International Politics Forum Feedback (Part 1)

[Tigerman]

I find this rather hypocritical of you, in light of the fact that you so objected to my thread titled “RASCAL LIED RE WMD”. You remember that one. That was the thread that illustrated your contradictions and hypocrisy in the IP forum.

@Rascal

Let it go. The objection was that the thread you mentioned was directed at an individual and hence out of place in the IP forum.

Bullshit.

The objection was that the thread illustrated your complete lack of debate integrity and your obvious contradictions and hypocrisy and your double standard.

That thread should never have been floundered. It was obviously a valid continuation of the “Bush Lied” argument and you disliked it because it exposed the absurdity of your argument and logic.

Your bias led you to agree that the thread should be floundered. This is further an example of your hypocrisy, as you once stated that those who permit their political bias to influence their decisions are not fit to moderate. Thus, you, Moderator Rascal, are unfit to moderate.

[Rascal]

Is there a rule against “shouting” now? Or, did you just unilaterally introduce that rule?

No, I didn’t say there is a rule or that he violated such. However shouting is IMHO not considered appropiate and mostly not necessary.

Might be subjective? No shit its subjective. Can we expect further subjective decisions from Moderator Rascal in the future? Will Moderator Rascal advise as to what rules are written in Moderator Rascal’s “book”?

As a moderator yourself one would have thought you are familar with the rules:

In the event that these guidelines are breached, a poster may be warned, suspended or even banned, depending on the degree of offence, and the reaction of the poster to any warnings or communications received from the moderators. We recognize that the degree or even commission of a posting offence is often subjective. Forumosa Admin has full confidence in the moderating team and their ability to deal with breaches of these rules.

forumosa.com/taiwan/rules.php

No doubt that this will cause inevitably some disagreement but in the end the moderators decision overrules your view on the matter.

Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum

[imyourbiggestfan]

Quite!

If Mr T had a “conflict of interest” then, so, necessarily does Rascal.

Unless, and only unless, as Ironlady points out, he is devoid of any opinion.

How then, E-clectic can you identify a conflict with one person and adopt a wait-and-see attitude with another?

A second point - Rascal’s style is noticeably more interventionist than Mr T’s was. He has pulled up numerous posters for insults/foul language, etc. I expect that the natural consequence of this more interventionist approach will be more work for the moderators.

I expect the style of moderation will become more intrusive as:

1. interventions increase in frequency as people ask for the moderators to check and admonish each separate ‘infringement’ in order to maintain consistent application of the rules across all posters.

2. interventions become more intrusive and limiting as more and more examples are found of “insults,” “unnecessary argumentation” etc.

Some posters are already asking for aggressive posts to be checked because they find them “inflammatory.”

[Rascal]

That thread should never have been floundered. It was obviously a valid continuation of the “Bush Lied” argument and you disliked it because it exposed the absurdity of your argument and logic.

Ok, so I disliked it - no disagreement here. Now what?

Your bias led you to agree that the thread should be floundered. This is further an example of your hypocrisy, as you once stated that those who permit their political bias to influence their decisions are not fit to moderate. Thus, you, Moderator Rascal, are unfit to moderate.

Oh dear, you do know though that I did not flounder that thread nor that I did request such nor that I was made aware that it would be floundered nor was I asked to give my opinion and the fact that this was all done before I became a moderator?

[color=red]So how does something that I wasn’t involved in exactly make me a hypocrite or unfit to moderate?[/color]

(I later stated the opinion that I thought it was the right decision.)

I still suggest to let go. Remember what you told me about squirming and wiggling? Time to take your own advise.

Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum

[Tigerman]

[quote=“Rascal”]Oh dear, you do know though that I did not flounder that thread nor that I did request such nor that I was made aware that it would be floundered nor was I asked to give my opinion and the fact that this was all done before I became a moderator?

[color=red]So how does something that I wasn’t involved in exactly make me a hypocrite or unfit to moderate?[/color]

(I later stated the opinion that I thought it was the right decision.)

[/quote]

Duh.

