within his rights to do as a staff member. You've been banned here several times, and never once by vmarks or at his insistence. He will provide information about exchanges with you if asked, but he has never, again to the best of my knowledge, tried to push on way or the other. He just provides links to the threads/posts in question.

You asked a question, a forum administrator answered it. That wasn't good enough. Now I, a moderator in the forum in question answered, and explained why I took the action I did (i.e. none). You didn't like that either. Well you aren't getting another one. You've been around here a long time, you know the rules. You've dealt with the repercussions of violating our rules. There really isn't anything more to say but that old chestnut "if you don't like it here, leave". It's clear that this is an issue to you, and until we say exactly what you want to hear, nothing we say is going to be good enough.

I do apologize if this comes across as unduly harsh, but this gets a bit tedious. This has been going on for years. Whether you or anyone else believes it, we do police our own. There have been moderators sent off to the happy hunting ground when we, as the staff, point out to the administrators that a mod is abusing his position or violating forum rules. We try to be fair and judicious with punishments. For the most part we try to explain what we've done, although that list of rules at the top of the PWL state quite clearly that we are not actually obligated to do so. I have no desire to see you go, but honestly if you really feel that you are unfairly put upon here, I don't understand why you would want to stay. Again, I know this post is rather assholish, and I do sincerely apologize for that, but it's seriously like beating your head against the wall to deal with this topic.

And to answer your question above, if you said someone was racist, and they disputed that but you showed specific posts to support your position, no I would not charge you an infraction for that. It would be up to the poster in question to defend his words, just as you did. I'm not here nurture anyone along. If someone has a past post come back to bite them in the ass, that's their problem to sort out when they get called on it. We're all responsible for our own words. If you are willing to support an accusation with actual proof, then it isn't a personal attack and I will not intervene as long as the discourse remains civil. Other mods may see that differently, but that's my position and I'll stand by it.
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
lexapro
Baninated
Join Date: Mar 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 17, 2008, 04:11 PM
 
I am an anti-depressant. Take some of me and these issues will cease to matter.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 04:14 AM
 
Why does it seem like only vmarks is singled out by the same radical, anti-Jewish clique repeatedly without cause? Aren't we getting past the point when these inane threads should be locked on sight?
( Last edited by Big Mac; Dec 18, 2008 at 04:25 AM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
red rocket
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 08:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by ThinkInsane View Post
As to having a "left leaning" mod for the PWL, well, we are a tech forum first and foremost, and as such I think promoting a new moderator based on their political views is... kinda dumb. And I don't mean to be insulting when I say that. If we were a site and forums focused on politics I'd agree wholeheartedly. We aren't. We have one subsection of one forum section to handle those topics, and it exists solely to try and keep the bickering out of the other areas. To select a mod based on political ideology, again in my opinion, gives undue importance to the least important part of this forum.

Come to think of it, I can actually see doing so making the situation worse, once both sides think the have a "champion" to defend their nonsense.
Well, the way it looks at the moment, the Zionists seem to have a champion to defend their nonsense, and the right wing theist militarists seem to have about at least two champions to defend their nonsense, all of which seem to be defending that nonsense pretty actively. The lefties don’t seem to have any champion to defend their nonsense, so they logically complain all the time.
( Last edited by red rocket; Dec 18, 2008 at 08:25 AM. Reason: E-Priming)
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 08:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by red rocket View Post
Well, the way it looks at the moment, the Zionists seem to have a champion to defend their nonsense,
The truth hurts, huh? If you can't compete in the realm of ideas with us Zionists, your strategy is to cry to the MacNN Mommy over your butthurt. Pathetic.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Dec 18, 2008 at 09:01 AM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 09:28 AM
 
Let's keep it civil, shall we?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 12:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by red rocket View Post
Well, the way it looks at the moment, the Zionists seem to have a champion to defend their nonsense, and the right wing theist militarists seem to have about at least two champions to defend their nonsense, all of which seem to be defending that nonsense pretty actively. The lefties don’t seem to have any champion to defend their nonsense, so they logically complain all the time.
But he is a VERY fair mod. Who cares what his beliefs are as long as he is fair in his moderation. I have received infractions from vmarks and I agree nearly 100% with what he says in the PWL. I even agreed with the infractions.

