There are no rules

I posted this a bit ago in these Feedback Forums, but, it was deleted :unamused: : There are no Rules.

Dunno why it was deleted, as I was just repeating what goose egg posted a few days ago:

So… Now you know.

No, you did more than that, in fact you made a personal attack against another member which is why your post was deleted.

:roflmao:

No.

I posted the exact same statement made by another poster about me, which you did not delete in that thread. I merely replaced my name with his name. Tell us why you left his statement about me in that thread, but deleted my post using his statement about him.

More Humpty Dumpty moderating. :unamused:

I posted the following:

Big John likes to argue and argue and argue so I don’t blame anyone for being terse with him and giving him merely an [color=#FF8000]adequate[/color] explanation.

A few days previous, Big John posted this:

So, why is Big John’s statement re me not a personal attack, but, my use of his own statement about him is a personal attack? :ohreally:

Humpty Dumpty if you ask me:

[quote]“When I use [color=#FF8000]Personal Attack[/color],” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be [Moderator]—that’s all.”[/quote]

Don’t be so obtuse, you called him a Dumbass. Your original content was posted to provoke a response, which it did and then you further escalated with a personal insult. or did you forget that part?

No, Mick. That was a different post, and it was made to illustrate the inconsistencies in moderating. You know, moderating that allows this to stay:

But, which considers [color=#FF0000]dumbass[/color], when used to illustrate (in the Feedback Forum) a point re the Rules and moderating, to be a personal attack, while none of the above are deemed to be personal attacks? :laughing: The MS jab was particularly nice! I appreciate that one, given that my sister suffers horribly with Multiple Sclerosis. Nice! :unamused:

OK, yes, I was attempting to provoke a response… but, not from Big John. I’m fairly certain Big John knew what I was saying. Instead, I was hoping to provoke some enlightenment among the [color=#FF0000]obtuse[/color] mods. [color=#FF0000]Obtuse[/color] is OK, right? I mean, you used it to describe me, right?

My use of [color=#FF0000]dumbass [/color]in a post was done in order to illustrate that there are no Rules and that the Mods make decisions as they please.

You guys keep telling us that if a post is reported, it will be dealt with. But, that isn’t accurate. I reported to TG Vay’s post above and yet, it still (as of the time I posted this) remains in the thread. Big John and I were having a friendly go at each other, just as Rocket and Ermintrude were with the pikey talk. And yet, TG deleted my post in which I used Big John’s exact post directed at me and turned it around at him. That post did not contain the [color=#FF0000]dumbass [/color]remark.

You guys are all over the place with your decisions. Don’t deny it. And this is Feedback and Gus asked me to continue to point out inconsistencies in moderating:

So, my post using Big John’s jibe at me re arguing gets deleted by TG, even though I used Big John’s exact words on him, and even though you stated this to me re my arguing:

So, you and Big John are allowed to comment on my argumentiveness, but, if I comment on Big John’s argumentativeness, my post gets deleted by TG. That’s fair! :roflmao:

Talk about [color=#FF0000]obtuse[/color]… You guys seem to need everything spelled out for you and even then the obvious is hidden… :unamused:

So, let me see if I understand the moderating mentality here:

This is all OK and is permitted to remain in posts made in the Feedback Forum:

But, this is not and gets deleted by Tempo Gain:

And these are OK and permitted to stay in the forum:

But, this is a bad personal attack and must be deleted immediately by Tempo Gain and he sends me a PM chastising me:

Riiiiiight! :unamused:

[quote=“Tigerman”]

But, this is a bad personal attack and must be deleted immediately by Tempo Gain and he sends me a PM chastising me:

Riiiiiight! :unamused:[/quote]

I did not chastise you. I politely informed you why the instance of moderation which began with you calling another poster a “dumbass”–which I didn’t even mention as I thought the reasons for its removal were so obvious as to not require it–required in my view the removal of an earlier post with no substantive message. While no great problem in itself, that post in my view had started the problem, and I try to resolve such situations in this manner. I also invited you to clarify your point in that post, if you wished.

I’m a simple man Tigerman. I won’t pretend to be able to perceive the deep-seated reasons which cause you to post such things, and act on that basis. You called someone a dumbass, I acted on it. If the table had been turned and it were another poster, I would have done the exact same thing. That’s the best you’re going to get from me. If it’s not enough, there’s nothing more I can do.

:laughing: Are you being purposely obtuse? Can you not read and comprehend a post in the context of a series of posts? You just posted this:

In [color=#FF0000]every[/color] case? :unamused:

READ the damn thread! The context was obvious. You allow the pikey comments and debate to remain due to the context, yet you fail to see the context of my remark aimed at illustrating the inconsistent application of the Rules. :unamused:

Nothing wrong with being simple. But being obtuse is not helpful to a moderator. We just went over all of the many inconsistencies in moderating decisions a few days ago, and goose egg invited me to continue to point out such inconsistencies so that you mods would “[color=#FF0000]have something to think about, and to talk about among yourselves… [and so] that future moderating decisions become more consistent, because they will be more easily understood by those affected by those choices[/color]”.