Your agreement with the decision to flounder a valid thread is what makes you a hypocrite.

[Rascal]

@IYBF

I can see why Mr T might be upset - the forum, indeed this particular thread, was thick with insults and yet only his attracted comment.

‘Mr T’ is upset because someone floundered his two threads and blames me for that, so now he is just looking for some payback.
For someone who has moderated the IP Forum before and should therefore know how difficult it is he shows quite some hypocrisy on his part and his manners in posting and voicing his criticism are, on occassion, anything but acceptable. If he is so concerned about such, why doesn’t he set a good example and show some support and understanding towards the new moderator(s)?

Further I have commented also towards another poster in the mentioned thread and towards other users in other threads, so I don’t think that anyone can accuse me of personally attacking Tigerman.

Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum

[Tigerman]

Is there a rule against “shouting” now? Or, did you just unilaterally introduce that rule?

@Rascal

No, I didn’t say there is a rule or that he violated such. However [color=red]shouting is IMHO not considered appropiate[/color] and mostly not necessary.

Might be subjective? No shit its subjective. Can we expect further subjective decisions from Moderator Rascal in the future? Will Moderator Rascal advise as to what rules are written in Moderator Rascal’s “book”?

[quote=“Rascal”]As a moderator yourself one would have thought you are familar with the rules:

In the event that these guidelines are breached, a poster may be warned, suspended or even banned, depending on the degree of offence, and the reaction of the poster to any warnings or communications received from the moderators. We recognize that the degree or even commission of a posting offence is often subjective. Forumosa Admin has full confidence in the moderating team and their ability to deal with breaches of these rules.

forumosa.com/taiwan/rules.php

No doubt that this will cause inevitably some disagreement but in the end [color=red]the moderators decision overrules your view[/color] on the matter.
[/quote]

Are you fucking kidding, Moderator Rascal? The cite you provide above does not give you the authority to make up new rules. It permits you some subjectivity in the way you deal with breaches and violations of stated existing rules.

What you attempted in warning BroonAle was the implementation of a new rule, not the subjective handling of an existing rule.

Do you know what you are doing? As a moderator, Moderator Rascal, one would have thought you are familar with the rules…

Please read the rules and familiarize yourself with the same. Should you require any assistance or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me for the same.

[Rascal]

Your agreement with the decision to flounder a valid thread is what makes you a hypocrite.

Certainly a subjective opinion only (that the thread was valid), as you can also see from the responses you have received there and the fact that others floundered it.

I guess there is nothing more to say. I have taken note of Tigerman’s concerns and will see if I can do better.

Kind regards,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum

[Tigerman]

@Rascal

[quote=“IYBF”]I can see why Mr T might be upset - the forum, indeed this particular thread, was thick with insults and yet only his attracted comment.

I have commented also towards another poster in the mentioned thread and towards other users in other threads, so I don’t think that anyone can accuse me of personally attacking Tigerman.

[/quote]

Bullshit.

Moderator Rascal only commented on another poster after I called Moderator Rascal on his lack of impariality.

[Tigerman]

@Rascal

[quote]Your agreement with the decision to flounder a valid thread is what makes you a hypocrite.

Certainly a subjective opinion only (that the thread was valid), as you can also see from the responses you have received there and the fact that others floundered it.[/quote]

Please explain why you think the thread was not valid.

[Rascal]

Please explain why you think the thread was not valid.

Since that thread and any opinions about it has no relevance to the current discussion (since I was not a moderator nor was I involved in the decision to flounder it) I see no reason to discuss it, all I had to say was said in the first of the two threads.
Now you may throw another tantrum, demand, beg, rephrase and post stupid “court orders”, but I will not entertain you on that.

And I do recall you argument was related to using names in the title, not if the thread itself was valid or not, but you lost that argument already.

Just let it go.

[Rascal]

[quote]Bullshit.

Moderator Rascal only commented on another poster after I called Moderator Rascal on his lack of impariality.[/quote]
Yes, as a proof that I take your views into account and do not selectively attack you only.