Same goes for Thinkinsane. I have gotten infractions from him as well.

I think you guys just can't stand being smacked down by him and think the only way you could silence him would be to add another mod, a left-leaning mod, to the mix. The thing you aren't considering, is that you will probably get more infractions because vmarks probably restrains himself while modding to make sure he is being fair. A secondary mod might not be so fair and you'll get more infractions.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 12:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
The thing you aren't considering, is that you will probably get more infractions because vmarks probably restrains himself while modding to make sure he is being fair. A secondary mod might not be so fair and you'll get more infractions.
I fail to see the downside, then. It takes away people's reason to whine and possibly cleans up the PL further.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 01:24 PM
 
I never said I was against another mod in the PWL. But some of the suggestions are certainly not going to work. And the non-participating mod idea is quite rough for volunteering staff that doesn't get paid.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 01:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
The truth hurts, huh? If you can't compete in the realm of ideas with us Zionists, your strategy is to cry to the MacNN Mommy over your butthurt. Pathetic.
Why are you deliberately trying to bait people into a flame war like that? What purpose does this post serve other than insult and provoke people 'on the other side'?
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 01:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
But some of the suggestions are certainly not going to work. And the non-participating mod idea is quite rough for volunteering staff that doesn't get paid.
Well, sure, but you didn't say that in you previous statement.

Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Why are you deliberately trying to bait people into a flame war like that? What purpose does this post serve other than insult and provoke people 'on the other side'?
I imagine the people who started this thread will claim it's because he knows can get away with it.

Though I find that doubtful in a Feedback thread.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 02:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Why are you deliberately trying to bait people into a flame war like that? What purpose does this post serve other than insult and provoke people 'on the other side'?
red rocket provided some pretty flame-worthy material as well. Why didn't you single him out also?
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 03:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar V View Post
Well, sure, but you didn't say that in you previous statement.
I didn't imply it either way really. I am all for a left-leaning mod in the PWL. But I predict if that happened then threads like this would still exist.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
red rocket provided some pretty flame-worthy material as well. Why didn't you single him out also?
Huh? You mean the post where he called each side's views nonsense?

Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
I didn't imply it either way really. I am all for a left-leaning mod in the PWL. But I predict if that happened then threads like this would still exist.
What, claims of bias? But then Admin could point to the new Mod and call the BS where it stood.

I don't claim a perfect memory, but don't recall seeing many of these threads until the past two years, whatever that means.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 03:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar V View Post
I imagine the people who started this thread will claim it's because he knows can get away with it.
Well, although I think I don't necessary agree with 'those people' in general, I would agree with that specific assessment. Would people know that posting flame bait will get you into trouble, they most likely wouldn't do it. Of course if you OTOH know you can get away with it, well why the heck not?
( Last edited by Simon; Dec 18, 2008 at 03:27 PM. )
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 03:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
red rocket provided some pretty flame-worthy material as well. Why didn't you single him out also?
Because he didn't.

He posted twice. The first post was totally innocent and in the second post he called both sides of the political spectrum for their senseless bickering. That kind of balanced criticsm has nothing to do with posting obvious flamebait that specifically aims at pissing off on side and then getting both side to go at each other.

I'm guessing he's getting away with it because he's a regular and the mods are trying to be 'nice'. I just hope being 'nice' doesn't come at the price of making this board unpleasant (which it no doubt will if flame wars are allowed to unroll). I have my doubts.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 06:37 PM
 
Oh don't you just hate it when people think about what they post, and make it make sense?

Honestly, both of red rocket's posts in this thread are fine, and pretty much exactly as both Dakar and Simon have characterized them. His second post WAS harsh, but it was the sort of harsh that is like raising your voice in a din of other voices and getting people's attention with it. It wasn't mean, rude, or even immature. Just "harsh." And I happen to agree with him on the spirit of his second post. Are we really low enough to consider everyone else so one-dimensional that they can be, entirely and utterly, reduced to one grossly oversimplified label?