Yes. I called Big John a Dumbass in an obvious illustration of how the Rules are not adhered to here by the mods. I showed you an obvious and blatent personal attack by Vay but you didn’t [color=#FF0000]act on that[/color]. :laughing:

Except the table has been turned repeatedly and you have NOT done the [color=#FF0000]exact same thing[/color]. You have done the opposite! :laughing:

That’s pathetic. Really. And of course there is more that you can do. You can stop being so butt-hurt and get more consistent in your moderating. Is that [color=#FF0000]too much[/color] to request? :unamused:

You called him a dumbass, I acted on it. Whatever else you are talking about wasn’t and isn’t obvious to me. If you think that’s obtuse, I’m fine with it.

I’m not butt-hurt at all. I believe I handled it in a completely rational and consistent fashion. There’s nothing else I can do.

What you don’t seem to understand TM–never seem to understand–is that “context” doesn’t mean “whatever TM thinks is right”.

I don’t see any reports from you, so I can’t comment on it. Maybe another mod handled it.

And as long as you’re going to make this a new thread, we should at least post the statement on which my claim is based:

[quote="“goose egg”][color=#FF0000]
At the end of the day, it’s the moderator who decides what stays and what goes in their forum regardless of the rules
[/color].
[/quote]

How can it not be obvious to you? I’ve sent you PMs citing with links the other violations. I’ve posted those links in Feedback.

You need to consult a dictionary for the definition of [color=#FF0000]consistent[/color], because I don’t think that word means what you think it does. :laughing:

You don’t seem to understand much of anything. I am not simply claiming to be :right". I am pointing out obvious inconsistencies and citing the same with links and asking you for clarification or at least acknowledgement of the inconsistencies.

I have sent you PMs with cites to the violations. :unamused:

And stop sending me PMs. My PMs to you are dismissed, so I will from now on disregard yours to me.

Tigerman, I agree with everything you say. I guess many of us know what you are saying is right. When Maoman left nobody was gonna do his supreme controller job no more so a response from Goose Egg was individual modding. Wasn’t Deuce suspended indefinitely at the outset? I remember someone was pretty ticked off, anyhoo.

So, my question is, what are you looking for from your efforts to highlight inconsistency? Do you want some mods to publicly say, “yeah, we mod as we see fit and Goose has given us the go ahead to do so.”? He has said as much himself. Mods do as they see best at the moment they are asked to do something. Yeah, inconsistent, often subjective. However, it is plainly stated/ implied that the rule is, 'each mod has individual autonomy and you have to deal with that system as best you can."

Mods are now operating blind. Do we blame the mods? Do we blame Goose? Do we ask for a new system? Maybe Mao and Goose could make up and we could have an iron rule again. :smiley:

I at least see what you say and agree 100%. So what should happen next?

Not bustin in but maybe cracking the door a smidgen to the bar fight going on. But If I may (amidst all the broken glass) ask why people can’t just say sorry and move on. And can’t just not worry about who is winning or losing in a thread argument? There are no funds to be earned here. Give yourself some bonus points for aiming for peace rather then discord perhaps?

IF someone wrongs you, you can ask for an apology and state your reasons and if none happens, let it be. Its not the end of the world. IF the other party is civil enough , maybe he/she can reflect a little on his/her words and perhaps in the spirit of discussion , either offer an apology or at least a commiseration? An acknowledgement of the other’s position and your right to differ.

Just sayin.

p…s re above post. Mao was basically chairman Mao. And he ruled with an iron fist ! IF the “country” is in disorder it sometimes takes a strong man to keep the shit together.

[quote=“superking”]Tigerman, I agree with everything you say. I guess many of us know what you are saying is right. When Maoman left nobody was gonna do his supreme controller job no more so a response from Goose Egg was individual modding. Wasn’t Deuce suspended indefinitely at the outset? I remember someone was pretty ticked off, anyhoo.

So, my question is, what are you looking for from your efforts to highlight inconsistency? Do you want some mods to publicly say, “yeah, we mod as we see fit and Goose has given us the go ahead to do so.”? He has said as much himself. Mods do as they see best at the moment they are asked to do something. Yeah, inconsistent, often subjective. However, it is plainly stated/ implied that the rule is, 'each mod has individual autonomy and you have to deal with that system as best you can."

Mods are now operating blind. Do we blame the mods? Do we blame Goose? Do we ask for a new system? Maybe Mao and Goose could make up and we could have an iron rule again. :smiley:

I at least see what you say and agree 100%. So what should happen next?[/quote]

I don’t know that I have an answer, SK. I just don’t like being modded by people that seem unable to comprehend the obvious meaning and or context of certain posts and who are frequently and laughably inconsistent in their decisions and explanations for the same.

I’ve asked to be banned to save the mods the trouble of having to deal with my criticisms. We’re constantly told to report violations or bring complaints to Feedback. Yet, when we do, we are berated and or dismissed while complaints are not addressed.

This is supposedly a site run for adults, yet its being moderated by kindergarten teachers (I mean no disrespect whatsoever to kindy teachers… rather, the point is… well, I hope its obvious).

But, OK, what I hope to see from my efforts to highlight inconsistency is more consistency from the moderators in their decisions.