BTW: Are you aware of rule 17.?

Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum

[Tigerman]

@Rascal

BTW: Are you aware of rule 17.?

I am. Are you?

Define “excessive”.

[Tetsuo]

Is anyone else sick of this “my e-penis is bigger than yours” stuff yet?

[Tigerman]

@Tetsuo

Is anyone else sick of this “my e-penis is bigger than yours” stuff yet?

Why are you thinking about anyone’s penis?

[Tigerman]

Please also explain why you feel the need to use my name in the title of each of my posts that you flounder.

@Rascal

Each of your posts that I floundered? I suggest you get your facts straight, because I can only find one thread in the Flounder forum that I floundered and used your name in the title. There are other posts that I floundered and they do not have your name in the title.

Are you being purposely obtuse, Moderator Rascal? You have used my name in several other threads that you have either floundered, flamed or moved to the feedback forum.

Here is one example… I pointed out your contradiction in a statement directed at fred smith (and your statement was actually nothing but a personal attack on fred smith) and you flamed my post and titled it “Tigerman Continues His Personal Attacks”.

Gee, Moderator Rascal, what was it that I stated that was such personal attack as to warrant flaming? Let’s see:

@Rascal to fred smith

For someone that has never voted what right do you have then to comment on anything?

@The Magnificent Tigerman

When have you ever voted in an American election? Never. So you shut up. You have no right to comment on US policy, foreign or domestic.

Wow! So, in Moderator Rascal’s book, pointing out a contradiction in arguments employed by Moderator Rascal is a “personal attack”. Fuck me!

[color=red]
Its OK for Moderator Rascal to state that fred smith hasn’t voted and as such fred smith has no right to comment… but it is not acceptable for me to state that Moderator Rascal hasn’t voted and thus has no right to comment.
[/color]

Fucking hypocritical, IMO.

I find this rather hypocritical of you, in light of the fact that you so objected to my thread titled “RASCAL LIED RE WMD”. You remember that one. That was the thread that illustrated your contradictions and hypocrisy in the IP forum.

@Rascal

Let it go. The objection was that the thread you mentioned was directed at an individual and hence out of place in the IP forum.

Bullshit, and you know it. That thread was a continuation of the argument you raised asserting that Bush lied re WMD. I turned your own logic and statements back on you and exposed the obvious contradictions in your argument and the double standards employed by yourself. You had nothing to say and so you refused to comment on my argument. That thread was not about you, Moderator Rascal (don’t flatter yourself)… it was about your argument and the contradictions in the same.

Durins Bane admitted he was wrong to flounder the entire thread and Moaman was, IMO, completely wrong for floundering that thread. but what the fuck, its his site and he can do as he pleases.

But, Maoman’s errant act does not excuse your own hypocrisy.

@Rascal

I don’t recall myself complaining that my name was used in the thread title, but of course feel free to prove otherwise.

What’s to prove? You just above stated that “the objection was that the thread I mentioned was directed at an individual”.

Now, is there some good reason for including my name in these threads that you flounder? If yes, please inform me of the same.

@Rascal

Note that this here is the Feedback and Announcement forum, not the Flounder forum.

Who gives a shit? You have floundered, flamed or moved to this forum several of my posts and you have included my name in the titles of those floundered, flamed or feedback forum threads.

Why do you find it necessary to do so?

@Rascal

I use the names because I can’t merge into the thread started by fred, so everytime I move posts here it creates a new thread. To distinguish the threads and make it easier for anyone to find his/her feedback I use names.

Bullshit. You use my name in threads in a personal attack on me. Stop doing so.

[Alleycat]

I hate to see such obviously good guys, both of whom I like very much, becoming such bad friends over nothing really.

[Tigerman]

@Alleycat

I hate to see such obviously good guys, both of whom I like very much, becoming such bad friends over nothing really.

Sorry to disappoint you, Alley. But, Rascal is a hypocrite.

[color=red]Moderator’s Note: This topic is continued [url=International Politics Forum Feedback (Part 2)