My politics are my own, but to hint, I like social programs that help people, but I think that it's not fair to make people who are working their own tails off pay for programs that support people without requiring those others to do all they can themselves. How's that for muddying the waters?

Which is all beside the point. The consensus seems to be that vmarks, whatever his politics, ideology, religion, hair care product preference, etc., is scrupulously fair or even a little lenient on people he disagrees with. I think I said something like that in this thread a while ago, didn't I?

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 08:30 PM
 
[deleted]
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar V View Post
Huh? You mean the post where he called each side's views nonsense?
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Because he didn't.
Actually, he did.

Originally Posted by red rocket
... the Zionists seem to have a champion to defend their nonsense, and the right wing theist militarists seem to have about at least two champions to defend their nonsense,
"the Zionists" and "right wing theist militarists" tend to support each other and be on the same side.
     
Oisín
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2008, 09:20 PM
 
"the Zionists" and "right wing theist militarists" tend to support each other and be on the same side.
That’s how he portrayed them, too, saying that both of them (on their side of the spectre) have their ‘champion’, while the lefties (on the opposite side of the spectre) currently don’t. He used the term ‘nonsense’ for both sides/all three groups.

(Personally, I’d find the terms ‘Zionist’ and ‘right-wing theist militarist’ as they’re being used here [and most commonly around these parts] to be more infraction-worthy; but both are so much par for the course in the PWL that we’d all have nothing else to do with our days than report posts if we were to get rid of them)
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 01:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
(Personally, I’d find the terms ‘Zionist’ and ‘right-wing theist militarist’ as they’re being used here [and most commonly around these parts] to be more infraction-worthy
THAT, is my point.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 02:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Why are you deliberately trying to bait people into a flame war like that? What purpose does this post serve other than insult and provoke people 'on the other side'?
Those are facts - not politely stated but facts nonetheless. And another fact is that when my posts have occasionally gotten modded by possibly left-leaning mods, I haven't once come to this Feedback forum or anywhere else to complain about supposed mistreatment. Most of the time I recognized that although they disagreed with me politically, I probably did get a bit too personal and too heated. I can take MacNN moderation, but the other side apparently can't. Some fellow right-wingers have occasionally gotten banned for their speech, but I've never seen them complain in Feedback, either. The leftists around here (and in life in general) don't really like free speech that clashes with their own and can't take it when they don't have the deck overwhelmingly stacked in their favor. See the Fairness Doctrine, for a real world example. The point is, though, the rest of the supervisors repeatedly vouch for vmarks's objectivity when it comes to moderation, yet the unjustified whining from the same clique continues. It's a tired and retarded attempt to silence someone they hate, and I'll speak up against whenever they pull this stunt. But this isn't the PL so I'll refrain from further comment unless compelled.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Dec 19, 2008 at 03:16 AM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 04:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Actually, he did.
Well so far everybody else including a senior mod have said otherwise. That's good enough for me. You know what they say about standing heat in kitchens.

Also, you conveniently only quoted the first part of his post. In the second he used the exact same tone and wording ("nonsense") for the other side of the spectrum. Everybody got what they had coming. Time to take it like a man (to use the words of one of the conservatives here).
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 04:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Those are facts - not politely stated but facts nonetheless. And another fact is that when my posts have occasionally gotten modded by possibly left-leaning mods, I haven't once come to this Feedback forum or anywhere else to complain about supposed mistreatment. Most of the time I recognized that although they disagreed with me politically, I probably did get a bit too personal and too heated. I can take MacNN moderation, but the other side apparently can't. Some fellow right-wingers have occasionally gotten banned for their speech, but I've never seen them complain in Feedback, either. The leftists around here (and in life in general) don't really like free speech that clashes with their own and can't take it when they don't have the deck overwhelmingly stacked in their favor.
You know I always get suspicious when people point out things like
• they have the facts
• they are righteous and it's the other side that's corrupt
• they hold the only truth while some other dark power is out to silence them

I'm probably a bit older than many people here. And I don't think age makes you any wiser. But one thing life has tought me is that there is not usually one universal truth and that things are rarely as simple as they might appear to be.