[quote=“Tigerman”] I’ve posted those links in Feedback.

[/quote]

True, and thanks. I’ve reported the post in question to the mods of that forum.

Still, I would mod your post the same way every time I become aware of it. As I’ve said every mod may be somewhat different, but in general, if something is bothering you, the report button is your friend.

But, why? You left Rocket’s post calling E a pikey alone and explained that you did so due to the [color=#FF0000]context[/color].

Yet, the clear [color=#FF0000]context[/color] of my post calling Big John a Dumbass was obviously a comment on the application of the Rules by the mods and not actually an insult or personal attack on Big John. Big John understood that.

I wish that were true. But, it hasn’t been my experience, at all.

[quote=“Tigerman”][quote=“superking”]Tigerman, I agree with everything you say. I guess many of us know what you are saying is right. When Maoman left nobody was gonna do his supreme controller job no more so a response from Goose Egg was individual modding. Wasn’t Deuce suspended indefinitely at the outset? I remember someone was pretty ticked off, anyhoo.

So, my question is, what are you looking for from your efforts to highlight inconsistency? Do you want some mods to publicly say, “yeah, we mod as we see fit and Goose has given us the go ahead to do so.”? He has said as much himself. Mods do as they see best at the moment they are asked to do something. Yeah, inconsistent, often subjective. However, it is plainly stated/ implied that the rule is, 'each mod has individual autonomy and you have to deal with that system as best you can."

Mods are now operating blind. Do we blame the mods? Do we blame Goose? Do we ask for a new system? Maybe Mao and Goose could make up and we could have an iron rule again. :smiley:

I at least see what you say and agree 100%. So what should happen next?[/quote]

I don’t know that I have an answer, SK. I just don’t like being modded by people that seem unable to comprehend the obvious meaning and or context of certain posts and who are frequently and laughably inconsistent in their decisions and explanations for the same.

I’ve asked to be banned to save the mods the trouble of having to deal with my criticisms. We’re constantly told to report violations or bring complaints to Feedback. Yet, when we do, we are berated and or dismissed while complaints are not addressed.

This is supposedly a site run for adults, yet its being moderated by kindergarten teachers (I mean no disrespect whatsoever to kindy teachers… rather, the point is… well, I hope its obvious).

But, OK, what I hope to see from my efforts to highlight inconsistency is more consistency from the moderators in their decisions.[/quote]

You asked to be banned?
Wouldn’t it be easier just to delete Forumosa from your favorites and your browser and log off permanently?

A moderator agrees, of their own volition, to act as a standard bearer for this site by being responsible for all content in their forum. A mod should read all posts in their forum and make decisions (which should be based on some standard rules) about which posts violate the sites rules. (And there are rules, cos after all, when a mod wants to do something and a poster disagrees the mod will say, “It is in the rules, you agreed to them.”) So a mod should make a decision to have enough time to properly attend to their forum and follow some rules. In a system where rules now seemingly exist only when a mod wants to back up a subjective decision I would say the report button has become very much a helper for the mods as a guide to what us proles individually feel is wrong. Mods can do as they wish, and we have to help them in deciding what are the new (subjective) standards of objectivity.

A question for our mods: Do you believe we have site rules and do you follow them objectively or are they open to personal interpretation?

But, why? You left Rocket’s post calling E a pikey alone and explained that you did so due to the [color=#FF0000]context[/color].[/quote]

We didn’t–that post was removed. And in a nutshell, he didn’t call E a pikey.

I didn’t. What I saw was the original post from you, which I left. When I came back there was a post from BIg John which looked like it took umbrage at what you wrote. Then there was a post from you calling him a dumbass, directly.

Mods can’t be expected to read between the lines on this stuff. I try, but it’s not always possible and I have to take things at face value, as I did here, and I would again.

I wish that were true. But, it hasn’t been my experience, at all.[/quote]

We deal with every report. We’re not always going to agree with every one.

A moderator agrees, of their own volition, to act as a standard bearer for this site by being responsible for all content in their forum. A mod should read all posts in their forum and make decisions (which should be based on some standard rules) about which posts violate the sites rules. (And there are rules, cos after all, when a mod wants to do something and a poster disagrees the mod will say, “It is in the rules, you agreed to them.”) So a mod should make a decision to have enough time to properly attend to their forum and follow some rules. In a system where rules now seemingly exist only when a mod wants to back up a subjective decision I would say the report button has become very much a helper for the mods as a guide to what us proles individually feel is wrong. Mods can do as they wish, and we have to help them in deciding what are the new (subjective) standards of objectivity.[/quote]

We’re all adults here SK. Do we really need every word of every person to be definitely monitored? I don’t think so. However we do strive to keep this an environment where people can have open discussion in an atmosphere free of personal insults. That’s not really hard–usually :slight_smile: Sometimes it is though, and we have to step in. I see reporting as action on the part of the community to help maintain a positive environment.

I think the rules are a broad instrument and always have been. Many situations aren’t black and white, and as our policies say policy.forumosa.com/spirit-of-the-rules/ it’s impossible to exactly define every one. I certainly try to be objective in all my decisions and I know all our mods do as well.