To address your complaint, I'd like to point you to Think Insane's post above where he writes that in his experience the conservatives like to complain no less than the liberals. It's just they do so through PM while the lefties seem to prefer doing it in public. What this tells me is that each side is trying to shush the other. Ironically the side that claims to 'take it like men' (sorry, I just love this ludicrous quote so much I'm going to have to use it again) isn't taking it any better than the other side at all - they're just hiding it. Sneaky.

Personally, I think anybody that goes into the PWL deserves what they get. That place isn't about an honest and respectful discussion or about hearing other people's view. It's about flaming the other side and sticking it top people with different beliefs or opinions. That said, if the lefties are convinced that PWL moderation is biased I fail to understand why they don't just leave. On thing you can always count on with extremists is that they die out when nobody stops to listen.
( Last edited by Simon; Dec 19, 2008 at 04:37 AM. )
     
Atomic Rooster
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: retired
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 06:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah View Post
From the other thread (too keep it on topic):


So... in the original thread he continues the same BS. But tells me to stay on topic.

I'd like the moderators here to tell me how I should respond to this? Should I allow him to continue to twist my words and derailing my thread. Or should I answer him and derail my own thread myself? It's a great choice he leaves me with....

And as this is an attack on me by a moderator I feel I'm completely within my right to post this in both the thread in question (so people there can hear my side of the story) and then put it here in the feedback forum.
Forget it man. marx is like a bad rash that won't go away. It's called Jewish guilt.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 08:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Why does it seem like only vmarks is singled out by the same radical, anti-Jewish clique repeatedly without cause? Aren't we getting past the point when these inane threads should be locked on sight?
Equating criticism of Israeli politics with anti-Semitism?

Propagandistic flame-bait.

Reported.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 08:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
That said, if the lefties are convinced that PWL moderation is biased I fail to understand why they don't just leave.
Most of them *have*.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 09:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Some fellow right-wingers have occasionally gotten banned for their speech, but I've never seen them complain in Feedback, either.
There have been plenty threads by `fellow right-wingers' (I don't like to put people into such simplistic categories). I could dig up plenty more. If you read the arguments, they are very, very close to what you read here. The reason that `the left' (whatever that is) is more vocal than `the right' is simply that the mod is perceived to be a `member of the right'.

People from `the right' are just as whiny and argumentative when they are steadfastly convinced that an action of a staffer's action was motivation by differences in political views. That's because whininess is a human quality and not a quality associated to people of a certain political color.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Dec 19, 2008 at 10:08 AM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 10:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
(Personally, I’d find the terms ‘Zionist’ and ‘right-wing theist militarist’ as they’re being used here [and most commonly around these parts] to be more infraction-worthy; but both are so much par for the course in the PWL that we’d all have nothing else to do with our days than report posts if we were to get rid of them)
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
THAT, is my point.
I did not take those phrases to be infraction-worthy because of how I saw the context in which they were used in that post. It seemed both sarcastic and ironic more than anything else, and that's why I did not take action against red rocket. Otherwise, I may have to take action on individual words and phrases used at any given time, such as the way certain boards use anti-cuss filters. Should we "buttbuttinate" our use of English simply because someone scanning a post may be offended? I don't think so. I will admit that I often scan posts, but if I see something that seems sketchy, I reread the whole thing and then often look back through the thread to determine the overall context.

This, by the way, is on topic. The extended context in which a user posts colors how users interpret his or her posts. While red rocket has been known to be a bit over the top at times, he's not known for tossing around pejorative terms like these, so one post using those terms is out of place enough to establish that this usage is not intended to be taken at face value. Other users have different histories, histories in which they have demonstrated quite the opposite use of such terms, and that establishes what they really intended those terms to mean.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2008, 11:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín View Post
That’s how he portrayed them, too, saying that both of them (on their side of the spectre) have their ‘champion’, while the lefties (on the opposite side of the spectre) currently don’t. He used the term ‘nonsense’ for both sides/all three groups.
It's rare that I would post twice in such a thread as this. However, I'd like to point out that equal-opportunity offensiveness is not some wonderfully clean thing which is welcome in polite discourse: it's still offense.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:55 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,